I thought I'd let folks here on the mailing list know something I just found out about -- there's not one but _two_ active policy proposals to curtail wheel warring:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Proposed_wheel_warring_policy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Admin_zero-revert_rule
I'm not sure how we ended up with two redundant proposal pages, but somehow we did. The first page, which I hadn't heard of until today, includes polls for five alternatives, the last two of which seem to have some support. The other page features one, more detailed and somewhat stricter, proposal, which hasn't been put to a poll but has been extensively discussed and seems to also enjoy some degree of consensus.
Anyway, I agree that it's probably time to turn these proposals into actual policy. There are folks here on this list who have much more experience with doing this than I have, so I won't try to teach grandma to suck eggs. What I've done so far is point people to the talk page of the former proposal page, suggestion that the issue be hashed out there, using the consensus versions of both proposals as basis for the policy.
Anyway, your input and policymaking skills are appreciated. Let's get this thing done.
"Ilmari Karonen" wrote
Anyway, your input and policymaking skills are appreciated. Let's get this thing done.
What 'thing'?
The thing that people seem to think about is rationing the use of admin powers. I'm against that.
If the basic issue is admins in conflict, who can't be bothered to discuss a difficult issue with each other as colleagues, then such proposals don't really solve that. I say that a lack of consultation, admin-to-admin, is a root cause of troubles. Simply imposing rationing doesn't address that.
What is more, I'm fundamentally against equating 'edit wars' and 'wheel wars'. From an ArbCom point of view, we handle edit wars very largely by ignoring content issues. We should not treat so-called 'wheel wars' in the same way. Admin actions are in protection of the project, and we need to look, very much, at what motivations and interpretations are behind them.
Recent ArbCom judgements show (I hope) some consistency in my approach. I don't want admins to have, in effect, fewer powers. I do want to treat lack of consultation with admin colleagues as very serious. And I would much prefer to have 1% of the current admins lose all their powers, for abuses, than have 100% of admins have restrictions placed on their discretion.
Charles