Forum:Absent Admins: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
::You can search individual user's contributions via the [[Special:Contributions]] you can also get a breakdown of your edits via [[Special:Editcount]], though I would not encourage for instance creating a list pitting one user (Admin or not) against the others, this might encourage an unhealthy amount of comparison amongst users here. | ::You can search individual user's contributions via the [[Special:Contributions]] you can also get a breakdown of your edits via [[Special:Editcount]], though I would not encourage for instance creating a list pitting one user (Admin or not) against the others, this might encourage an unhealthy amount of comparison amongst users here. | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Am I being naive, or just silly and missing your point? Loads of sites I go to when I log in remind me how long ago it was since I last visited (probably most of them actually, particularly sites you log into to interact with others). I wasn't talking about a contribution account beside each name which I agree could be competitive (although not necessarily a bad thing, unless someone wants to create loads of dead link pages or pages without any significant content.... would they?!) Surely a last visit date wouldn't be too objectionable would it? We could see at a glance how our community here is growing (or not in terms of people coming back regularly)[[User:The Librarian|The Librarian]] 15: | ::: Am I being naive, or just silly and missing your point? Loads of sites I go to when I log in remind me how long ago it was since I last visited (probably most of them actually, particularly sites you log into to interact with others). I wasn't talking about a contribution account beside each name which I agree could be competitive (although not necessarily a bad thing, unless someone wants to create loads of dead link pages or pages without any significant content.... would they?!) Surely a last visit date wouldn't be too objectionable would it? We could see at a glance how our community here is growing (or not in terms of people coming back regularly)[[User:The Librarian|The Librarian]] 15:53, 15 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
::As far as the Admin level, what I stated is the Wikipedia article, find another precedent (if you actively disagree) and the admins that ''are'' active on this wiki will review it, though as it stands I am still against removing any user rights. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 15:11, 15 July 2008 (UTC) | ::As far as the Admin level, what I stated is the Wikipedia article, find another precedent (if you actively disagree) and the admins that ''are'' active on this wiki will review it, though as it stands I am still against removing any user rights. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 15:11, 15 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
If you want a precedent then here it is [http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Wookieepedia:Administrators#Extended_leaves_of_absence Here] not that i want to remove admin rights from users i just don't see the point of people having these rights if they are not here i think the link provides a good guideline to follow[[User:Dark Lord Xander|Dark Lord Xander]] 15:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC) | If you want a precedent then here it is [http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Wookieepedia:Administrators#Extended_leaves_of_absence Here] not that i want to remove admin rights from users i just don't see the point of people having these rights if they are not here i think the link provides a good guideline to follow[[User:Dark Lord Xander|Dark Lord Xander]] 15:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:53, 15 July 2008
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.
I was going through the list of recent changes when i saw the find users admin section and a list of 15 users came up although i was suprised to see upon closer inspection of the fifteen 3 hadn't made an edit since 06, 3 hadn't made a contribution since 07 and another 4 had only made sparce edits into 2008 leaving only 4 out of 15 that had made solid or infact any contributuions in the last 2 months.
The point I am trying to make is should these people still have admin rights i mean sure they may have been instrumental in the creation of the wiki but if they haven't been editing for more than a year should they still have admin privilages ?
Now i am not saying they be removed perminatly I myself have had to take time off from editing when things come up in my life all I am saying is remove them while they have been absent for more than 6 months without contributing at all and if they come back by all means give them the rights back.
This way it ensures that if a user wants to be an administrator of the wiki they have to be active in its creation if something comes up in there lives which is understandable since we all have a life outside of editing here then there role can be taken up by another user who is around.
This is just a though that i have had after looking at the list so tell me what do you think Dark Lord Xander 12:49, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- I am very much against this proposal. There are a few reasons for removal of adminship see Wikipedia: Administrators - removal of adminship, none of them encompass 'not being here enough'. It certainly is not enough reason to remove their admin status. I have created a page which details various admins Tardis:Administrators. --Tangerineduel 13:17, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thats fine it was just an idea that i had and throught it was better to get it out there also i guess i am just not used to being on a wiki where an admin hasn't been present since 06 although the did have a section for past admins (Admins no longer around but still classed as admins and still with admin rights Dark Lord Xander 13:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Another thing the the active Admin contains two users one Amxitia who hasent edited since 06 and Freethinker1of1 who hasn't contributed since 07 so i think they should be moved out of that list Dark Lord Xander 13:44, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- Hi, I haven't looked into the administrator thing very much but it strikes me odd that someone who hasn't been actively involved in the site could if they wanted too, come back to something, after several years, still with a privilede level, and change things that may not follow the concensus of this wiki community in the time since they have been gone. Furthermore if I was new to the site and was seeking advice, I would probably ask someone with Administrative status, and not be very impressed if I didnt receive a reply for a year or two! (exaggeration here on my part). I also would have thought that if the Administrator was taking a knowing 'break' (as opposed to dying) then a courtesy, would be to step down and let the site know. ("With great power, comes great responsibility" someone once said!) I would probably support inactive after a year, certainly after two years. 4 (active) out of 15 is quiet poor isn't it or is that usual?
- PS As another thought it would be interesting to know when TARDIS crew members last contributed to the site (if if it is only on their talk page) Is this available somewhere, 'cos its not on the crew page? The Librarian 14:58, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Thats what i am saying if they no longer use the wiki how can they be an admin to me it doesn't make sense Dark Lord Xander 15:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- You can search individual user's contributions via the Special:Contributions you can also get a breakdown of your edits via Special:Editcount, though I would not encourage for instance creating a list pitting one user (Admin or not) against the others, this might encourage an unhealthy amount of comparison amongst users here.
- Am I being naive, or just silly and missing your point? Loads of sites I go to when I log in remind me how long ago it was since I last visited (probably most of them actually, particularly sites you log into to interact with others). I wasn't talking about a contribution account beside each name which I agree could be competitive (although not necessarily a bad thing, unless someone wants to create loads of dead link pages or pages without any significant content.... would they?!) Surely a last visit date wouldn't be too objectionable would it? We could see at a glance how our community here is growing (or not in terms of people coming back regularly)The Librarian 15:53, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- As far as the Admin level, what I stated is the Wikipedia article, find another precedent (if you actively disagree) and the admins that are active on this wiki will review it, though as it stands I am still against removing any user rights. --Tangerineduel 15:11, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
If you want a precedent then here it is Here not that i want to remove admin rights from users i just don't see the point of people having these rights if they are not here i think the link provides a good guideline to followDark Lord Xander 15:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)