Tryptofish (talk | contribs) m →Closure: delete extra spaces between sentences |
Matt Lewis (talk | contribs) Significant readability tidy in preparation for RfC, combined with one large addition, See talk. |
||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
'''Community de-adminship''' removes [[MW:Manual:Administrators|the ''sysop'' right]] from an account, per the consensus of the [[Wikipedia:Wikipedians|Wikipedia editor community]]. This guide explains how the process works. |
'''Community de-adminship''' removes [[MW:Manual:Administrators|the ''sysop'' right]] from an account, per the consensus of the [[Wikipedia:Wikipedians|Wikipedia editor community]]. This guide explains how the process works. |
||
* There is a short |
* There is a short '''FAQ''' on CDA '''[[Wikipedia:Community de-adminship/FAQ|here]].''' |
||
== |
==What this process is== |
||
⚫ | The '''Community de-Adminship (CDA)''' process is for the community to request the removal of [[Wikipedia:administrators|administrator]] status (known as the 'sysop right') from a currently active administrator account. Each CDA request is formatted as a nomination (by 10 editors, all of three months and 500 edits standing), followed by an accompanying outcome poll, which must contain at least 50 votes in support of the CDA, reaching (as a rule of thumb) 65% of the total votes polled. The decision to [[WP:DESYSOP|de-sysop]] will be based on whether there is a clear consensus beyond that point to do so. |
||
===What this process is=== |
|||
⚫ | The '''Community de-Adminship (CDA)''' process is for the community to request the removal of [[Wikipedia:administrators|administrator]] status (known as the 'sysop right') from a currently active administrator account. Each CDA request is formatted as a nomination (by 10 editors |
||
Although there are some important differences, CDA is intended to be a comparable process to [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship]], about which you can read more at the [[Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship]]. That is also the process to use in order to re-gain the ''sysop'' right after it is removed by community consensus. |
Although there are some important differences, CDA is intended to be a comparable process to [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship]], about which you can read more at the [[Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship]]. That is also the process to use in order to re-gain the ''sysop'' right after it is removed by community consensus. |
||
== What this process is not == |
|||
This process is ''not'' for: |
This process is ''not'' for: |
||
;Emergency de-sysopping: Emergency desysopping of accounts for the immediate protection of the project is the province of Jimbo Wales, Stewards, and the Arbitration Committee. Discussions here take ''no less'' than 7 days, and are unsuitable for emergency measures. |
;Emergency de-sysopping: Emergency desysopping of accounts for the immediate protection of the project is the province of Jimbo Wales, Stewards, and the Arbitration Committee. Discussions here take ''no less'' than 7 days, and are unsuitable for emergency measures. |
||
Line 20: | Line 19: | ||
;Dispute resolution or other discussions: Dispute resolution should proceed through the normal channels. Disputes with an administrator must be discussed first with that administrator, and then via the normal channels such as third opinion, mediation, request for comment, and arbitration. Mild or one-time only incivility should instead be reported to [[WP:WQA|Wikiquette Alerts]]. If the administrator is listed at [[WP:AOR|Administrators open to recall]] and you believe the conditions listed there have been met, they should be reported there. |
;Dispute resolution or other discussions: Dispute resolution should proceed through the normal channels. Disputes with an administrator must be discussed first with that administrator, and then via the normal channels such as third opinion, mediation, request for comment, and arbitration. Mild or one-time only incivility should instead be reported to [[WP:WQA|Wikiquette Alerts]]. If the administrator is listed at [[WP:AOR|Administrators open to recall]] and you believe the conditions listed there have been met, they should be reported there. |
||
:A CDA request |
:A CDA request should only be initiated only ''after'' substantial community discussion at a suitable venue, such as [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard]] or [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User]], has failed to produce a resolution, and there must be documentation of these prior attempts. |
||
;Removing the flag from ''inactive'' accounts: Any administrator account nominated here must be an account that has actively used editor or administrator tools recently. There is no consensus at the English Wikipedia for removing the ''sysop'' flag from inactive administrator accounts |
;Removing the flag from ''inactive'' accounts: Any administrator account nominated here must be an account that has actively used editor or administrator tools recently. There is no consensus at the English Wikipedia for removing the ''sysop'' flag from inactive administrator accounts. There is some evidence from the English Wikibooks and English Wikinews, that such actions are arguably detrimental to projects in the medium and long terms. |
||
;Removing rights other than the ''sysop'' right: This process covers solely the ''sysop'' right |
;Removing rights other than the ''sysop'' right: This process covers solely the ''sysop'' right. |
||
;Getting administrator actions undone: The places for doing that are variously ''the enacting administrator's user talk page'', [[Wikipedia:Deletion review]] (for deletion/undeletion), [[Wikipedia:Requests for page protection]] (for protection/unprotection), and [[Wikipedia:Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents]]. |
;Getting administrator actions undone: The places for doing that are variously ''the enacting administrator's user talk page'', [[Wikipedia:Deletion review]] (for deletion/undeletion), [[Wikipedia:Requests for page protection]] (for protection/unprotection), and [[Wikipedia:Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents]]. |
||
Requests here are ''not valid'' if made on these grounds, and are subject to summary closure by Bureaucrats or the Arbitration Committee. |
Requests here are ''not valid'' if made on these grounds, and are subject to summary closure by Bureaucrats or the Arbitration Committee. |
||
== Related processes == |
|||
* [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship]] — where the community decides whether to add the ''sysop'' right to accounts |
* [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship]] — where the community decides whether to add the ''sysop'' right to accounts |
||
* [[Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval]] — where the community decides whether to add the ''bot'' right to accounts |
* [[Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval]] — where the community decides whether to add the ''bot'' right to accounts |
||
= The CDA process = |
|||
== Before nomination == |
|||
Before nomination here, consider whether your nomination is covered by the [[#What this process is not]] restrictions above. Attempt to discuss your concerns with the administrator, and to enlist the aid of other administrators. ''Attempt persuasion first.'' |
Before nomination here, consider whether your nomination is covered by the [[#What this process is not]] restrictions above. Attempt to discuss your concerns with the administrator, and to enlist the aid of other administrators. ''Attempt persuasion first.'' |
||
Line 38: | Line 37: | ||
It is generally not acceptable to make repeated nominations of the same administrator for the same reasons, without materially new evidence, and such nominations may be speedily closed. Repeated resubmission of failed nominations may be treated as [[WP:DE|disruption]]. |
It is generally not acceptable to make repeated nominations of the same administrator for the same reasons, without materially new evidence, and such nominations may be speedily closed. Repeated resubmission of failed nominations may be treated as [[WP:DE|disruption]]. |
||
== Nomination == |
|||
Nominations are made by creating a sub-page of [[Wikipedia:Community de-adminship]]. The sub-page is named after the account that it is to have the right removed. So to nominate, for example, [[User:Example]] for community de-adminship, the |
Nominations are made by creating a sub-page of [[Wikipedia:Community de-adminship]]. The sub-page is named after the account that it is to have the right removed. So to nominate, for example, [[User:Example]] for community de-adminship, create the new page [[Wikipedia:Community de-adminship/Example]]. |
||
Nominations may be made in either of two ways: |
Nominations may be made in either of two ways: |
||
; |
;By the Arbitration Committee: The Arbitration Committee may, by a motion, decide to refer the decision about the ''sysop'' right to the Community as a whole, for community consensus. An Arbitrator or a clerk must sign the nomination, linking to the Committee's motion. |
||
; |
;By the Community at large: Nomination by the Community at large requires the signatures of no fewer than 10 editors (the full criteria of which is defined below), within a period not longer than 7 days. Signatures must be placed in the nomination area of the requests, as a simple signed bullet point. |
||
Nominations are expected to provide a ''short'', ''single'', ''objective'' statement of the nomination, supported by detailed and specific evidence. |
Nominations are expected to provide a ''short'', ''single'', ''objective'' statement of the nomination, supported by detailed and specific evidence. |
||
===Validity=== |
|||
Discussion does not open until an Arbitration Committee clerk, a Bureaucrat, or an Arbitration Committee member, certifies a nomination as valid. Nominations are ''not valid'' unless all of the following apply: |
Discussion does not open until an Arbitration Committee clerk, a Bureaucrat, or an Arbitration Committee member, certifies a nomination as valid. Nominations are ''not valid'' unless all of the following apply: |
||
* 10 editor signatures has been collected, or the Arbitration Committee has passed a motion. |
|||
* Either the Arbitration Committee has passed a motion, or the requisite number of editor signatures has been collected. |
|||
* A notice of the de-adminship request is |
* A notice of the de-adminship request is placed on each of [[Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)]], the [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard]], and the [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard]]. (Anyone may post such a notice.) |
||
* A notice of the de-adminship request is |
* A notice of the Community de-adminship request is given to the nominated administrator. |
||
===The nominees=== |
|||
When a nomination is made by 10 editors, those editors: |
|||
* ''must'' have all signed the request, ''themselves'', within the 7 day period. Stale signatures are invalid and must be re-signed to be made valid. |
* ''must'' have all signed the request, ''themselves'', within the 7 day period. 'Stale' signatures are invalid, and must be re-signed to be made valid. |
||
* ''may not'' be subject to [[Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement|Arbitration enforcement]] editing restrictions, Arbitration Committee restrictions, or Community restrictions, including, but not limited to, topic bans, project bans, and paroles without the permission of the Arbitration Committee or another person or group empowered to lift those restrictions. |
|||
* ''must'' be active editors on the English Wikipedia, with accounts more than three months old and with no fewer than 500 edits. |
* ''must'' be active editors on the English Wikipedia, with accounts more than three months old and with no fewer than 500 edits. |
||
An Arbitration member or Bureaucrat may withdraw the validity of an editor, or editors, who are considered to be potentially unreliable nominees. This is generally done in extreme cases only, and usually when the nomination has been submitted. One full day is to be allowed for any replacement(s) to be found. |
|||
''Tip for editors who are not "in good standing":'' If you cannot convince 10 ''independent'' editors "in good standing" of the merits of your request, such that they take it up themselves, then your request is probably without merit and should not be pursued. |
|||
In addition, nominations by editors |
In addition, nominations by editors of an administrator currently in an active arbitration process, may be initiated only with the permission of the Arbitration Committee. |
||
Parties to the CDA process may legitimately contact other editors to request specific input, but must at all times do so otherwise in strict accordance with [[WP:CANVASS]]. |
Parties to the CDA process may legitimately contact other editors to request specific input, but must at all times do so otherwise in strict accordance with [[WP:CANVASS]]. |
||
== Discussion and poll == |
|||
Discussion and polling proceeds for ''at least'' 7 days after discussion opens. Discussion and polling may be summarily closed ahead of that 7 day deadline at the discretion of Bureaucrats or the Arbitration Committee. |
Discussion and polling proceeds for ''at least'' 7 days after discussion opens. Discussion and polling may be summarily closed ahead of that 7 day deadline at the discretion of Bureaucrats or the Arbitration Committee. |
||
===Discussion=== |
|||
'''Discussions are subject to the usual rules.''' |
'''Discussions are subject to the usual rules.''' |
||
Line 73: | Line 77: | ||
'''Anyone may participate in the discussion.''' |
'''Anyone may participate in the discussion.''' |
||
Civil, relevant, discussion, based upon our policies and guidelines, is welcome from any editor in the community, whether with or without an account. However, disruptive comments, and contributions by sockpuppets, banned users, or blocked users (unless blocked by the administrator being reviewed ''and'' when the CDA is materially related to that block) are not permitted and will be |
Civil, relevant, discussion, based upon our policies and guidelines, is welcome from any editor in the community, whether with or without an account. However, disruptive comments, and contributions by sockpuppets, banned users, or blocked users (unless blocked by the administrator being reviewed ''and'' when the CDA is materially related to that block) are not permitted and will either be removed or struck out. |
||
===The poll=== |
|||
The poll contains three sections: support, oppose, and neutral. An opinion is registered with a signed numbered list entry (the # markup), exactly as is done at Requests for Adminship. '''Comments are encouraged''', and !votes presented without a rationale, as well as "per" comments, are discouraged and '''may be discounted''' by the closing Bureaucrat. |
|||
The poll contains three sections: support, oppose, and neutral. An opinion is registered with a signed numbered list entry (the # markup). |
|||
'''Commenting next to the vote is strongly encouraged''', and '[[!votes]]' presented without a rationale, and "per" comments are both stongly discouraged, and may be discounted by the closing Bureaucrat. |
|||
Community de-adminship is not a replacement for [[Wikipedia:Requests for comments]], and is not structured like a user RfC. In particular, there is only ''one'' poll of signatures, because there is only one thing to assess: the consensus for removing or not. |
Community de-adminship is not a replacement for [[Wikipedia:Requests for comments]], and is not structured like a user RfC. In particular, there is only ''one'' poll of signatures, because there is only one thing to assess: the consensus for removing or not. |
||
Editors (including nominators) may change their minds during the discussion period. To signify that, |
Editors (including nominators) may change their minds during the discussion period. To signify that, they must strike through the old opinion (changing the # markup to #: so that the list numbering remains correct) and sign the new opinion. |
||
== Closure == |
|||
Sometime after the seven days for the discussion have elapsed, a Bureaucrat will review the request and close it. Bureaucrats are volunteers, and closure is not required to occur exactly on the deadline. |
Sometime after the seven days for the discussion have elapsed, a Bureaucrat will review the request and close it. Bureaucrats are volunteers, and closure is not required to occur exactly on the deadline. |
||
Bureaucrats determine the consensus of the community, using both the opinion poll and the discussion on the talk page. There are two outcomes: either the ''sysop'' right is to be removed or it is not. If the sysop right is to be removed, the Bureaucrat will present the request to a Steward, showing project consensus for |
Bureaucrats determine the consensus of the community, using both the opinion poll and the discussion on the talk page. There are two primary outcomes: either the ''sysop'' right is to be removed or it is not. If the sysop right is to be removed, the Bureaucrat will present the request to a Steward, showing project consensus for its removal by the Steward. In either case, the Bureaucrat will close the discussion, recording the outcome, and archive it. |
||
===The decision=== |
|||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | For an Administrator to be de-sysopped, a Bureaucrat will review the discussion to see whether ''both'' a minimum of 50 editors and a general [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] support de-sysopping. Consensus is sometimes difficult to ascertain and is not a numerical measurement, but as a general descriptive rule of thumb most of those above 80% support for de-sysopping are passed; most of those below 65% fail, and the area between is subject to Bureaucratic discretion. |
||
⚫ | Bureaucrats are, explicitly, free to take into account rationales and discussion, and to discount any and all forms of [[Wikipedia:sockpuppet|sockpuppet]]ry and canvassing to recruit people who are not part of the Wikipedia editor community (including [[WP:SPA|single-purpose accounts]] created for the purpose). |
||
⚫ | Bureaucrats are, explicitly, free to take into account rationales and discussion, and to discount any and all forms of [[Wikipedia:sockpuppet|sockpuppet]]ry and canvassing to recruit people who are not part of the Wikipedia editor community (including [[WP:SPA|single-purpose accounts]] created for the purpose). The point of the process is determining the consensus ''of the Community''. |
||
====Extension==== |
|||
Bureaucrats may also, at their discretion, extend the discussion period in order to obtain wider input, or allow on-going active discussions to continue in order to reach a better consensus. |
Bureaucrats may also, at their discretion, extend the discussion period in order to obtain wider input, or allow on-going active discussions to continue in order to reach a better consensus. |
||
====Appeal==== |
|||
Appeal of a decision is to the closing Bureaucrat, in the first instance. One may also apply to [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship]] in the normal way. |
Appeal of a decision is to the closing Bureaucrat, in the first instance. One may also apply to [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship]] in the normal way. |
||
==Speedy closure== |
|||
If a nomination is clearly frivolous and/or subject to [[WP:SNOW]] in favor of opposing, then an ''uninvolved'' Administrator or Bureaucrat may close the discussion. |
If a nomination is clearly frivolous and/or subject to [[WP:SNOW]] in favor of opposing, then an ''uninvolved'' Administrator or Bureaucrat may close the discussion. |
||
==Review process== |
|||
After one year or five CDA nominations, whichever is sooner, a formal review of this process will be made. |
After one year or five CDA nominations, whichever is sooner, a formal review of this process will be made. |
||
Revision as of 01:23, 28 January 2010
Community de-adminship removes the sysop right from an account, per the consensus of the Wikipedia editor community. This guide explains how the process works.
- There is a short FAQ on CDA here.
What this process is
The Community de-Adminship (CDA) process is for the community to request the removal of administrator status (known as the 'sysop right') from a currently active administrator account. Each CDA request is formatted as a nomination (by 10 editors, all of three months and 500 edits standing), followed by an accompanying outcome poll, which must contain at least 50 votes in support of the CDA, reaching (as a rule of thumb) 65% of the total votes polled. The decision to de-sysop will be based on whether there is a clear consensus beyond that point to do so.
Although there are some important differences, CDA is intended to be a comparable process to Wikipedia:Requests for adminship, about which you can read more at the Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship. That is also the process to use in order to re-gain the sysop right after it is removed by community consensus.
What this process is not
This process is not for:
- Emergency de-sysopping
- Emergency desysopping of accounts for the immediate protection of the project is the province of Jimbo Wales, Stewards, and the Arbitration Committee. Discussions here take no less than 7 days, and are unsuitable for emergency measures.
- Temporary de-sysopping
- Temporary de-sysopping is the province of the Arbitration Committee. Requests for the same should be made to the Committee.
- Voluntary desysopping
- An administrator who wishes to no longer have access to administrator tools may apply to Stewards in the normal manner at m:Steward requests/Permissions.
- Blocks, bans, topic restrictions, or other community sanctions
- This process is solely for removing the sysop flag from accounts, and determining whether the community at large has a consensus for doing so. Blocks, bans, restrictions, and sanctions should be enacted through the usual mechanisms.
- Dispute resolution or other discussions
- Dispute resolution should proceed through the normal channels. Disputes with an administrator must be discussed first with that administrator, and then via the normal channels such as third opinion, mediation, request for comment, and arbitration. Mild or one-time only incivility should instead be reported to Wikiquette Alerts. If the administrator is listed at Administrators open to recall and you believe the conditions listed there have been met, they should be reported there.
- A CDA request should only be initiated only after substantial community discussion at a suitable venue, such as Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard or Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User, has failed to produce a resolution, and there must be documentation of these prior attempts.
- Removing the flag from inactive accounts
- Any administrator account nominated here must be an account that has actively used editor or administrator tools recently. There is no consensus at the English Wikipedia for removing the sysop flag from inactive administrator accounts. There is some evidence from the English Wikibooks and English Wikinews, that such actions are arguably detrimental to projects in the medium and long terms.
- Removing rights other than the sysop right
- This process covers solely the sysop right.
- Getting administrator actions undone
- The places for doing that are variously the enacting administrator's user talk page, Wikipedia:Deletion review (for deletion/undeletion), Wikipedia:Requests for page protection (for protection/unprotection), and Wikipedia:Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents.
Requests here are not valid if made on these grounds, and are subject to summary closure by Bureaucrats or the Arbitration Committee.
Related processes
- Wikipedia:Requests for adminship — where the community decides whether to add the sysop right to accounts
- Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval — where the community decides whether to add the bot right to accounts
The CDA process
Before nomination
Before nomination here, consider whether your nomination is covered by the #What this process is not restrictions above. Attempt to discuss your concerns with the administrator, and to enlist the aid of other administrators. Attempt persuasion first.
Consider that nominations that do not address the core issue of whether the community as a whole does or does not trust the account to have the sysop right will likely fail, and possibly backfire spectacularly. Determining that is the purpose of this process. If this is not the issue in your case, then you are in the wrong place. In all but the most extreme cases, there should be a demonstrable pattern of repeated unacceptable behaviors, not just a single incident. Processes like this one usually result in intense scrutiny of all involved parties. The bright light you are about to shine on a particular administrator will reflect on you as well.
It is generally not acceptable to make repeated nominations of the same administrator for the same reasons, without materially new evidence, and such nominations may be speedily closed. Repeated resubmission of failed nominations may be treated as disruption.
Nomination
Nominations are made by creating a sub-page of Wikipedia:Community de-adminship. The sub-page is named after the account that it is to have the right removed. So to nominate, for example, User:Example for community de-adminship, create the new page Wikipedia:Community de-adminship/Example.
Nominations may be made in either of two ways:
- By the Arbitration Committee
- The Arbitration Committee may, by a motion, decide to refer the decision about the sysop right to the Community as a whole, for community consensus. An Arbitrator or a clerk must sign the nomination, linking to the Committee's motion.
- By the Community at large
- Nomination by the Community at large requires the signatures of no fewer than 10 editors (the full criteria of which is defined below), within a period not longer than 7 days. Signatures must be placed in the nomination area of the requests, as a simple signed bullet point.
Nominations are expected to provide a short, single, objective statement of the nomination, supported by detailed and specific evidence.
Validity
Discussion does not open until an Arbitration Committee clerk, a Bureaucrat, or an Arbitration Committee member, certifies a nomination as valid. Nominations are not valid unless all of the following apply:
- 10 editor signatures has been collected, or the Arbitration Committee has passed a motion.
- A notice of the de-adminship request is placed on each of Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous), the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard, and the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard. (Anyone may post such a notice.)
- A notice of the Community de-adminship request is given to the nominated administrator.
The nominees
When a nomination is made by 10 editors, those editors:
- must have all signed the request, themselves, within the 7 day period. 'Stale' signatures are invalid, and must be re-signed to be made valid.
- must be active editors on the English Wikipedia, with accounts more than three months old and with no fewer than 500 edits.
An Arbitration member or Bureaucrat may withdraw the validity of an editor, or editors, who are considered to be potentially unreliable nominees. This is generally done in extreme cases only, and usually when the nomination has been submitted. One full day is to be allowed for any replacement(s) to be found.
In addition, nominations by editors of an administrator currently in an active arbitration process, may be initiated only with the permission of the Arbitration Committee.
Parties to the CDA process may legitimately contact other editors to request specific input, but must at all times do so otherwise in strict accordance with WP:CANVASS.
Discussion and poll
Discussion and polling proceeds for at least 7 days after discussion opens. Discussion and polling may be summarily closed ahead of that 7 day deadline at the discretion of Bureaucrats or the Arbitration Committee.
Discussion
Discussions are subject to the usual rules. Community de-adminship discussions follow the normal Wikipedia talk page etiquette. All editors are reminded in particular that the Wikipedia:No personal attacks policy applies to all parts of a de-adminship request.
Extended discussion belongs on the discussion page. The main request page is for the nomination, the poll, and the closure. All discussion not directly relevant to the purpose of the nomination, i.e. evaluating the level of community support for a given Administrator, may be refactored to the talk page of the request. (Tip: If you want to provide an extended comment, or to begin a discussion of an indirectly related point, link to a section on the talk page.)
Anyone may participate in the discussion. Civil, relevant, discussion, based upon our policies and guidelines, is welcome from any editor in the community, whether with or without an account. However, disruptive comments, and contributions by sockpuppets, banned users, or blocked users (unless blocked by the administrator being reviewed and when the CDA is materially related to that block) are not permitted and will either be removed or struck out.
The poll
The poll contains three sections: support, oppose, and neutral. An opinion is registered with a signed numbered list entry (the # markup).
Commenting next to the vote is strongly encouraged, and '!votes' presented without a rationale, and "per" comments are both stongly discouraged, and may be discounted by the closing Bureaucrat.
Community de-adminship is not a replacement for Wikipedia:Requests for comments, and is not structured like a user RfC. In particular, there is only one poll of signatures, because there is only one thing to assess: the consensus for removing or not.
Editors (including nominators) may change their minds during the discussion period. To signify that, they must strike through the old opinion (changing the # markup to #: so that the list numbering remains correct) and sign the new opinion.
Closure
Sometime after the seven days for the discussion have elapsed, a Bureaucrat will review the request and close it. Bureaucrats are volunteers, and closure is not required to occur exactly on the deadline.
Bureaucrats determine the consensus of the community, using both the opinion poll and the discussion on the talk page. There are two primary outcomes: either the sysop right is to be removed or it is not. If the sysop right is to be removed, the Bureaucrat will present the request to a Steward, showing project consensus for its removal by the Steward. In either case, the Bureaucrat will close the discussion, recording the outcome, and archive it.
The decision
For an Administrator to be de-sysopped, a Bureaucrat will review the discussion to see whether both a minimum of 50 editors and a general consensus support de-sysopping. Consensus is sometimes difficult to ascertain and is not a numerical measurement, but as a general descriptive rule of thumb most of those above 80% support for de-sysopping are passed; most of those below 65% fail, and the area between is subject to Bureaucratic discretion.
Bureaucrats are, explicitly, free to take into account rationales and discussion, and to discount any and all forms of sockpuppetry and canvassing to recruit people who are not part of the Wikipedia editor community (including single-purpose accounts created for the purpose). The point of the process is determining the consensus of the Community.
Extension
Bureaucrats may also, at their discretion, extend the discussion period in order to obtain wider input, or allow on-going active discussions to continue in order to reach a better consensus.
Appeal
Appeal of a decision is to the closing Bureaucrat, in the first instance. One may also apply to Wikipedia:Requests for adminship in the normal way.
Speedy closure
If a nomination is clearly frivolous and/or subject to WP:SNOW in favor of opposing, then an uninvolved Administrator or Bureaucrat may close the discussion.
Review process
After one year or five CDA nominations, whichever is sooner, a formal review of this process will be made.