Forum:From Rollback to Administrator

I'd like to discuss the benefits that a person would receive from becoming an administrator. It's just that I feel that a promotion from rollback to administrator is a really big step up. Not sure whether this will ever be taken to consideration, but it would be nice to have a couple more tools without necessarily becoming an admin. Otherwise I would have nominated myself for administrator-ship, but I'm not exactly sure whether I'd be ready to hold such rights if my nomination was approved.

In any case I feel the only benefits I'd receive from being an administrator would be to delete unneeded files / pages and to block vandals, trolls and sockpuppets.

And um......exactly how many tool buttons do admins have that rollbackers don't? It would explain a lot if I knew.

I guess the real reason why I'm asking this is because if I were to nominate myself for be nominated for administration, I wouldn't be able to give a good impression as to how I'd benefit from becoming one. Sometimes I feel that you don't know how to be something until you've actually became it. It was the same with me nominating myself for rollback, but that wasn't such a big step up.  C.Syde  ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 08:04, May 11, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion
Some wikis have an intermediate user level in between rollbackers and full sysop/administrators. There are many access rights granted to administrators that can also be given to another user group, if the community decided to create it. The individual rights given to this intermediate group depends on each local community. For instance, we could create a "moderator" position that allows the user to rollback, delete inappropriate blog post comments, rename pages without leaving a redirect behind, and other rights, without allowing that same user the right to issue blocks or lock pages - that's just as an example.

Ultimately doing this would require community consensus and a conversation with Wikia Staff. --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 12:07, May 11, 2014 (UTC)

(Adding on to my previous comment) - Moving from a non-admin to an admin role is a significant step, to be sure. And while we can never be 100% sure of what any person will be like as an administrator, we can evaluate a user's editing history to get a pretty good idea of whether they are responsible and experienced enough to handle administrator tools. It's worth noting that the administrator tools themselves are simple to use from a technical standpoint; the real challenge of being an administrator is knowing when (or when not) to use those tools. For me personally, I weigh my decision whether or not to support a promotion by whether or not the user has demonstrated an understanding of our rules and guidelines on a functional level, and truly understands what they're doing when they issue blocks, lock pages, etc. These are all traits that non-administrators can demonstrate in the RfA, which is part of the reason why the RfA process is so formalized. --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 12:40, May 11, 2014 (UTC)


 * All rollbacks have is the rollback link. That's literally it. Making the jump from rollbacker to sysop is huge.


 * It was proposed on Wikipedia that, due to the number of "misbehaving sysops" there, it was suggested that there be user groups that offered little chunks of sysop abilities. So one user group would allow the user to delete pages, one would allow the user to block IPs, etc. but didn't provide the entire sysop package. It was promptly... rejected and placed in perennial proposals. The only user groups that were formed out of little chunks of the sysop package was the reviewer, rollbacker, Template editor, account creator, file mover, autopatrolled, IP block exempt, and Course managers. Hmm, that's a lot, actually, but the gist was that, if you could be trusted to delete a page, there's no reason why you couldn't be trusted to block a user as well. --k6ka (talk &#124; contribs) 02:43, May 12, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. The main reason why I began this forum is to help determine whether I felt that I was ready to nominate myself for administration yet.

From what I've read on the becoming an administrator page, a user doesn't necessarily need to be relied on to live up to being an admin frequently to be an administrator. They just need to use the tools when the admin in question feels it is convenient / necessary to do so.

A few questions are, how many extra buttons / options does an admin have aside from the usual ones and the rollback button?

Would all admins need to be listed on the admin board?

Is using the admin tools for the wrong reasons the only way to have a person's admin rights removed (aside from stepping down), once a user has become an admin?

 C.Syde  ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 04:11, May 12, 2014 (UTC)
 * Moving thread to help desk


 * You shouldn't create forum posts in the community discussion forum unless you're looking to discuss something that impacts the entire community. If you simply have a question, the best place to put the thread is the Help Desk, or to ask the question directly to another user.


 * Anyways, there are literally dozens of things that admins can do that normal users cannot; they're all listed at Special:ListGroupRights. To list them all out here would take a long time and I'm sure I would forget some, so here's a short list of the major tools:


 * Can delete and undelete pages
 * Can protect or semi-protect pages, and edit semi- or fully-protected pages
 * Can edit MediaWiki pages
 * Can edit another user's CSS or JS pages
 * Can block and unblock other users (can also unblock themselves)
 * Can promote and demote Chat Moderators
 * Is automatically given rollback rights, and Chat Moderator rights on Chat


 * As for activity... The wiki used to have a rule requiring administrators to be regularly active, but that rule was suspended and is no longer enforced. A principle of wiki administratorship is that an admin isn't required to use administrative tools, but may use them when the situation warrants them. Administratorship isn't like a job; you won't be penalized if you don't use the tools that adminship provides, just as you won't be penalized if you become inactive.


 * The list of administrators here is mainly a list of active users; there are several admins and bureaucrats who still have those rights but are inactive and therefore not on that list; you can follow these links to see full lists of active and inactive sysops and bureaucrats.


 * There is no framework in place to remove administrators once they've been promoted. Administrators can demote themselves if they so choose. Misuse of administrative tools would likely result in a community discussion regarding demotion that, if successful, would result in user rights being revoked by a bureaucrat. A bureaucrat won't remove administrative rights without first discussing it with the community, unless there's a serious reason for doing so (e.g. the admin's account was hacked into). --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 14:11, May 12, 2014 (UTC)


 * An administrator can revoke his/her own sysop status without the need of a bureaucrat, if I remember correctly. Removing bureaucrats is slightly harder. Only Wikia Staff and the bureaucrat themselves can remove the bureaucrat flag. A misbehaving bureaucrat would require the intervention of Wikia Staff. --k6ka (talk &#124; contribs) 15:04, May 12, 2014 (UTC)

Okay then thanks!  C.Syde  ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 03:37, May 13, 2014 (UTC)


 * I know this thread has been dried, but I'd like to point out some things that I think are important for someone who deems to be an admin.


 * Some regular users think that becoming an admin is a "reward" for being a prolonged active user. Some think that because they've contributed enough for the wiki, and that they've gained enough prominence, they deserve to be rewarded administratorship rights. You need to know, that, it is incorrect to think so, and administratorship rights are not rewards, and are not deserved. Anyone of course can become a regularly active user, contributing the wiki from the start until he/she retires, without becoming an admin at all.


 * The second thing to think is that as you become an admin, you do not hold the position as a job. Often people might think that once they become an admin, they'd be required to do tasks, maintain the wiki regularly, be present daily, and so on, like a full-time job. This isn't true, and even if you never think of that, at least this gives you the idea. An administrator is granted handy tools that can be very useful to help maintain the wiki. Administrators believe they could make good use of these tools for everyone's sake (this is to put it simply, as I might sound exaggerating). If you don't think you'll really need all these complicated stuff, or don't really want to get involved with tools, perhaps you should reconsider if you really want to be an admin.


 * Third, like I said before, anyone can contribute the wiki without becoming an admin. I can't say that admins are very special, although they do appear more often and know more technical stuff than most other users. You should consider your motives why you want to be an admin. Do you think the deleting and blocking tools can be helpful to you? Maybe you feel like instead of taking a long route to report a vandalism to an admin, it'd be easier for you to just block the vandal ahead. Or maybe you feel like there's this article you really don't think will suit the wiki, and instead of the hassle and possibility that an admin will refuse to delete it due to reasons, you can just delete it by yourself. Well, think again! There are reasons why admins don't block users or delete articles just on their own accord. This is why discussions are held, and remember that even regular users can get involved in discussions. So you shouldn't consider these tools as a shortcut to get away with the hassle of one's considerations whether to act or not. But then again, of course there are many cases where admins can just act ahead when it's obvious, as long as they're not reckless.


 * You really don't have to respond or answer these points. You just need to consider it in your own mind. When you think all is good, you may be ready to become an admin!  Nikel  Talk  –  Vote!  09:21, May 24, 2014 (UTC)

I most certainly understand what I'm doing and I am most certainly ready to be one. The real concern is how to prove myself without getting too level-headed - a nasty and dangerous weakness (just an exaggeration!) which can make a user appear much less ready than they actually are? :) --  C.Syde  ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 03:12, June 21, 2014 (UTC)