Meta talk:Administrators/Removal (inactivity)/October 2017

Staff

User:Delphine (WMF), User:Heather (WMF), User:MCruz (WMF), User:Milimetric (WMF), User:Ocaasi (WMF) and User:Reedy (WMF) have made less than 10 edits and/or actions in the last 6 months (some made 0) and would fall under the inactivity policy. Maybe you want to take this opportunity reconsider whether you still need adminship. --MF-W 13:46, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, I wasn't aware of this policy. I edit a lot on a sub-namespace (Config:Dashiki:) which is why I need adminship. So I'm a very limited admin, and I never exercise my rights outside of that small namespace. Is there some way to mention that somewhere or should I just make an effort to keep up at least a few edits per month to not trigger this policy? Milimetric (WMF) (talk) 21:39, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

No, staff accounts are not subject to this policy. I just pinged you so that you could relinquish adminship if you didn't need it anymore. --MF-W 03:12, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Dschwen

He would need to be removed automatically, but I did not list him as Meta:Administrators#Temporary_adminship_or_adminship_by_decree suggests that should not be done. But I wonder how that conclusion was reached from Meta:Requests for adminship/Dschwen 5. Though it would be logical, as he would in no time be appear again to request adminship again, as previous experience teaches us. --MF-W 13:46, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps this would be another case where requiring an October confirmation would be beneficial? --Rschen7754 19:12, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

It would make sense. --MF-W 03:13, 3 October 2017 (UTC)