Talk:Admin activity review

This page is for discussions related to the Admin activity review page. Please remember to: Sign posts using the four tildes (~~~~) Remain civil and polite during discussions. Place new text under old text (start a new post). For older conversations you can see the archive index.

hi.wiktionary is unique in that bureaucrats can desysop on that wiki, so traditionally it has been left off of AAR (as are all such wikis) even though it may not have an activity policy - see User:Openbk/list2. However, there is only one bureaucrat who has been inactive for 3+ years: see statistics here. Could it be added to the Admin activity review/2018/Data page for this year? --Rschen7754 07:03, 23 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

@MarcoAurelio: --Rschen7754 19:33, 24 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Policy do not exclude wikis with bureaucrats able to desysop (and in the case of hi.wiktionary, this is absolutelly abnormal that this wiki got such a thing) so I'd say yes to adding it to this year set. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:47, 25 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

I'll do that later today. When I was a steward, I generally left those wikis off because if a removal was required, a steward would be doing it, which would be a violation of steward policy. But since AAR is a global policy too, I'm not sure what takes precedence. --Rschen7754 19:30, 25 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Notice to inactive right holders says stewards will evaluate the responses and refer a decision back to the local community in ambiguous cases. What does this mean? NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 09:51, 28 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Cantonese Wikipedia has established a desysop policy that formally enshrines Meta's admin activity review as our mechanism of removing the rights of inactive admins. This doesn't make any practical difference, but if the annual admin activity review makes a distinction between "there is no local policy" and "local policy defers to us", yue.wp has officially moved from the first camp to the second camp. Deryck C. 19:50, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply