Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Bureaucrat discussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Not to be confused with Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard.

A bureaucrat discussion or 'crat chat is a procedure by which bureaucrats on Wikipedia can discuss whether consensus is present at a particular request for adminship (RfA) or request for bureaucratship (RfB). They can also be held for resysop requests if there is a doubt concerning the suitability for restoration of admin permissions.

Bureaucrat discussions should not be confused with the regular discussions, involving bureaucrats, at the bureaucrats' noticeboard and on other pages.

Purpose

[edit]

Bureaucrat discussions are only held when a bureaucrat is unsure whether consensus has been reached in an RFA or RFB. Typically, these are borderline cases, or ones in which unusual circumstances apply.

Before restoring the administrator flag, a bureaucrat should be reasonably convinced that the user has returned to activity or intends to return to activity as an editor. Should there be doubt concerning the suitability for restoration of admin permissions, the restoration shall be delayed until sufficient discussion has occurred and a consensus established through a bureaucrat chat.[1]

Holding a bureaucrat discussion ensures that the decision making process in such cases is transparent. However, as bureaucrat discussions delay a decision and can take considerable time on the part of bureaucrats, they are used only as a last resort, after measures such as extending the RFA or RFB have been considered. They are not used for all controversial cases; if the closing bureaucrat can determine consensus alone, there is no need for a bureaucrat discussion.

Process

[edit]

A bureaucrat discussion is started by one bureaucrat placing an RFA or RFB on hold. This ends the discussion on the RFA or RFB and prevents any more comments in support or opposition being added.

The bureaucrat then creates a subpage of the RFA or RFB's page, on which to hold the bureaucrat discussion. They start a discussion by giving an explanation of why they feel unable to determine consensus, and highlight some areas which the discussion may need to address. The discussion is linked from the RFA or RFB. Finally, the bureaucrat informs other active bureaucrats of the discussion, both on their user talk pages and on the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

To keep the discussion focused, it is open only to bureaucrats (other editors may comment on the associated talk page). Bureaucrats who have taken a position on the RFA or RFB itself are expected to state this and recuse themselves from the discussion. The talk page of the bureaucrat discussion is available for all users to comment on the ongoing discussion, and bureaucrats will often respond directly to comments made there.

Past experience has shown that bureaucrat discussions usually work best when they operate over a short time frame. Once several bureaucrats have participated, if agreement arises, the RFA or RFB is closed as usual. If no agreement among the bureaucrats emerges after one to two days, a common proposal will be to close the RFA or RFB as "no consensus", given that as a group, the bureaucrats cannot determine consensus.

Previous bureaucrat discussions

[edit]
Discussion Type Date Duration in hours Percent support Outcome Initiated by Closed by
Danny RfA April 9, 2007 4 68.4% Successful Taxman Rdsmith4
Gracenotes RfA May 31, 2007 134 73.9% No consensus Cecropia Cecropia
Cobi RfA October 10, 2007 17 69.7% No consensus Deskana Cecropia
Remember the dot RfA October 28, 2007 13 73.8% No consensus Deskana Deskana
Riana RfB March 6, 2008 60 85.9% No consensus WJBscribe WJBscribe
Avraham 2 RfB May 12, 2008 3 82.3% No consensus Kingturtle Taxman
Kww 3 RfA October 17, 2009 44 68.7% No consensus WJBscribe Andrevan
Nihonjoe 4 RfB November 25, 2009 82 82.7% Successful Avraham EVula
Juliancolton 2 RfB January 2, 2010 26 82.0% No consensus Nihonjoe Nihonjoe
Lear's Fool RfA January 9, 2011 47 75.4% Successful X! EVula
Mlpearc RfA August 11, 2012 16 73.2% No consensus Pakaran Pakaran
Salvidrim RfA January 13, 2013 24 76.4% Successful Avraham Avraham
Trappist the monk RfA September 16, 2013 24 71.1% Successful WJBscribe WJBscribe
Lugia2453‎ RfA November 4, 2013 36 69.3% No consensus Wizardman Xeno
SarekOfVulcan 3‎ RfA January 25, 2014 57 66.1% No consensus Maxim Xeno
Mkativerata 2 RfA August 9, 2014 31 69.6% No consensus Writ Keeper Xeno
Rich Farmbrough 2 RfA July 5, 2015 27 66.0% No consensus Maxim WJBscribe
Cyberpower678 RfA July 10, 2015 31 73.8% No consensus WJBscribe WJBscribe
Liz RfA August 4, 2015 37 73.5% Successful WJBscribe Maxim
Hawkeye7 2 RfA February 1, 2016 27 66.8% No consensus Avraham Nihonjoe
Godsy RfA December 5, 2016 36 68.0% No consensus WJBscribe Xeno
GoldenRing RfA April 7, 2017 40 66.9% Successful WJBscribe Maxim
Jbhunley RfA August 7, 2018 42 69.5% No consensus Xaosflux Xeno
RexxS RfA April 8, 2019 60 64.1% Successful Maxim Dweller
Floquenbeam 2 RfA July 29, 2019 92 73.7% Successful Primefac Primefac
Money emoji RfA February 18, 2020 107 69.9% Successful Primefac Primefac
Tamzin RfA May 2, 2022 35 75.3% Successful Maxim Useight
ScottishFinnishRadish RfA September 20, 2022 44 71.8% Successful Acalamari Xaosflux
MB RfA January 8, 2023 28 68.4% No consensus Primefac Primefac
Pppery RfA August 7, 2023 24 73.3% Successful Maxim Primefac
Non-standard chats
In July 2018, a non-standard 'crat chat formed regarding a resysop request, running for about 70 hours before closing successfully.

Analysis

[edit]
Last updated 24 October 2024

RfA's discretionary range has been set from 65% to 75% since 2016, and was de facto 70% to 75% before that.[2]

  • 3 bureaucrat discussions have been held for RfAs below this range.
    • 2[3] ended in promotion.
    • 1[4] found no consensus.
  • 20 have been held for RfAs within this range.
    • 7[5] ended in promotion.
    • 13[6] found no consensus.
  • 3[7] have been held for RfAs that were above the range. All ended in promotion.

The lowest passing percentages are 64.1% post-2016[8] and 68.4% pre-2016.[9] The highest failing percentage is 73.9%[10]

RfB had a discretionary range of 85% to 90% until 2010, when it was modified to a passing mark of "somewhere around 85%".[11] All four RfB bureaucrat discussions happened before that change:

  • 3 were for RfBs below the range.
    • 1[12] resulted in promotion.
    • 2[13] found no consensus.
  • 1[14] was within the range. It had no consensus.

The lowest passing percentage is 82.7%.[12] The highest failing percentage is 85.9%.[14]

Twelve administrators and one bureaucrat have been promoted as the result of a bureaucrat discussion.

  • 5 admins[15] remain admins.
  • 3 admins[16] resigned uncontroversially.
  • 2 admins[17] were desysopped for inactivity.
  • 1 admin[8] and 1 bureaucrat[18] had their tools removed for cause.
  • 1 admin[19] resigned while facing desysop.

Notes and references

[edit]
  1. ^ See Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2019 Resysop Criteria (2).
  2. ^ Wikipedia:2015 administrator election reform/Phase II/RfC, closed December 30, 2015
  3. ^ RexxS, Danny
  4. ^ SarekOfVulcan 3
  5. ^ GoldenRing, Money emoji, Trappist the monk, ScottishFinnishRadish, Pppery, Liz, Floquenbeam 2
  6. ^ Rich Farmbrough 2, Hawkeye7 2, Godsy, MB, Kww 3, Lugia2453, Jbhunley, Mkativerata 2, Cobi, Mlpearc, Remember the dot, Cyberpower678, Gracenotes
  7. ^ Lear's Fool, Tamzin, Salvidrim
  8. ^ a b RexxS
  9. ^ Danny
  10. ^ Gracenotes
  11. ^ December 30, 2009, edit as implementation of Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/RfB bar
  12. ^ a b Nihonjoe 4
  13. ^ Juliancolton 2, Avraham 2
  14. ^ a b Riana
  15. ^ Trappist the monk, Liz, Floquenbeam, Moneytrees, ScottishFinnishRadish
  16. ^ Lear's Fool, Tamzin, Pppery
  17. ^ Danny, GoldenRing
  18. ^ Nihonjoe
  19. ^ Salvidrim!
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Bureaucrat_discussion&oldid=1253202199"