Forum:Content Moderators

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Content Moderators
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 20 January 2016 by Liquidhelium.

Yooooo, [[w:User_blog:DaNASCAT/Introducing_New_Moderator_Opportunities_For_Community_Administration|tomorrow (Jan 14th) Wikia will be adding a new usergroup called Content Moderators]]. Assuming I read this correctly, it looks like the group will be able to be added by admins. They will have the ability to

  • Delete and undelete pages
  • Protect and unprotect pages
  • Suppress redirects on page moves
  • Move files
  • Reupload files (Which any user account can do here anyway?)
  • Rollback

It mostly looks like an extension to our Custard group, with less rights. Is this something we'd like to look into? We could add in the rest of our custard group rights into it to have a more powerful not-quite-admin group. Or we could just ignore it.

Given the nature of the rights given (delete and protect), we'd probs need to have some higher means of entry or simple discussion/admin discretion to the requests if we were to use it.


Comment - I'm not sure if we have anyone in the position to be deleting/protecting pages who is not an admin, but given that it doesn't give access to tools like Block and the sort I could see it being helpful to some. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 18:21, January 13, 2016 (UTC)

Oppose - Sounds useless. MolMan 18:22, January 13, 2016 (UTC)

Comment - So its admin without block, mediawiki edit, and userright management (and possibly more, need to see Special:ListGroupRights tomorrow); alternatively its custodian+rollback+delete+protect. I don't know if we'd have that much of a use for such a group. If we do want it, I would definitely want some sort of RfConMod process for it. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 18:42, January 13, 2016 (UTC)

Oppose - per mol Star Talk ayy lmao ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 18:47, January 13, 2016 (UTC)

Oppose - per above jayden

Ban - Can we ban proposals about adding delete/protect/block to new/existing usergroups.

Other rights have been successfully added. Actually, there are more successful requests than there are unsuccessful. But each time the request is for deleting, protecting, or blocking rights, the idea is shot down. Let's shoot it down for good.

#NoMiniSysops MolMan 19:14, January 13, 2016 (UTC)

The new user group exists and there's no way to remove it. Banning it based on 4 year old forums even I had forgotten about is a bit pointless (as is the existence of the list itself, but that's for another day). cqm 21:09, 14 Jan 2016 (UTC) (UTC)
It literally meets the requirements Forum:Yew Grove/Previously rejected proposals, regardless of age of previous discussions. The age of those previous discussions only goes to show how firm our stance is, giving more reason to add this to that list. MolMan 21:13, January 14, 2016 (UTC)
This isn't a proposal to add rights or create a new group, it's whether to utilise a new feature similar to if we want to use forum, wall or blogs. Lets just agree the group isn't for us and carry on like it doesn't exist much like we'd do if this was added to the list. cqm 22:14, 14 Jan 2016 (UTC) (UTC)
Using it would fall under this point of "don't suggest". Would keep us from even thinking about more mini sysop groups in the future. MolMan 01:22, January 19, 2016 (UTC)

Oppose - The current admins do a fine enough job. Adding admin-lites don't seem to add any benefits. --Deltaslug (talk) 19:37, January 13, 2016 (UTC)

Well... Haidro isn't. MolMan 01:22, January 19, 2016 (UTC)

Oppose - #eluneforconmod - Korasi's sword.png Archmage Elune  TalkHS Void knight deflector.png fetus is my son and I love him. 20:16, January 13, 2016 (UTC)

Oppose - As said in every other thread... If we trust people to delete/protect pages then they should be an admin. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 03:38, January 14, 2016 (UTC)

Oppose - At first I looked at this and thought "wow, I could help out the wiki in those areas again!". But then I thought about it, and it really doesn't sound useful to me or anyone else. 7kyt1iT.gif --WINE OF GOOD HEALTH (Actually Stinko) 03:47, January 14, 2016 (UTC)

Comment - The majority of the opposition is based on the protect/delete right rather than the use of the group itself. We can add rights to the group, as Ty suggested, as well as remove those we don't want. It's customisable. I don't believe the group as it stands is immediately useful to us. It's designed to be a single fix for all wikis, and is never going to work perfectly any mature wiki, if it does at all.

However, I think the idea of merging custodian with rollback is interesting as the groups have become blurred over the years and are no longer exactly what they say on the tin due to the extras we've tagged onto them. Having said that, rollback cannot be removed anymore than these new moderator groups. cqm 21:09, 14 Jan 2016 (UTC) (UTC)

Oppose - Per Haidro. Temujin 03:28, January 16, 2016 (UTC)

Oppose - why does Wikia love unpacking the admin set so much? Geez what are admins even supposed to do anymore after this... Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:13, January 19, 2016 (UTC)

Administrate? MolMan 01:18, January 19, 2016 (UTC)
Someone's gotta file these TPS reports Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 01:19, January 19, 2016 (UTC)
lol that'll probably be the next group. Plus this makes bureaucrats even more useless with admins being able to hand out all the subgroups. Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:19, January 19, 2016 (UTC)
Crats are already useless. MolMan 01:21, January 19, 2016 (UTC)
We've actually made a push ourselves to make the bureaucrat role more useless by allowing admins to give out Rollback and custard, so that's not all on Wikia. ;) svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 03:05, January 19, 2016 (UTC)

Closed - Content Moderators will not be utilized by the RuneScape Wiki. --LiquidTalk 21:54, January 20, 2016 (UTC)