User:Pedro/Net Positive
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an essay; it contains the advice and/or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. It is not a policy or guideline, and editors are not obliged to follow it. |
 |
This page in a nutshell: If granting a user admin tools is going to produce more help than harm to Wikipedia then the user should be supported in that request. |
At WP:RFA I will often sum up my feelings by stating if I believe a candidate will be a net positive to Wikipedia as an administrator as well as an editor. My interpretation is as follows:
- It is probable, and desirable, that a new administrator will start using the BLOCK, PROTECT and DELETE tools in an area they have expressed interest in.
- It is probable, although not certain, that a new administrator will make mistakes.
- It is possible, although much less certain, that any given new administrator will make severe mistakes.
- 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. Point of View pushing).
The objective of RFA is to determine if the community believes that any given editor is capable of dealing with the tools that come with adminship, and the implication of the outcome of application of those tools.
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.
Where I find which is the majority of cases that a given candidate's abilities to use the tools correctly (i.e. within policy, guideline and consensus) is greater than their chance of misuse causing harm then net positive applies.
- Note "more help than harm" is explicitly not numerical; 51 good deletions v. 49 bad ones is not "more help than harm."
