Toggle menu
Toggle personal menu
Not logged in
Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits.

Tardis talk:Forking announcement/editors

Discussion page

There are dangers to this, that no-one has commented on yet. For example, while I won't name names, I saw an admin on the Once Upon A Time wiki be manipulative enough to gaslight everyone until screenshots caught them out and they got removed (and banned) by Fandom. What happens here? What if you're blocked and need to talk with an admin but they're ignoring you - like I've had happen to me on other wikis - and you need Fandom's involvement to deal with it? Perhaps there needs to be a new role made: an independent adjudicator to look over everything and remain impartial? --HarryPotterRules1 21:04, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

There are a variety of issues that I think we probably should have had a thread to discuss, even if this was ready to go, yeah. For one, indiewikibuddy is worthless, as best I understand. We shouldn't be recommending it. It still helps fandom SEO, b/c you're still clicking fandom links, you just have an extension that redirects you. Najawin 21:35, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
I gotta admit, I'm kinda annoyed at the lack of communication. I don't blame you for wanting to get away from Fandom, but I'd much rather deal with their shit than not have anyone to turn to when admins get too big for their boots or block you unfairly. - Laura
Yeah, it's a dangerous precedent that needs to be discussed. Even if there's just a specific person that always has the right to tell Admins "No. Bad. Wrong. Look at [incident]/[thing] again" and cannot be overruled by any Admins. --HarryPotterRules1 00:17, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Regarding "lack of communication", we did try to reach as many editors as we could via off-Wiki channels… Fandom's repressive tendencies regarding would-be forks rather prevented anything that would have publicly given the game away, was the problem.
As far as procedure to handle bad admins, that's certainly a concern, yes. A forma adjudication system would be a fine topic for a Forum thread. Though either way it's certainly our intention to at least try to build up to a sufficiently large admin team that it would be wildly implausible for a majority of them (let alone the totality) to be in on some kind of nefarious conspiracy — thus allowing the rest of the team to censure a bad admin. --Scrooge MacDuck 00:15, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, I would highly recommend coming to me or User:Tangerineduel in case admin actions need reviewing. (I should note that TD and I aren't in communication off-wiki. You can expect full transparency.)
× SOTO (//) 01:13, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Just to add in on this, as a regular editor who has been fair privy to a lot of what has gone on - I can concur that the admins here did go to good lengths to try and reach out to as many editors as possible without 'raising flags' with FANDOM. It's safe to say that FANDOM has a certain history - one in which, just on a personal level, I feel their more recent amendments to their Forking Policy have shown... But anyway, that's enough dwelling on that from me here.
And I agree that sometime in the near future, we should look at implementing a formal adjudicator system. As Scrooge says, something that would be good for a Forum thread. Now that we are away from FANDOM - the great news is that there's room to be business as usual on everything in terms of doing these things entirely on-Wiki, and I'd love to hear other editors' thoughts with regards to such a system. JDPManjoume 10:59, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.