[WikiEN-l] Who monitors Wikipedia?

[Ray Saintonge]

Chris Howie wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Kurt Maxwell Weber <kmw at armory.com> wrote:
>   
>>  I've suggested something similar in the past:
>>  For their initial confirmation, administrators are required to reach a
>>  certain, objectively-defined and absolute threshold of votes (not
>>  a "discussion", not "consensus", but an outright vote), discounting SPAs,
>>  socks, and maybe a few others.  A week after their confirmation process
>>  begins, if they meet that criteria they are admins.
>>
>>  From then on out, they must maintain that support.  A page is maintained for
>>  each administrator.  It begins with the original confirmation request, and
>>  from that individual users may add or withdraw their support for that
>>  administrator as they see fit.  Once a week, on the same day as the admin was
>> initially confirmed, someone checks to see if they still meet that threshold.
>>  If they fall below the threshold for two consecutive weeks, they are
>>  de-adminned (requiring two consecutive weeks rather than just a single week
>>  helps give admins a chance to explain why they did what they did, in the
>>  event of a particularly controversial action that may nonetheless have been
>>  the best thing to do in a particular situation).
>>     
> Good luck getting anyone to run for adminship if they're going to be
> subjected to what amounts to a weekly RfA.
>   
I like the idea in principle.  Nevertheless, I find the two-weeks 
details impractical.  Surely there are other options when the person 
falls below the threshhold.

The other thing that we can't know at this stage is how often people 
will fall below the threshold.  It may very well be a very small number, 
unless someone gets on a campaign about absent admins.  Of course of 
those are MIA after 52 weeks, they're just as likely to be MIA after 53 
weeks.

Even if we do nothing when they fall below the threshold, the page will 
still be there to show when an admin has dropped below a 25% community 
confidence level. And if the average community support level is at 25% 
then an individual 25% doesn't look so bad.

Ec