| abstract
| - __NOWYSIWYG__ Wikia has recently introduced a new "moderator" user group, the details for which can be found at this blog, and which I would encourage everyone to have a look at. The update has removed the ability of non-admins to remove/restore replies from message wall and forum threads that are not their own, with these rights now being placed under said moderator position, with a few additional rights such as being able to close and highlight threads. In relation to this update, I would like to propose we create a "Requests for moderator rights" page that would function in much the same way as the "Requests for rollback rights" page. Users would be able to request moderator rights, and then a bureaucrat or administrator (since, as I understand, it admins have the ability to enable such rights) would consider their request based on their history on the wiki. In terms of creating the page itself, the existing rollback requests page would pretty much suit with some minor rewording. 01:21, January 24, 2015 (UTC) One thing that's irked me since the full switch from comments to the discussion board is that anyone can just remove replies or threads. So I support this motion for sure. 01:26, January 24, 2015 (UTC) Per PSU, I don't like that anyone can remove those messages. I support this, however I don't think that admins can add that group (correct me if wrong). 02:42, January 24, 2015 (UTC) Wikia has created it and it will be enabled on all wikias. It's up to us if we actually give people these rights, and HoT is simply proposing for a page to be created in which people can request these rights. 02:56, January 24, 2015 (UTC) That sounds fine, but I wonder if a separate page is really necessary. I mean, with the function so similar to rollback users rights of deleting and editing comments, why not just have all the rights listed on the rollback requests page and incorporate this new group into rollback? I.e, that would mean that all current rollback users get this right, all future rollback users get this right when they get rollback and if and when they lose rollback, they lose this. Just because wikia separates them doesn't mean we need to have them become an entirely separate group. -- 03:40, January 24, 2015 (UTC) I considered that, but a number of users spend most of their time on the discussion boards and do not have any great history of correcting vandalism. Therefore, if the two positions were combined, those that might wish to become moderators could be restricted from that because they do not fall under the requirements for rollback, and vice versa. I think having them separate is a better option. 12:00, January 24, 2015 (UTC) I kind of agree with ARG, but Thor also has a good point. I believe that maybe only a few rollbacks get this right. So they need rollback as a prerequisite and then be able to get the rank. NOTE: Rollbacks would not have to be moderators as well to be nominated for adminship. 14:58, January 24, 2015 (UTC) Getting rollback is based on anti-vandalism and corrective work, whereas moderator rights are more to do with removing inappropriate posts and threads. As I noted above, there are many users that spend most of their time on the discussion boards, and don't focus that much or at all on vandalism work or editing in general. Some of these users could make very good moderators, particularly as they spend more of their time checking over discussions, but if we required rollback to be a prerequisite, they wouldn't be able to gain moderation rights since they wouldn't fall under the requirements to become a rollback. I don't see that moderator rights really require one to be a rollback already, since the focus of each isn't really the same. 19:19, January 24, 2015 (UTC) On this Wiki, rollbacks are already responsible to DELETE and EDIT blog and article comments, so made it made sense to extend that rights to wall comments. The other forum rights, can be restricted to the new "Moderator" group . Management-wise, I lean towards rollbacks be made a prequisite to be moderator, but I am open to separating the roles. This is my proposed changes to Special:ListGroupRights: {|class="wikitable" !Rollback !Moderators |- | delete rollback commentdelete commentedit + walledit + wallremove | forumadmin notifyeveryone wallarchive walledit wallmessagemove wallremove + commentdelete + commentedit |} Also, according to Wikia's wall message code, there is a lingering code snippet that grants all rollbacks users the 'walledit' rights, i.e., the ability to edit wall comments, even if it is not explicitly granted by the wiki. I expect Wikia to take this out in the future. Later. — Hasdi Bravo • 19:30, January 24, 2015 (UTC) I would support having the two sets of rights be separate and having a separate request page for moderator rights. Neither should be a prerequisite for another and the tradition of adminship nominees requiring rollback rights should continue. I think we should be cautious about one process giving out too many rights at once when many users might not use all the rights. It also means that the bar set to give users one set of the rights would be lower because no-one would have to worry about someone inexperienced with one side of the wiki inadvertently doing things wrong to another side of it. This arrangement is more flexible, in my view. The 888th Avatar (talk) 02:14, January 26, 2015 (UTC) 888 pretty much addressed everything I wanted to say, so yeah ditto. File:Waterbending emblem.png Water Spout 05:23, January 26, 2015 (UTC) Seems opinion isn't totally clear at the moment. If others don't have comments to share we'll need to have a vote. The 888th Avatar (talk) 09:52, January 29, 2015 (UTC) I think it would be a good idea to vote now as no one else has shared their opinion. What should the voting options be exactly? 04:25, February 4, 2015 (UTC) I'm not convinced that a vote is needed. By my count, there were 5 in favour of the proposal as stated, 2 in favour of creating a separate page but requiring rollback as a prerequisite, and 1 in favour of merging the moderator rights with the current rollback position. This to me shows a pretty large swing in favour of the proposal, and so combined with the fact that there was very little discussion anyway, I don't see a problem closing the forum in favour of the proposal. 23:45, February 4, 2015 (UTC) WS and 888 said to make it totally different which would be another two. So what seems to be most in favor is making moderator a completely different page and user group and making rollback a prerequisite to moderator and both are equally toed so that is why we should probably vote. Things aren't so clrear right now. 00:06, February 5, 2015 (UTC) As I read it, 888's (and by extension WS's) response was entirely in line with the original proposal, so I don't see why they should be taken separately. 00:15, February 5, 2015 (UTC) Can't seem to stop missing things. I had forgotten what you had originally proposed. So I guess the only thing to discuss now are the requisites then? 00:23, February 5, 2015 (UTC) Given that only two people were in favour of that, again I do not see that a vote is needed. 23:17, February 5, 2015 (UTC) Maybe I didn't say this as clear as I should have, I mean what is needed to gain moderator status like for rollback for which you need history undoing bad edits, etc. 23:43, February 5, 2015 (UTC) I've created a sandbox here as an example, using the existing rollback page as a template. I think the requirements listed there should suffice. 23:26, February 6, 2015 (UTC) Looks great! This thread can finally be closed now. 23:55, February 6, 2015 (UTC)
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)