Wikiversity talk:Custodianship/Archive 5

Admin activity review
I've added a link to the global Admin activity review policy, We should discuss possible changes to our policy to include situations where an inactive Custodian wants the tools back. There's a number of ways that we could handle this. See Should we have our own inactive administrator policy? for prior discussion. But, we should probably add something to the policy to cover this. Thoughts, comments? --mikeu talk 00:38, 2 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I'd be inclined to add them to the Curator group. That likely covers most of what they would want anyway.  If they return and are active as a curator, we could look at restoring the admin flag.  I'm not sure whether admin restoration is better handled by policy or on a case-by-case basis.  -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 01:30, 2 January 2016 (UTC)


 * It's not really a pressing issue. If someone wanted to retain the tools (after notification, but before removal) the policy says:


 * "The notified users should then post information to the local community about the notice of maximum inactivity they received from the stewards in order to discuss the matter. If the community then decides to manage these inactive advanced administrative rights holders on their own, they should contact the stewards at the stewards' noticeboard, where the messaged user could provide evidence to the stewards about the local community's decision."


 * Sp, that would cover it. FYI, Wikiversity would have been exempt from this policy if there had been any activity in Community Review. (no edits since 2012)
 * per "However, wikis where stewards will not perform notifications nor removal actions include: * wikis with currently active review processes, such as Commons Wiki"


 * I really don't have a preference, I just wanted to get a sense of how everyone felt about it. --mikeu talk