User talk:GaganTopia: Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
Tag: 2017 source edit
Line 38: Line 38:


: Ok, thanks. [[User:GaganTopia|GaganTopia]] [[User talk:GaganTopia#top|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 19:34, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
: Ok, thanks. [[User:GaganTopia|GaganTopia]] [[User talk:GaganTopia#top|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 19:34, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
== Additional rights ==
You've been asking other admin to gain additional rights. Unfortunately you are not eligible, as you're banned on other wikis at the current time -- with reasonable cause. Essentially, this wiki uses the rules laid down by the Adoptions process as a baseline, but then reserves the right to add additional conditions. Because you've been banned, you wouldn't be able to adopt this wiki, so you wouldn't be able to attain other additional rights, either. Also, you are primarily a discussions participant, not an editor, which further goes against our basic edict that people wishing to hold additional rights primarily be editors, not conversants in discussions. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}} 19:42: Wed 16 Mar 2022</span>

Revision as of 19:42, 16 March 2022

Re: discussion guidelines

Hi, there are discussion guidelines, but they're hard to find and, in my eight years admin experience I've seen that very few people read either our discussion guidelines or our wiki editing policies. One of the main jobs of admin is to remind people of these rules because they don't do it themselves. Believe it or not, it's actually helpful to constantly post those comments in the discussion boards because anyone reading my posts learns the rules. Is it a pain for me to have to constantly repeat myself? Yes. Is it a pain for other users to have to see my comments over and over? Yes. However, it is the best solution, given the way these discussion boards are set up by FANDOM. Thanks and I hope this answers your question Shambala108 02:58, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Thanks! :) GaganTopia 03:08, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Re: discussion boards

Hi, when it comes to being an admin, we prefer people who have been editing for at least a year. We don't have similar specific guidelines regarding moderators of discussion boards, but I wouldn't be comfortable making anyone a moderator unless they 1) have been posting for at least a year and 2) show signs of understanding the wiki's discussion rules (this would include letting new users know when they have violated one while still making it clear that you are not a moderator). Thanks Shambala108 00:00, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! :) GaganTopia 00:03, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Should I talk of this at all (for example, if somebody says I’m “mini-modding”, shall I say I’m applying for discussions moderator)? GaganTopia 16:46, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Council

Hey! Good question. It means I belong to the Community Council. You can read more about that here.

In my case, it means I was a Wikia Star back in the day, when that was still a thing. As a part of the Council I'm one of the voices for the community in the planning process.
× SOTO (//) 22:44, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Oh, I see! Cool! GaganTopia 23:51, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Some clarification

Hi there are a few things to clarify.

  • First, you are going to stop complaining to other users, be they admins or not, about my editing behavior. If I choose to clean up an edit or block a vandal, that's up to me. I don't owe you any explanations, but I have limited editing time and often can only do one or two things at a time. Since you have now done this twice, it's starting to feel like a personal attack.
  • Second, I am not interested in a non-DWU section for the discussion boards. I understand other wikis do it, but it's not something I care to have to patrol.
  • Third, "inappropriate" is in the eyes of the beholder. I don't think that the user's profile image violates policy, but you might be able to convince another admin.

Thanks for your attention. Shambala108 20:44, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Previous account

I'm sorry but I'm a little confused. While it is true that your having a second account doesn't violate T:SOCK, Tardis:Username policy requires that you post that information on your user page, which you only did so a couple of days ago. And yet you are hoping to get moderator rights sooner? I specifically stated above that someone who wants such rights would have to show that they understand the wiki's discussion rules, and yet you kept this other account to yourself until now. This suggests you are not as familiar with the rules in general as you might think you are.

I do have to address one thing. It's fine to remind other users of the rules when you think they've been violated (but you must do so in a way that makes clear that you are not an admin or moderator). However, I am going to have to ask you to not do so when it comes to the following things: vandalism, swearing, user names and user profile pictures. If you have a problem or question with one of these, please ask an admin.

Thanks for your attention Shambala108 01:16, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Off-topic threads in discussions

I'm sorry, but this is a Doctor Who wiki. All discussions must be in some way related to that universe. Off-topic discussions are not allowed. This is a long-established rule, codified at T:DISCUSS, as well as in the Guidelines attached to the Discussions area (tardis.fandom.com/f) itself. Thanks for your understanding!
czechout<staff />    19:32: Wed 16 Mar 2022

Ok, thanks. GaganTopia 19:34, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Additional rights

You've been asking other admin to gain additional rights. Unfortunately you are not eligible, as you're banned on other wikis at the current time -- with reasonable cause. Essentially, this wiki uses the rules laid down by the Adoptions process as a baseline, but then reserves the right to add additional conditions. Because you've been banned, you wouldn't be able to adopt this wiki, so you wouldn't be able to attain other additional rights, either. Also, you are primarily a discussions participant, not an editor, which further goes against our basic edict that people wishing to hold additional rights primarily be editors, not conversants in discussions.
czechout<staff />    19:42: Wed 16 Mar 2022