Anonymous user
Forum:Making changes to the admin portal talk page: Difference between revisions
Forum:Making changes to the admin portal talk page (edit)
Revision as of 04:19, 22 August 2014
, 9 years ago→Conclusion
imported>C.Syde65 No edit summary |
imported>C.Syde65 |
||
| (36 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Forumheader|Community discussions|archive}}
''The text below is copied over from [[The Sims Wiki talk:Admin Portal]] (the "Admin Portal talk page"/"APTP"). It was an addition to a proposal to create the [[The Sims Wiki:Administrators' noticeboard|Administrators' noticeboard]] (which has been created), which asks what should happen to the APTP itself. Since the discussion below has evolved beyond the scope of an administrative question, I have chosen to move it here so that the general community can weigh in on it. This is important, considering that one of the proposed actions is to lock the APTP to non-administrative edits. Please weigh in below so we can resolve these questions.'' -- '''[[User:LostInRiverview|<font color="navy">LostInRiverview</font>]]<sup> [[User_talk:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">talk</font>]] ~ [[User_blog:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">blog</font>]]</sup>''' 07:40, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
----
Line 120:
I suppose I'm underestimating my trust and experience. I guess I've learnt it already. I still stand by to my previous comments though. -- '''[[User:C.Syde65|<font color="maroon">C.Syde</font>]]''' ([[User talk:C.Syde65|<font color="black">talk</font>]] | [[:Special:Contributions/C.Syde65|<font color="black">contribs</font>]]) 07:53, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
:Forgive me for being blunt, but this thread isn't about you. This thread is about deciding how the APTP will be managed, as it applies to ''all editors'', not just you. And it strikes me as slightly hypocritical how you argue that admins and users are equal, yet you also say that "experienced editors feel that we are simply more than just regular users." So... you'd be in favor of prohibiting "inexperienced" users from editing the APTP so long as ''you'' are allowed to edit it? -- '''[[User:LostInRiverview|<font color="navy">LostInRiverview</font>]]<sup> [[User_talk:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">talk</font>]] ~ [[User_blog:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">blog</font>]]</sup>''' 08:11, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
I never said this thread was about me, and I hope you don't believe that I think that, because it isn't what I think. And it's quite alright if I can't edit it.
I'm not trying to be a hypocrite and I know that I may sound like one. But it may take some time to get used to the idea of not editing the APTP considering that I was previously able to use it.
If we could still edit the talk page, there would be many users that I'd consider experienced enough, but if we can't, that's fine. -- '''[[User:C.Syde65|<font color="maroon">C.Syde</font>]]''' ([[User talk:C.Syde65|<font color="black">talk</font>]] | [[:Special:Contributions/C.Syde65|<font color="black">contribs</font>]]) 08:21, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
I've changed my opinion slightly. I was thinking maybe registered users could edit the page - but if they can't then again that's okay. -- '''[[User:C.Syde65|<font color="maroon">C.Syde</font>]]''' ([[User talk:C.Syde65|<font color="black">talk</font>]] | [[:Special:Contributions/C.Syde65|<font color="black">contribs</font>]]) 08:31, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
:We can't arbitrarily decide who is and isn't experienced enough to edit that talk page. The best solution is to lock the page and limit the discussions that take place there, which is exactly what I have been suggesting since the beginning, and that's what K6ka's suggestion would do as well. -- '''[[User:LostInRiverview|<font color="navy">LostInRiverview</font>]]<sup> [[User_talk:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">talk</font>]] ~ [[User_blog:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">blog</font>]]</sup>''' 08:36, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
At last, I think your point has reached a page I simply can't tear up.
Is there a portal of any kind / or rather community area where users such as myself ought to be discussing things instead? -- '''[[User:C.Syde65|<font color="maroon">C.Syde</font>]]''' ([[User talk:C.Syde65|<font color="black">talk</font>]] | [[:Special:Contributions/C.Syde65|<font color="black">contribs</font>]]) 08:39, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
:As I've already said, yes. Regular community discussions would take place in the Community Discussions forum. Issues involving the administrators would be referred to the Administrators' Noticeboard. Sensitive issues wherein the administrators need to converse with one another would take place on the Admin Portal talk page. The types of discussions which could take place on the APTP will be limited to ensure that regular editors are allowed to participate in all decisions that are relevant to them. -- '''[[User:LostInRiverview|<font color="navy">LostInRiverview</font>]]<sup> [[User_talk:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">talk</font>]] ~ [[User_blog:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">blog</font>]]</sup>''' 08:43, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
::@[[User:LostInRiverview|LostInRiverview]] By "administrator responsibilities", do you mean other tasks, like page deletion? Well, I can get if APTP was used to discuss blocks and editing restrictions. Page deletion, however, is discussed at [[Category talk:Candidates for deletion]], and all other tasks and proposals (such as policy changes) are done on their respective forums/talk pages. What other "administrator responsibilities" that can safely be discussed at APTP that I'm not aware of? --'''[[:User:K6ka|k6ka]]''' ([[:User talk:K6ka|talk]] | [[:Special:Contributions/K6ka|contribs]]) 10:51, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
#Yes, blocks and whatnot should be dealt by administrators, not regular users.
#Yes; the report page has ran it's term and I think it's perhaps time to retire it.
#Welcome messages seems like the best bet to me. Also, perhaps somewhere on the main page (maybe, I'm still thinking about that).
@ C.Syde65 -- I'm picking up this feeling that you are perhaps nervous, and a little upset over the fact that the admin noticeboard could possibly be locked and you feel upset about this because you feel you are being left out and think that participating in discussions about other users futures here on TSW should be discussed by all users. In some ways, I get what you are meaning, but you have to see the administrators viewpoint on this. Imagine this scenario, for example, you partake in a discussion that involves a user vandalising articles countless times. While the administrators agree on the point that the user should be blocked for a month or two or whatever, you disagree with them and say that the vandaliser should be given another chance. This problem may be small but you are not the only regular user commenting in this debate, there are a few others, who are experienced, and decide to be highly kind to this vandal and they take their side. Do you see my point? Not only do the administrators have to deal with the annoying vandal, they also have to make sure that you and the experienced users are warned or whatever. My point is, the administrators aren't just planning on locking the noticeboard for their sakes, it's also for the community's sake. And you are a part of that community. I really do hope you take this big, large, <s>probably not a very good scenario</s> seriously and think it through. [[User:Beds|<font color="#6B1D51">'''Beds'''</font>]] <sup>([[User_talk:Beds|<font color="#512d17">'''talk'''</font>]] - [[User_blog:Beds|<font color="#512d17">'''blog'''</font>]])</sup> 13:12, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
:I was thinking about a link to [[TSW:AN]] at the top navbar as well. [[The Sims Wiki:Report]] should redirect to the admin's noticeboard. Also, do we really need a link to the APTP at the navbar if we're going to lock everyone else out of it? --'''[[:User:K6ka|k6ka]]''' ([[:User talk:K6ka|talk]] | [[:Special:Contributions/K6ka|contribs]]) 14:27, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
:@K6ka I don't think the particular conversations that could take place on the APTP necessarily need to be listed out. It's one of those things that we'll know when we see them. For example... let's say the community held a discussion saying that they wanted to eliminate all the individual trait pages and combine them onto one page. The discussion to do this would be public and would take place in the Forum, but there could also be an APTP discussion planning the deletion, with admins figuring out how to do it best. That's just an example off the top of my head.
:@Beds, I think you mean the Admin Portal talk page, not the Noticeboard. - '''[[User:LostInRiverview|<font color="navy">LostInRiverview</font>]]<sup> [[User_talk:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">talk</font>]] ~ [[User_blog:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">blog</font>]]</sup>''' 16:44, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
::Wow, quite a discussion going on. I have been following it for the past few days and just letting it absorb because I frankly don't know what I thought on the matter yet. Having said that, it seems to me that (and correct me if I'm wrong) the Administrators' Noticeboard would be used by users to notify of things they have seen that need the admins' input to handle/resolve. The Admin Portal Talk Page would be used by admins to discuss how sensitive matters should be handled. If that is the case, I would think that locking the Admin Portal Talk Page would be very reasonable and probably the best option because the Noticeboard seems like a place where a user can say their piece without having to get involved in the discussion too much because they don't have that much say in what happens.
::So let's say that there has been some vandalism that a user has noticed. The user (probably not knowing the history/back story of the offender) leave a message on the Noticeboard and suggests a course of action. The discussion could then be taken to the Admin Portal Talk Page because there are several issues involved. (If the reporting user wants to read the discussion, they can.) Then once the Admins have hashed out a plan of action, they would say on the Noticeboard that the action has been resolved and maybe give links to allow people a way to understand how and why a decision was reached if they are so inclined to see.
::The only thing I can think of that might happen is that maybe someone wants to be able to ask why the admins decided to do what they did. Obviously it wouldn't change what was decided, but where should such discussions take place if not on the Admin Portal Talk Page because it is locked? Would this go on the Noticeboard again? Or should it go to individual talk pages? I'm personally inclined to go to an admin's user talk page to have the discussion since any of the admins should be able to explain the consensus (or at least refer to another admin that might better be able to explain it if necessary). I wasn't planning to be so long winded, but I guess that is my one-cent as a non-admin.<sup>(Two-cent opinions are now worth one cent due to inflation.)</sup> [[User:Icemandeaf|Icemandeaf]] ([[User talk:Icemandeaf|talk]]) 19:50, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
:::![[User:Icemandeaf|Icemandeaf]]: Is this kind of like a "job shadowing", where the student watches the expert work without intervention, and then later asks questions on why he/she did what they did? <sup>(and on a completely unrelated note, Go Canada for abolishing the worthless penny)</sup> --'''[[:User:K6ka|k6ka]]''' ([[:User talk:K6ka|talk]] | [[:Special:Contributions/K6ka|contribs]]) 19:53, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
::::You're probably right that it is. I can't think of any other reason why someone would be so interested to know what is happening unless they are just a naturally curious person. I can't see how that would be a bad thing though. [[User:Icemandeaf|Icemandeaf]] ([[User talk:Icemandeaf|talk]]) 19:58, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
:::::Actually it's a bit more than just curiosity. As I've said before, a good admin keeps their eyes and ears open before being given the mop. They should ask questions that they may have, so they gain knowledge on the subject, and even after they've been promoted they should still ask any questions, to clarify anything that might not be clear. It's what makes a good student, as the old saying goes <sup>(or does it?)</sup>. --'''[[:User:K6ka|k6ka]]''' ([[:User talk:K6ka|talk]] | [[:Special:Contributions/K6ka|contribs]]) 20:01, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
::::::Makes sense to me. [[User:Icemandeaf|Icemandeaf]] ([[User talk:Icemandeaf|talk]]) 20:04, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
I think I agree with what Beds and Icemandeaf have said.
In Beds' case, yes to not have this page to discuss things on would make me feel left out and a little emotional as well. Despite still being able to discuss things in the community discussions.
If anyone thinks I sound nervous and level-headed, I think it's my upcoming nomination for administrationship. -- '''[[User:C.Syde65|<font color="maroon">C.Syde</font>]]''' ([[User talk:C.Syde65|<font color="black">talk</font>]] | [[:Special:Contributions/C.Syde65|<font color="black">contribs</font>]]) 21:06, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
@Beds - I see what you mean, but if the admins wouldn't give a specific user another chance, I certainly wouldn't. -- '''[[User:C.Syde65|<font color="maroon">C.Syde</font>]]''' ([[User talk:C.Syde65|<font color="black">talk</font>]] | [[:Special:Contributions/C.Syde65|<font color="black">contribs</font>]]) 05:31, June 22, 2014 (UTC)
: I haven't been able to read all of the comments on this page yet. I just wanted to say my thoughts on it. I think creating an admin noticeboard would be a good idea. For the following reason; When I'm not sure what to do, or if I need help, or I don't understand the rules of something on the wiki, I never know who to ask. Sometimes I'll make a guess and ask one admin, then someone else would answer. Having one place to ask all these questions would be much more conveniant for me, but other users as well. Also for admins, to reply, instead of having a long conversation for an offline admin to find. I'm probably just resaying what other people have said, but I do think it would benefit the wiki much more. [[User:WayfinderOwl|WayfinderOwl]] ([[User talk:WayfinderOwl|talk]]) 06:35, June 23, 2014 (UTC)
==2 weeks later==
Has this thread come to a conclusion? [[User:Auror Andrachome|Ѧüя◎ґ]] ([[User talk:Auror Andrachome|talk]]) 01:45, July 7, 2014 (UTC)
:Auror, can you draw a conclusion from the discussion? If so, you're totally within your rights to specify what has been decided. There's nothing written anywhere (so far as I know) which says a non-admin can't determine consensus/lack of consensus on The Sims Wiki. I personally would conclude this thread, except that I am particularly involved in the discussion so any resolution I draw could be biased. - '''[[User:LostInRiverview|<font color="navy">LostInRiverview</font>]]<sup> [[User_talk:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">talk</font>]] ~ [[User_blog:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">blog</font>]]</sup>''' 09:29, July 7, 2014 (UTC)
Involved editor trying to come to a conclusion:
#[[TSW:AN]] will be used for:
##Requesting that an administrator investigate a situation/request that administrative action be taken
##Reporting vandalism and cases of spam, though for severe or urgent cases consider reporting at [[TSW:IRC|IRC]], or to the [[w:c:vstf:Project:IRC|VSTF]].
##Request [[Help:Page protection|page protection]], either due to vandalism or to halt an edit war.
##Reporting a misbehaving user, or requesting arbitration. '''Only report on TSW:AN if there is foul user conduct, such as name calling, insults, or death threats'''. Simple editing disputes that are being handled with civility will be closed - see [[wikipedia:WP:DR|WP:DR]] for tips. The administrators' noticeboard is only for cases where users are attacking each other instead of trying to work the problem out.
##Requesting speedy deletion of pages, though editors are encouraged to use {{t|speedydelete}} instead. If a user has mass-created a lot of pages, contact the [[w:c:vstf:Project:IRC|VSTF]] on their IRC channel and type <code>!vstf vandalism on http://sims.wikia.com/ </code> instead. Pages with controversial deletion tags ({{t|Delete}}) should be discussed at [[Category talk:Candidates for deletion]] instead. Development discussion goes at [[The Sims Wiki talk:Development Portal]], community discussions go at [[TSW:CD]]... etc. In short, if it doesn't require an administrator, it doesn't belong on TSW:AN.
##Discussing page undeletion. Examples include an image or fanon that was deleted but the author wants a copy of it back, or pages that have been deleted previously and require discussion on whether they should be restored.
#The APTP (admin portal talk page) is used by administrators to discuss matters only an administrator has access to. This includes blocking users, deleting pages from a permanently blocked user, adjusting block settings, protecting pages, etc. This page will be locked so only sysops can edit it, though users are always free to lurk (this isn't something we can control). This page is only for cases where the community doesn't need to be involved - the majority of discussions should be open to the community to discuss. This page is for sensitive situations that only trusted users should handle.
##APTP is also used for handling [[TSW:ER|edit restrictions]], though users may suggest ERs - see below.
##Users who think a discussion on APTP could be open to the community to discuss may request it on [[TSW:AN]].
#Users reporting on [[TSW:AN]] may ''suggest'' possible sanctions against users, but these are only suggestions - administrators should use their judgement and they can ignore these suggestions if they find them to be insufficient or inappropriate.
#Everyone should know that both pages are not places for sunshine and rainbows. Wikipedia's [[wikipedia:WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]], especially its [[wikipedia:WP:ANI|incidents' noticeboard]], very rarely end in everyone being happy. It almost always ends with a user being blocked or banned, and almost always ends with tears. As such, these two pages should be a last resort when discussing sanctions against users.
#Both TSW:AN and APTP are not for editing disputes. If there is a disagreement but there is no edit warring, nor is anybody being uncivil or if there are no insults being hurled across the room, the discussion should be closed (if it wound up on TSW:AN) and the user(s) directed to [[wikipedia:WP:DR|WP:DR]]. TSW:AN is for cases that have gone beyond the edits and have turned to personal attacks, legal threats, and "Commenting on the editor and not the edits themselves".
#The majority of cases, '''especially non-controversial tasks''', should be handled at [[TSW:CD]]. Development discussion should ''not'' go on the administrators' noticeboard, even non-arbitration cases like editing a MediaWiki page. [[TSW:CD]] should be used instead.
#While users may ask questions at [[TSW:AN]], it's better if they went to the [[Forum:Help desk|Help desk]] instead.
#APTP should be limited to administrator responsibilities and things only an administrator can do. It's not a "Teachers Lounge where the teachers sip coffee and devise new ways to torture their students", nor is it a "Moderator's only club room. We have pool tables and TVs and couches in here." Most other things, like MediaWiki changes and non-speedy page deletions, should be open to the community to discuss.
So far it's making sense. I hope this conclusion will wrap up the discussion and hopefully get things rolling. Oh, and I still stand firm in redirecting [[The Sims Wiki:Report]] to the administrators' noticeboard, since I think that page is too quiet to warrant its own page, really. --'''[[:User:K6ka|k6ka]]''' ([[:User talk:K6ka|talk]] | [[:Special:Contributions/K6ka|contribs]]) 13:28, July 7, 2014 (UTC)
I've just realized, I really don't mind not being able to edit the page, since there really isn't anything that I feel I'll be needing to discuss. And either way, I'll still be able to ask questions about user rights - which was really my only intention of using the admin portal.
If there's anything that does concern me - it's the community portal - is it just that I need to adapt to using it more, or the layout may need a bit of touching up?
Those arguments I made above were caused by misunderstanding. I saw the administrators point on this and I was able to understand that from the start. But I still thought that it was unfair to leave the big problems to people who had the faith of the community to handle the problems - for reasons below.
I always saw issuing warnings to users acting in bad faith and reporting them when they didn't improve their behaviour as an important job. Also regular users (registered/unregistered/rollbacks) have, are and always will be able to ask questions related to user rights and blocking.
I never really saw the difference between that and actually discussing the blocks of users, but I do now. -- '''[[User:C.Syde65|<font color="maroon">C.Syde</font>]]''' ([[User talk:C.Syde65|<font color="black">talk</font>]] | [[:Special:Contributions/C.Syde65|<font color="black">contribs</font>]]) 04:48, July 21, 2014 (UTC)
==Conclusion==
The administrator noticeboard has been created. Based on discussion, the admin portal talk page '''should''' be limited to administrator responsibilities and things only an administrator can do. [[User:Auror Andrachome|Ѧüя◎ґ]] ([[User talk:Auror Andrachome|talk]]) 01:13, July 31, 2014 (UTC)
| |||