31:
94:
165:
If you are commenting at RFA and find that a given candidate's ability to use the tools correctly (i.e. within policy, guideline and consensus) is likely to provide a greater benefit to the project than the consequences of their abuse or misuse of the tools, then a
115:
is a process to determine if the community believes that a given editor is capable of dealing with the tools that come with adminship, and the implication of the outcome of application of those tools.
199:
151:
Given that mistakes may happen, a secondary consideration should be whether (accidental or otherwise) misuse of the tools outweighs positive and proper use of the tools.
16:
This essay is about evaluating an editor's contributions in requests for adminship. For the essay on unblocking editors with net positive contributions, see
194:
143:
It is possible, although unlikely, that any given new administrator will use their tools for things found either undesirable or simply against policy (e.g.
46:
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more
Knowledge (XXG) contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
47:
112:
179:
106:
tools to a user is going to produce more help than harm to
Knowledge (XXG) then the user should be supported in that request.
118:
Whilst there are a number of extra functions granted to admins, blocking, deleting and protecting are the most "visible".
17:
51:
140:
It is possible, although much less certain, that any given new administrator will make severe mistakes.
61:
127:
131:
39:
123:
103:
144:
188:
54:. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
137:
It is probable, although not certain, that a new administrator will make mistakes.
154:
Of course "more help than harm" in terms of administrative actions is explicitly
122:
It is probable, and desirable, that a new administrator will start using the
170:
applies and the candidate should be supported in their request.
88:
25:
76:
69:
134:tools in an area they have expressed interest in.
158:numerical; 51 good deletions v. 49 bad ones is
8:
200:Matters related to requests for adminship
48:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies or guidelines
195:Knowledge (XXG) essays about adminship
113:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for adminship
7:
180:Knowledge (XXG):Disruptive sanctions
145:pushing a particular point of view
52:thoroughly vetted by the community
14:
92:
29:
23:Essay on editing Knowledge (XXG)
1:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Unblockables
216:
59:
15:
100:This page in a nutshell:
162:"more help than harm".
50:, as it has not been
110:
109:
87:
86:
207:
96:
95:
89:
79:
72:
33:
32:
26:
215:
214:
210:
209:
208:
206:
205:
204:
185:
184:
176:
93:
83:
82:
75:
68:
64:
56:
55:
30:
24:
21:
12:
11:
5:
213:
211:
203:
202:
197:
187:
186:
183:
182:
175:
172:
149:
148:
141:
138:
135:
108:
107:
97:
85:
84:
81:
80:
73:
70:WP:NETPOSITIVE
65:
60:
57:
45:
44:
36:
34:
22:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
212:
201:
198:
196:
193:
192:
190:
181:
178:
177:
173:
171:
169:
163:
161:
157:
152:
146:
142:
139:
136:
133:
129:
125:
121:
120:
119:
116:
114:
105:
101:
98:
91:
90:
78:
74:
71:
67:
66:
63:
58:
53:
49:
43:
41:
35:
28:
27:
19:
168:net positive
167:
164:
159:
155:
153:
150:
117:
111:
102:If granting
99:
37:
38:This is an
189:Categories
77:WP:NETPOS
62:Shortcuts
174:See also
128:Protect
132:Delete
124:Block
104:admin
40:essay
130:and
160:not
156:not
191::
147:).
126:,
42:.
20:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.