Forum:Administrivia

Forums: Index > Watercooler > Administrivia

2022 June 25[]

Okay, yearly bureaucrat-ting session. In theory, the rationales can be found in the logs. Maybe next time I'll put in a fuller discussion.

Reminder: Full description of user access levels.

Promoted to Content Moderator:

User:Arisano (directly)

To rollback:

As usual I'm worried I'm being too stingy. Do we really need a probationary period? Maybe someone who's only edited a few times should be allowed to move pages and manage protection, etc.? Especially since I only do this once per year. ⚙Zarchne (talk) 01:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

With little spam or malicious editing not handled by Fandom (I think there was one I fixed in the past year, maybe a few) there's little need for anything more powerful than moving pages, but there's no role that is just "move pages". (Rollback is not much better than just editing to make the same change.) The larger the number of powerful admins the greater chance one will cause problems (or the password of one will be guessed by someone). So as long as there are admins who regularly check in I don't see much need to add anyone as Content Moderator or higher. I don't say the existing admins are better than newer editors, just that we don't need more. The one exception is if someone wants to do a major project that requires special permissions. Argadi (talk) 02:49, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

And now that I look at it again, ordinary registered users can move (but not delete) ordinary pages. ⚙Zarchne (talk) 18:12, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

I do check the user report occasionally to verify there are admins editing fairly often. I wish I could tell how often the admins read the site -- I check for changes several times a day (when not driving or flying) to see if there are any recent problems that should be fixed (as well as to read the changes for my own enjoyment). Argadi (talk) 02:49, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

2021 July 27[]

User:Undomelin had some CSS (that looked like real CSS to me) as a proposal to use to adjust the new skin. So I increased their permission level to admin ("sysop"), which should allow trying that out. ⚙Zarchne (talk) 22:33, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

It seems to me that if User:Undomelin gets a promotion to sysop because of what they have proposed to so, User:Zibbiz deserves the same for what they have already done, so I have taken care of that. -- 🔧William Ansley (talk) 01:49, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

2021 June 16[]

I did a review of user activity a few weeks ago and while there were a few promotions I could have made, none seemed that important. But since then User:Zibbiz has made so many great contributions and it seemed they should be able to move pages as well (without bothering with the rollback probation period — and this isn't supposed to be a big deal). So there you go. ⚙Zarchne (talk) 16:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I fully agree that Zibbiz deserves the promotion. If you hadn't already done it, I was planning on doing it this weekend. -- 🔧William Ansley (talk) 03:26, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, folks! I'm glad to be here. Zibbiz (talk) 22:44, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

June 2020[]

When we started this wiki, the three Moderator roles (Chat, Discussion, Content) didn't exist; the only choices were rollback and sysop (admin). At the time, the suggestion on Wikimedia wikis was that most people can be admins, it shouldn't be treated as big deal. So I used rollback to for initial recognition, with the intention that if the user kept editing, sysop would follow pretty quickly. (Everything moved way quicker back then, obviously.)

Since then, the Content Moderator role has become available. That should make moving up from rollback even less of a decision. The main thing that Content Moderators can do is delete pages. Admins have the ability to change the wiki's appearance.

Here's the full story (again) on what each role can do (I had to check this. again, to be sure): Help:User access levels

Cleanup[]

I removed bunch of rollback permissions from admins because they are redundant and I decided I didn't like the clutter. I removed Content Moderator from Administrator User:Bkharvey for the same reason.

Admins[]

Here's an always-current list of admins: Special:Listadmins

I didn't promote anyone to admin.

Content Moderators[]

These users were promoted to Content Moderator:

The current list: Special:ListUsers/content-moderator

Rollback[]

Here's an always-current list of rollback users: Special:ListUsers/rollback

These users were promoted to rollback:

I am thinking that the rollback users who are editing can become Content Moderators. The exception is that if a user has only ever posted in the daily Forums, there's no reason for it.

⚙Zarchne (talk) 04:43, June 11, 2020 (UTC)

May 2016[]

Added some privs... they're in the User Rights Log Special:Log; maybe will summarize in a bit. More needs to be done, I think. Since User:Rej Maddog hasn't been around for a couple years, maybe we should make another bureaucrat. ⚙Zarchne (talk) 17:42, May 12, 2016 (UTC)

December 2011[]

Hm. Sorry about the last two years. Looks like you guys have done okay, though. Nevertheless, does somebody want to make a nomination for Bureaucrat? I probably can resume doing the promotions myself, but you never know. Better to have a backup, someone who has stayed involved. Or, there are three obvious choices, should I promote all three of you? ⚙Zarchne 03:48, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

For those (like me) who didn't know the details of the roles:

I believe Rej Maddog would be a good candidate, staying active and working to improve the wiki. Corgi has also been a great resource, but possibly not as useful as a Bureaucrat currently due to lack of recent activity. (Caveat: I can't tell how often Corgi visits and monitors but does not edit.)

(There are also several users due for rollback or sysop.) Argadi 11:10, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, congratulations to Argadi and Rej Maddog, whom I have made bureaucrats. Go forth and make new sysops. ⚙Zarchne 20:28, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

Some overdue permission changes:

User	was	added	reason given
User:Agathahetrodyne	none	rollback	long overdue
User:Bosda Di'Chi	none	rollback	good standing
User:AndyAB99	none	rollback	good standing
User:Mysteria Femina	none	rollback	good standing

Argadi 22:59, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

January 2010[]

Okay, about three months overdue for bureaucratting, sorry. Blame Facebook.

User	was	added	reason given
User:Rej Maddog	rollback	Sysops	way overdue
User:Brassica	rollback	Sysops	continued good standing
User:Ravenhull	rollback	Sysops	continued good standing
User:Finn MacCool	none	rollback	good standing, many edits
User:Louisiannan	none	rollback	good standing, many edits
User:Sir Chaos	none	rollback	good standing, many edits
User:Nekokami	none	rollback	good standing, many edits
User:Zerogee	none	rollback	good standing, many edits
User:Synalon Etuul	none	rollback	good standing, many edits
User:PersephoneKore	none	rollback	good standing, many edits
User:Kalaong	none	rollback	good standing, many edits
User:Aquillion	none	rollback	good standing, many edits

⚙Zarchne 02:59, January 21, 2010 (UTC), 03:02, January 21, 2010 (UTC),03:53, January 21, 2010 (UTC),04:01, January 21, 2010 (UTC)

June 2009[]

Felt like about time to do some bureaucratting, and I didn't hear any complaints the last time (complaints from people who received increased power are ignored).

User	was	added	reason given
User:DryBrook	rollback	Sysops	Continued good standing
User:Rej Maddog	none	rollback	Good standing, 100 edits.
User:Tatter D	none	rollback	Good standing, etc.
User:Brassica	none	rollback	Well-praised edits (92)
User:Axisor	none	rollback	User in good standing; many edits

⚙Zarchne 00:23, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

[polite but reasonably enthusiastic applause] -- Corgi 01:08, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

*gleep!* Okay, okay. No big deal. No big deal. Nobigdealnobigdealnbgdl. Right. Okay, now that I have that out of my system, with great power comes great responsibility. And even no-big-deal power carries some responsibility. So, um... Rollback is "undo", multiplied. Useful for reverting vandalism and such. Right? -- Brassica 02:55, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, like that fishing spammer we had show up on one of the forum pages a little while back. Rollback doesn't save the change, it leaves no evidence behind. Think of it as a sort of time-travel. That was, as a means of reassurance, the first time I'd ever had to use rollback (wanted or needed to). -- Corgi 15:54, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Apparently Wikia does a good job of keeping down the spammers. (Maybe it's safety in numbers; spammers or spambots have their IP addresses blocked by somebody else before they find us.) So it mainly functions as a way to recognize sysop candidates. Which is also No Big Deal^TM; every sane and involved person (or, in Corgi's case, moderately sane and very involved person) should be able to do admin functions.⚙Zarchne 17:45, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

March 2009[]

Okay, whatever reason I (as Bureaucrat) could not remove Sysop bits has been fixed, so we don't have to worry about making someone a sysop and then changing our minds.

User:Argadi is now a Sysop
User:Corgi now has rollback
User:Quadibloc now has rollback

I'm thinking about adding rollback to User:DryBrook and User:Ravenhull and adding Sysop to Corgi and Quadibloc. ⚙Zarchne 08:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the vote of confidence, but I'm perfectly happy just making suggestions for a while yet. Your call. Rollback probably wouldn't get me into any trouble. --DryBrook 15:11, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

The main thing is, the interface could use work and one needs sysop to effect changes to that. As noted below (whether I/we (Mnenyver, the community in general) actually seem to treat it this way) sysop can be considered "no big deal". (And especially so now that it can be unset.) We're all just fans here, after all. (I suppose the Foglios would say they're "just cartoonists"...) Taking things slow just tends to ensure a certain level of maturity. Also, as may be said, a substantial sign of being fit for power is not wanting it. ⚙Zarchne 18:09, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, made a bunch of changes...

User	was	added	reason given
User:Corgi	rollback	Sysops	mostly sane person, apparently
User:Quadibloc	rollback	Sysops	sane person; wants to work on UI!
User:Ordinary	none	rollback	experiment
User:Altgorl	none	rollback	active, user, over 100 edits...
User:Ravenhull	none	rollback	user in good standing
User:DryBrook	none	rollback	user in good standing

⚙Zarchne 21:19, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

November 2008[]

User:Ordinary complained about not being able to work on site design to User:Argadi. I'm thinking I could make the latter a sysop post-haste, Ordinary seems a bit green but it's probably better to err on the side of "no big deal". First call for discussion. ⚙Zarchne 12:19, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Three important questions[]

I'm feeling like I've stirred up almost enough trouble for the moment, and to do more on the most important stuff would really be worth investing in a bot. So I'm going to try to go back to ignoring the bits and pieces for a bit. (Yeah, good luck with that.)

However, couple or so administrative questions, in decreasing order of importance:

Since the discussion on moving to another wiki host has not continued, and we now see pretty much what the changes are (and we're working to ameliorate them), I take it we're just going to live with Wikia for now?
Would anybody object to making User:Mnenyver being made a bureaucrat? I'm suggesting it to reduce the impact of me getting hit by a bus or whatever.
Would it be worthwhile to make User:Evaneyreddeman an admin? She hasn't asked but it seems like she's been around long enough and uncontroversial that if she noticed something out of place she should be able to put it back. Also, that would increase her ability to use her artistic abilities to directly affect the wiki.

— Zarchne 21:55, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

1) Staying on Wikia is fine with me. If we get complaints about the ads, we may want to open up discussion again about paid hosts. 2) Do I need bureaucrat privs? I have no objections, just wondering. 3) And Evaney is awesome. No problem with her as a sysop. --mnenyver 12:32, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

According to User talk:Mnenyver#Spam page, needs deleting Mnenyver would be making sysops if she had the ability. Probably we should have a Category and noticeboard (like this here forum)... a policy... for this kind of thing, but in any case, right now this is the second call for discussion. Note that bureaucrats can only grant "crat" and "sysop" privs, they cannot remove them. There is also a "rollback" priv that crats can be add and later remove. (On some wikimedia wikis bureaucrats can also grant the "bot" priv that allows editing without recording the edit (since bots can make a lot of edits ) but we don't seem to have that here. I haven't been able to get the clank configured correctly, either.) According to Wikipedia policy, being an admin is "No big deal". Anyway, yay or nay on crat for Mnen? — Zarchne 07:58, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I vote aye, but what's this about crats not being able to remove privileges? Not the case on another wiki where I'm a crat. -- that old bearded guy 12:58, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't have anything to say at this point except "strange but true". Quoting the relevant Special: page:

You can add users to these groups: bureaucrat, rollback and sysop.
You can remove users from these groups: rollback.

⚙ Zarchne 03:33, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't know that I'd be very useful as a sysop, but I'm not opposed to it. I'm primarily a traditional artist, and I know next to no coding, but if I can be helpful anyway, I'd be more than happy to contribute to the pretty-fying of our wiki. -Evaneyreddeman 14:51, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Just a quick reply: I didn't mean I'd go around making everyone a sysop, by the way. I tend to err on the side of "safe". I just happen to think we have a good group of folks here. --mnenyver 18:08, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I was actually surprised when I re-read that and thought about how it could be interpreted, so I'm glad you posted an apologia. Gotta keep up appearances of lack of foregone conclusion, y'know? ⚙Zarchne 03:33, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of overcaution, my plan is to wait until July 4th to set the crat bit on Mnen, so that about a full week will have passed since I proposed it. She can then set the sysop bit on Evaney to celebrate her inauguration. I suggest she set the rollback bit on User:Argadi while she's at it. Again, apologies for any perceived overdrama. Third call for discussion. ⚙Zarchne 05:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Yea. She's always been awesome, she will use it well. -Acacia 03:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

She's got my vote, whether or not she makes me a sysop. -Evaneyreddeman 16:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay, the discussion is closed; Mnenyver is a Bureaucrat. (Now, where should this be archived?) ⚙Zarchne 18:59, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Following Z's suggestion, User:Evaneyreddeman is now a sysop. :) --mnenyver 19:24, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Retirement: I really enjoyed working on this wiki and working with all of the other fans, but my time has become precious and I must, regretfully, spend that time on other things. I noticed that the main page and some other regular tasks haven't been updated in quite a while, possibly because people thought I would have editorial input. So it occurred to me that I should leave a note here in case someone wants to take over those jobs. (See Girl Genius:Job_List and Girl Genius:Regular Maintenance - the lists themselves probably require updating too.) Good luck with the wiki and I hope to pop in from time to time! And congrats on making the "What's Hot" list! --— m ^(talk) 06:24, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Hey, you can't sniff leave — at least until you find replacement. ⚙Zarchne 01:10, April 19, 2010 (UTC)