I see comments from only 5 users, and rowiki has only 3 'crats. I strongly suggest that this is not advisable, especially given the recent hiwiki situation. This right should be enabled only in wikis with a significant number of 'crats where the potential for abuse is virtually none. I suggest that on such a small wiki it's highly unadvisable and should not be fullfilled.

5 users is a significant number on ro.wp. I have no idea what the hiwiki problem was, but I would say that we should have the right to risk an abuse if we wish to do so. I'm pretty sure removing the admin rights is something that can easily be undone by stewards if things really get out of hand. We have quite a high turnaround rate for administrators and asking for removal on meta just takes too long.

5 votes are not even considered enough to appoint a local 'crat so they most certainly shouldn't be enough for such a change.

EN.WP.ST47 wrote:

Greetings,

There does not appear to be local consensus, but feel free to discuss that here. If you want to discuss this on the merits, please go to http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Limits_to_configuration_changes#Disconnection_from_stewards_overseeing so that we can have discussions on this in a centralized location.

(In reply to comment #3)

5 votes are not even considered enough to appoint a local 'crat so they most
certainly shouldn't be enough for such a change.

How in the name of god did you figured that out? Perhaps you're talking about some meta limit, which does not directly applies to ro.wp. There is currently no limit to the number of votes needed to be appointed on ro.wp.

wikimedia wrote:

With all due respect, but the ability to deadministrate users should be reserved for stewards and bureaucrats on big wikis with many administrators like enwiki and dewiki. I count 25 administrators on rowiki ( https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:List%C4%83_utilizatori/sysop ).

Taking in consideartion the lack of projects-wide policy, and the reticences of people to open such a policy (cf. bug ), I doubt we can say "the ability to deadministrate users should be
reserved for stewards and bureaucrats on big wikis with many administrators".

See also http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Limits_to_configuration_changes#Disconnection_from_stewards_overseeing

As this isn't clear per policy, and bugzilla isn't the place to discuss such a policy, I'll close this bug as won't fix for now, until there is a clear policy.

This isn't prohibited by any policy to my knowledge. There are some members of the community who think that somehow only stewards should be able to do this. What they think of it is irrelevant unless they can get enough support to change the global policy.

I'm not going to reopen this bug because there doesn't appear to be community consensus for the change (there are no 'no' votes but the number of people participating is not nearly enough, WONTFIX -> INVALID), but please ignore comments 6 and 8.

After some discussion it turns out I completely misunderstood Matanya's comment.

It seems that he meant there was no clear policy for determining whether this change has local community consensus. Don't ignore that. :)