| Revision as of 17:35, 5 November 2007 editJzG (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers155,071 edits avoidance← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 04:09, 17 September 2024 edit undoAcroterion (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators232,488 editsm Reverted edit by 112.204.162.43 (talk) to last version by NagsbTags: New redirect Rollback |
| (98 intermediate revisions by 60 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
#REDIRECT ] |
|
{{dablink|] redirects here; you may also be looking for ] (shortcut: ]) or ] (shortcut: ]).}} |
|
|
{{policy|WP:WW|WP:WHEEL}} |
|
|
{{Nutshell|Tenable administrative actions should not be reverted without discussion. Think long and hard before reverting another administrator's actions.}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Rcat shell| |
|
A ''']''' is a struggle between two or more ] in which they undo another's administrative actions — specifically, ] and reblocking a user; ] and redeleting; or ] and reprotecting an article. |
|
|
|
{{R to section}} |
|
Most editors (and admins) tend to agree that wheel wars are a ]. Just as ] is considered harmful and needlessly divisive, so is wheel warring considered improper behavior for an administrator. |
|
|
|
{{R with Wikidata item}} |
|
|
|
|
|
}} |
|
A '''wheel war''' starts when a tenable privileged action is reverted without ]. Consensus can be obtained by discussing with the original administrator, or posting on one of the administrators' noticeboards. |
|
|
|
|
|
Untenable actions include: anything done in error, such as blocking a different user than the one intended; anything done in bad faith, such as deleting the main page; and anything forbidden by policy, such as blocking a user while engaged in a dispute with them or protecting a page while edit warring. Tenable actions are those for which a reasonable case can be made; the use of sysop tools in cases where reasonable administrators may disagree is considered tenable. Disagreements are to be resolved by discussion. |
|
|
|
|
|
A privileged action based on new circumstances is not considered a revert, even though it may have the effect of reversing an earlier action. For instance, if a page is protected due to edit warring, and the warring parties come to an agreement on the talk page, the article may be unprotected without need for discussion. |
|
|
|
|
|
== Possible indications == |
|
|
Possible indications of wheel warring are: |
|
|
|
|
|
* Admins get too distressed to discuss something. |
|
|
* An admin takes it upon himself to undo another admin's actions without consultation. |
|
|
* An admin deliberately ignores an existing discussion (often at ] or ]) and implements his or her preferred action or version of an edit. |
|
|
* An administrative action is repeatedly performed and reversed (by anyone). |
|
|
|
|
|
== Sanctions == |
|
|
Sometimes, admins are temporarily blocked for wheel warring. However, this can result in a wheel war itself, which creates an escalation of conflict and should therefore be avoided. Wheel warring may result in loss of administrative privileges through the arbitration process. Wheel warring has been used as grounds for sanctions by ] in a few cases<ref>]</ref><ref>]</ref><ref><span class="plainlinks"><font color="002bb8"></font></span></ref><ref>]</ref><ref>]</ref> (''see ]'') and by ] in the case of another administrator undoing one of his blocks.<ref><span class="plainlinks"><font color="002bb8"></font></span></ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Alternatives == |
|
|
If you feel the ''need'' to wheel war, try these alternatives: |
|
|
|
|
|
* Discuss the substantive issue with opposing admins. |
|
|
* Post the issue to ] and '''wait''' for comment from other admins. |
|
|
* Seek ], just as you would in case of a potential edit war. |
|
|
* ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
Misplaced Pages works on the spirit of ]; disputes should be settled through civil discussion rather than power wrestling. |
|
|
|
|
|
==Recommendations for avoiding wheel warring== |
|
|
Prevention is better than cure. Administrators can help to reduce drama by posting a rationale for any privileged action at ] or its subpages for review. This also helps the editor community to understand actions which may have been taken on the basis of information which cannot be shared publicly (e.g. in response to ] complaints). |
|
|
|
|
|
Before reverting another privileged action, see if any such debate is already underway. Wait until a clear consensus is established before reversing a privileged action. Ideally, the original administrator should be the one to reverse the action. |
|
|
|
|
|
==Cases of wheel warring used as grounds for sanctions by ArbCom == |
|
|
<references /> |
|
|
|
|
|
== See also == |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
== External links == |
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
] |
|
|
|
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|