User:28bytes/XRV implementation

Administrative action review (AARV) determines whether use of the administrator tools or other advanced permissions is consistent with policy. Any action involving a tool not available to all confirmed editors—except those covered by another, more specific review process—may be submitted to AARV for community review. Its purpose is to reach a consensus on whether a specific action (or set of related actions) was appropriate, not to revoke permissions or review an editor's conduct in general.

To request an administrative action review, please first read the "purpose" section to make sure that it is in scope. Then, follow the instructions below.


 * Purpose

Administrative action review may be used:
 * 1) to review an individual administrator action, including (but not limited to) a block, a page protection, or an override of the title blacklist
 * 2) to review an individual action of someone using one of the following advanced permissions
 * 3) *Account creator
 * 4) *Articles for Creation Helper script
 * 5) *Autopatrolled
 * 6) *AutoWikiBrowser
 * 7) *Event coordinator
 * 8) *File mover
 * 9) *Mass message sender
 * 10) *New page reviewer
 * 11) *Page mover
 * 12) *Pending changes reviewer
 * 13) *Rollback
 * 14) *Template editor

Administrative action review should not be used:
 * 1) to request an appeal or review of an action with a dedicated review process
 * For review of page deletions or review of deletion discussion closures, use Deletion review (DRV)
 * For review of page moves, use Move review (MRV)
 * 1) to ask to remove a user's permissions:
 * Permissions granted at WP:PERM may be revoked by an administrator if AARV finds them to be misused.
 * Repeated or egregious misuse of permissions may form the basis of an administrators' noticeboard or incidents noticeboard report, or a request for arbitration, as appropriate.
 * 1) to argue technicalities and nuances (about what the optimal action would have been, for example), outside of an argument that the action was inconsistent with policy.
 * 2) to ask for a review of arbitration enforcement actions. Such reviews must be done at arbitration enforcement noticeboard ("AE"), at the administrators’ noticeboard ("AN"), or directly to the Arbitration Committee at the amendment requests page ("ARCA").
 * 3) for urgent incidents and chronic, intractable behavioural problems; use Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (ANI) instead
 * 4) for serious, entrenched or persistent disputes and cases of rule-breaking; use Arbitration (ArbCom) instead
 * 5) for a block marked with any variation of CheckUser block, OversightBlock, or ArbComBlock; Contact the Arbitration Committee instead
 * 6) to attack other editors, cast aspersions, or make accusations of bias. Such requests may be speedily closed.

 Before listing a review request, consider attempting to discuss the matter with the performer of the action as this could resolve the matter more quickly. There could have been a mistake, miscommunication, or misunderstanding, and a full review may not be needed. Such discussion also gives the performer the opportunity to clarify the reasoning behind a decision. Start a new discussion by clicking below and filling out the form. Inform the person of this discussion.  You must leave a notice on the editor's talk page.
 * Instructions
 * Initiating a review

The use of ping or the notification system is not sufficient for this purpose.

You may use  to do so. You can also do this manually by creating a new section, copy-pasting one of the templates, and filling it out. Copy this template skeleton if requesting review of an action on a page (including articles):

~

Copy this template skeleton if requesting review of an action on a user:

~     

Any editor may express their opinion about an action being reviewed. In the administrative action review discussion, please type one of the following opinions preceded by an asterisk ( * ) and surrounded by three apostrophes ( ''' ) on either side:
 * Participating in a discussion
 * Endorse the original action; or
 * Overturn the original action and optionally an (action) to take instead.

If you have additional thoughts to share, you may type this after the opinion. Place four tildes ( ~ ) at the end of your entry, which should be placed below the entries of all previous editors.

Be civil, stay on-topic and remember: uphold Wikipedia policy.

Discussions are open for 7 days, after which an uninvolved administrator may close them. The closer should make a closing statement that summarizes the consensus reached in the discussion and clearly states the outcome. Suggested outcomes include endorsed, overturned, or no consensus. When possible, the closer should implement the outcome. If it is not, the closer should notify a user who can execute as needed.
 * Closing a review

Individual actions that are not endorsed can be reversed by any editor. Permissions granted at WP:PERM may be revoked by an administrator if AARV finds them to be misused.
 * After a review