User:XDanielx/Recall

I am a member of Category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall, which means that if editors feel I am misusing administrative powers (but not so much that a WP:RFAR is called for), they have the option of challenging my admin status. I joined the category because I believe administrators should be accountable and responsive to the community, rather than acting independently. Based on the suggestions of User:Lar and others, I have decided to lay out some specific procedures to avoid possible future controversy. I hope that no one will ever be compelled to initiate the process, but wikihistory shows that community trust can come and go in a flash.


 * 1) To initialize a recall process against me, an editor should first post on my talk page expressing their intent to rescind my adminship. A total of five users who meet the criteria (see below) must support the motion for recall to proceed -- the initiator and four others.
 * 2) * These five users must, minimally, have been editing for two months and have made 400 mainspace contributions prior to the time at which the recall thread is posted. These editors can be moderately involved with the issues at hand, but not to an extreme. As an example, moderate participation in a pertinent XfD is okay, but not an extensive history of opposition to my views. Essentially, I will want to see if I have lost the trust of editors whose trust I once had (or likely would have had, had the known me), because that is what, in my view, calls into question the continued holding of a position of trust.
 * 3) * A reasonable amount of canvassing is okay with me, as long as it is done on-wiki and only editors who have been involved with the issue(s) of controversy are contacted.
 * 4) * I won't set a specific time limit by which the five signatures must appear, but if the thread is old enough to be archived (through normal means, probably by a bot), I'll consider it dead and void. If you really want, you can always start a new thread.
 * 5) Following this, an RFC/U should be opened, and the relevant issues discussed. Anyone may then initiate a vote in a new RFC/U thread when they think the time is right, but not before I have a chance to post a response. I will want a chance to address the concerns before any voting, not in the middle of it.
 * 6) * The condition that editors must have two months of service and 400 mainspace contributions to be recognized still applies, but highly involved editors will no longer be discounted. If you absolutely disagree with me on everything that should not be a barrier to you participating, since in this stage editors who absolutely agree with me on everything will be able to participate as well.
 * 7) * The vote should minimally have two options, like "support rescinding adminship" and "oppose rescinding adminship."
 * 8) * The vote will end when no votes have been added for several days AND there is a minimum of 20 votes. I may decide to "forfeit" and close it early if the result is against me.
 * 9) * If RFC/U no longer exists at the time, we will work something else out. Most likely we would organize something in my user space.
 * 10) If a majority favors having me keep my admin status, that will be that. If the majority favors rescinding the bit, I will do one of two things. Most likely, I will simply ask someone with the necessary powers to remove my admin bit, and the thing will be over. If I think the RFC/U was improper for whatever reason (e.g. perhaps the canvassing from Stage 1 was excessive and the effects carried over into the RFC/U), I may post a reconfirmation RfA. Chances are that I will simply step down, but I hold the RfA option in reserve.

For more general information on the administrator recall system, see these links: