Wikipedia:What adminship is not

This essay describes what adminship is and isn't.

General

Admins do not have "command authority" in the sense that some imagine. They can draw a line based on policies, norms and judgement, and enforce that line with the tools. They often have good insight and suggestions to users, and they should be good at gaining others' co-operation and working with people. But they do not, ever, act as "managers" to people in the business sense. They implement policies in which the community in a broad sense has agreed upon. Thus, for example:

• They do not "decide what people see". An admin who deletes a page can only do so after a consensus has been reached: in accordance with the communal decision. Whilst they are implementers, they do not decide the policy. Likewise, admins implement a standard of editorship and use of blocking and protection which has already gained consensus via a discussion (in which admins have absolutely no special authority of any kind).

• They do not need to know how "everything works". But they do need to know enough not to misuse what they touch, and to conduct themselves well. The emphasis is on "not making mistakes", not on "doing it all". Users do things, admins just handle the few exceptions where for practical reasons we don't let every new user do so. Even very experienced admins—including those elected to higher positions than admin—usually don't know how everything works.

• Admins are users that the community has trusted to operate the tools. If an admin goes for a year without making an edit, it doesn't necessarily have an impact on their trustworthiness when they return to editing. Hence an admin's obligation isn't to "do" any specific role; rather, to act responsibly if or when they do take action.

• Admins should gain broad respect, but frankly no user is obligated to respect or listen to them (it's not a requirement of editing), and many will not. Blocking is not merely a tool to be used instead of talking to people.

High standards are required, but many people will have misconceptions of what it is that admins actually do. Mostly, admins are:

1. users the community have chosen based on experience and trust.
2. users who have consistently good standards on general conduct as editors.
3. users who are allowed to act as custodians of the tools that for pragmatic reasons need to be restricted in access (due to the presence of many people on the Internet who would use them for purposes that don't help the project).
4. users who are trusted to only use the tools provided to enact a decision within the standards that the community has decided, and not otherwise.

More specifically

Adminship is not a trophy

Being an administrator does not place you in an elevated status within Wikipedia. It is not the user-equivalent of a good article or featured article. Administrators will find they have no extra sway in policy or other decisions because of an RfA. It does not affirm a user's contributions as an editor and is not an award for good editing or other good service. You will not gain more respect simply by being an administrator. It may help to consider the other meaning of the word administrator, that is one who facilitates, rather than one who controls.

Adminship is simply a statement that the individual is a normal user whom the community views as likely to use the extra tools responsibly if given access to them. An admin is just a normal user with a mop and a bucket. It certainly does not give you any Sergeant-like authority.

Adminship is not an entitlement

High edit counts and a dedication to Wikipedia often demonstrate reliability and aptitude for adminship. However, candidates with high edit counts sometimes fail to pass a Request for adminship, because RfA is about a user's approach and attitudes, not about "how much they do". This is not personal; it does not mean that the community fails to appreciate your contributions. A number of exceptional editors are not admins and will never be, some through choice, some through communal consensus. A number of admins regularly ask to have their administrator user permissions removed in order to leave administrative chores behind and get back to editing instead. There are good contributors on Wikipedia who simply do not have the proper temperament to be administrators; but they are still valuable to the project. A high quantity of edits and a long tenure as a member of the community does not entitle one to the administrator user permissions.

It's important to know that the administrator user right is a senior-level toolset for users who have demonstrated a high level of wisdom, knowledge, and expertise on Wikipedia. They consistently demonstrate a high level of knowledge of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines - as well as a high level of respect toward Wikipedia's founding principles at all times. They are skilled at consistently adding content to articles that are worded to reflect a neutral point of view, and they include in-line citations to reliable sources to support the content they add to articles that require them. They are consistently civil and respectful toward other users that they interact with - including those who aren't civil towards them, and they maintain a calm and collaborative level of conduct during situations where discussions and disputes become extremely heated. They take the lead and help other users with finding the answer to their problems, and they demonstrate experience in areas that show an abundance of knowledge of Wikipedia's guidelines.

Adminship is not diplomatic immunity

Every administrator must keep in mind that they simply hold tools that aid in Wikipedia maintenance, and nothing more. This means that administrators are not exempt from any of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and must follow them just like all Wikipedia editors must do, and they are held to the same level of accountability (if not a higher level of accountability) as any other user if they violate them. On top of being expected to play a lead role and set the example when it comes to areas such as civility, conflict resolution, knowledge of policy, and appropriate use of the administrator tools, they are also expected to use their tools within compliance of Wikipedia's policies at all times. Administrators who repeatedly fail to do this, or who cause significant community concerns regarding their contributions, actions, behaviors or conduct, or have lost the community's trust and confidence with being able to hold the administrator user permissions and use the tools correctly can be readily blocked, have their administrator privileges revoked, or be subject to bans or other sanctions.

Adminship is neither compulsory nor necessary to aid Wikipedia

Administrators have access to useful tools not available to other users, and are able to use these to serve Wikipedia in additional ways. However, some Wikipedians do not wish to become administrators, and despite having the expected levels of experience, community support, and trust. Users always have the option to reject the opportunity or decline a nomination to request the administrator tools. Additionally, many tools and maintenance areas on Wikipedia exist so that non-administrators can assist by carrying out important tasks — many more areas and tasks than most users think! See this page on contributing to Wikipedia for more information. Users can label the ways they contribute by, for example, joining WikiProjects and using the relevant Userboxes.

Adminship is not a game

Requesting the administrator user permissions (whether it be through an RFA or an election) is a process that the community takes very seriously; it is not a game, nor is it something that's there for users to do "just for fun". When you are an administrator, you don't just get to block and unblock whoever you want, delete and undelete whatever you want, go around editing protected pages however you want, or go around protecting and unprotecting pages whenever you want. It's important to realize that any action that you perform with these functions can be reversed by another administrator. The community expects administrators to carry out administrative actions with good judgment at all times. Before carrying out an administrative action that you're unfamiliar with or unsure about, you must keep in mind that administrators are expected to verify that a consensus exists supporting the action you're about to carry out and before you proceed to do so.

In particular, applying blocks to IP addresses, IP address ranges, or to user accounts is one of the most contentious acts that an administrator can perform; it is considered a very serious matter by the community if blocks do not comply with Wikipedia's relevant policies and guidelines, or are applied without using proper judgment or without fully understanding the situation and if a block is necessary beforehand. Administrators who repeatedly make poorly-placed blocks will quickly find that they'll become unpopular with prominent members of the community, and with apparent personal attacks being thrown towards you as justifiable under the circumstances. On some occasions, a poor blocking history can result in an administrator's user permissions being revoked.

Adminship is not for sale

Because adminship reflects community trust in an individual, not an account, you, and only you should have access to the extra tools that were granted onto your account. They are not to be shared in any way, shape, or form with other users. Giving another user access to your account in order to make even legitimate administrative actions is absolutely prohibited, and your administrative tools may be revoked if you are caught sharing your account or allowing someone else to use your account.

Adminship is not a big deal

See also: WP:NOBIGDEAL

Adminship is not meant to be anything special beyond access to extra editing tools which, pragmatically, cannot be given to every user. It does not give any extra status, weight in discussions, or special privileges beyond what is necessary to technically use those extra tools.

See also

• Wikipedia:Administrators
• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship
• Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide
• Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list
• Wikipedia:Administrator Code of Conduct
• Wikipedia:Advice for new administrators
• Wikipedia:General sanctions
• Wikipedia:Adminship is not for new users
• Wikipedia:What (other) user rights are not