Wikipedia:But I'm an Administrator!

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
On Wikipedia, no editors are given tiaras or fancy ceremonial tassels. Not editors with tens or hundreds of thousands of edits. Not even Administrators.

Sometimes in articles for deletion (AfD) discussions, one editor's argument may be given more weight over another simply because one has more edits on Wikipedia or one may even be a Wikipedia Administrator. Don't fall for it.

At the time this essay was created, the original author User:Paulmcdonald submitted this:

I have over 35,000 edits recorded on Wikipedia. According to Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits, I am ranked 1,927 in terms of most edits among all registered Wikipedians. I'm not "number 1" but I've done a lot. And I'm wrong a lot.--Paul McDonald (talk) 02:04, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Each argument should stand on its own accord and on its own merits in Wikipedia discussions. That means the newest editor, with the least edits, may have the best idea or the most relevant point of view. An anonymous IP editor who just joined the project last week may have the best idea.

Don't let anything like "seniority", edit counts, or Wikipedia status of an editor (awards, Barnstars, years of experience) sway your opinion. If the "experienced" editor has information why they hold a certain position in a discussion, they should be able to convey that experience and argument in a way that other editors can make their own judgement based on that experience, and on the merits of that .

In other words, provide details for the experience and explain your argument, don't just respond with "Because I'm an Admin/top editor, so there."