Wikipedia talk:List of administrators/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Single list of active admins

Per a suggestion from User:Moe Epsilon, I'm changing user:Rick Bot so that it keeps a single list of active admins rather than the 3 lists split by first letter. Starting tomorrow, the bot will update a full list of active admins at Wikipedia:List of administrators/Active - temporarily in addition to updating the split lists at Wikipedia:List of administrators/A-F etc. Assuming no one objects, in a few days I'll change the bot to stop updating the split lists (at which point the split lists might as well be deleted or changed to redirects to the appropriate spot in the full list). I'm attempting to make this transition relatively transparent. If anyone has any issues with this or notices any problems, please let me know. -- Rick Block (talk) 05:17, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Seems perfectly cromulent. Thank you for your efforts on this. –xeno^talk 17:01, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Admin shortage

I've recently returned to Wikipedia after a long absence (I've hardly done anything since 2007). I came back expecting to find that the number of sysops had grown in proportion to the size of Wikipedia — in other words, that there would be around 10,000 at least. That's not what I find. I find that the number of active sysops has actually declined over the last five years. What's up with that?

I think the whole administrative system needs a major overhaul. Some suggestions :

• Abolish the sysop/admin position completely. Instead, give most of the powers (except blocking) that sysops have to all users by default after completing 2500 edits and six months' tenure. Users who cause trouble can have these powers revoked; they can be put into a new category of "restricted editor."
• Abolish the Bureaucrat and Checkuser positions. Transfer their powers - along with the sysop "blocking" power — to the Stewards (of whom there should be A LOT MORE). "Grandfather" all existing active sysops, bureaucrats, and checkusers (provided they don't have a history of causing problems) into Stewards, and replace RFA elections with Steward elections, for which the bar needs to be lowered considerably.

I expect that some users who hold entrenched positions and glory in TITLES will not like this proposal. But Wikipedia is already top-heavy with bureaucracy, which needs to be streamlined. I call for a system shakeup. Who's with me? David Cannon (talk) 13:23, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

A bold proposal. I would seriously consider supporting this if the downward trend continues to the point of emergency crisis. So far we're still maintaining but if this continues... -- œ^™ 03:48, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Killing inspiration

I'd joined very first time to Wikipedia after doing a full day study from YouTube tutorials and with so many helpful instruction from very kind admins. But This is no easy a new user learn everything in just one day, also Wikipedia have different ways to upload information, article and indeed user information. With my short time learning I tried edit my user page and talk page. I follow exactly Wikipedia help with template Infobox person but I agree perhaps I didn't understand much well using parameters for now. Same way I search people how doing good formatting for talk page. I choose one as example Sara FB (talk) how she did simple and beautiful.

I agree for my poor understanding perhaps I make mistaken against Wikipedia rules but I was truly believing that I was just trying to see how much I understand and of course I believed have so many good heart users & admins around Wikipedia who will guide me what is right. I was keep doing more study to learn but must needed times to be perfect like Sir, Anthony Bradbury how he is perfect. He working with Wikipedia more then 10 years, so here no doubt how he good about all, but today I was feeling he admin for killing inspirations of new users job without try explain what was right way to try again, even he didn't said a single word for notify me. All users and admins knows well how difficult try to do something for very first time and all was needed a proper guidelines. When I see first time Sir, Anthony Bradbury deleted my user page and nothing he advice for next try I was thinking maybe Wikipedia not for me, because of if an admin only able to delete things and not interested to suggest right way, so I'll do try hardly next time but some another admin like honorable admin Sir, Anthony Bradbury will delete my hard working job without explain to learn right way. That feels heartbreaking, no matter I did incomplete but I'm not ashamed because I did how better I understood and I try best for very first time. So I called it killing inspiration to a new user.

I was thinking I won't reply anything to Wikipedia but I see another admin Sir, Alexf. He also found wrong in my talk page, but he did something surprising. Admin Sir, Alexf spend so long time to show me what I'v made mistaken and what I need do corrections, he try show me step by step my wrong editing. I thank admin Alexf personally and I see his user page how he updating everything for help users. I read his helpful tips tips for the angry new user what really make me smile. No, I'm not angry but I see difference with those both admins Sir, Alexf & Anthony Bradbury. I Also read user page of Anthony Bradbury, he seems living with many pride of his success but Wikipedia not his personal property I believe, If Anthony Bradbury tired of helping new users then better he take rest and leave to them who always willingly ready to help new users. Don't kill simple peoples inspiration that they will start thinking they can't do perfect, like I was feeling maybe I can't do. all just need proper guidelines and times. Thank you! --Maxmasum (talk) 18:24, 18 November 2017 (UTC)