Wiki_Administrators

People who have the administrative password can do some extra-powerful stuff like automatically renaming pages. For example,

one could rename a page from JohnQDude to John Q Dude, and not only would the page be renamed, but all the links.

Additionally, administrators can actually delete pages. We probably don't want to do much of this, because in general, a redirect is better than a deletion! In that way, old links from search engines, etc., still work.

I, Jimbo Wales, propose that I should give out the administrator password fairly freely. People who have been around for a week or two, contributing to the pages in a useful way, should have access to this. Indeed, the only reason not to give it out willy-nilly is that someone really could mess things up. (For example, by renaming every page to 'Bob'.)

I think, as long as someone has shown good will (and that means pretty much everybody who is a regular visitor) should have it.

Are there any thoughts/objections to this?

(Also, I think that the admin password would give us a quick

way to let regulars in to edit, while blocking others, if we come under attack from spammers or vandals at some point.)

There are actually two separate levels of special access: the "editor" level and the "admin" level. Admins are given complete power/control over the wiki. They can do things like:

Renaming or deleting pages
Locking individual pages from further editing
Locking the entire wiki against public editing with a single command
Banning IP addresses or networks from editing
Running the CPU/disk-intensive maintenance function at any time (other users are limited to once per 12 hours)
All editor-level functions

The "editor" level currently has very few extra powers, which include:

Editing pages even when the entire wiki is locked to outside users
(As a site option, default off) Renaming or deleting pages

Note that each level can have multiple passwords, which can be individually revoked. This means that you could have a relatively public editor password and other less-public passwords (for major contributors, for instance). If the public password is abused, it could be revoked without affecting the less-public passwords. (For Wikipedia I might suggest/code other systems for managing access, like allowing admins to simply grant/revoke editor-level access without using a password.)

Perhaps CliffordAdams knows of some reason why this is a bad idea.

The main problem I (CliffordAdams) see is that one could cause severe disruption with some of the admin-level commands. Features like locking pages or banning networks might be controversial.

I think it would be better to give relatively free editor-level access, and possibly move some functions from the admin to the editor level. My suggestions are:

Give editor-level access to anyone who has written at least 3 "good" contributions (or one excellent page). Most contributors will get this access quickly.

Give admin-level access to people who have been around for at least a month, have written at least 10 "good" pages, and who want to help with "admin" tasks.

Personally, I think "admin" level access should be viewed as a community service rather than a reward. Indeed, if there are enough volunteers, I think there should only be a few permanent admins and a larger number of limited-time admins, rotating every few months.

For renaming and deletion, I'm considering a new feature to let anyone suggest changes or deletions, which could be quickly confirmed by any admin user. In the meantime, I think it would be best to restrict these features to admins only. A public page for rename/deletion suggestions could be established, and admins could frequently cut/paste suggestions from that page into the rename/deletion form. --CliffordAdams