Anthere wrote:
May international wikipedias have a different power
structure than the english one ?
I think that each project should have its own structure, not just the
international wikipedias.
Will all the stewards currently listed on meta have
these powers over all wikipedias or just the english
one ?
I looked through that and I found it unclear. I'm not quite sure what
the correct term is anymore. "Steward" seems acceptable, as is the
present "bureaucrat". "Honorary developer" strikes me as misleading.
I agree with Tim that developers should not be meddling in the politics
of the individual projects. Doing so can damage their credibility. I
agree with the duties that Tim would allocate to developers, though I
would add to that the duty to deal with bug issues and other technical
matters. Since their are not enough developers to allow each project to
have its own private developer, each project should have at least one of
the developers be its "assigned" developer. That developer would have
the task of occasionally reviewing bug reports on the project, and
attempting to deal with them. If he finds himself being asked
"political" questions his only option would be to refer those question
to the appropriate person - most likely the bureaucrat for the project.
In a new project the developer is also both a sysop and a bureaucrat.
It is in his own best interest to delegate these powers as soon as
possible. (Note: I prefer to avoid semantic distinctions between
"rights" and "powers")
Each project should have at least one bureaucrat, and that bureaucrat
rights should be assigned on a per project basis. This does not prevent
a project from having more than one bureaucrat. Being a bureaucrat on
the tamil wikipedia would be pointless is I don't understand Tamil.
The key asset that a bureaucrat brings to a project is the ability to
view the project at the big picture level. Like the chief justice of a
court or the speaker of a legislature, his vote counts for no more than
that of his coleagues. He is just there to insure that things get done,
and if one of those tasks is creating further sysops, it can become
clear to the members that he will carry out the will of the members when
so asked. A modicum of mediation skills and common sense can be helpful
to a person in this position.
Ec