What Can I Do To Help?[edit]
If you're an admin, you should already have a solid idea of what areas admins are useful for. These areas include:
-
- A place to notify admins of clear cases of vandals, spammers, and other like disruptive users. An administrator is notified of a situation, and use their judgement to decide a suitable resolution to the matter. An administrator generally is expected to revert the damage done, and either warn or ban the user(s) involved depending on the frequency and severity of the disruptions. Also, whether the admin thinks the edit was a mistake made in good faith, or intentionally made in bad faith.
- This is where possible cases of copyright violations are posted in regards to text in an article. Typically, an administrator is notified of a situation, and attempts to contact the user and warn them of their actions. Most cases are false alarms, or simply mistakes made by new users. In extreme cases, where the user continues to post in spite of warnings, an administrator may tag a page as protected or under investigation for copyright complaints. An administration may block a user from editing for the duration of the project. Some may impose conditions in order to unblock their account.
- One of the most active general boards for gaining the attention of admins about specific incidents of potential violations of Wikipedia policies. Issues range from disruptive posting, copyright violations, and edit warring. Other users are able to comment on the case, and an admin generally bases his resolution on evidence collected on his own and brought up in discussion. Possible resolutions can involve anywhere from mediation, to warnings, to blocking a user.
- This page involves users who actively patrols Special:RecentChanges for potential cases of Wikipedia policy violations, which he then posts and tries to get the attention of administrators. Other users are allowed to participate in the discussion. Its format is similar to the general AN/I board, but emphasis is placed on timeliness of response, and swiftest resolutions.
- This noticeboard involves specific cases posted by users of possible candidates for speedy deletion. An administrator's first concern is quickly deleting or reverting changes recently made. After the changes have been fixed, admins bases the punishment on the Three-revert rule and edit warring violations.
Admin's Tools[edit]
Familiarize yourself with the primary tools an admin uses:
- This details the process of granting access to the accountcreator group, mainly to users that are actively participating in the Wikipedia:Request an account process. It also details the process of removing this status for whatever reason.
- This article details how to detect candidates for rollback and how to perform rollbacks and in extreme cases, mass rollbacks.
- In extreme cases of repeat vandalism, especially from multiple accounts, an administrator may have to protect a page from further vandalism. It also details how to arbitrate content disputes, which can result in a quicker resolution, and thus a quicker change back to unprotected states.
- Also involves protecting pages in order to prevent a page from being repeatedly created, when the page is known to have been deleted recently for violating the standards of content creation.
- Details how to engage in the various methods of conflict resolution during the discussion areas anywhere on Wikipedia. Methods used are useful for varying degrees of control the administrator needs to have over the situation.
- Details the process on how to block users for any reason.
- Oftentimes, it is useful for administrators to view deleted pages, such as in collecting evidence about a current case for a repeat offender.
Realize that these tools are extremely powerful, and can do extensive damage to Wikipedia if used improperly. Study past cases in which Wikipedia admins have caused extensive disruption at Wikipedia:Village_stocks. A famous example involves a curious user who inquired on whether it was possible to delete the main page of Wikipedia, another admin assured him (jokingly) that he had already tested the theory and proved that it was not possible, the joke was lost on the original admin who promptly attempted to confirm the other admin's statement by deleting the main page.
Admin Conduct[edit]
Judgement[edit]
As a rule of thumb, if a new administrator is not sure whether to do something, it is best to ask a more experienced admin. Part of being an admin is learning when it is the proper time to use your tools. Certain situations require more care than others, such as:
- Blocking users
- Deleting pages
- Protecting pages
Communication/Accountability[edit]
Administrators must always be civil in their interactions with other users, and must always act to improve Wikipedia. This is also known as "acting in good faith". Behavior unbecoming of an administrator includes:
- Personal attacks/biting
- Edit warring
- Sock puppetry
- Extreme cases of breaching public trust (for example, using administrator privileges to reveal personal information)
- Conflict of interest
Punishment for administrators found to be acting in "bad faith" can range anywhere from a warning, to arbitration, to immediate desysopping.
Security[edit]
Account security is paramount for admins, because unlike users, admins have the ability to cause site-wide damage extremely easily. An account compromised by someone with bad intentions has the potential to do large amounts of damage. It is therefore important to have strong passwords, and change them often. It is also important that admins do not share their password with anyone, even with people they trust.
If an administrator account is compromised, it is required that the account holder attempt to regain control of the account or failing that, alerting a bureaucrat. Failing to do so will result in desysopping.
|
