Wikiquote:Admin accountability poll

Note: I did NOT create this my self, this is mainly copied from Wikipedia:Admin accountability poll

There are many opinions regarding adminship held by a variety of people, and a number of perennial complaints about adminship or the related procedures. This straw poll seeks to find out if a substantial majority of editors believes that certain changes should be made to our procedure or precedent.

This is NOT a policy proposal, nor is this poll in any way binding. This is a gauge of public sentiment. However, if public sentiment is that a certain policy would be beneficial, effort can be made towards creating a policy proposal. Voting may be evil but learning public opinion is not. If a public opinion is obvious, people may want to take it into account for their future actions or judgments.

This poll consists of a number of statements that people can express agreement or disagreement with. Feel free to comment on your opinion. I've attempted to compile all frequently-expressed statements; that should not imply that I agree with any or all of them. If I've missed a couple, please let me know. – Ilovemydoodle (talk / e-mail) 05:06, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Requests for Adminship

The standards for becoming an admin should be higher than they are now

Disagree (admin standards)

Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:06, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

There should be suffrage rules for voting on RFA

Agree, suggest something very low (RFA suffrage)

Simply an edit before the RfA. --Ferien (talk) 12:38, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Agree, suggest 1 month, 100 edits (RFA suffrage)

Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:07, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Agree, only admins should vote (RFA suffrage)

Kale

Bureaucrats should remove votes that are in bad faith or nonsensical

Don't remove, but strike out (bad faith RFA votes)

Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:07, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Existing administrators

We're already aware that admins should not 1) protect pages in an edit dispute they're involved in, 2) block when they have a previous conflict with the user, or 3) unblock themselves when specifically blocked by another admin. There are some other admin actions that seem to be controversial.

Current Admins' job performance?

Approve (job performance)

Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:08, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Approve. – Ilovemydoodle (talk / e-mail) 21:26, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

• No issues with job performance. My only personal concern is there don't seem to be quite enough admins watching at any given time. People are busy, have offline lives and so forth -- WQ perhaps could use more admins. Antandrus (talk) 16:42, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

  Agreed. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 19:16, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Current Admins' job performance for Lemonaka

Lemonaka is the most recent admin on the English Wikiquote (I think?, but don’t remember for sure). Ottawahitech (talk) 23:45, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Discussion (job performance)

Lemonaka seems quite active on the WikiQuote:Village Pump which to me is a very positive sign. They also seem to be fairly active patrolling MainSpace pages looking for signs of edit wars and vandalism. Their UserPage mentions only one Adminship, which to me is a good thing because I think it allows an Admin to concentrate on doing a good job here instead of constantly chasing problems at other wikis

Another + to Lemonaka is that they always notify users before deleting pages that those users had started. This gives contributors, or any other person who follows the usertalk page of the contributor, an opportunity to save volunteer work before it disappears from public view.

One minor problem I see is Lemonaka's level of understanding of the English language which is, after all the working language of this wiki. According to their home page Lemonaka is at level-3 English. However, I hope that with active participation this potential problem will soon disappear. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:01, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

@Ottawahitech To begin with, I'm not Lemonade.
This page was created by Ilovemydoodle (talk · contributions), after some brave, though most disruptive and incomprehensive, actions of trying to reform this project, they has been blocked and locked for more than a year and the page has gone stale; Since then, no one left any comments here. I got a notification of your pinging here, but just blank about what I can or I should do on this page. Lemonaka (talk) 15:33, 22 November 2023 (UTC) updated Ottawahitech (talk) 23:45, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Wheel warring is an inappropriate use of admin powers

Agree (wheel warring)

Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:08, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Ignoring consensus is inappropriate for an admin

Yes, but copyvio/NPOV concerns trump consensus

Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:09, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Other (ignoring consensus)

Most of the time an Admin shouldn’t ignore consensus, but in some cases it is understandable. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 02:37, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

The rollback button should only be used in cases of clear vandalism, or reverting oneself

Agree (rollback)

Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:09, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Or reverting a bot error --Ferien (talk) 12:39, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Disagree (rollback)

Disagree. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 17:18, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Rollback should never be used in content disputes

Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:09, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Admins placing blocks should be contactable via email

Agree (admin emails)

Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:09, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Suggested enforcement

Someone should have the authority to temporarily de-admin problematic admins

In other words, troublesome admins might lose their admin rights for e.g. a week. A steward or dev can do this, and possibly this could be added to the bureaucrat abilities.

Disagree (temporary de-adminning)

I think the admins in this case should just be de-adminned if their behaviour is that disruptive. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:10, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

All admins should be subject to periodic reconfirmation of their admin status

For instance, once per (time period), if (X) users (or X admins) express disapproval of an admin, that admin is subject to an RFA-like process for reconfirmation.

Disagree (periodic reconfirmation)

Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:11, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Miscellaneous

Requests for comment is not taken seriously enough

There are some who consider RFC to be anything from a minor "shot over the bow" to a useless step before inevitable arbitration.

Should Wikiquote have Checkusers

Should there be CheckUsers on Wikiquote?

Agree (checkuser rights)

Yes, this would be useful for weeding out sockpuppets. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 00:25, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

@Rubbish computer: Could you please notify more users of this poll by leaving the following message at the end of their Talk Page: {{subst::WQT:ACP}} – ~~~~ (don’t create a new section, the Template does that automatically)? – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 00:37, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Ilovemydoodle, I think I'd rather post at the village pump. Will do so now. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 00:38, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

@Rubbish computer: Also, do you think there should be a closing date for the poll? – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 00:42, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Ilovemydoodle, I don't think it matters either way as long as it's open for a while. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 00:52, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

There should be an intermediate layer between "user" and "admin"

For instance, a user who gets the rollback button but no other admin abilities, or a user who gets deletion tools but not blocking tools.

Agree (intermediate user layer)

Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:12, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Other (intermediate user layer)

Like the idea of rollback rights, patroller rights are also a good one (autopatrol, patrolling other articles). However, I do not think it is right to split up the core admin tools. If you can be trusted with delete, then why not block? --Ferien (talk) 12:42, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

• Agree with Ferien here, exactly. Rollback is useful as a right conferred on established users, but unbundling the tools is an unnecessary complication. Antandrus (talk) 16:40, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Agreed, I support separating tools such as editing templates, rollback, import, merging, etc. But not the core tools. – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 11:56, 14 July 2022 (UTC)