Wikipedia:Administrators open to recall/Admin criteria
This page is part of the overall voluntary and unofficial admin recall process and supporting material. It is a list of criteria developed by various admins who are members of Category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall, as well as others interested in adminship who are not yet admins. Only the admin themselves should add their information to this table, as the recall process itself is voluntary, and so is making criteria or process information known in advance (although some would strongly encourage it). In addition to the criteria and processes developed by individual editors, a sample process is available.
This list is incomplete and may be outdated.
|A. B.||criteria||process||For now, I am committed to using the same process Lar has laid out so meticulously at User:Lar/Accountability|
|AGK||process||File an RFC; if that holds that there are concerns, I will submit to a reconfirmation-RFA; and if that fails, I will resign. (May 2008; updated Sept. 2012)|
|Alex Bakharev||criteria||process||from August 2006|
|Amorymeltzer||criteria and process||A (hopefully) straightforward procedure aimed at promoting discussion. It allows for unlimited recall attempts based on any action or edit at any time.|
|anetode||I will relinquish the admin bit by request of five editors in good standing or one administrator who has earned my respect. Lar's recall disclaimers apply.|
|AnonEMouse||criteria||process||Shame that something so simple has to be converted into "party of the first part shall be referred to as the party of the first part...", but so it goes.|
|Arjun01||criteria||process||For now at least I am going to using the same processes that Lar has described. In a well explained process I might add. Simple|
|Audacity||criteria||process||Firsfron's standards look good|
|BanyanTree||criteria||process||Requires another admin subject to recall for a kick-off, while keeping the rest pretty simple. A tradeoff between broad accountability and avoiding unnecessary drama and process.|
|Barneca||criteria||process||Pretty simple. An admin conduct RfC can escalate into a recall if 4 users in good standing indicate I should resign.
|Bigtimepeace||criteria and process||Admin recall should be a fairly simple process with minimal bureaucracy—i.e. not a big deal. Basic idea and formatting on my page is blatantly stolen from Shell Kinney. I hope I can simplify it further in the future.|
|Cailil||criteria and process||Inspired by SirFozzie's criteria & process.|
|Carcharoth||criteria||process||I wish it could be simpler, but the 28 December 2007 page versions I've linked to in Lar's page detail the criteria and process for anyone wishing to ask me to stand for recall. Please check the current version for any major changes - these will not apply unless I update the links here.|
|Ceyockey||Let us keep the initiation of the process very simple: If one or more editors feel that I am consistently violating wikipedia policies or disrupting other editors' activities in the exercise of my admin tools, that editor or editors should consult Wikipedia:Administrators open to recall/Default process and invoke it. Please don't start the process until after you have discussed things with me on my talk page. Thanks. (to be improved)|
|CT Cooper||Criteria and process||A petition process followed by a modified request for comment process, then a resignation process. Requires five users in good standing to certify a petition, and a majority or tie of voting users supporting a modified request for comment for it to be successful. My own distinct process, but borrows ideas from that of Lar and Walton One.|
|David Fuchs||criteria and process||No brag, just fact.|
|Ddstretch||criteria and process||Home-grown, but Firsfron's simple criteria was the starting point.|
|Deryck C.||criteria and process||Based on Lar's criteria, with certain simplifications and changes, in particular looser eligibility for editors whom I know offline in reflection of my involvement in offline Wikimedian activities.|
|Doczilla||criteria||process||Per Lar for now while I continue analyzing what has and what hasn't worked in the past. Although, I must commend Firsfron's simple, direct approach.|
|Dppowell||Criteria and process||Adapted from Alison (and, by extension, Lar and Fvasconcellos).|
|Elonka||Criteria and process||Original system: Recall can be initiated if there is proof of abuse of admin access within the last 10 days. Recall must also be certified by 6 neutral Wikipedians in good standing, including at least two "senior" Wikipedians (Bureaucrats/Arbs/CheckUser/etc).|
|Epbr123||criteria||process||I'll stand for a reconfirmation RfA if a user I respect advises that I should.|
|ErikHaugen||Lifted from AGK: "file an RFC; if that holds that there are concerns, I will submit to a reconfirmation-RFA; and if that fails, I will resign."|
|Ev||criteria||process||Using Lar's criteria & process for now.|
|EVula||criteria||process||Pretty straight-forward, and gives the requesting editor a decent shot at having me de-sysopped if I deserve it.|
|Fayenatic london||criteria||process||Amended from User:James086/recall: 3 users or 2 admins complain within 61 days.|
|Fetchcomms||criteria||process||Not to be abused.|
|Firsfron||criteria||process||Keep It Simple, Stupid.|
|Floquenbeam||User:Floquenbeam/Recall||Nutshell version: Start an RFC. Unless there is a consensus that I should remain an admin, I'll resign.|
|Friday||some thoughts||Start an RFC-like discussion. If there is significant consensus that I've been misusing the tools and should give them up, that's what I'll do.|
|Fvasconcellos||criteria||process||Not as simple as I'd like. May revise soon.|
|Hersfold||criteria and process||Based kinda loosely on Lar's - and I swear on pain of indefinite blocking that I shall abide by that process should it be started.|
|hmwith||process, criteria, & such||Admin user conduct RfC (inspired by Barneca).|
|Hut 8.5||criteria||process||Includes elements from a few other peoples' recall criteria.|
|Jayvdb||criteria and process||Marked as "temporary" pending a formal arbitrator recall process, eligibility is from functionaries, supporters, or those who have made significant contributions to Wikisource, once 5 eligible ask, steps down as arb and stands for new RfA.|
|Jennavecia||criteria||process||Designed by taking those of EVula, SirFozzie and Lar and smushing them together. :D|
|Josiah Rowe||criteria and process||Copied shamelessly from Hmwith, whose process was in turn inspired by Barneca's.|
|kbthompson||criteria||process||Lar's process seems fine for now. Should I find a better one, or a wider consensus emerge, I reserve the right to change my choice.|
|Keilana||Criteria||Process||Less liberal than before, based off of EVula's requirements. Still somewhat liberal.|
|Kirill Lokshin||criteria||process||Very simple; the basic idea is borrowed from Shell Kinney.|
|KrakatoaKatie||criteria||process||Unabashedly stolen from EVula while I think about it some more, but I don't think I'll change it much.|
|Kubigula||criteria||process||Based on Lar's and some others.|
|Kudpung||criteria||process||A combination of others' ideas from this page. Simpler than it looks. Includes a preformatted page.|
|Kwsn||criteria||process||Simply using Lar's method.|
|Lar||criteria||process||Extensively revised in mid December 2007 to include detailed process descriptions, has talk page for comments and feedback.|
|Luna Santin||criteria||process||Composed after reviewing the work of other admins in the category, but is especially based on the subpages created by Lar and Alison (whose in turn is based on Fvasconcellos's)|
|Malik Shabazz||Criteria and process||Based on Elonka's and Merovingian's processes.|
|MaxSem||Criteria and process||Via RFC|
|MBisanz||criteria||process||Some novel ideas with widespread notification, check the box style reports, and BAG recalled folded in with admin recall.|
|MLauba||criteria||process||Modeled after MBisanz, with some tweaks based on WP:RFDA and recent WP:CDA changes. Per statement on my RfA, will of course be mooted if / when we have a proper community way to desysop.|
|Mtmelendez||criteria||process||It's simpler than it looks.|
|Nancy||criteria||process||Like Pedro's but with a longer self-selected list of potential participants.|
|Nightstallion||criteria||process||I'll be using the very well developed criteria and process written up by Lar, as well. (The version linked to applies.)|
|Pedro||criteria||process||Made to be easy and simple. Let's hope I never go of the rails.|
|Persian Poet Gal||criteria||process||I am comfortable with what Lar has put together, may customize my criteria in the future.|
|Pigman||criteria||process||Completely ripped from Firsfron. Simple and sweet, no complications.|
|Remember the dot||criteria and process|
|Revolving Bugbear||criteria||process||I plan to write my own criteria at some point, but until then, I will use Lar's.|
|RHM22||criteria and process||I will voluntarily relinquish all administrative privileges if petitioned to by four members in good standing.|
|Riana||criteria||process||Not as liberal as I'd like it to be, I'll try revising it in the coming days. Any feedback welcome :)|
|Roger Davies||criteria||process||Simple and straightforward (and stolen from Shell Kinney).|
|Royalguard11||criteria||process||To the point I think.|
|SarekOfVulcan||criteria||process||Using Lar's criteria for now, may modify later|
|Sean William||criteria||process||Short, simple, to the point.|
|SebastianHelm||process and notes||Avoiding bureaucratic overhead so we all can focus on creating a good encyclopedia.|
|Singularity||criteria||process||Should be relatively simple...actually a combination of User:David Fuchs's and User:Husond's criteria.|
|SirFozzie||criteria||process||Will relinquish administrator status with five editors in good standing's request.|
|Tbo 157||criteria||process||Will resign or start an RfC. Consensus will be judged by an uninvolved trusted user selected by the clerk.|
|Tim Vickers||criteria||process||Simple approach from Firsfron|
|TParis||criteria / process||Mix of a few different ideas - offers three options depending on speed and severity. Pretty straight forward.|
|utcursch||criteria and process||I'll step down upon a request from 5 users in good standing.|
|Walton One||criteria and process||My own distinct criteria and process. I will step down on the request of any three users in good standing.|
|Warofdreams||criteria||process||Using Lar's comprehensive criteria and process, for now at least.|
|WGFinley||criteria and process||Blatantly stolen from AGK involving RFCU|
|Woody||criteria||process||Follow Lar's processes of RfC or resignation.|
|xDanielx||criteria and process||Fairly typical; involves RFCU|
|Y||criteria and process||Will take to ArbCom or relinquish administrator status outright upon request of five administrators in good standing.|
|Yannismarou||criteria and process||Based on Firsfron and Y|
|zzuuzz||criteria and process||Fairly standard but a bit unique. Requirements may vary.|
- Wikipedia:Administrators#Administrator recall
- Wikipedia:Administrators open to recall – The "main" page, giving a brief description of the idea.
- Wikipedia talk:Administrators open to recall – talk page with discussion.
- Wikipedia:Administrators open to recall/Admin criteria – the criteria and process for recall used by various category members.
- Wikipedia:Administrators open to recall/Sample process & Wikipedia:Administrators open to recall/Alternative process – sample procedures and criteria.
- Automated recording of changes to this category, provided by User:BryanBot's category tracking functionality.
- Records of past recall requests, hand-maintained by volunteers.
- Reference material about other proposals, ideas and general information.
- Category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall – The category page, showing which administrators state they are voluntarily open to recall.
- Category:Wikipedia bureaucrats open to recall – for Bureaucrats
- 17 August 2008 Category Deletion Discussion
Note: this page was copy/paste moved from Category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall/Admin criteria (because you cannot move a category page to a non category page). For the early edit history of this page, or for any GFDL related concerns, you should refer to that page's edit history. Admins should consider revalidating their listing by a null edit to this page. If that is done by all admins present when this was copy/pasted, that page can be deleted but for now it will remain a soft redirect.