WikiEducator talk:Administrators

From WikiEducator
Jump to: navigation, search
Workgroup to propose policies and guidelines for WE Administrators

Project Home/Charter  |  Meetings  |  Workgroup report  |  LANDING PAGE - Policies and guidelines

Draft Policies

WE Admin page | Selection of Admins | Policy for page deletions | Policy for page protection | Policy for blocking users

Draft Guidelines

Page deletion guidelines | Guidelines for Blocking users  | Guidelines for protecting pages

Also see & edit Consensus Policy (Draft under development) of inter-group interest

Admin Workgroup Meeting (Asynchronous), Second Session, from 0001 UTC on 5 August 2009 to 2400 UTC on 7 September 2009


Hi, I'd like to be an administrator here. I have considerable experience with MediaWiki administration on a variety of wikis, ranging from large ones like English Wikipedia to small ones like I have also been pretty active in the WikiEducator and OER Foundation world for a while, and believe I am reasonably well known in this community. I don't expect I would be very active, but would be happy to take care of administrative tasks on request. I have looked through the various related policy pages and am comfortable consulting them, and if appropriate other members of the community, before taking any non-trivial administrative action. -Pete F. 22:08, 6 December 2013 (UTC)


Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Should we create a new page to list the WikiMedia user roles and which features/tools each has access to?013:57, 11 December 2009
Basic question about terminology102:22, 24 August 2009
Meeting; Second Session005:27, 5 August 2009

Should we create a new page to list the WikiMedia user roles and which features/tools each has access to?

It seems to me that the WE user (listed first in the table under Types of Administrators) is not an administrator and so doesn't really belong under this heading. I propose that we create a new page, possibly WikiEducator:User access levels (modeled on [1]) and move the "Overview of user rights" table to the new page, to be expanded to include all WM defined roles. Then on this page just about administrators we should define what an administrator is relative to the WM defined roles, e.g., is a bureaucrat or a bot an administrator?.


ASnieckus (talk)13:57, 11 December 2009

Basic question about terminology

I've looked over our content so far as regards administrators, and wonder if we are using the term administators in two different ways: 1) as the word to describe users who perform technical day-to-day maintenance and support (sysops, bureaucrats...see "Types of Administrators") and 2) a short form referring to the Sysop Administrator. Although I'm beginning to gain a better understanding of this distinction, I found it very confusing when I first joined the WE Administrators group. I have no knowledge of how these terms relate to the mediawiki software, so maybe there's good reason for this double use.

If there is room for adjusting how we use these terms, my preference is to use Administrator to refer to the class of users who do technical maintenance/support and to refer to the Sysop Administrator as a Sysop (short for systems operator).

Other thoughts on this?

ASnieckus (talk)07:05, 15 August 2009

I just copied this message from another page on procedures: I am confused. I would shy away from so many initials/acronyms. I am afraid the procedure is far too sophisticated for me. I need something simple. I agree with Alison that we need to define some of the terms like: a bureaucrat? Administrator? Who is approving? What criteria will they have?

Nelliemuller (talk)02:19, 24 August 2009

Meeting; Second Session

Dear friends, Thus the WE Admin Group has approved its charter ( Workgroup:WikiEducator_Administrators#Vote_for_the_Charter) . Now it is the time for the important part of our business ; developing following policies and guidelines for WE Administrator/Sysop users.


  1. Selection of Admins
  2. Policy for page deletions
  3. Policy for page protection
  4. Policy for blocking users


  1. Page deletion guidelines
  2. Guidelines for Blocking users
  3. Guidelines for protecting pages

As hard jobs are ahead, instead of Coffee time, we may start with a breakfast time for five days from 05/08/2009. Our breakfast menu is splendid as seen above <smile>. Our strategy during the breakfast time will be copying relevant open licensed content to the respective policy/guideline pages and freehand editing. No signature would be requiring as in the coffee time. Members can also opt to furnish suggestions or start discussion threads on the corresponding TALK pages.

Our tentative plan for the second session is:

  • After the breakfast we will hold three days discussions on each item starting from selection of admin and ending at guidelines for protecting pages.
  • From 28/08/2009 to 31/08/2009 we will give time for feedback from the WE community.
  • From 01/09/2009 to 04/09/2009 we will vote each item.
  • On 05/09/2009 & 06/09/2009 we will write the report and
  • On 07/09/2009 we will submit the same to WCC.

Another item of common interest to all the Workgroups – the Consensus policy – is also included in our group navigation template for promoting the idea ( ). It is not a part of our charter. So, let us now start our splendid breakfast to face the real challenge.

Warm regards

Anil Prasad 17:27, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Anil Prasad (talk)05:27, 5 August 2009