Wikinews:Administrators

This is an official policy on English Wikinews. It has wide acceptance and is considered a standard for all users to follow. Changes to this page must reflect consensus. If in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.

Shortcut: WN:A WN:RFA

This page is a list of administrators, as well as a place to request the granting and removal of admin status.

Admins have no special editorial rights. They can edit pages in the MediaWiki: namespace (system messages), block users, delete pages, and protect pages. Blocking, deletion, and protection are all governed by site policy. Statistics on these activities are here.

• Requesting adminship: You are probably qualified for adminship, provided that the following conditions are true:

1. You've done at least two month's work on Wikinews.
2. You are trusted by the community.

You can view some of the latest requests in the archive, where you can also see some common questions, comments and objections made during the process.

• Former administrators who resigned their adminship in good standing may be reinstated at the discretion of any bureaucrat, while administrators who resigned under controversial circumstances must reapply for adminship by the usual means.

• Requesting de-adminship: Stewards are the only users who can remove administrator privileges. They will not de-admin unless there is community consensus for this to happen or at the request of the administrator in question.

We currently have 13 administrators on Wikinews who are listed below. Names of bureaucrats are listed in bold.

• Adambro
• Anonymous101
• Bawolff
• Brian
• Brian McNeil
• Chiacomo
• Cirt
• Craig Spurrier
• Blood Red Sandman
• Daniel
• Dark Squall
• Deprifry
• Divol, Jacques
• Doldrums
• DragonFire1024
• FellowWikiNews
• IlyaHaykinson
• Jcart1534
• JoshuaZ
• Nathan Carter
• Markie
• Messedrocker
• Nyarlathotep
• Nzgabriel
• Planoneck
• Ral315
• Skenmy
• Steven Fruitsmaak
• SVTCobra
• Thunderhead
• TUFKAAP
• Zachary
• Zanimum

Inactive administrators: (No edits in the past 30 days)

• Borofkin
• Cllewr
• Crimson
• Dan100
• Elliot K
• Eloquence
• Frankie Roberto
• ironiridis
• Lankiveil
• Lyellin
• Mindspillage
• NGerda
• Pingswept
• RossKoepke
• Sfullenwider
• Submarine
• Terinjokes
• TheFearow
• Tomos
• Uncle G

Admin action required

See Wikinews:Admin action alerts. Please put all alerts there.

Requests for adminship

After seven days, a bureaucrat will turn those users into sysops who have consensus support from the community. Do not list people as administrators who have not been granted the appropriate permissions by a bureaucrat!

See /Archive for old requests. Don't forget to inform the Wikinews community of your RFA.

Requests for de-adminship

Remember: For requests for de-adminship, "support" means "remove admin access," and "oppose" means "keep admin access."

Note that we currently have a Category:Admins open to recall.

User:Jimbo Wales

User has never used the admin or bureaucrat rights he has on the project and considering the healthy number of admins we have I suspect he never will so doesn't need these rights anymore. Jimbo only edits extremely rarely here. Adambro - (talk) 19:59, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Votes

Comment This user did not recieve adminship through normal processes. (I think Eloquence gave him the admin bit after he made a comment about mediawiki:Sitenotice, but don't quote me on that). Bawolff ☺☻ 22:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose removal of administrator rights, he often (on enwp) edits archives etc. to courtesy blank material per emails he recieves, and he may need that here. Better safe than sorry, really. Support removing bureaucrat rights. Daniel (talk) 23:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

  Comment His edit history here shows no use of admin rights and this perhaps suggests it is unlikely he'll ever use them in future. If he never had cause to use them when the community was smaller then I doubt he would now. Also, I'd hope that he'd think twice before doing so and instead leave such actions to our now much more established community. He's active over on enwp and so him having admin rights there is perhaps appropriate. Admin/b'crat rights are supposed to be practical tools, Jimbo having these rights instead seems to be symbolic now. Adambro - (talk) 11:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I tend to agree with Adambro here. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 11:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Neutral per Adambro. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 12:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

• Support - changing vote. Adminship is provided here on the basis of "if you need it, and you are trusted, have it". Jimbo is a trusted person, but he does not need admin rights here. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 15:54, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support the removal of all admin rights. Anonymous101 :) 14:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
• Comment This isn't important for the discussion but here is Jimbo's opinion on being desysoped per inactivity: " I think automatic desysopping anyone for inactivity is a really horrible idea and should be rejected". Note that this is not my opinion.Anonymous101 :) 14:26, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
• Comment: This is really a waste of time. Jimbo will restore his adminship when he feels like it. He exists above policy and guidelines. -- Cat ^chi? 14:40, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Has anyone actually contacted the person in question? -- Cat ^chi? 16:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
    • Yes, on his Wikipedia talk page which he often checks. Anonymous101 :) 16:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
      • Please email too... -- Cat ^chi? 16:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
        • Why?Anonymous101 :) 16:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
• Comment This comment is transffered from the associated discussion on Wikipedia:

Actually, I do think you should not consider board members above the policies and guidelines. Anthere - (talk) 16:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiNews rocks. Adminship is provided on the basis of necessity. It's a mop and bucket, not a badge of authority, as they say. This is great because it demonstrates a lack of favoritism. If Jimbo complains and gets sysop back, I'm going to have to eat my tongue, though. This comment by White Cat is incorrect:

Jimbo will restore his adminship when he feels like it. He exists above policy and guidelines.

☯  Zenwhat (talk) 15:31, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

As does all board members. They will not hesitate to re-admin re-bcrat or re-oversight themselves should the need arises. They (Foundation) own the site and they make the rules. Just because they let us decide some issues on our own does not mean they do not reserve the right to interfere. The removal of their access is hence symbolic. -- Cat ^chi? 16:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Pingswept

User had 3 edits in 2007 as a whole.

Votes

• Support per nom --MarkTalk to me 16:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of admin rights due to inactivity. Adambro - (talk) 17:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of rights. This user is clearly inactive on Wikinews. Theres no point in allowing him to keep the admin tools if he hasn't edited for months. If they return and request the admin tools back, however, I would probably support them. User:Anonymous101 :) 17:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support inactive --Ryan524 - (talk) 17:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support as inactive. Cirt - (talk) 19:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support Daniel (talk) 23:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support as inactive. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 12:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

User:RossKoepke

User had 4 edits in 2007 as a whole.

Votes

• Support per nom --MarkTalk to me 16:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of admin rights due to inactivity. Adambro - (talk) 17:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of rights. This user is clearly inactive on Wikinews. Theres no point in allowing him to keep the admin tools if he hasn't edited for months. If they return and request the admin tools back, however, I would probably support them. User:Anonymous101 :) 17:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support inactive --Ryan524 - (talk) 17:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support as inactive. Cirt - (talk) 19:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support Daniel (talk) 23:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support as inactive. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 12:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Uncle G

Last edited Dec 2007

Votes

• Support per nom --MarkTalk to me 16:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of admin rights due to inactivity. Adambro - (talk) 17:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of rights. This user is clearly inactive on Wikinews. Theres no point in allowing him to keep the admin tools if he hasn't edited for months. If they return and request the admin tools back, however, I would probably support them. User:Anonymous101 :) 17:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support inactive --Ryan524 - (talk) 17:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support as inactive. Cirt - (talk) 19:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support Daniel (talk) 23:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support as inactive. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 12:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Dan100

User last edited in July 2007, almost a year ago.

Votes

• Support per nom --MarkTalk to me 16:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of admin rights due to inactivity. Adambro - (talk) 17:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of rights. This user is clearly inactive on Wikinews. Theres no point in allowing him to keep the admin tools if he hasn't edited for months. If they return and request the admin tools back, however, I would probably support them. User:Anonymous101 :) 17:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support inactive --Ryan524 - (talk) 17:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support as inactive. Cirt - (talk) 19:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support Daniel (talk) 23:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support as inactive. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 12:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Frankie Roberto

User last edited in July 2007, almost a year ago. Also has only used the admin tools twice.

Votes

• Support per nom --MarkTalk to me 16:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of admin rights due to inactivity. Adambro - (talk) 17:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of rights. This user is clearly inactive on Wikinews. Theres no point in allowing him to keep the admin tools if he hasn't edited for months. If they return and request the admin tools back, however, I would probably support them. User:Anonymous101 :) 17:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support inactive --Ryan524 - (talk) 17:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support as inactive. Cirt - (talk) 19:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support Daniel (talk) 23:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support as inactive. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 12:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Mindspillage

Last edited in April 2007, over a year ago.

Votes

• Support per nom --MarkTalk to me 16:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of admin rights due to inactivity. Adambro - (talk) 17:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of rights. This user is clearly inactive on Wikinews. Theres no point in allowing him to keep the admin tools if he hasn't edited for months. If they return and request the admin tools back, however, I would probably support them. User:Anonymous101 :) 17:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Shes a her. Bawolff ☺☻ 22:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

• Support inactive --Ryan524 - (talk) 17:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support as inactive. Cirt - (talk) 19:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support as inactive. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 12:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

User:NGerda

Had 4 edits in 2007 as a whole.

Votes

• Support per nom --MarkTalk to me 16:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of admin rights due to inactivity. Adambro - (talk) 17:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of rights. This user is clearly inactive on Wikinews. Theres no point in allowing him to keep the admin tools if he hasn't edited for months. If they return and request the admin tools back, however, I would probably support them. User:Anonymous101 :) 17:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support as much as I like this user, ad heck I was even the one who nominated him, it would not be fair to the others for me to vote diffrently here so I support for being inactive.--Ryan524 - (talk) 17:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support as inactive. Cirt - (talk) 19:17, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support Daniel (talk) 23:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support as inactive. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 12:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Crimson

User has only used admin tools 5 times, and last edited in Oct 07.

Votes

• Support per nom --MarkTalk to me 18:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support per nom - Inactive for over 6 months and little use of the tools. Cirt - (talk) 18:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal due to inactivity. Adambro - (talk) 22:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support inactive --Ryan524 - (talk) 23:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Question: has an effort been made to contact these users via email? Daniel (talk) 05:26, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

  They have all been notified via their Wikinews talkpages - you would have to ask Markie (talk · contribs) if he emailed them. Cirt - (talk) 05:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

  I'm just thinking they may be more likely to get an email than a talk page message. Daniel (talk) 05:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

  IMO if the user isnt checking their userpages then they aint active or even involved with the community, but if you want to email them then feel free. --MarkTalk to me 09:45, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

  I emailed them just to be double-sure. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 13:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

  Crimson and Elliot were the only two with a valid email address/chose to recieve emails from other users, so they were the only two to get an email. I've voted for the others. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 13:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

  I'd agree with Mark. I'm of the opinion that we shouldn't be emailing users in these circumstances. What are we saying, that if they return they can keep their rights? Is that really appropriate, firstly, do we want users return from such a long period of absence and having all the buttons to play with and secondly do we want users returning for the reason of avoiding their rights being removed? I'd suggest not. Adambro - (talk) 14:45, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

  It should be noted that most of these users wouldn't have verified their email, as before they left, you did not have to. So most of them have emails, but you can't email them due to configuration changes. Also I think it is impolite to remove someone without telling them. the chance they'll come back is next to none, its just courtesy.Bawolff ☺☻ 22:41, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

  (re to Adambro) i) courtesy and ii) on the off-chance they'll come back and start being active, having been reminded of the project. It is unlikely they're sitting at home thinking "Thank god I left Wikinews", but have probably forgot all about it. Daniel (talk) 23:26, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

• Support per nom. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 09:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support --Brian McNeil / ^talk 12:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of rights. This user is clearly inactive on Wikinews. Theres no point in allowing him to keep the admin tools if he hasn't edited for months. If they return and request the admin tools back, however, I would probably support them. User:Anonymous101 :) 17:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Sfullenwider

This user has used their admin tools only 3 times, and also are inactive, with one edit in Jan 2007, and before that in Oct 06.

Votes

• Support per nom --MarkTalk to me 17:57, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support per nom - Inactive for over a year. Cirt - (talk) 18:19, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal due to inactivity. Adambro - (talk) 22:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support inactive --Ryan524 - (talk) 23:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support per nom. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 09:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support --Brian McNeil / ^talk 12:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support Daniel (talk) 13:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of rights. This user is clearly inactive on Wikinews. Theres no point in allowing him to keep the admin tools if he hasn't edited for months. If they return and request the admin tools back, however, I would probably support them. User:Anonymous101 :) 17:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Cllewr

This one should be pretty simple also hopefully, as the user has NEVER used their tools, yes, 0 admin actions ever. They also last edited in October 07. --MarkTalk to me 17:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Votes

• Support per nom --MarkTalk to me 17:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support per nom - 6 months of inactivity (combined with never using the tools). Cirt - (talk) 17:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal due to inactivity. Adambro - (talk) 22:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support inactive --Ryan524 - (talk) 23:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support per nom. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 09:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support --Brian McNeil / ^talk 12:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support Daniel (talk) 13:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of rights. This user is clearly inactive on Wikinews. Theres no point in allowing him to keep the admin tools if he hasn't edited for months. If they return and request the admin tools back, however, I would probably support them. User:Anonymous101 :) 17:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Elliot K

This user has only used his admin tools 3 times, and last edited in Jan 07. --MarkTalk to me 17:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Votes

• Support per nom --MarkTalk to me 17:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support per nom - Almost 1.5 years of inactivity. Cirt - (talk) 17:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal due to inactivity. Adambro - (talk) 22:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support inactive --Ryan524 - (talk) 23:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support per nom. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 09:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support --Brian McNeil / ^talk 12:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of rights. This user is clearly inactive on Wikinews. Theres no point in allowing him to keep the admin tools if he hasn't edited for months. If they return and request the admin tools back, however, I would probably support them. User:Anonymous101 :) 17:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Submarine

Well im gunna put this user up for de-admining due to lack of use of the tools/inactivity. This one should be pretty simple IMO, as the user has NEVER used there tools, yes, 0 admin actions ever.--MarkTalk to me 17:45, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

also, this users last edit was just over a year ago. --MarkTalk to me 17:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Votes

• Support per nom --MarkTalk to me 17:45, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support per nom - in addition to nom statement, user has made no contributions to the project for over a year. Cirt - (talk) 17:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal due to inactivity. Adambro - (talk) 22:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support inactive --Ryan524 - (talk) 23:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support per nom. --Skenmy^(t•c•w) 09:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support --Brian McNeil / ^talk 12:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support Daniel (talk) 13:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support removal of rights. This user is clearly inactive on Wikinews. Theres no point in allowing him to keep the admin tools if he hasn't edited for months. If they return and request the admin tools back, however, I would probably support them. User:Anonymous101 :) 17:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Requests for reconfirmation

Any user in good standing may request a reconfirmation of an admin who has marked themselves open to recall here. Any administrator who would like a confirmation that he has the continued support of the community may also list themselves here. If you are requesting reconfirmation due to inactivity, click here.

Please use Support if you believe the listed administrator should retain their administrator privileges, or Oppose to vote for their removal.