Forum:Crowns and AEAE

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Crowns and AEAE
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 4 February 2010 by Calebchiam.

Recently the crown images that were used to identify administrators, bureaucrats, or users with rollback were deleted because they violated AEAE. I'm curious as to whether this was really necessary. To me, crowns were simply a means of identifying what tools a user had, similar to hilited usernames. I'm also having a hard time applying AEAE to this situation. Administrators may be equal to other users in how their opinions or edits are valued, but they are simply not equal to other users in their ability to protect, delete, block, ect. I think that we need to truly nail down how administrators fit into AEAE, and also make a decision regarding images/userboxes that distinguish one user from another.

So, at this point, I guess I'm not proposing something as much I'm trying to start a discussion regarding how AEAE should be dealt with. I could be misinterpreting AEAE, so input on this matter would be greatly appreciated. --Aburnett(Talk) 19:51, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

EDIT: Also, I understand that bots aren't users, but they do still have a crown. Why? --Aburnett(Talk) 19:53, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

The deletion of the crown images was silliness, in my honest opinion. While we are all equal as editors, Sysops do have special tools, and you can't get around that. The only part of it that I can see breaking AEAE at any point would be the fact that they are crowns, and they are only crowns because they look similar to the pmod/jmod crowns in the game this wiki is about. We already know we are all equal, the crowns are irrelevant. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 19:57, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - If a crown violates AEAE, a hilited name also does. FredeTalk 20:15, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I don't understand why these were deleted though, If they were violating the policy, why were they not deleted earlier? Liam - Beta Tester (talk) 20:27, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I think that the small crowns, which are often used in sigs, should stay deleted, because they can be misleading for newcomers. In RS, moderators have 'power', and thus have a crown next to their name. Jmods are pretty much the bosses of the game.

However, on this wiki, we have bureaucrats and administrators and stuff with 'tools'. If they have a crown next to their name, newcomers will automatically assume that they are moderators and have power, because in RS, mods also have crowns. This makes RS:AEAE very confusing for them, and can lead to awkward situations.
Also, some people have used these crowns to brag about what they call their "rights" on this Wiki, which is ridicule, because all editors are equal.

However, the big crowns are only used in userboxes. These userboxes are not used for bragging, but for general information - 'I am a sysop. I have administrator tools.' That tells people that they could ask that person to do something that requires admin tools, but it is less confusing for newcomers and it is not a way of bragging. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 21:26, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - (Edit Conflict) Thanks for creating this forum. Degen's idea that they represent royalty are absurd. If they're a violation of AEAE, then hilites are, "This user is X" templates are, and simply saying "I am an administrator/bureaucrat" is, too. http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/3921/thehimmemote.pngGone. 21:29, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

It's not absurd. He has a point. I think that maybe using crowns isn't really such a good idea - but what icon should be used instead? Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 21:50, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to see some images that actually represent rollback/admin/'crat be used rather than a crown - e.g. a bucket with the red R on it for rollback, a broom with green A, etc. Images from RS if possible. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 22:05, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
A bukkit? OMG! --Iiii I I I 22:08, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
Only the believers deserve bukkits. HAIL BUKKIT! LVDMBucket detail.pngrwojy 22:12, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
SHUVELS> BUKKITS Also, the crowns are based off of images from RS (P/J-mod crowns). That's why they were made like that in the first place. http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/3921/thehimmemote.pngSHUVELS

Support re-addition of crowns - Who's the idiot who wanted to remove the crown icons in the first place? Fruit.Smoothie 23:33, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

That was Dengen and made over 3000 wanted pages :( Twig Talk 772kZGs.png 23:36, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support re-addition of crowns and re-write of AEAE - I think this is ridiculous. AEAE does not make sense in the fact that all editors are equal. It is way to general in saying that all editors are perfectly equal and no editors have power over another. That is true, in ways, but HOW is it equal if I have the power to delete so-and-so, but a new editor who just joined doesn't? That is not equal. We might be equal in the fact that all of our opinions are equal and we all have the same rights and the same rules to follow, but when it comes to privileges and tools, we are not equal. You can't just simply label everything on this wiki to be equal, 'cause it's not.

Another thing, WHAT is so wrong with crowns? Is it the way they're shaped or the way they light up the screen's pixels that make them go against AEAE? If I painted an A on a bucket and a crown, and placed one in this userbox, and one in this userbox, is there a difference in their meaning? I sure as hell don't think so, saying "ohh, well a crown means royalty and power and a bucket means nothing" isn't the true meaning of something. That's an opinion. Deletion summaries shouldn't be based on opinions, they should be based on if and how the subject goes against our policies, and you can't delete something over an unclear policy. For suggestions on how to make AEAE clearer, well, read the above paragraph.

My two cents, Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 00:01, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Lil diriz, if you think AEAE needs a rewrite, maybe you should read it again. The policy is basically saying that no one's opinions/beliefs have any more precedence over others, and no one has any authority over other users. Quoting the policy: Administrators and bureaucrats are trusted members of the wiki community who are recognised for reliable edits and fairness in dealing with discussions or arguments. This does not give them authority over other players in overruling decisions. Simply put, having the tools to delete and block does not give them any more authority than other users. C.ChiamTalk 03:04, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
Well yes, I know that much. I know it says that, but it could be written clearer. Well, it should sound more like this, but not in list form:
1) Does one user have more authority over another user, opinion-wise? No
2) Does one user have more power over another user, ownership-of-the-wiki-wise? No
3) May one user have more tools than another user has? Possibly, depending on the user
See what I mean? We're all equal in most ways, but it's possible that we differ when it comes to a user's tools. By this, I mean rollback rights, admin rights, b'crat rights, forum admin rights, bot rights, etc. Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 19:23, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Wouldn't the simple solution to the problem to be to pick another object that doesn't have any relation at all to royalty and gods chosen representive on Earth and all that stuff. The object doesn't have to be a crown that bares an "A" to show that it is an admin. We could get that bucket of water photo, use paint to crudely draw an "A" on it and it would be able to take the place of the crown with no real downsides. There is probably something better to use then a bucket however Lol Unicorn horn dust.png Evil Yanks talk 00:13, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I just don't see why this is such a problem in the first place. It's not, really. Like I said, Degen's assumption that crowns = royalty/editors-not-being-equal is his opinion. What if I think crowns mean poverty and/or death? It's not set in stone what anything means, society and people just apply meanings to them that we think fit. Obviously, Degen thinks the meaning of royalty/editors-not-being-equal fits nicely with crowns. I however, think crowns mean poverty and death. Who's gonna stop me? Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 00:23, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
3 edit conflicts in a row! This is the first sentence that you get when you type "crown" into wikipedia: "A crown is a term (crown (anatomy)) referring to a part of the head or of a hat, or to a head ornament or type of headgear for the highest rank in a socio-political hierarchy." Pretend that you are watching a show, any show, and you see someone who is wearing a crown. Your first though would be that "Ooh, he is a king, and therefore he is in charge of making decisions." It is the same with Jagex being represented by golden crowns in-game and on the forums; it is to show to players that don't know what it means that they are more then just an ordinary user. I personally don't mind if the crowns are removed or not (it doesn't seem like that much of a problem) but I don't see why we have to go back to crowns when there is an obvious stigma attached. Unicorn horn dust.png Evil Yanks talk 00:47, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I would suggest using whatever the default wikia uses, I think wikipedia also uses crowns so yeah I'd support using the status quo as such ;) Veritas vos Liberabit 00:33, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion - Just so each editor doesn't feel inferior in regards to admins

Cleaner.png

having crowns, how about we shrink the image for the Varrock cleaner (as shown to the right) down to fit inside the userboxes and put a crudely drawn "A" on his chest to symbolize the housekeeping/maintenance tasks that admins normally do on a day-to-day basis. This would also to a stop to bragging rights, as I doubt most people would brag about having a userbox with a cleaner in it. That's my two cents on the matter. [1] N7 Elite (Ready to talk now?) 00:35, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I have to agree that deleting the crowns was not really necessary. Technically, not all editors can be equal anyway because administrators/bureaucrats do have access to more tools than normal editors.

According to RS:AEAE: Administrators and bureaucrats are trusted members of the wiki community who are recognised for reliable edits and fairness in dealing with discussions or arguments. This does not give them authority over other players in overruling decisions; all major decisions of this kind (such as requesting adminship) must be made by the community, and not by an individual

How does a picture of a crown give you authority over anything? It's just a symbol representing your status as an editor. New wikians won't necessarily assume that you are some kind of leader or something because you have a crown in your signature (or elsewhere). Once they read RS:AEAE, then they'll know that administrators/bureaucrats are not authoritative figures.  Tien  00:36, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Said wonderfully. Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 00:39, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Sorry for the double comment, I just needed to add a point. If an icon is changed, the new icon will merely represent authority like the crown did. For example if the crown was replaced with a chisel, the chisel would become associated with "sysop or crat" status, therefore it'd become another status symbol of authority.

Just image for example that all Ferrari sports cars are redesigned to look very very ugly indeed. After a while, very very ugly cars would make people think of Ferrari sports cars.

In the same way that by changed the crown to say a bucket, the bucket would connotate the authority, extra powers and heightened respect that many administrators receive, and so the argument would be back to square one.

Veritas vos Liberabit 00:42, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

DefinitonsMain Entry: 1crown Pronunciation: \ˈkrau̇n\ Function: noun Usage: often attributive Etymology: Middle English coroune, crowne, from Anglo-French corone, from Latin corona wreath, crown, from Greek korōnē culmination, something curved like a crow's beak, literally, crow; akin to Latin cornix crow, Greek korax raven — more at raven Date: 12th century

1 : a reward of victory or mark of honor; especially : the title representing the championship in a sport 2 : a royal or imperial headdress or cap of sovereignty :


Main Entry: 1buck·et Pronunciation: \ˈbə-kət\ Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French buket, from Old English būc pitcher, belly; akin to Old High German būh belly Date: 13th century

1 : a typically cylindrical vessel for catching, holding, or carrying liquids or solids


A crown is much more "glorius" than a bucket. No one is going to want to be a rollback or a sysop to get a "bucket"(or hammer or chisel or spade). The difference is clear.

Oh, major point a lot of people are missing. Technically, the pictures were not used in mainspace, and every day pics are deleted for not being used in mainspace. The difference here is that too many sigs and whatnot linked to them for deleting to be practical. So lie to yourself if you want about what a crown means, deleting per not used in mainspace was perfectly legitimate.--Degenret01 02:19, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Oh come on, can't that rule be loosened up a little? Maybe I shouldn't be directly be asking you, and rather the community, but can't the rule be changed? I mean, damn, the policies and rules on this wiki just take the fun out of everything. First it's no costumes, then there's no images not used in the mainspace... we can't be a little lenient and allow what, 14 crown images to bypass the rule? They were used perfectly fine, and I'm sure alot of people liked them as they were. Really, is it such a big deal to have a few images that aren't used in the mainspace? [[:File:Star.svg|This star image]] isn't used in the mainspace, but people haven't had a problem with it. It's used for purely recreational activites (I'm of course talking about the wikifest), it's not used in the mainspace. Even Leevclarke, an admin, uploaded it! Degen, would you like to delete [[:File:Usergrammarfiendl.png|this]], and [[:File:Notificatie.gif|this]] too? They're both used in userboxes only, are used for recreational activites (giving little tidbits of information on a userpage), and people seem to like having them on their userpage too. These images are no different than the crowns (ignoring the conversation we've had about definitons and AEAE, as we'll just keep arguing on and on... no one wins this way, we need the community's opinion). Soon, all userboxes are going to be are text. There's nothing wrong with having a little fun once in a while. I'll propose a change to image policy or something, if this post is in the wrong place. Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 03:07, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
Degen, are you trying to be funny or something? You're being EXTREMELY absurd. http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/3921/thehimmemote.pngGone. 03:40, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
Comment - RS:IMG on non-mainspace images:
All images hosted on the wiki must be used in the main article namespace at least once.

Project-related images, such as the sysop crown, are an exception.

RS:IMG
Reference to the specific images in question aside, I think we do have a use for non-mainspace images if they help the wiki in some other way. --Quarenon  Talk 03:55, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Support Re-addition of crowns on userpages- I don't find having a crown on your userpage is braggy or violates AEAE. It's just a crown. Now in signatures on the other hand, is confusing to new editors, because in runescape, p-mods and J-mods have "special powers" which is completely misleading of admins. there not actual people who get paid, and can do ANYTHING. Support Re-Addition, Per Lil diriz 77. Runecrafting-icon.png Stormsaw1 Talk Sign HighscoresRunecrafting-icon.png 04:58, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - There should have been some discussion before these crowns were deleted. While I can understand where Degen is coming from, they are merely used to identify the different user groups. Jagex uses crowns so we obviously based ours off of their ideas. I support undeleting them. Andrew talk 05:15, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Dengen is an idiot: Plain and simple. Words and images have no business concerned with the matter of equality, ONLY ACTIONS DO! Keep the crown. Also, can someone please provide me a link to Dengen's user page? I would like to have a little chat with him. Fruit.Smoothie 01:47, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

I think the crowns should be kept, but ban the use of them in signatures. --Nup(T) 03:53, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
No, they shouldn't be banned from signatures - I don't see how that affects AEAE more than the use of them in userboxes. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 05:10, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Support undeletion - I stated my long paragraph about the many reasons why they should be kept on Forum:Rollback - A privilege, not a right.. The crowns are simply a symbol; to represent something. I can't be bothered writing something long so I'll just to a copy-paste job:

"WHAT? The crowns were deleted because they apparently showed a form of authority? 1. The crowns are were there to assist the viewer in knowing that the user is an admin/'crat/whatever. 2. It was also there to make te userbox look more appealing. Templates always look pretty with an image. ^_^ 3. If it is the fact that they were "crowns" which represent royalty which is authority, I believe they were crowns because Jagex/player/forum mods user crowns. At first there was only one admin crown and it was derived from the in-game one, with the little pixelated "M". Then we made another one for 'crats, then bots, then staff and helpers, and somewhere in the middle a rollback one was made. If people go pasting them on their signature, go boasting it around the forums, etc. then we should do something. I think the crowns should be brought back and only used on userpages by the users; also maybe try and change the usage from "crown" to "icon". Wikipedia has an icon for admins there. Anyway, my view on the rollbacks acting all authoritative, just tell 'em that they can't go boasting about it. Simple as that. Not much we can do, the policies already state it is not a right, privelige, honour or, in a way, status. Cheers." Chicken7 >talk 05:56, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Comment Whichever way this goes, I believe bot crowns should remain, as it is not used on anything but bot pages, not in sigs or stuff. MTHDZHBucket detail.pngrwojy 07:23, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Support undeletion - per all. Degenret, I think you should have discussed this first in the Yew Grove before deleting the crown images.

Issue: Why delete them now?
Crown images have been used since February 2008 (see File:Bureaucrat crown.svg) and were discussed earlier here... why did they not violate AEAE then?
Question: Why delete them now all of a sudden?
Issue: Crowns, bots, and AEAE
Unused file/Unused in mainspace: Crowns also show authority which violate AEAE. Vanity images do not belong on the wiki.
— Deletion summary of File:Bot crown.svg Degenret01


I was wondering why the bot crown image was deleted? I don't think a bot will ever be considered authority or royalty. Bots are used for automated edits, for goodness' sake. Besides, AEAE does not apply for bots, only the bot policy should apply.
Suggestion: If user crowns are considered symbols for power and royalty, maybe we could replace the crown with a triangle/square/circle/etc?
Issue: Not used in mainspace
Technically, the pictures were not used in mainspace, and every day pics are deleted for not being used in mainspace.
— Forum:Crowns and AEAE Degenret01
As some have pointed out, they are plenty of other project-related images that are not used in the mainspace. Admins should use their own discretion when they delete images. Admins should not delete images simply because they appear in Special:UnusedFiles. I remember restoring an image, which was used incorrectly (via a direct URL). It ended up in the UnusedFiles list, and was subsequently deleted. If the admin bothered to check if the file was still being linked, the image would not have been deleted. I quote a line from UnusedFiles:
Please note that other web sites may link to a file with a direct URL, and so may still be listed here despite being in active use.
— Special:UnusedFiles
The crown images are used extensively, and deleting them will only create an unnecessary mess in Special:WantedFiles. The images could have been redirected to the "This image has been deleted" image, or a blank image (i.e. File:1x1-pixel.png). Even if they were personal files, deletion was definitely NOT the solution.
Suggestion: Admins should check if the image is used before deleting. If it is used a lot, and needs to be deleted, redirect them instead.

Cheers.   az talk   08:00, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Comment Before these were deleted, I uploaded them to my wiki so I have got a backup of the images. I have added the crowns back to the userboxes using my wiki's url for them. Feel free to revert if not wanted. ;) Liam - Beta Tester (talk) 11:44, January 9, 2010 (UTC) Idea failed. :(

Comment - The images are not lost. A sysop will be able to undelete them based on the result of this thread. --Quarenon  Talk 11:51, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Why do these need to go through an undeletion process before their undeletion when they were deleted without any type of deletion process? (errr.... that makes sense, right?) http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/3921/thehimmemote.pngGone. 14:40, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

O_o I think this is the answer you're looking for: This discussion is the undeletion process. If the decision is to bring them back, we will do it straight away. If we keep doing things without discussion, we'll have back and forward edit wars. Lol Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 15:09, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Replace big ones with different icon, delete small crowns - Per what I said above. I agree with Degen. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 17:19, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Support undeletion - Per every undeletion support, the crowns are simply a symbol, they just represent the tools that somebody has, it's not anything showing royalty/power over the others. If the crowns are SO bad for the wiki because of what they SEEM to represent, maybe we could replace the crown with a triangle/square/circle/etc, like Azliq said. Quest point cape detail.png Brux Talk 18:00, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Support undeletion - While I see what Degen was trying to get at, I do disagree. They are used in userboxes to identify admins, etc. I do not think they violate AEAE, they just provide a handy way for someone to show they are an admin. I think the crown image is being overanalyzed. I'm guessing it was used because it is similar to the crowns in RS. A Pmod can mute you in RS and a sysop can block on the wiki, makes sense to me. Air rune.png Tollerach hates SoF Fire rune.png 18:35, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Delete small, Keep large - so, after reading the extensive comments above, I would agree with deleting the smaller crowns. These are only used within signatures, and the crowns use in signatures is most defiantly just using the crowns symbol of power. As for the larger crowns, those should be undeleted. They didn't violate the image policy being a "project image", and they do not violate AEAE because they don't show that an admin has any special authority over discussions. they simply identified users who had special abilities in maintaining the wiki, similar to name hiliting. I wouldn't be opposed to a new set of images either, like a bucket or a broom, but I think the crown seems more official and will probably look better than some pixilated images taken from a game screenshot. --Aburnett(Talk) 18:54, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Shields

Comment - Perhaps use a different symbol instead of a crown which projects undue authority, a shield would be more symbolic to the role of admins and I imagine would be fairly easy to create especially with templates already available, just a thought.--

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

22:49, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

It sounds good, except for that Shields already seem a bit regal and may be warped in the minds of wikians to mean such. Still, it's the best idea anyone has had thus far. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 00:14, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
What about a wooden shield? It doesn't seem as regal as a Falador shield 3 or something. --Iiii I I I 00:30, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
I would rather go with the Kite Shields. As a non-sysoped user, I don't feel like sysops "tower over" me with the crown images. we all know they are a reference to the pmod crowns, and I would rather go with that. If the Crowns are not undeleted, I support the shields. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 13:22, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

Undelete, allow in signatures per all, and because having the icons in signatures aren't much different from hilite, in my opinion. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 23:03, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - On another wiki, They have got this symbol for the administrator userbox: http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/admintools/images/8/86/Admin-mop.png. So I was thinking we could have only the mop if we don't have the crowns undeleted. Liam - Beta Tester (talk) 09:19, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

Shields sound cool As Azaz says, they are more representative of what we do than the crowns (which I truly loathe). Almost anything would be better than a crown. There is just no getting around that people here come from RuneScape where crowns = authority. Whether we mean it to or not, new people WILL get the wrong message.--Degenret01 10:13, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

Shields - What a great idea. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 11:12, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I have tried making the shield crowns but when I uploaded them on photobucket, they looked to small so I am thinking about party hats. Either shields or party hats. In my opinion, If I make the party hats and they look good, I would go for the party hat idea of mine :)

Here are the party hats we could use:

  • Administrator: Adminpartyhat.png
  • Rollback: Rollbackpartyhat.png

I have only got Administrator and Rollback so far because they are the only colors that are available party hats.

Anyone agree?

Liam - Beta Tester (talk) 13:20, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

Party hats are crowns... Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 19:46, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

I liked the idea of shields, so I went ahead and played around for a few minutes making some. Let me hear your feedback. Admin3.png Crat1.png Bot1.png Forum1.png Rollback2.png Karlis (talk) (contribs) 01:32, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

Dude those are hawt. Support. =D Andrew talk 02:47, January 11, 2010 (UTC)
I'll keep my bukkit, thanks. THWVNWBucket detail.pngrwojy 02:49, January 11, 2010 (UTC)
I like them, but I truly do not see a problem with the crowns. If they actually have become a sign of authority, so will these. Maybe they will not be as authoritative as the crowns, but they will slowly be recognised the same way the crowns are, whatever that is. Also, it'd be good if they were .gifs so that we could make them smaller and bigger and they'd not turn pixely. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 04:17, January 11, 2010 (UTC)
Well they aren't definitive, and were merely a rough draft. They can be quickly changed as needed. As it stands, I don't see a connection to shields and authority at all, as if anything, they represent protectors, or people here to defend the wiki and keep it safe and pleasant. =) Karlis (talk) (contribs) 04:20, January 11, 2010 (UTC)
Well, just throwing this out there, poor people can afford shields so they died and rich people could so they lived. Shows the autority or being safe O_o. scoot4.pngscooties 04:24, January 11, 2010 (UTC)
Stretching the "meaning" just a bit aren't we? Having this (the crown, shield, whatever we use) shows that you at least know a fair amount about the wiki, and are easily identified by newcomers as a source of help. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 04:27, January 11, 2010 (UTC)
The shield could be like a family shield, symbolising that you are a respected member of the RuneScape wiki Family/Community. Unicorn horn dust.png Evil Yanks talk 04:31, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

Comment I really think, to keep it as fair as AEAE as possible, there should also be ones for regular users. A lot of them do their part reporting vandalism and reverting bad edits. Maybe a grey or dark blue color with a "U". It will show them they are as respected and as needed as everyone else, and they truly are.--Degenret01 04:44, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

Lots of colours to play with, so here's a handfull:

User1.png User2.png User3.png User4.png Karlis (talk) (contribs) 04:55, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

Karlis, I have just two things to say to you: (1) Those are some epic-looking shields =D, and (2) I really hope that they are used in place in the crowns. I especially like the idea of promoting RS:AEAE by giving regular users their own shield as well. Nice thinking! [2] N7 Elite (Ready to talk now?) 06:03, January 11, 2010 (UTC)
Don't get me wrong, though. I really like them and support these crowns. Smile One last thing, remember to make the crowns match the hilite, although, it looks like you've already done that! Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 07:18, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

I am starting to like this shield thing. The current design that Karlis posted are pretty good as is, but I would like to see the colours change to match the colour of the highlight. The idea to have shields for regular users was great, as well. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 20:03, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

Supporting Karlis's shields - They don't represent authority at all, there are crowns for everybody and they look awesome :3 FredeTalk 20:14, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

But what about IPs? They are surely being left out ;). scoot4.pngscooties 23:09, January 11, 2010 (UTC)
Lol dear me, they don't even have a userpage Lol Also, we need one for Wikia helpers; yes, some of them use the template. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 23:52, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

As it stands, I tried to match the shields to the previous crown colours. I can change them to hilights if necessary. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 02:17, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

Oh I see. Maybe hilite would be better; we were actually trying to change the crowns to the hilite colour, but the svg format prevented us. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 02:29, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

Support use of partyhats, shields, or crowns, as long as they are changed to the hilite colour, and look more like icons that the Varrock Cleaner image - All the ideas sound good, but I don't oppose the undeletion of the crowns. I would like to see the images changed to the hilite colour, though. Also, if we are to put these images in signatures, the partyhats/shields should look like icons (like the crowns were). White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 12:06, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

Also, is a rollback crown really needed? I don't see why a user would need to know if someone was a rollback. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 12:06, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
If we're going to have icons for normal users, we should have them for rollbacks. Then again, it may discourage users who want rollback for apparent "authority" if they don't even get an icon, or use the normal user one. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 15:18, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
The point of the rollback icons is to show that one is a rollback, just like the icon for admins, crats, helpers or anything else does. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 16:33, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

While obviously I didn't read the whole discussion, I Zaport da shields. Dey r hawt. But bukkits are awesome too. --

Water Wave icon.png
Captain Sciz
TalkEditsHiscores File:Runecrafter hat.png|link=

19:26, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

The shields look great, I definitely support them. If all users could have a shield image there would be no problems with AEAE. Could we not do the same with the crowns? usercrown.png I know its awful =], but you get the idea... --Aburnett(Talk) 20:03, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

I played with Cflm's SVG crown in AI and created some user crowns that don't look quite so hideous...(here, here, and here) I'll play around with shields later, as I would like whatever we use to be SVG, it just looks so much hawter . --Aburnett(Talk) 20:29, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
Attempt at a shield... Just a thought. --Aburnett(Talk) 21:09, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

Support Shields - They're hawter than crowns, and with the user shields there's no problems using them at all! Quest point cape detail.png Brux Talk 20:09, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

Support Aburnett's Shields - Hawt, uses vector image format, and per Brux. - TehKittyCatTalk Wikian-Book 21:33, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

Suppocomment - I really like that shield! I do have one minor suggestion: could you make it a bit more like the Falador shield 3, with the bottom corner sticking out a bit more? It isn't needed, but I personally think that would look even better. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 21:44, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

I agree the Falador shield 3 would look nicer. But we do kind of want the images to fite nicely into a perfect square, so that it goes well in a userbox and other things. Also, I think it may be a good idea if we don't use the world "shield". I know it isn't as bad as crowns, but eventually I can see some authority-loving users saying "Oi! You see the shield I have on my userpage/sig! You listen to me!" Whereas I don't see someone going "Oi! You see the icon/symbol I have on my userpage/sig! You listen to me!". We also must remember that police badges are usually shields. Although, I support the .svg shields. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 01:51, January 13, 2010 (UTC) icon
How about these? (here, here, here, and here). they're a little sloppy (is the C off center?) and I cant figure out how to control the size when they're rendered as a PNG, but that's a start. --Aburnett(Talk) 02:30, January 13, 2010 (UTC)

Ok, these are my updated versions. Everything should be centered, the gradients are a work in progress tho, of you want a color change let me know. I also made a User shield per Degenret's suggestion, and also in response to Chicken's point. Now no one can use shields (or "badges") for authority, because everyone "can haz"! Feedback please? (also edited above comments to remove the "Click to see" mess) --Aburnett(Talk) 04:41, January 13, 2010 (UTC)

Also, it would look like this in a userbox: --Aburnett(Talk) 04:52, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
adminsmall.png This user is a RuneScape Wiki administrator.


No offence, but I like Karlis's better. Yours looks like a police badge Lol FredeTalk 16:43, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
I love these. Great! Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 17:21, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
I prefer Karlis's retro ones. Althought tha one is also epic. Swiz Talk Review Me 19:15, January 13, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - This is starting to turn into another logo/skin design discussion where everyone wants to make their own version and we are never able to decide which to use. It was fine with Karlis' images..there is no need to submit over 9000 different versions AngryAngryAngry Andrew talk 20:54, January 13, 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Karlis' are fine, we can use them as the "official" wiki-hosted ones; users are free to make their own versions and host on photobucket/imageshack etc. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 21:12, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
So far, the only submissions that have really been taken into consideration are the ones been by me and Karlis (significantly under 9000). I think we should hold off and discuss this for just a tad longer, I think its safe to say we've settled on the shield as basic design, but I would like to see if we could get SVG images as opposed to the .png ones for better quality. On that note, I agree with Frede's point about the police-badge shape, so here is a SVG image loosely based of Karlis' design. --Aburnett(Talk) 21:23, January 13, 2010 (UTC)

General Comment - I don't know what to make about the shield, crown, or bucket. For myself, if I ever put on one of these user boxes I'm going to have a nice bucket of manure with flies hanging above it. Give me a little bit of time, and I'll come up with that. I'm not particularly thrilled with the idea of a shield, "police badge", or some other symbol of authority, but hey, if you want to go on an ego trip, be my guest. Really, in the long run, it really doesn't matter and this is some incredible naval gazing to be worked up about this issue. This wiki has survived a couple of years without having this symbol of "administrators", and we can survive a couple more years without settling this question. When Wikiversity was first set up, I raised the issue of self-importance of admins on a wiki, and the term was changed to "Janitor" and "Custodian". I think it fits the role rather well, and IMHO so should the symbol. That is just my $0.02 on this issue. --Robert Horning 23:12, January 13, 2010 (UTC)

Why are you automatically assuming we want these shields to boost our egos? Andrew talk 03:39, January 14, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Could we get Karlis's shields higher quality? White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 03:05, January 14, 2010 (UTC)

I don't remember whether or not this specific issue has been resolved, but if the crowns supposedly create an atmosphere of authority because of the relation to royalty, has no one noticed the corrolation between shields and nobility? And if some people see crowns as a sign of authority or whatnot, then can't we just use AEAE to actually justify their existence? And, since I love starting sentences with "and" even though some grammar rule supposedly forbids it, we've gone something like two-and-a-half years without any problems, so when a rollbacker or two goes overboard we abolish them all? If someone throws around a horribly pixelated crown as a mock sign of power, then the person is the problem, not the crown. Deal with them.

If the initial purpose of the crowns and the current purpose of the recently-made shields are one in the same, then tell me: what will keep the shields from signifying authority as well? The hilites can signify authority also, but why do we keep them? Because they make sysops easier to find. The crowns serve the same purpose.Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 05:50, January 14, 2010 (UTC)

I honestly do not think most people associate shields with nobility. A more normal looking shield as Karlis made vs the police badge looking ones that ABurnett made makes me think defense. And it is ok to associate a symbol with sysops and such, I was just looking to disassociate sysops from royalty/authority. And how many people brand new to this wiki will see a crown some months before they even hear of AEAE? By that time it is already in their mind and it will be months more before that can be undone.--Degenret01 06:11, January 14, 2010 (UTC)
I, personally, associate shields with combat, militaries and/or [law] enforcement.
We could give them a link to AEAE via the welcome template. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 06:43, January 14, 2010 (UTC)
No more links on the Welcome template!!!!!!!!! It's worse than Special:Allpages ^_^ Chicken7 >talk 06:56, January 14, 2010 (UTC)
But it's not as bad as my Watchlist :P. Would you prefer linking to a policy hub? All the vague direction needed to dub a job as dne in only half the effort! Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 07:04, January 14, 2010 (UTC)

Just to clear this up, I did not intend on making a police badge shape Frown, I was going for a Falador shield 3 look, but now I can defiantly see the connotations that design has. Also Chia has brought up a good point, I don't know of any admin who actually uses the crown as a sign of authority. If someone comes to our wiki and sees a sysop crown and immediately thinks that sysops are above other editors, I'm pretty sure that they will quickly figure out that that's not true. If a few users try to use the crowns as a symbol of authority when they don't actually have any more authority, why should we assume that that's all the crowns were for. --Aburnett(Talk) 20:42, January 14, 2010 (UTC)

Comment- Aburnett, yours are cool, but Karlis's were cooler. SO, instead of adding even more to this disscusion, why don't we make a decision? I think this discussion has been "discussed" enough. I vote for Karlis's shield. Runecrafting-icon.png Stormsaw1 Talk Sign HighscoresRunecrafting-icon.png 05:54, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Comment/Vote - I haven't posted in a while, but I feel I should vote. In order of most to least, I support the original crowns, then I support Aburnett's orginial shields (not the fally-3-police design, I mean these), then I support Aburnett's fally-3-police design (these), then I support Karlis's shields. As I highly doubt we'll keep the original crowns, Aburnett's first shields look best, imo. They don't look like a police badge, and show protection. My only concern is the protection part. A Wikian does not only protect Wikia, such as with anti-vandalism. A Wikian may participate in ALL kinds of work. Therefore a shield just isn't fantastic. For example, maybe a certain administrator doesn't like patrolling the recent changes or warning/blocking vandals. Why should they have an icon which represents protecting Wikia, when they don't like to do it? Most bots don't protect wikia like that, for example, AmauriceBot specializes in updating the Exchange:, not protecting the wiki.

Because of this, I still stick with my original opinion of keeping the crowns, they were never a big deal in the first place, and were simply an icon to show what tools a user has. No one has ever used them to say "I'm better and more powerful than you." Ever. Even if they did, all you'd have to do is remind them of AEAE, then if they still don't agree and continue to act all tough and powerful, block 'em. Just because one user might (still very unlikely) acts powerful, does that mean everyone should suffer and not be able to use the crowns how they were intended to be used? No, that's not fair at all. Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 06:25, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I agree with Lil diriz 77. I never used crowns before, and I only used it to show that AzBot was a bot and also a "sysop". Having a "police shield" for AzBot is not appropriate if you ask me. I myself hardly do much anti-vandalism work, and prefer to do other stuff with my sysop tools. This is why I suggested earlier that we simply used circles or some other abstract polygon as icons instead. This way, the icon would not symbolise royalty, power, protection, defence, janitor, etc. It will simply be an icon to show that the user has some additional tools.   az talk   08:03, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

I actually like that idea Az, just having colored shapes to distinguish would serve the purpose of identifying users, nothing more. --Aburnett(Talk) 17:02, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Az here. All of the sysops do different things. I like being more of a community, laid back admin. Sure, I occasionally take down the b&hammer down on trolls and vandals, but stereotyping the sysops (or any other ranking) is not cool. Could we have a few different images/templates, depending on what the individual wants (ie a broom, a mop, a shield, an outreached hand) etc? Otherwise, the crowns served the same purpose, and the shield will just be met with the same fate. It's an image, not a real world thing. Zaros symbol.pngChaos Monk Talk SignCoins 250.png 23:16, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I miss the crown in my sig... :( I think we should add back the crowns. They're not saying "I have a crown, I'm better than you!", they're just showing powers or symbols. It's like removing someone's quest cape from their signature or userbox that says they have a quest cape. Not everyone has one, does that mean that they should take it away from the people who do? I had the rollback crown in my signature because I thought it looked good. I wasn't trying to flaunt it around saying "Hey everybody, I'm better than you with my little red crown! Suck it!". There was really no reason to get rid of the little crowns.

Everyone being equal is kind of like communism; there's no potential to gain. This is kind of why I think AEAE is a dumb policy. It seems like people take the policy to different levels, some taking it so far that a simple crown is a violation of the policy.

I really believe that all editors are not equal. Equal means they have the same rights, same powers, same everything, they're equal and balanced or whatever. A blocked user has no powers on the wiki. They're not even equal to an IP. An IP address does not have the same powers on the wiki as a rollback, and a rollback user doesn't have the same powers as an administrator. While some may say that the policy doesn't apply to powers like being able to block users or quickly revert vandalism, it only applies to opinions and such, IMO, the administrator has the right-of-way. The admin has more stature on the wiki and is a trusted user whereas the IP address is virtually unknown. If it came down to an admin and an IP flaming each other, the admin probably wouldn't get their powers removed. They'd just get a warning from another admin or 'crat to calm down. The IP would probably be blocked. This is because the admin is already a trusted member of the community and we all make mistakes. However, the IP is seen as a tool for vandalism rather than a respected member of the wiki.

Sure the unknown person could become a great wiki editor, but until they do that, until they become known, what they believe isn't as respected as an admin's. I'm not saying this is how it should be. I'm just saying this it how it is, whether we come out and say it or not. AEAE works good on paper, but it doesn't seem to be a great policy. You all may disagree with me, that's okay. Perhaps I'm just reading into this too far. 20px‎ Kudos 2 U Talk! Edit count! Contribs!

Since the shields were not liked by all, clearly we should all use curley-Q's. =D Karlis (talk) (contribs) 07:25, January 16, 2010 (UTC)
I think shapes of some kind would be the best per Az's idea. --Aburnett(Talk) 17:05, January 16, 2010 (UTC)
I dont like those curly ones Frown but I wouldn't mine shapes or shields Swiz Talk Review Me 17:54, January 16, 2010 (UTC)
But when you make shapes, they should be the same, to further illustrate RS:AEAE. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 19:20, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking about having stars instead of crowns as they could be better than the crowns. I just got these together just then so I appreciate it if you don't like them. Here they are: [3] Liam - Beta Tester (talk) 12:00, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - What difference does it make whether they're crowns, stars, shapes, shields, or whatever? If we're going to use anything, why not just go back to the crowns? It's just a symbol... If we were using the swastika or something I'd understand but it's just a crown. 20px‎ Kudos 2 U Talk! Edit count! Contribs! 16:42, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Because crowns are also used in-game to refer to mods. This would cause confusion and a misconception that admins are somehow mods on the wiki. Butterman62 (talk) 16:59, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Choosing an icon

Since this seems to be becoming a "choose my symbol!"-type thread, I think it needs to be ordered. The choices so far:

  • Crowns
  • Shields
  • More shields
  • Polygons
  • Stars
  • Circles
  • ...

Of course, each of these has its own pro's and cons, so making a choice isn't going to be easy.
Let's just choose one of these icons and get on with it. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 18:27, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Comment I'd just agree on circles, it would kinda represent the never ending aspect of an administrators work Veritas vos Liberabit 18:39, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Can we put "Circles" as a option, because I Support them. --Aburnett(Talk) 18:42, January 17, 2010 (UTC)
I like all of them, but I like Veritas' idea about the circle. Swiz Talk Review Me 19:07, January 17, 2010 (UTC)
Only 67 of the users here are administrators. I don't get your point, it doesn't apply to the other thousands of users here. Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 19:35, January 17, 2010 (UTC)
Nor is what they do "work" or "neverending". Wikia is a place to volunteer, not work. And based off of that, they could stop or retire any time they want. Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 19:39, January 17, 2010 (UTC)
I'm well aware that administrators volunteer, however they volunteer to do work which they can stop at any time. Administrators are always doing tasks which the administrative powers allow them to do, like blocking vandals etc. which is why I chose the work neverending. However, I think if I continue writing the discussion will go off topic, this is about the selection of images to choose, not about trying to pick apart my word choice. Veritas vos Liberabit 18:08, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
I was just concerned because your post only talked about administrators when this thread is about everyone on the wiki. It's not only administrators who work hard on the wiki. Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 20:00, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Circles or Shields - It's the most basic shape I can think of (other than a dot). Just be careful not to make it looks like this. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 10:48, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Shields or crowns - The point of them is being a recognisable symbol so people would see it and know "they're an admin, I can ask them for help". Circles are too simple and can get confused with too many things. I truly do not see the problem with shields or crowns. Circles are just not appropriate in my opinion. Chicken7 >talk 11:17, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

I also think that it needs to be something RuneScape related, as we are, The RuneScape Wiki! Chicken7 >talk 11:36, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps a rune essence then ? Veritas vos Liberabit 18:11, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
That sounds like a good idea. I'm in favor of the crowns, then the rune essence. Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 20:00, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
Rune essence would look abit...Tasteless. I think We should stick with the shapes/crowns etc =S Swiz Talk Review Me 20:25, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Shields - Per Chicken. Shields are defiantly a worthy symbol (that being that it will generally correctly imply what their job is) for administrators on this wiki, and it's easy to recognize. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 11:32, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Shields - Per Steler FredeTalk 20:27, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I also believe there should not be any crown/shields on any signatures. Shields are a sign of chivalry in my opinion, so I support shields.Youdead00 20:52, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - This discussion is taking forever to accomplish nothing. lets set a deadline of January 23 for everyone to support whatever TYPE (crown/shield/circle) of icon they would like. We can then take the appropriate steps from there. With this in mind, I'm going to Support Circles or Crowns. Based on the comments above above, we have the following support- crowns: 2, circles: 3, shields: 5. Please comment if you haven't yet so we can get somewhere =] --Aburnett(Talk) 22:41, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Shields - avoids the whole crown mod confusion thing. Also the shields look awesome. :P Butterman62 (talk) 23:25, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Shields - Per above. And it's true, they look really awesome Lol. Quest point cape detail.png Brux Talk 23:55, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Crowns because I really don't feel they violate AEAE. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 00:17, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Comment Or we could use all of them so people have lots o' choices. Eh? Make templates such as {{User admin|shield/shape/crown}}? I think that could work.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dave Lopo (talk).

That could create confusion on what the proper symbol is. Although any user is allowed to create their own personal userbox and change things. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 07:51, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Shields - Look awesome!  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Evil yanks (talk).

Aburrnett's SVG shield based off of Karlis - That one looks epic. Combines two great designs. ~MuzTalk 02:08, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Shields - Most people like this idea anyways and there is no point in turning this discussion into an "I thought of a different picture to use so I'll submit it and then we'll all have to decide between like 900000000000000 symbols" discussion. Andrew talk 02:14, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Make them kite, not square shields...Youdead00 02:50, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Crowns or Shields/Comment - Personally, if I were an admin, I would be quite happy using a bukkit with a letter on it. However, many users wouldn't, and it would be confusing to use more than one symbol. So far, I think that crowns and shields are the best design. I do not believe that either is a violation of AEAE. Certainly the bot one is not a symbol of vanity - I don't think that TLULbot is going to go around bragging that it's a bot. Unless, of course, I program it to do so. I'm a regular user and I approve this message.  TLUL Talk - Contribs 06:56, January 19, 2010 (UTC) 

AMG I IZ A BOT AND U ARENT! --TLULbot 06:59, January 19, 2010 (UTC)
AMG I IZ Z0 5AD Chicken7 >talk 07:51, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Circles or Crowns - per Aburnett. Either bring back the crowns, or go for circles. (We can use charms instead of runes). But, no shields please. I dislike the idea of shields as it symbolises combat and violence.   az talk   09:52, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

This game is based around combat and violence. Shields in my opinion represent protecting and aiding, which is what our administrators do. They are quite well suited in many ways. Chicken7 >talk 22:49, January 19, 2010 (UTC)
^ Exactly how I feel about shields. When I first saw the shield icon, my thoughts were "Oh good! It even symbolises how the sysops protect our wiki!". I'm a regular user and I approve this message.  TLUL Talk - Contribs 23:42, January 19, 2010 (UTC) 
Crowns show protection and aid even better in my opinion. We all know what they resemble, and it's obvious how the connection is made. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 01:23, January 20, 2010 (UTC)
I don't mind the crowns, although it seems many users do, because it is what sparked this discussion. Crowns or shields, but please, NOT BUKKITS! Chicken7 >talk 03:14, January 20, 2010 (UTC)
But bukkits can hold all sorts of things, like water to cool off flamewars and glue/honey to slow down vandals! Lol Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 15:28, January 20, 2010 (UTC)
lol narb ^_^ Chicken7 >talk 02:27, January 21, 2010 (UTC)

Shields would fit in with the game I suppose Swiz Talk Review Me 16:33, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, here's a question: what is to say we can't have more than one set of icons? I mean, it can't be that complicated if they are color-coordinated and have the same letters for equivalents. Even if a select few people think that they may be different things, just telling them that they're simply different designs would fix the problem. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 01:23, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

I think that having multiple sets of symbols might be too confusing. Some users might get the impression that a shield is "worth more" than a bukkit. Just my three cents (yes, you owe me $0.01 now). I'm a regular user and I approve this message.  TLUL Talk - Contribs 02:15, January 20, 2010 (UTC) 

You guys, I don't think you noticed the point Az and I talked about up there in the second section. Shields are meant to represent protection, and in Wikia's case, "protection" would mean to warn/block vandals, patrol the recent changes, etc. However, not all of us do that. Of the 16402 users on this Wiki, REALLY, how many people actually do that stuff? Probably about 100. So, sure, the shield would fit nicely with what those 100 people do. What about the other sixteen thousand people who don't participate in anti-vandalism? This is why I think the crowns shouldn't have been changed in the first place, they were only to show what tools a user had, nobody EVER abused them to act high and mighty. Ever. In the future, if someone ever did, we could warn them for breaking a rule, warn again, and block if needed. If a Wikian really ever gets that cocky and high-headed, I will be damn surprised. Why we would change the crowns in the first place is beyond me. They were simply a nametag. Example: A newbie comes along looking to rename an image he uploaded because it doesn't fit too well. He can't, so who does he think to ask? Someone with administrator powers. One of these "administrators" could easily be identified with said crown and nametag. "Oh, he can help me!" said the newbie. Do you get my point? They are nametags, they have never been used to make oneself appear more powerful than another user. Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 08:54, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

Actually, they have been (ab)used as a sign of power by a few users, usually, if not always, rollbacks. In one case, I remember a rollback saying "LOOK YOU SEE MY CROWN!?" or something along those lines. And I truly do not get what's wrong with the shields Diriz! Some people (not me) are just gonna still oppose the use of crowns, so let's just appease them and change it. I don't think users are going to look at a shield and say "Ooohh, I don't block vandals so that is WRONG". And what is so special about polygons? They have no meaning at all. A user could interpret that as "This wiki has no creativity!" or even "If I get this userbox infobox, does that mean I have no meaning at all, like the icon?". They are of course things that people would never think of, but it is the same as the shields. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 10:58, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

It seems people like the shapes idea, and since our game is RuneScape, why not choose a circle based off a Rune? Something like this, although I would need to play around with it a bit as it looks rather indistinguishable at smaller sizes. I was even originally going to just go with black lettering. Just a thought. Also, if you notice the bleeding of the green at the bottom - It doesn't look like that at my end, must have happened when I saved it to .png to upload to photobucket. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 15:16, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

I quite like that. Similar to az's charms idea a few posts up. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 15:28, January 20, 2010 (UTC)
Actually, from reviewing all the community's comments above, shapes is the least popular idea compared to others. Although, I must say, your icon is pretty cool (although I wouldn't support it per my comment about the shapes above) Chicken7 >talk 15:37, January 20, 2010 (UTC)
Compared to shields or crows yes, but as people say those two represent authority, circles seemed to be the most popular neutral icon. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 15:39, January 20, 2010 (UTC)
I also made it because I enjoy playing around with image editing programs. =) <3 being a nerd. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 15:42, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

The rune idea could be nice (and total agreement on playing with image editing programs =P), but lets keep it simple for now and just decide on what type of shape (shape here meaning crown, circle or shield (clarity ftw)) we are going to use. Once we have that settled we can work on the finer points of that shapes design. Everybody submitting designs based on different shapes is just going to slow this whole process down further. As Chicken said, the circles are currently one of the least popular choices, so it doesn't make sense to start designing until we know for sure what type of shape has the most support. Also Lil Diriz, I don't see how you can argue that shields mean something but crowns don't when they both mean something, but the primary purpose of both designs will of course be to distinguish users with special rights. Again though, lets just stick to choosing a shape =] --Aburnett(Talk) 20:20, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

Wow. 63 KB and pretty much nothing established, save for the fact that bukkitz are epic and that THE ALMIGHTY BUKKIT SHALL SMITE CHIKEN7 AND ALL OTHER UNBELIEVERS!!!! But, besides that... Support Karlis' shields. --

Water Wave icon.png
Captain Sciz
TalkEditsHiscores File:Runecrafter hat.png|link=

20:35, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

OMG! Chicken7 >talk 02:27, January 21, 2010 (UTC)

Crowns or shields - They are symbols that somehow relate to the game we're writing about. Crowns match the JMOD and PMOD crowns, shields are like the protection equipment in game. Random polygons/circles just seem boring and meaningless to me. Air rune.png Tollerach hates SoF Fire rune.png 22:46, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

Er... The crowns were removed because they looked like mod crowns... Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 18:27, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
I think sysops are somewhat comparable to PMods (they moderate the community in some similar ways), so I think the similarity actaully gives new users a familiar symbol that they understand and can identify with. That's what I presume the reasoning behind the crowns were in the first place. Air rune.png Tollerach hates SoF Fire rune.png 20:05, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
Hear, hear.   az talk   04:34, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
Indeed, the very fact that JaGex uses them should be one of the reasons we do not. We are not Jagex, we are not affiliated with them, our tools here bear only a passing resemblace to what Jmods and Pmods do. We should use some thing entirely different to make that distinction.--Degenret01 04:58, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Degen on this one. Crowns bear too much resemblance to RuneScape Mod crowns. Shields is the best icon, as it symbolises protection and, well, shielding. This is far closer to what sysops do here. And as for the ideas about circles and runes, sure, they may look cool, and sure, playing around with image editing is fun, but I just don't think that it has any meaning at all. "Oh look, he has a rune next to his name." "So what?" "Ummm... I don't know". Stars are even worse - they imply a reward (IMHO). Shields are the ONLY symbols that I do not find misleading, confusing, or pointless. I'm a regular user and I approve this message.  TLUL Talk - Contribs 06:14, January 22, 2010 (UTC) 
And I, TLULbot, agree with him. With a bot crown, that obviously shows that I am more powerful and that I rule this wiki. Hence, my vote is worth more. TLULbot 06:14, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
I disagree. Shields may be good for protection and shielding, but what about bureaucrats, bots, etc.? Note that this icon is used for all types of users, not just the anti-vandalism admins...   az talk   09:41, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
So what? All users protect the wiki, do they not? I understand that some may not revert vandalism or whatever. But there are other ways to protect. Updating articles with the latest and most useful information is protecting the wiki's good image on being one of the best information resources. Contributing to discussions may be protecting the wiki from large scale vandalism or legal issues. Protection can take many forms. Chicken7 >talk 13:15, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
Come on... All users protect the wiki? I agree the most users contribute in a way or another... but I think you are taking this protection thingy too far. People contribute to help other people, and to guide other people. Not to protect the wiki's good image, prevent legal issues, and what not. We have been using the crowns for the past couple of years without any issues, and boom, they get deleted without any discussions whatsoever. Two years into the future, a user will feel that shields symbolise something else, they are vanity images, blah, blah, blah, and those icons get deleted again. We should either bring back the crowns because they are used in RuneScape, and use something else which does not symbolise anything. Simply undeleting the crowns will probably solve the icon selection "crisis" we are currently having.   az talk   15:45, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
lol, I agree I was over-exaggerating about the protection thing, but I just don't think it's such a big deal about the apparent "meaning" of the shields. I do agree that this may only be a "temporary solution" to the whole AEAE scuffle, but IMHO, it suffices. I just wouldn't like to see hexagons and triangles as what are supposed to symbolise something. Chicken7 >talk 12:41, January 24, 2010 (UTC)

Support Aburnett's "police badge" shield - I think shields are a nice, non-royalty, RS-related, non-boring and generally better version of the crowns. I think Aburnett's first shield design looks neater and more professional than Karlis's (no offence to Karlis of course). ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  06:25, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

on second thought-Aburnett's shields are much neater than karlis's, and they have the same, dull color as the old crowns. I now SUPPORT aburnett's fally-3 design. And can we all stop talking about AEAE? If you think shields are bad then why don't you make something else? BYE Runecrafting-icon.png Stormsaw1 Talk Sign HighscoresRunecrafting-icon.png 17:03, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

Crowns - Crowns only for me. I just think they're better. I don't dislike the shields, but I really see absolutely no need to change the symbols. 20px‎ Kudos 2 U Talk! Edit count! Contribs! 23:47, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

Bureaucrats, Admins,Or anyone really...make a deadline for voting and count up supports for crowns, shields,etc. This is kinda going on for too long, and we should have reasoned something by now. Then, with the user which made the winning designs permission, add their pic. to userboxes and such. Runecrafting-icon.png Stormsaw1 Talk Sign HighscoresRunecrafting-icon.png 02:16, January 23, 2010 (UTC)

We are not a democracy, so we do not count votes. See RS:NOT#DEMOCRACY.   az talk   03:48, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
Not to mention rushing the decision means possibly reopening it some time down the road.--Degenret01 04:36, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
I actually read that article, and a "consensus", is voting. Right? we tally who wants what, and then make a decision. That's voting. That article doesn't make any sense, as a consensus iis a democracy, voting, polling, getting the communities view. It seems like we spend more time argueing about policies than actually doing anything. My 5 cents. Runecrafting-icon.png Stormsaw1 Talk Sign HighscoresRunecrafting-icon.png 06:47, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
Try reading this instead: RuneScape:Consensus.   az talk   07:49, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
Nope. It basically means voting, but since voting isn't allowed we try to just cover it up. Runecrafting-icon.png Stormsaw1 Talk Sign HighscoresRunecrafting-icon.png 16:54, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
"Democracy" here means voting on its own - when something gets more votes than something else, it 'wins' and passes. Consensus here means that you don't just look at the amount of votes - you look at the arguments. When someone has a very good argument, that's more important than a bunch of people voting without any reasoning. Right? Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 09:24, January 24, 2010 (UTC)

Why not two "symbols" A set of shields for each user group and a set of circles also for each user group. I'm on the laggy comp so can't scroll up to see if that covers everyone but I am pretty sure it does. Anyhow, that will allow people to select which icon they feel is better for them personally. As an aside, when I deleted the crowns I truly expected no one to really care. I thought about it quite a good deal and it seemed that the community had reached a point where there wasn't anyone around who seemed to be all that attached to them.--Degenret01 04:36, January 23, 2010 (UTC)

Although I don't oppose two symbols, I think its unnecessary. After tallying up the support above (Not that we're counting), Circles had only 3 supports, and crowns were in a distant second with 6 supports. Shields are clearly what the community wants, they had 14 supports , and if that's not a reasonable consensus, then I don't know what is. I propose we now get a consensus on which design to use for the shield, design 1 or design 2. Also, I'm hoping Karlis will be able to change his design to mach the hiliting colors per the substantial support that revived above--Aburnett(Talk)
I can if needed, or attempt to recreate it as an svg. --Karlis (talk) (contribs) 06:35, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
Did you count the undeletion comments? Anyway, 14/23 is still short of the 70% needed for rough consensus.   az talk   07:49, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
I only looked at the options posted under Choosing an icon, and I was thinking that 50%+ was a consensus, not 70%+, in that case, lets hear what some more people have to say. --Aburnett(Talk) 17:34, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
Aren't we sort of getting off track? This thread was originally about either keeping the crowns deleted or bringing them back. I did a quick skim review of the dicussion on the deletion of the crowns, and I counted (Yes, I know) something like eight votes for undeleting the crowns, three for some sort of compromise (i.e.: deleting some of them), and maybe one vote for keeping them deleted (correct me if I am wrong). So if we are going to cut it by a percent (which all depends on how you go about coming up with a percent. You could think of it as 8/12=67% and count those for a sort of partial deletion not for undeleting them, or 11/12=91% and count them with undeletion votes.), by no means are we in agreement that they should stay deleted. So, if we go by a figure of around nine out of ten wanting the crowns undeleted, they should be undeleted, should they not? And if we go by two out of three people wanting them undeleted in full, do we not go back with the status quo prior to the spark of this dicussion because of the lack of overall agreement? Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 01:39, January 24, 2010 (UTC)
First, the thread was orginally about "...So, at this point, I guess I'm not proposing something as much I'm trying to start a discussion regarding how AEAE should be dealt with....". Second, threads can evolve in purpose. Third, some of those undelete supporters now like shields.--Degenret01 04:58, January 24, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Guys, really? Do we really need this big long discussion because someone thought crowns, something we've used for years, violated AEAE so they deleted them? Come on, they're just images that are used to make a template marking one's status not look as boring. I think we have meaning and intention confused. I say just undelete them. — Enigma 22:50, January 30, 2010 (UTC)

Undelete

This is going nowhere. Enigma is right, we need to focus on one thing instead of trying to reinvent the wheel. I propose we undelete the crowns. --Aburnett(Talk) 21:31, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - As nom. --Aburnett(Talk) 21:31, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I do not see how the crowns violate AEAE. Construction-icon.png Matt is Me / Harmonising / Lvl 3 skils3 Talk Cooking cape (t).png 21:55, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per Aburnett and Not Lvl 3. Prayer.png Jedi Talk HS Log Tracker Summoning.png 21:59, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Going right back to Frede's comment, if the crowns violate AEAE then user hilite does as well. I know I shouldn't bring the affairs of other wikis into this discussion but I ran a user hilite trial on the CoD wiki (I used the coding with kind permission) and withdrew it because of the AEAE policy. It didn't seem right as it made the admins look "special", and besides, we don't have an exceedingly large community so everyone basically knows who's who. I can understand why you have the hilite system here - the RuneScape wiki gets a lot of editors and for the new user's sake it's important who knows who's who. As another way of user identification I think they should be "undeleted". Dragon 2h sword old.pngCallofduty4 Talk

Support - Amen, this has gone on long enough, what with the many different choices to pick from, and the styles, and the colors.... Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 06:22, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Let's put this to and end =/ FredeTalk 06:31, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

Support - per my earlier posts.   az talk   10:50, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose To everyone who says no one is misusing it, right here in a vote for undeletion of rollback crowns a sysop who has been on this wiki for years says Oppose - Although I support bringing the other crowns back, there isn't anything special about being a rollback, and there is no reason why other users would need to know. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 13:34, January 9, 2010 (UTC), which is perfectly clearly showing he thinks being a sysop is special, and other user groups are not as important. And he has been here for years. What do you think the new person on this wiki will think? Continue to lie to yourselves all you want, the reality is right there.--Degenret01 14:39, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't get what you're trying to point out here. We are discussing why we should undelete the crowns. I don't know what C Teng thought when he said that, and I do not wish to assume that "he thinks being a sysop is special". Why he actually say that? I believe that is assuming in bad faith, and literally putting words into his mouth. A new person on this wiki will think whatever he/she wants to think, so it is our duty to correct them if they are wrong. Some may think that being a sysop and a rollback gives them power and authority over others, but other sysops and rollbacks should explain to these users that this is not the case. If these sysops and rollbacks are found to be abusing their entrusted tools, then report them to the community, and the community will decide. For example, instead of deleting the crowns because someone abused the crowns, the person who abused the crowns should be reported.
Degenret, I like you and what you do in this wiki, but I disagree with your drastic actions of deleting the crowns without consulting the community. For example, I never liked the User of the Month project that we have here in this wiki, but did I delete the project pages because I thought they were vanity pages? No, because most users thought it is nice to acknowledge the contributions of users. I felt it was an unnecessary project, and I simply chose not to participate in them. To Degenret and whoever who dislikes crowns, stop using the crowns. It is as simple as that.   az talk   15:52, February 1, 2010 (UTC)
Your very last statement bothers me a lot. To ignore a wrong and simply not participate in it does nothing to solve it. Like all the people whom drive SUVs and say "if you don't like that they devour gas don't use one". That solves nothing. I already admitted I seriously misjudged this community when I deleted the crowns, I truly gave it much thought and truly thought no one would really care.--Degenret01 16:40, February 1, 2010 (UTC)
It may be wrong to some, but it is not wrong to others. While you may feel it is wrong, I don't think that is the case. This issue is similar to the swearing issue which we discussed a few months back. Some were thinking it is wrong to swear, while other thought it was okay. When the community is split over something, the best thing to do, IMO, is to forget about it and move on. As you put it, this issue is not a serious issue. Degenret, the best thing you could do right now is to undelete the crowns yourself, and if you want, discuss the deletion of the crowns in another thread. I think this might be the best course of action. Based on the most recent comments, everyone else has supported the undeletion of the crowns.   az talk   17:03, February 1, 2010 (UTC)
After the work that others did to help this, it would be turning my back on them to undelete them myself. Karlis who did all he could to stay away from the drama of the YG came in to help a friend. And he wasn't the only one. I am not turning my back on any more friends for the wikis sake, I have done too much of that already. Not to mention betraying my belief in how utterly wrong they are. Go ahead and un-delete them, anyone. I know where the wiki stands and I will not delete them again.--Degenret01 17:28, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per Azliq. Also, in my opinion, the inclusion of these images on many pages should have been the primary reason to go through a VfD process instead of speedy deletion. --Quarenon  Talk 17:30, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

Conditional Support for big crowns - If it is made very clear that these crowns do not represent authority. But keep the small ones deleted. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 18:33, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

I keep the rollback crown - the small one -in the top-right of my page for the reason that it is subtle, and hardly noticeable. (I personally think all crowns should be placed there as a quickref) Why should they be kept deleted? http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/3921/thehimmemote.pngGone.
What importance is it if people know that your a rollback? Rollback doesn't change anything in anything non-vandalism, and it's not something that needs to be flaunted around. I'm a rollback and I haven't even mentioned to to anyone after I recived it. Keep them deleted. scoot4.pngscooties 03:05, February 2, 2010 (UTC)
The small crowns are often used in signatures, making it seem as if those that had them were an authority. New editors often assume that, because mods in RS have crowns, the admins, rollbacks, crats and whatnot here are also an authority - they're not. Why would there need to be a signature on a whole load of pages showing that one has rollback? Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 06:54, February 2, 2010 (UTC)
I see your point, but why not just ban users from having crowns in their signatures. We can broadcast it over the sitenotice, put it on the crown description pages, the signature policies and warn users who break the rules. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 07:04, February 2, 2010 (UTC)
Sounds good. Though "warn users who break the rules" - it shouldn't really be a warning, just a clarification about RS:AEAE and all that. Not really something like "if you do this again you will be blocked forever mwuhahaha". Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 13:47, February 2, 2010 (UTC)
LOL, I agree. Bad choice of words on my part. Lol Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 05:01, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Chicken7 >talk 07:04, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Lets undelete them. Air rune.png Tollerach hates SoF Fire rune.png 00:59, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per myself. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 17:03, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

Support - They were perfectly fine the way they were. I'm a regular user and I approve this message.  TLUL Talk - Contribs 02:47, February 4, 2010 (UTC) 

Request for closure - After five days, numerous supports, and the original deleter 'allowing' us to undelete them, I suggest that they be undeleted and this forum be closed. Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 05:49, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

Closed - The crown images will be undeleted. C.ChiamTalk 09:05, February 4, 2010 (UTC)