This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Administrators page. |
|
Archives:
Index,
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10,
11,
12,
13,
14,
15,
16,
17,
18,
19,
20,
21,
22,
23Auto-archiving period: 30 days
![]() |
![]() | This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | The project page associated with this talk page is an official policy on Wikipedia. Policies have wide acceptance among editors and are considered a standard for all users to follow. Please review policy editing recommendations before making any substantive change to this page. Always remember to keep cool when editing, and don't panic. |
![]() | NOTE: This talk page is not the place to post questions for administrators.
|
![]() | NOTE: This talk page is not the place to request access to administrator user rights. For requests for adminship, see WP:RfA. |
![]() | This page has been cited as a
source by a notable professional or academic publication: Stvilia, B. et al. Information Quality Discussions in Wikipedia. University of Illinois U-C. |
Index |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
External videos | |
---|---|
![]() |
I tried my damn best to be a better person, and reported on someone who was banned unfairly in 2012. Instead of getting help I was forced to either do what I'm told or get out, and I want to help Wikipedia, but fuck it I'm not even reading revision histories if I am gonna be villainized for the smallest mistakes. So please do it I know it takes a long time without bots, but I want nothing to do with this website if I can't even ask civil qusetions without getting heat for it. And I WILL make a video talking about the unfair ban as it was unjust, it happened over a decade ago which makes it worse. As for me, don't ban me just close this account for good, I don't know how or have the power to do so. But I'm fed up with how I can't even return nicely without rudely being demanded to leave. One more thing, look for someone good at English to translate the Bogi Ágústsson I'm not doing it anymore if I can't even ask questions without getting into trouble. Also before it's too late get this site some ads, lack of ads is why it's failing financially.
Also if I'm required to end the post with a question, how can I trust a wiki where you are warned even when you try to return civilly? Blaze The Movie Fan ( talk) 12:13, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Also if I'm required to end the post with a question. There's no policy like this so i wonder if you've been given bad advice by someone. Also it is a bit odd to see drama over such an old ban. So much can change in 10 years. A wel-formed unblock request by the blocked or banned editor may be successful. Oh and the foundation has plenty of money. – Novem Linguae ( talk) 16:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
You used the {{Help me}} tag but did not ask a question. Please write out your question and replace the {{Help me}} tag when you are done. They seem to be in a passion over something, and it's currently unclear why. ——Serial Number 54129 18:05, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
I have made series of WP:Bold changes to this policy page, aiming to clarify confusing sentences, cull repeated guidance, and increase concision, all while preserving guidance determined by community consensus. [1] [2] Clearly, I have failed, and as @ Andrybak have disagreed with the edits, I wanted to start a discussion. Andrybak has given helpful feedback: from the edit summary, I realized I have deleted a policy shortcut template, which was not intended. Andrybak pointed out I changed some wording that was determined via consensus. While I believe to have preserved the intended meaning in such sentences, I should have made a effort to discuss beforehand.
However, I believe most of my other copyedits were improvements, and I would like others to identify problematic aspects, so that copyedits identified to be improvements can remain intact. Ca talk to me! 14:08, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Based on what I see at WP:AN#More admin misconduct, I suggest adding more explicit language to the vandalism and "purely administrative" areas concerning involvement to the effect that any administrator may take appropriate measures to deal with any editor who makes threats against them or anyone else. I'm sure somebody can argue how "threats" may be parsed, but we can certainly agree on violence, stalking, or doxxing as obvious candidates. Acroterion (talk) 19:00, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Admins removed for inactivity have to run a new RfA if they want to be resysopped after a two-year period of inactivity. For admins removed under
the recent 5-year/100-edit inactivity requirement, does that mean two years after the removal of admin tools
(as
WP:ADMIN#Restoration of admin tools suggests), or does it mean two years from the last edit or log action
(as
WP:RESYSOP suggests)? It doesn't really matter which answer we choose, but it's important to resolve the ambiguity one way or another so there are no issues when it inevitably comes up at
WP:BN. Probably the easiest solution would be to change the sentence
here beginning In the case of an administrator desysopped due to a year of inactivity...
to "In the case of an administrator desysopped due to inactivity, the two-year clock starts from the last edit or log action prior to the desysop" or something like that. (This came up previously
here.)
Extraordinary Writ (
talk)
23:21, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Administrators page. |
|
Archives:
Index,
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10,
11,
12,
13,
14,
15,
16,
17,
18,
19,
20,
21,
22,
23Auto-archiving period: 30 days
![]() |
![]() | This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | The project page associated with this talk page is an official policy on Wikipedia. Policies have wide acceptance among editors and are considered a standard for all users to follow. Please review policy editing recommendations before making any substantive change to this page. Always remember to keep cool when editing, and don't panic. |
![]() | NOTE: This talk page is not the place to post questions for administrators.
|
![]() | NOTE: This talk page is not the place to request access to administrator user rights. For requests for adminship, see WP:RfA. |
![]() | This page has been cited as a
source by a notable professional or academic publication: Stvilia, B. et al. Information Quality Discussions in Wikipedia. University of Illinois U-C. |
Index |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
External videos | |
---|---|
![]() |
I tried my damn best to be a better person, and reported on someone who was banned unfairly in 2012. Instead of getting help I was forced to either do what I'm told or get out, and I want to help Wikipedia, but fuck it I'm not even reading revision histories if I am gonna be villainized for the smallest mistakes. So please do it I know it takes a long time without bots, but I want nothing to do with this website if I can't even ask civil qusetions without getting heat for it. And I WILL make a video talking about the unfair ban as it was unjust, it happened over a decade ago which makes it worse. As for me, don't ban me just close this account for good, I don't know how or have the power to do so. But I'm fed up with how I can't even return nicely without rudely being demanded to leave. One more thing, look for someone good at English to translate the Bogi Ágústsson I'm not doing it anymore if I can't even ask questions without getting into trouble. Also before it's too late get this site some ads, lack of ads is why it's failing financially.
Also if I'm required to end the post with a question, how can I trust a wiki where you are warned even when you try to return civilly? Blaze The Movie Fan ( talk) 12:13, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Also if I'm required to end the post with a question. There's no policy like this so i wonder if you've been given bad advice by someone. Also it is a bit odd to see drama over such an old ban. So much can change in 10 years. A wel-formed unblock request by the blocked or banned editor may be successful. Oh and the foundation has plenty of money. – Novem Linguae ( talk) 16:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
You used the {{Help me}} tag but did not ask a question. Please write out your question and replace the {{Help me}} tag when you are done. They seem to be in a passion over something, and it's currently unclear why. ——Serial Number 54129 18:05, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
I have made series of WP:Bold changes to this policy page, aiming to clarify confusing sentences, cull repeated guidance, and increase concision, all while preserving guidance determined by community consensus. [1] [2] Clearly, I have failed, and as @ Andrybak have disagreed with the edits, I wanted to start a discussion. Andrybak has given helpful feedback: from the edit summary, I realized I have deleted a policy shortcut template, which was not intended. Andrybak pointed out I changed some wording that was determined via consensus. While I believe to have preserved the intended meaning in such sentences, I should have made a effort to discuss beforehand.
However, I believe most of my other copyedits were improvements, and I would like others to identify problematic aspects, so that copyedits identified to be improvements can remain intact. Ca talk to me! 14:08, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Based on what I see at WP:AN#More admin misconduct, I suggest adding more explicit language to the vandalism and "purely administrative" areas concerning involvement to the effect that any administrator may take appropriate measures to deal with any editor who makes threats against them or anyone else. I'm sure somebody can argue how "threats" may be parsed, but we can certainly agree on violence, stalking, or doxxing as obvious candidates. Acroterion (talk) 19:00, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Admins removed for inactivity have to run a new RfA if they want to be resysopped after a two-year period of inactivity. For admins removed under
the recent 5-year/100-edit inactivity requirement, does that mean two years after the removal of admin tools
(as
WP:ADMIN#Restoration of admin tools suggests), or does it mean two years from the last edit or log action
(as
WP:RESYSOP suggests)? It doesn't really matter which answer we choose, but it's important to resolve the ambiguity one way or another so there are no issues when it inevitably comes up at
WP:BN. Probably the easiest solution would be to change the sentence
here beginning In the case of an administrator desysopped due to a year of inactivity...
to "In the case of an administrator desysopped due to inactivity, the two-year clock starts from the last edit or log action prior to the desysop" or something like that. (This came up previously
here.)
Extraordinary Writ (
talk)
23:21, 19 July 2024 (UTC)