The "free" encyclopedia jargon is a myth. Right now, there's an implicit caste system that determine who actually controlled the whole page. Sorted by the lowe

The "free" encyclopedia jargon is a myth. Right now, there's an implicit caste system that determine who actually controlled the whole page. Sorted by the lowest hiearchy : 1. IP edits 2. Registered new user 3. Registered old user, with a mobs of fellow old user, that could enforce anything in the name of "community consensus". 4. Administrator. An ascended registered old user with a mobs of fellow old user "supporter" who vote for them during the election session. They actually wield power to ban user, permanently delete someone contribution, and lock the pages. Abuse of power is rampant so far. There's no balance of power at all to fix this problem except hoping the majority of "good" administrator (and public outcry) finally oust a "bad" administrator. 5. A mobs of administrator. Any infightings inside the administrator circle could be overpowered by the majority mobs of administrator, all again in the name of "community consensus". Political battle inside Wikipedia is bloody and i've experienced it first hand. Oh, regarding the level 5 user (a mobs of administator), here's an interesting story : https://www.engadget.com/wikipedia-banned-seven-users-after-reported-infiltration-by-a-chinese-group-104143971.html https://www.engadget.com/wikipedia-banned-seven-users-after-... Why seven? Because you need to control a majority of administator to finally wield the ultimate political power across the whole wikipedia.