Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Edit warring/Archives/2014/October: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Archiving 1 discussion(s) from Wikipedia talk:Edit warring) (bot
 
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) from Wikipedia talk:Edit warring) (bot
 
Line 5: Line 5:
Due to power given to administrators such persons should be impartial, especially when engaging in edit warring discussion. It is obvious and basic rule for almost every community, but apparently not in wiki projects, real Wild West. Whenever an administrator is engaging for the benefit of a friend, such person should almost automatically risk de-adminship. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/31.175.152.230|31.175.152.230]] ([[User talk:31.175.152.230|talk]]) 08:26, 27 September 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Due to power given to administrators such persons should be impartial, especially when engaging in edit warring discussion. It is obvious and basic rule for almost every community, but apparently not in wiki projects, real Wild West. Whenever an administrator is engaging for the benefit of a friend, such person should almost automatically risk de-adminship. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/31.175.152.230|31.175.152.230]] ([[User talk:31.175.152.230|talk]]) 08:26, 27 September 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:I think you're looking for [[WP:INVOLVED]]? A policy exists, although something as extreme as de-adminship is never automatic but is decided through process and discussion. [[User:K7L|K7L]] ([[User talk:K7L|talk]]) 18:43, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
:I think you're looking for [[WP:INVOLVED]]? A policy exists, although something as extreme as de-adminship is never automatic but is decided through process and discussion. [[User:K7L|K7L]] ([[User talk:K7L|talk]]) 18:43, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

== Protection ==

I would like to suggest a padlock be placed on this page. [[User:Lightning BOLT!|The Lightning Strikes!]] [[User Talk:Lightning BOLT!|<sup>Try me! </sup>]] 23:58, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
:There's no need for protection. --[[User:NeilN|<b style="color:navy">Neil<span style="color:red">N</span></b>]] <sup>[[User talk:NeilN|<i style="color:blue">talk to me</i>]]</sup> 12:48, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
::It's already protected, but there isn't a padlock. [[User:Lightning BOLT!|The Lightning Strikes!]] [[User Talk:Lightning BOLT!|<sup>Try me! </sup>]] 23:12, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
:::{{done}} - {{thank you}}- [[user: MrX|Mr]][[user talk:MrX|X]] 23:30, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 00:18, 2 December 2014


Impartialilty

Due to power given to administrators such persons should be impartial, especially when engaging in edit warring discussion. It is obvious and basic rule for almost every community, but apparently not in wiki projects, real Wild West. Whenever an administrator is engaging for the benefit of a friend, such person should almost automatically risk de-adminship. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.175.152.230 (talk) 08:26, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

I think you're looking for WP:INVOLVED? A policy exists, although something as extreme as de-adminship is never automatic but is decided through process and discussion. K7L (talk) 18:43, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Protection

I would like to suggest a padlock be placed on this page. The Lightning Strikes! Try me! 23:58, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

There's no need for protection. --NeilN talk to me 12:48, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
It's already protected, but there isn't a padlock. The Lightning Strikes! Try me! 23:12, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 Done - Thank you- MrX 23:30, 27 October 2014 (UTC)