User:Steve Smith/Administrative stuff
The following is a (doomed to be forever incomplete) list of places editors can help out on the "administrative" side of Wikipedia (the term is used generally, and not intended to apply solely to administrators).
| Page | Purpose | Who can help | What help is required | Useful policies, guidelines, and essays |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deletion | ||||
| Articles for deletion | To allow editors to discuss whether articles should be deleted | Anyone | Participation in deletion discussions. Admins can help by closing expired discussions. | Deletion policy, AFD Wikietiquette, Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions |
| Images and media for deletion | To allow editors to discuss whether images and other media should be deleted | Anyone, though for most discussions a good understanding of Wikipedia's Non-free content criteria is needed | Participation in deletion discussions. Admins can help by closing expired discussions. | Deletion policy, Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, Non-free content criteria |
| Templates for deletion | To allow editors to discuss whether templates should be deleted | Anyone | Participation in deletion discussions. Admins can help by closing expired discussions. | Deletion policy, Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions |
| Stub types for deletion | To allow editors to discuss whether a given stub type should be deleted | Anyone | Participation in deletion discussions. Admins can help by closing expired discussions. | Deletion policy, Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions |
| Miscellany for deletion | To allow editors to discuss whether pages not dealt with elsewhere should be deleted (usually those in userspace or Wikipedia space) | Anyone | Participation in deletion discussions. Admins can help by closing expired discussions. | Deletion policy, Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, User page policy |
| Category:Proposed deletion | To view articles tagged for proposed deletion | Anyone, although administrators are generally more useful here than are non-administrators | Any editor can remove the proposed deletion tag from an article that he/she doesn't feel should be deleted. Any editor may "second" a proposed deletion by adding Template:Prod-2 (though the usefulness of doing so is questionable). Admins may deleted articles that have been proposed for deletion for more than five days. | Deletion policy, Proposed deletion |
| Category:Speedy deletion | To view articles tagged for speedy deletion | Generally only administrators are useful here, though any editor can review the articles and remove tags if they feel that they were placed inappropriately. | Admins may delete articles that meet the criteria for speedy deletion. | Deletion policy, Criteria for speedy deletion |
| Deletion review | To allow editors to discuss whether administrators correctly dealt with specific disputed deletion decisions | Anyone | Participation in deletion discussions. Admins can help by closing expired discussions. | Deletion policy |
| Items for discussion | ||||
| Categories for discussion | To allow editors to discuss whether categories should be deleted, renamed, or merged | Anyone | Participation in discussions. Admins can help by closing expired discussions. | Category deletion policy, Category naming conventions, Overcategorization guideline |
| User categories for discussion | To allow editors to discuss whether user categories should be deleted, renamed, or merged | Anyone | Participation in discussions. Admins can help by closing expired discussions. | Category deletion policy, User categories, Overcategorization of user categories guideline |
| Redirects for discussion | To allow editors to discuss whether redirects should be deleted | Anyone | Participation in discussions. Admins can help by closing expired discussions. | When should we delete a redirect? |
| Non-administrator noticeboards (project-wide - there are also a number of wikiproject-specific noticeboards) | ||||
| Neutral point of view noticeboard | To discuss the application of the policy on neutral point of view to problematic articles | Anyone with a good understanding of the policy on neutral point of view | Participation in discussion, fixes on articles deemed to need them | Policy on neutral point of view |
| No original research noticeboard | To discuss the application of the policy prohibiting original research to problem articles | Anyone with a good understanding of the No Original Research policy | Participation in discussion, fixes on articles deemed to need them | Policy on original research, Policy on verifiability |
| Biographies of Living Persons noticeboard | To focus attention on violations and potential violations of Wikipedia's policy on the biographies of living persons | Anyone with a good understanding of Wikipedia's policy on the biographies of living persons | Participation in discussions, fixes on articles deemed to need them | Policy on the biographies of living persons |
| Reliable sources noticeboard | To discuss the reliability of disputed sources | Anyone with a good understanding of Wikipedia's guidelines on reliable sources | Participation in discussions | Reliable sources guideline, Policy on verifiability |
| Bot owners noticeboard | To discuss issues relating to bots on Wikipedia | Anyone with a good understanding of Bot policy | Participation in discussions | Bot policy |
| Conflict of interest noticeboard | To draw the community's attention to areas in which editors are editing under a conflict of interest | Anyone with a good understanding of the conflict of interest guideline | Participation in discussions | Conflict of interest guideline |
| Ethnic and cultural conflicts noticeboard | To draw the community's attention to areas in which nationalist sentiments are preventing consensus and/or neutral point of view from being reached | Anyone with a good understanding of Wikipedia's policy on neutral point of view, though a good dose of masochism is also helpful | Participation in discussions | Policy on neutral point of view |
| Fiction noticeboard | To discuss the application of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines to articles on fictional topics | Anyone with a good understanding of Wikipedia's core policies and an understanding of how to apply these core policies to fictional topics | Participation in discussions | Policy on verifiability, Policy on original research |
| Fringe theories noticeboard | To discuss articles in which fringe theories are being treated in a fasion not compliant with the policy on neutral point of view and/or the guideline on fringe theories | Anyone with a good understanding of the relevant policies and guidelines | Participation in discussions | policy on neutral point of view, guideline on fringe theories |
| Administrator noticeboards | ||||
| Administrators' Noticeboard | To discuss items requiring administrators' attention | Anyone is welcome to discuss items, but many of the items require intervention that only administrators can provide | Discussion of items | |
| Administrators' Noticeboard for Incidents | Nominally to discuss incidents (as opposed to general items) requiring administrators' attention, but in practice it is essentially a second Administrators' Noticeboard | Anyone is welcome to discuss items, but many of the items require intervention that only administrators can provide | Discussion of items | |
| Administrators' Noticeboard for Arbitration Enforcement | To discuss administrative actions required as part of the enforcement of arbitration cases | Anyone is welcome to discuss items, but many of the items require intervention that only administrators can provide | Discussion of items | |
| Administrators' Noticeboard for 3RR | To report violations of Wikipedia's edit-warring policy. | As there is rarely discussion surrounding 3RR cases, non-administrators are not generally very useful here | Administrators can issue blocks for edit-warring | Three revert rule |
| Bureaucrats' Noticeboard | To discuss items requiring bureaucrats' attention | Anyone is welcome to discuss items, but many of the items require intervention that only bureaucrats can provide | Discussion of items | |
| Editor conduct issues | ||||
| Wikiquette alerts | To report low-level problems with editor conduct | Anyone with reasonably good communication/conflict-resolution and with an even temper | Discussion of items, providing outside opinions, low-level mediation | Wikiquette, Civility policy, Policy prohibiting personal attacks, Guideline on the assumption of good faith |
| Request for comment on user conduct | To discuss ongoing behavioural problems by editors | Anyone | Providing opinions | |
| Requests for arbitration | To request a judgment from the Arbitration Committee on a behavioural issue that could not be resolved by any other step in dispute resolution - the final step in dispute resolution. | Anyone, though only members of the Arbitration Committee are permitted to make judgments | Providing opinions and advice to the Arbitration Committee on proposed cases and those it had already agreed to hear, providing evidence in cases that the Arbitration Committee has already agreed to hear | Arbitration Committee |
| Copyright issues | ||||
| Requests for privileges | ||||
| Page assessment and promotion | ||||
| Article dispute resolution | ||||
| Abuse reporting | ||||
| Village pump | ||||
| General help | ||||