Can "kids" be administrators?
Without thinking, a lot of people would say "Hell no!".
Today, I encountered an RfA oppose which mentioned that the candidate was simply too young to be an admin (and that they should wait 10 years before a new RfA!)... A Wiki friend and I discussed this and we both agreed that that was a very ignorant and naive thing to say...
Okay, fair enough, young people can be immature, annoying and hot headed... in fact, that happens a lot of the time... but it's all a part of growing up.
I think, if I can categorise for a moment, the young people that edit Wikipedia fall into 3 distinct groups:
1) Obvious immature vandals bent on Wiki-destruction!
2) Mature, capable, educated young people who wish to help
3) Well meaning but clearly misguided young people
Number 2 is, in my opinion, clearly suitable to be an administrator.
But if you push all of those into one pigeon (I love pigeons, actually) hole you're going to lose some great Wikipedians to utter ignorant bias.
Sure, some teens seem to enjoy writing: "COCK" and "Homosexuals are gay" on certain articles but not everyone is like that...
It's incredibly ignorant to even suggest that.
Anonymous Dissident is a well known and well respected Wikipedia administrator. He is 12 years old. That's mighty young, no? But the thing is; he's not even a teen and he is already a lot more mature than many adults... he can also write incredibly well which is impressive to say the least.
Sometimes I don't understand my fellow Wikipedians...
You seem so incredibly intelligent and yet you have biases which lower others' perception of you.
Please don't oppose people purely based on age. Let's keep it sane and logical and stick to their contributions and how they handle themselves...
It's a far better way to judge someone rather than stereotyping a number...
(If I was so bothered I would train a 7 year old to be the best Wikipedian ever just to prove these people wrong but you know... I just wouldn't wanna embarrass them...)
2 comments:
I could not care less about how old the user is. If they are 3 years old and producing quality featured articles, good for them! Some people are a lot more mature than others - a good example you put is Anonymous Dissident. Not only did he pass his RfA with over 100 votes of support (and just one oppose not related to age), he's an admin on four other Wikimedia wikis. I've never seen any poor judgement from him. In fact, it's generally adults who are the ones who get into trouble on the wiki, and have to be desysopped. I've talked to Friday before about his warped views - it's like talking to a stubborn seven year old and unfortunately he won't listen. (I also think saying "wait 10 years" is equally dumb, since people will probably lose interest and the wiki will be very different then, if it's still around that is. He may as well say "Just get off the website, kids aren't allowed here." Pathetic really that some users, especially admins sink to this level.)
Friday's views are not "warped". In the Western world, children are generally considered to be too immature to be in positions of responsibility. That Wikipedia has, for better or worse, adopted a contrarian view, is a rather glaring cultural idiosyncrasy.
Also, without intending to be facetious, though I admit to being pedantic, Friday is, as I recall, a "she", not a "he".
Post a Comment