`    {| class=``messagebox`` style=``background-color: #FCF; border-color: #F8F`` |- |These pages contain material which is ha ha only serious. Very ha ha, but also very serious, so pay attention after you're done with the giggles! |}   Adminitis is a state of mind in which some Wikipedians find themselves at times. Though generally confined to administrators, the condition has been observed in some non-administrators. Although the exact causes are unknown, there is thought to be some correlation towards extensive and prolonged anti-vandalism activity.  == Symptoms == * Strongly believes that all users are equal but admins are more equal than others * Assumes bad faith frequently * TLAitis (see WP:WOTTA) * Stops editing articles, but continuously pontificates about ``writing the encyclopedia`` * Impatience * Exhibits immediatism * Hangs out in project namespace * Has no time for featured articles * Frequently refreshes pages to catch the latest change that (of course) needs to be reverted * Believes that he or she is always right (sorry, EVula...) * Believes anyone who uses the word 'vote' for 'express a view in a straw poll' should be banned for life * Originally hailed as the nicest person on the wiki, now reviled as the most hated troll * Prevents pages from being edited in encyclopedic fashion for policy reasons * Seems to enjoy biting new users * General BOFHness * Strict adherence to ``Wikipedia policy`` while not using common sense or conversely, * Strict adherence to ignore all rules, as a strict rule... while not using common sense * Self-denial. ``This page cannot possibly apply to me`` * Humor breakdown. ``This page is not funny`` * Sudden spike in use of specific admin tools, or use of admin tools in areas where he hadn't been using them before * Requires less and less evidence to be convinced of sock puppetry until confidently asserting that all new users are the same person * Spends hours writing sarcastic pages about admin behavior * Believes he is the only real claimant to the ``Defender of the Wiki`` barnstar * Exhibits signs of MPOV * Thinks people are attacking them when they're only trying to be nice * Has a habit of removing criticism while pretending it's a personal attack * Indulges in biting delicious newcomers  == Diagnosis == It is a near universal truth that sufferers from this illness will reject any diagnosis of the condition by an outside party. With that in mind, it's important for those who have received this diagnosis to conduct a self-test. If more than three of the following apply to you, you may be suffering from this illness:   * You frequently feel that pages are broken and must be deleted (protection is for wusses!). * ``Everyone is a vandal or a troll, and must be blocked`` is a recurrent thought. * ``Blocking people is a punishment! (not a tool to get people to cool down and edit the wiki)`` is a mantra, not anti-wiki.  * If you nominate this page for MfD even though it's only 2 minutes since the last revision, you may possibly be suffering from adminitis. ** Corollary: If you speedy, you are certainly suffering from adminitis. * If you accuse the creators of this article of making a WP:POINT, especially if you forget that making a point does not imply disruption (you need to disrupt to make a point, not make a point to disrupt! -P), you are probably infected.  * And if you buy the above line of thought, you are definitely infected.  == Pathophysiology == The infectious nature of this illness is unknown at this time.  More study needs to be conducted in order to identify transmission mechanisms. No effective containment mechanisms have been identified. So far anti-vandal bots have proved immune to this condition, although as yet there is no convincing explanation concerning this anomaly.   Observational studies have noted that sufferers will seek the counsel of their Wikipedia friends, but end up infecting them in the process. Other studies have noted the evolution of a Wikipedia editor as potentially having a causal role in this illness.   == Treatment ==   Treatment varies from case to case. As of 2006, no consensus exists on the best methods for recovery. Some methods that have been used: * Write some articles. That stuff on the pages with a white background. (You may remember it if you think back to when you started on Wikipedia.) * Taking a wikibreak (short or long depending on severity of infection) * Submitting an RfC with yourself as the party. Note: Can lead to worsening of the infection, if all your friends come out to say what a great person you are. Do NOT tell your friends about the RfC.  * Ask  for a second opinion * Self de-adminship.  == Prognosis and wikimortality == Mortality rates from this illness have not been clearly supported by research. Frequently, what appears to be a wikideath becomes a wikiresurrection in the form of a user who is considerably more circumspect, and often more detached from processes. Some resurrectees have exhibited shortness of temper, but with considerably lower flameout levels. Reinfection is rare, but if it occurs is almost always unrecoverable.   If the initial condition is not fatal, it may take months for a patient to recover, even if under the care and treatment of WP:ARBCOM.  ==Relation with Jimbo Wales== * Chides people by asking them how Jimbo Wales would react if he sees (insert your favorite example) a la asking how your mother would feel if she sees you doing (insert your favorite example). * Considers the Jimbo Wales article to be 's user space. * However argues that Jimbo is Big Brother whenever Jimbo's opinions go against him, but couches it in language such as ``benevolent dictator``.  == See also == *  If you are doing this, you have adminitis * How to win an argument (from Meta): the internationally accepted case description *  If you are doing this, you are fine, you do NOT have adminitis * Wikipedia:No vested contributors`