[WikiEN-l] Wheel warring

[Conrad Dunkerson]

* jayjg wrote:

> One can posit all sorts of "maybes", but the fact remains that
> reverting the first admin assumes the first admin is incorrect. 
> Instead of assuming, contact them first, and find out for sure.  It's
> quite simple, and it astonishes me that anyone would defend summarily
> reverting an admin action over communicating with them first and
> building a consensus.  This is not an emergency, and almost never is.

I find your position equally illogical. Tracking down the admin who 
originally protected a page to get their 'buy in' on unprotecting it after 
the issue has been resolved would be a pointless waste of time. MAYBE one 
time in a hundred they are going to have some non-apparent reason for 
wanting the page to remain protected, but usually not.

Admins contravene the actions of others every day without anyone saying a 
word about it. When situations change or new facts are uncovered admins 
SHOULD take the initiative to do what makes sense in the current 
circumstances. Putting that on hold to get the original admin's near 
certain agreement would be a pointless drag on getting things done. Ergo, 
this 'never ever undo the action of another admin without discussing it' 
seems to me untenable.

The only time you should need to 'discuss first' is if you think the other 
admin might disagree with your decision. People who's judgement of what 
another admin might object to is consistently off aren't likely to become 
admins in the first place or to remain that way. Wheel warring is almost 
never due to such mistaken assumptions as to what is ok, but rather due to 
deliberate actions which the person KNOWS the other admin will object 
to... often while 'discussion' is going on.