Forum:Adding Forumadmin to UserRights

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Adding Forumadmin to UserRights
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 15 January 2009 by Degenret01.

With the recent requests for the forumadmin permission, I was wondering if it is possible to add the following lines to the LocalSettings file. (I’m assuming that each wiki has it’s own LocalSettings.php, and that staff are willing to edit it.)

$wgGroupPermissions['bureaucrat']['forumadmin'] = true; # Gives bureaucrats forum adminship. (optional, with consensus)
$wgGroupPermissions['forumadmin']['forumadmin'] = true; # Gives forumadmins forum adminship.
$wgAddGroups['bureaucrat'] = array( 'forumadmin', 'current_groups...' ); # Bureaucrats can add forumadmin.
$wgRemoveGroups['bureaucrat'] = array( 'forumadmin', 'current_groups...' ); # Bureaucrats can remove forumadmin.

Adding these lines would prevent having to call a staff member over every time someone needs the forumadmin permission, and would also get forumadmin to appear on the UserRights page again. Remember, all forumadmins can do over sysops is create stickies, announcements, and polls on the forums. Quest map icon.png Laser Dragon Task map icon.png 03:47, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

If it's possible I support. It'd make things a bit easier. Andrew talk 04:00, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
We can't do anything with LocalSettings; only Wikia staff can fiddle around with that.--Richardtalk 04:11, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
I was planning on getting consensus here, and then taking it to staff. Quest map icon.png Laser Dragon Task map icon.png 04:15, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
I believe this wiki to be stable enough and with a large enough group of users that this is a reasonable request. I'm not sure what Wikia policy is for making changes of this nature, but anybody who has become a bureaucrat on this wiki ought to be mature enough to responsibly use these permissions without creating a mess here. I certainly support this action in terms of building a consensus to present to Wikia. --Robert Horning 13:07, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
I support this idea completley! It really annoys people when you have to wait a long time for staff to grant the ability to that user. White partyhat.pngMoneymaker72Dragon platebody.png 16:00, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

If that was even possible, I'd be a forumadmin by now. It can't be done, it would seem.

InstantWinstonDragon 2h sword old.pngold edits | new edits

22:52, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Couldn't we always send a request to a wikia staff member so they can add a special group of administrators called 'fourm admins'?--Pkthis 21:29, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Support Why not? We could always use a select group of people to patrol the fourms. It would be similar to having rollback users, except in this case, they are trusted with fourm powers. Although not necessicary, I do believe that being an active fourm admin could also help with nomination, provided that the fourm admin makes accurate use of their powers.--Pkthis 21:29, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

The forumadmin permission already exists, but only staff members can add it. All sysops are already moderators on the forums and can lock, move, delete, ect. Quest map icon.png Laser Dragon Task map icon.png 20:51, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
I actually am supposed to be a forumadmin, but central can't even give me the powers due to technical problems. This could pose a problem for letting the wiki's crats even do this. 23:34, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Support - If the option is possible, then by all means have it added, the more autonomous the wiki is, the better.--

Helm of neitiznot (charged).png Azaz129 Crystal shield.png Talk Edits Contribs

21:02, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Support- better late than never. ~kytti khat 23:14, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I've asked Sannse to make the changes. Quest map icon.png Laser Dragon Task map icon.png 22:27, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

  • Support - it'd be good and helpful. And would it be a voting process or something like the rollback requests. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 09:16, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Support - That's a great idea. I know Dtm tries his best, but perhaps one or two more users to create stickies and polls would be helpful. I don't think it's a good idea to give it to crats automatically though. Not everyone on the wiki is active on the forums, and so only those users who could really make the best out of forumadmin should have it given to them, not just crats/sysops. To become a forumadmin, however, users should have to show that they can make good use of the powers. For example, they must have a certain number of posts, must be mature on the forums (and wiki), must have been on the forums for a certain amount of time, if they're a sysop they should have made use of their sysop powers on the forums, etc...Yellow partyhat.png Ilyas Talk Contribs 00:43, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Just to let you know that the changes to the code to allow bureaucrats to make forumadmins have been made, but won't go live until next Tuesday... we haven't put anything new on the site over the holiday, just to be on the safe side. -- sannse<staff /> (talk) 16:23, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Sannse! It is appreciated. Is this just for RS Wiki, or is this something across all Wikia sites? Regardless, this can be quite useful. Thanks again! --Robert Horning 17:45, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
This setting only applies to wikis using the phpbb forums (which is about 3 wikis iirc). Those are not supported any more, so no new wikis will be getting them. Other wikis use the wiki forum set-up instead. -- sannse<staff /> (talk) 19:29, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Sannse! Maybe now we should create a new section in RFA for Requests for Forum Adminship! Oh and guys remember forumadmin is sorta like crat in how there's really no limit to the amount of sysops/forum mods we can have, but there should be a limmit to the amount of bureaucrats/forumadmins we have at one time. Forumadmin is just an addition to forum mod/sysop, just like bureaucrat is just an addition to sysop.Yellow partyhat.png Ilyas Talk Contribs 18:12, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
You do have to be a sysop to be a forum mod, but you don't have to be a sysop to be a forumadmin, correct? Andrew talk 18:14, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Well, yes that's how I think it works, but its' probably possible to make people forum mods, we're just not going to do that because we have sysops.Yellow partyhat.png Ilyas Talk Contribs 18:31, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
No, this is something that is completely different. You can be a forum admin and not a "sysop" (aka Administrator), both, or just a "sysop". Bureaucrats can give themselves this authority, and I think it is reasonable to assume that bureaucrats can give themselves this authority without a wiki-wide vote. As for where to apply for forum admin status.... I'll leave that to others to decide. I'm assuming that a request on RuneScape:Requests for adminship would be appropriate to become a forum admin as well. This authority gives those with this permission set to be able to act as moderators on the forums associated with this wiki. This should be a "no big deal" type of request like admins, but should be for those who spend time on the forums and can help keep this under control --Robert Horning 18:30, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes that's what he's saying about the forumadmin/sysop/forum mod/crat thing. And I think we should start working on RFFA (req. for forum admin) right away. It should be similar to an RFB because... Because of the giant reason thing I posted above... And instead of the table thing saying "RFB? - yes or no" it should ask for the actual type of Request, so for example instead of it being yes or no, you would either put "sysop", "bureaucrat", or "forumadmin". I know there's going to be a ton of requests once we get this going, but how many forumadmins do you guys think there should be at one time? I think anywhere from three to five is good, any less would be OK, but it's nice to have a few more, and any more than that would be too much (we only need a couple people to make stickies and such, since it's only an addition to forum mod).Yellow partyhat.png Ilyas Talk Contribs 18:37, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
The exact number of forum admins is mostly irrelevant. We need a couple, and those should be highly trusted individuals. The problem with bureaucrats is that if they all disappear for some reason, we have to appeal to Wikia central to make a new bureaucrat... and that can sometimes be a hassle. At least with bureaucrats and this new bureaucrat ability, we can internally create new forum admins without having to go to Wikia central any more even if all of the forum admins are gone. That should factor into the issues for moderating the forums as well including the number of folks that need to be involved. --Robert Horning 18:53, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
(New indent) We should start creating an RFFA page or just add it into the RFA page, and by the time the new forum admin feature is actually added, we should be just starting the requests.Yellow partyhat.png Ilyas Talk Contribs 19:08, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
I started making a draft a while ago here. Feel free to edit. Butterman62 (talk) 19:44, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Mine was already successful, right? Or would I have to go through the whole RFFA (as opposed to RFA) thing again as the consensus was reached on the "wrong" page? :p 02:22, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Lol do you really think we're that mean? We wouldn't do that to you lolz, that's like saying "Ok well this man was found innocent after being accused of murder, but now that the judge is dead, we need to put him on trial once again."Yellow partyhat.png Ilyas Talk Contribs 02:44, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
According to Sannse, wikia have now sorted out the rights, so now it's just up to a 'crat to give it a try on InstantWinston. Administrator Hurston (T # C) 11:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC)