User:Reaper Eternal/recall template

There is now a formal desysop procedure at Wikipedia:Administrator recall. It is recommended that you use the formal procedure instead.
This page formerly housed my voluntary recall criteria. Should the formal process ever be removed, this page will immediately become active again, even if I forget to remove the historical notice.

This user subpage is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference.
If you want to revive discussion regarding the subject, you might try contacting the user in question or seeking broader input via a forum such as the village pump.

So I'm a hazard with the mop? Maybe I've gone to the point of no return? Am I abusively using my administrator status? If you answered "yes" to any of the questions, it's time to see if I should still be an admin, so file a recall petition. I have a few basic requirements, however, to prevent abuse and harassment:

The abuse must be less than 30 days old from its public discovery.^{[note 1]}
You cannot be a sockpuppet.
It cannot be my closure of a contentious discussion.^{[note 2]}
The abuse must require admin actions or conduct as an admin. Checkuser counts. Rollback is not an admin action.

If none of those are an issue, you can file the request. Create a new section on my talk page, make a brief description of the abuse, with links, and then paste the following code below it:

<!-- Enter a brief description of the abuse -->
=== Filer ===
* ~~~~

=== Support petition ===
#

=== Discussion ===

Now one of three things will happen:

You convince me that I am a hazard with the mop, in which case I will request my own desysopping without waiting for this process to conclude.
You do not convince me, but if 20 users in good standing^{[note 3]} sign below the complaint within 96 hours (4 days), I will request my own desysopping.
You cannot convince me I am a hazard or gather enough signatures, so nothing happens.

If I end up being successfully recalled, this will count as resignation under a cloud. I will not attempt to regain the tools except through RFA.

That is all.

Notes

^ In short, you can't dredge up ancient wrongs that were put to rights long ago. Note that the 30 days is from public discovery of the abuse, not when I did it.
^ Contentious discussions will, by their very nature, have people who strongly disagree with the closure. There are other avenues of appeal (i.e. WP:DRV) if you feel my closure is inaccurate or invalid for some reason. Be sure your reasoning doesn't fall under WP:IDONTLIKEIT when you appeal, however, or your appeal may be speedily closed.
^ Users in good standing are accounts with 250 article edits who are not subject to any active sanctions. The filer does not have to meet this requirement.

[1] In short, you can't dredge up ancient wrongs that were put to rights long ago. Note that the 30 days is from public discovery of the abuse, not when I did it.

[2] Contentious discussions will, by their very nature, have people who strongly disagree with the closure. There are other avenues of appeal (i.e. WP:DRV) if you feel my closure is inaccurate or invalid for some reason. Be sure your reasoning doesn't fall under WP:IDONTLIKEIT when you appeal, however, or your appeal may be speedily closed.

[3] Users in good standing are accounts with 250 article edits who are not subject to any active sanctions. The filer does not have to meet this requirement.

[note 1]

[note 2]

[note 3]