Hi guys. I know I've been fairly inactive lately (I apologise so much for that :(), but I wanted to propose something. It's been noted that the "Titled Users/Acknowledgement" secion of the Staff page has not been in use. Although general consensus is that we do not need mods at the time, I believe that the following users should be acknowledged by granting them Titles:
In addition, I nominate Henry for rollback. He's one of our hardest workers, having created or rehauled many of our weapons, armour and location pages. In all honesty, he deserved rollback last year, before I recieved it. At the very least he should have a title.Support? Opposition? Comments?
I support the giving of titles to these users, I have been lurking around and I think they deserve the recognition. Also, Henry should have rollback. He also deserves it and I keep forgetting that he does not have it.
Other than the Henry part, I oppose this. We already have one empty position of no power on the Staff Page, we hardly need to expand on another. In fact, it was never made clear to me what a "Titled User" was. Under what circumstances do you attain it? Do you have any new privileges? Is their a point to it other than saying "thanks"? Because if you really need to say "thanks" to people, you might want to revive Awards instead of giving them meaningless "Titles".
The Titles are from way back when, before Rollback existed.
I support Yuan's suggestion with the exception of replacing Dazuro on the list with Silver, or at least to include her on it. I also think Henry should've received rollback months ago. @BlueH: This is not about giving any sort of power. It's about recognition. These users have been very helpful to the Wiki and they deserve the credit.
Well that's fine. A noble endeavor. But being on the Staff of this wiki implies some sort of expanded authority, even if it barely exists at all (Rollback). A Légion d'honneur is probably what you're thinking of, not a title of authority. The same can probably be said of Rollback as well, now that I think of it.
Oppose giving Henry the rollback status. We don't need more rollbackers. He could go on the titled users list though. And I'm not doing (heh, doing can be pronounced two different ways) this for any hatred towards HenryA, far from it. I just don't think we need more rollback users. I didn't think we needed any when I was given the rights. You can remove them if you want.
As soon as we need a new rollbacker, then HenryA would be the guy I'd say without a doubt.
Heh, Xeno is about to pass HenryA's editcount. ^_^
Actually, why not. I'm strongly against giving more rollback rights, but give rollback to HenryA and acknowledge those other users. I think it's a stupid idea. -- :p - not even I know where I'm going with this message now. I should probably stop. :3 ILHI 20:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Henry deserves rollback rights, definitely. Also agree with all current titled user nominations.
How "exclusive" is this titled user recognition supposed to be? I think the name is rather lacking, since it carries no title. More of a "recognized" thing, really. I see this as a weay to show appreciation for people who have contributed a lot and aren't staff members. Which makes me think that there are a few more people that I feel should be thanked. Silver and Dazuro haven't been on here for about a month, so.. :/ I think Xenomic, Jeppo, BlueLionheart, Otherarrow, and Gamer2127 should be recognized if we're going to see it as a thank-you, as those are the people that I think should be thanked.So that brings up the point: How often can we nominate titled users, and does a B-crat or simply an admin need to give the OK? I'm interpreting this more as a "staff member likes" rather than "community shows support for" thing, which.. I think is kind of wrong o.O
Agreed. I know you guys don't respect my opinion, but 8bit is right. It shouldn't be just up to the staff to decide who gets recognized, but rather all of the community who cares. Problem is, it could turn into a giant popularity contest. Maybe it should be up to our large group of editors who have proven themselves? Anyways, I support Henry getting rollback since he long deserves it. I also support giving acknowledgements to Silver, ScatheMote, and BfD. Xenomic, sorry dude, but I don't think he's been around for long enough. It was also on his talkpage that he was thinking about leaving, but that's most likely irrelevant. Peace out.
Can I get put down for most irritating? Exdeath64 00:25, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Don't worry DSS, it's not your opinion we don't give a crap about.
Apologies, my list probably shows bias as I am usually only aware of the editors who edit during the Asian timezones. I think that similar to moderator nominations, a user can nominate a person for a title (listing reasons) and wait for community approval. An admin can then add that user to the Staff page.
For the Staff page, I was considering having the description changed to:
"These users are those who have made significant contributions to the Final Fantasy wiki, and have been acknowledged by the community as deserving of merit. Although they have no additional user rights, titled users are considered to be part of the Staff."
Therefore, like all Staff, they are expected to act civilly and display mature judgement. They also get the busy Cactuar on their pages.
I'll add Silver to the list. The only reason she wasn't on there was because I thought she had been rather inactive lately (although now that I've checked, Dazuro has been less active...). Anyway, these are the reasons I nominated each person:
It goes without saying that I believe they can act with the decorum needed of staff members. I don't know so much about the other editors and their editing habits, so would anyone else like to supply reasons for their nominations? Thank you all for your comments and nominations! ^_^ They are very much appreciated, including yours, DSS.PS: I'm glad that everyone seems to think Henry should be a moderator. He certainly deserves it, and I was considering giving up my position if people thought that we didn't need anymore mods. Thank you ^^;.
No, Yuan, I'll give up my position if its required. "Decorum", "civilly", "judgement" [sic], these words do not apply to me. I'm pretty sure Henry has done more for the wiki than I have anyway.
I'm pretty sure no one needs to give up a position. You've done a great deal for the wiki too. And "judgement" is British English spelling, not a typo. </nitpick> :p
I disagree about Dazuro, he hasn't done that much when you think about other users. And nothing comes to mind when you mention BfD. Also, Xeno's done a lot more than that. SilverSummoner has also done a lot more. Crisis Core enemy articles anyone? Though, DSS did a lot too, and Ultimateria created more but people here can barely remember him, right?
I also disagree with the staff template being added to their user page.
And finally, I find it funny that three mods seem to be offering up their rollback. Though one is barely active and the other one has announced he's leaving. Meh. ILHI 19:24, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I haven't listed everything. If I did, I would be writing a paragraph for each person there (although they deserve that recognition). As for the staff templates, both Koku and Frusion have the template on their user pages already...do you really want to ask for them to be removed? That's a kick in the face after all the work they've done. Barely active? Check my contribs: I'm less active than I used to be by far, but I'm still alive and kicking (I'm not dead yet!). I'd really like to see some more non-staff members commenting: many users seem to feel that the Staff hand down judgements from above, without consulting the community. Wouldn't it help if non-staff members participated in these discussions, then?
Sure it would, if they know what (or who) they're talking about. And ILHI - You're right. I concede and support Xenomic as well.
What about the staff members we have now. This page kinda insults them. Sure, Henry and Xenomic may deserve it, but don't count out the staff members we have now. Your making them seem imcompitent to help anymore.
...what are you talking about? This is about giving new titles to users and putting them on the Staff. The Staff members already have titles, and most of the active ones have commented already. Giving other users doesn't mean we're somehow taking acknowledgement away from Staff members. I don't understand at all where you're coming from.
I think we should steer away from specific users for a while and get to the core question: Do we want tiled users or not? We can't squabble over who deserves it unless we implement it first and choose one or two users who absolutely deserve recognition. I believe that the only harm this function might cause if users feel resentment towards those recognized because or perceived contribution "value" to the wiki.
Not sure about this, it would too easily become a popularity contest of who's the most liked rather than who is a valued contributor. It's a good idea in theory, but it would slide into favoritism. Not to mention if we make it a regular feature, it would feel like we have to title somebody. And the more people we title, the less meaningful it is, people are declared "special" until no one is.
I see two solutions. Allow nominations, but make it one person per month and confine voting to Staff members and other titled users, to try and uphold a sense of professionalism. Or, if users want to be recognized for significant contributions, dig up the old Award templates and give them another whirl. I never wanted them gone, but no one could agree on what to do with them.
Come vote in the Soul Shrine and take one of my Final Fantasy quizzes.
I don't particularly like the idea of only giving awards. The point of nominating the users means that they should have recognition, and giving them award simply will not make them recognized. On the other hand, Drake's first suggestion seems like a good idea, as we don't want too many titled users as then being titled is meaningless. However, letting only the staff pick the titled users may cause the normal users to becomes angry to be left out, and if everyone votes, it may become a popularity contest. However, I believe that a popularity contest is less likely as none of the nominees are so popular (or popular at all [me]) that their popularity outweighs their contributions.
If this is going to become a competition then stuff the idea completely. Should be based on everything the user has done. Not of one month's work. Eventually we'll get the suck users being nominated, because I can count the users I'd nominate on one hand. We don't get a new legendary user a month so it won't work that way. ILHI 16:41, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
C'mon, put me down has most annoying...I CAN get worse...
Yes there is. People like to be congratulated for their work. If we offer a form of congratulations, not only do they feel better for their work, it makes other people work harder in hopes of being congratulated.
@ILHI: I think Drake wants to allow only one or two people per month based on all of their contributions. We don't have to do someone every month, nor does the nominations base on users' work the current month, but all their contributions. His idea's point is that not too many people get nominated so the coveted titles stay coveted.
Well, before we sink further into this titled user thing, let's rehash the other half of this forum's purpose: Henryacores is mod? Yes? Everyone supports, Diablo should appoint. ^^
What if we turned it into a "User of the Month" feature on the main page? But regardless, I believe staff members should be exempt from winning any sort of top user award, primarily because 1. They are staff, therefore they must of earned the position, which says a lot in itself. And 2. They are likely to be the ones deciding who wins it.
Everyone supports, Diablo should appoint.
This sounds very official. Can I get a gavel so that I may use it when I declare my verdict?
Henry should have been made a Mod a long time ago.
I thought he already was one. That explains a lot.So I assume no one objects?
Ok, Henry and Xenomic now have lovely rollback powers. Since no one posted, I assume no one objected. Anyone else I missed who is really deserving?
Wow, deserving doesn't even sound like a word anymore. ILHI 14:35, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
I didn't do it out of appreciation, I did it because Henry and Xenomic have done a lot for this wiki. Also, everyone is treating rollback as if it is some kind of amazing ability. It's this reverence of it that makes me hesitant to grant it to users.
I must ask, though, are we to continue to give out titles or are we going to give rollback to most deserving of the title nominees instead of titling the users?
Agreed Diablo, Rollback is just "undo" with a few less clicks. It's the acknowledgment that counts more than the power. Rollback is nothing, Moderator is the true award. Drake Clawfang 16:40, 5 July 2009 (UTC)EDIT CONFLICT YOUR FACES: No, giving it because they've done a lot for the wiki is appreciation. It's commending them for doing a lot for the wiki. Rollback should be given out when we need more people with rollback. Which is actually never because rollback's such a useless ability, users with it can't do anything more than another. So we don't need rollbackers ever. Meh, giving people rollback just causes more problems with how we're going to organise the staff page. ILHI 16:43, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
I couldn't agree more ILHI, I've always wondered why Rollback isn't just given to all users right off the bat. It's not like it can be abused.
Now, if instead of Rollback it was one of these abilities I could give out, then it would mean something:
Now those three abilities are much more abusable than rollback, and thus should be the ones I can give out.
It's the acknowledgment that counts more than the power. Rollback is nothing, Moderator is the true award.
I didn't grant them a title, I just gave them the ability to revert edits quickly. I've always hated this moderator stuff, causes so many problems.
I must ask, though, are we to continue to give out titles or are we going to give rollback to most deserving of the title nominees instead of titling the users?Titles are relics of a by-gone age. They remain there just for the hell of it.
Actually Diablo, moving pages is a problem, there's often and anti-spam measure that limits us to moving a page only every few minutes. The ability to bypass that, especially when making large-scale revisions, could be helpful. And yes, it could be abused, but, isn't the point of Mods being that they are given Rollback and their position for being trustworthy and helpful? I agree otherwise though, locking and deleting pages should remain Admin powers.
Come vote in the Soul Shrine and take one of my Final Fantasy quizzes.
The thing is, rollback can be abused. We've seen many times that users, especially newbie users, tend to do one of the following two things: make lots of edits to a single page without bothering to preview their changes or make an edit that is outright against our methods or customs, even if these things are done in good faith. I've seen some rollback users forget the assume good faith policy of our Wiki and revert revert revert whatever edits the newbie did without offering an explanation as to why. Breaking the rules of using rollback stated here is basically abusing rollback.
Hm, reminds me of that Simpsons episode where Bart goes to karate classes. "We give you rollback so that you need never use it".
And Fae, good faith is nice, but if I'm undoing an edit to Cloud's height/birthday for the 20th time, frankly, at that point I don't care enough anymore to put a summary.
Come vote in the Soul Shrine and take one of my Final Fantasy quizzes.
Hey Faethin, if n00b users are that big of a deal, make the rules and regs clearer to them, I mean REALLY how many people click on the Cecil head template? When I first started I did not touch it until at least a month later. Is there any way to add something like a list of tips for beginners that counter some of the more frequent problems directly onto their userpage (like reminding them to preview before saving changes)? And has for the rollback bit, perhaps things should change so mods get something other then rollback? If you want to shut down vandals, try adding in locking rights. The mods can rollback the act itself then lock the page until the admin gets a chance to ban or otherwise shut down the vandal and then unlock it after the attack is over. Exdeath64 11:03, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
- A page shouldn't be locked due to a single vandalism edit, only if it's the repeated target of vandalism or the site of an edit war. I think admins can edit MediaWiki to change what the editing page says, but it's not likely users will read it (they don't seem to read the link that says "Editing help", for one). If they don't read the nice, big welcome message, what's to say they'll read an editing message? — YuanSaluto!Acta 11:23, 7 July 2009 (UTC)