Final Fantasy Wiki
m (Add)
m (I remember this too)
 
(11 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Forumheader|Rin's Travel Agency}}
+
{{Forumheader|The Labyrinth of Time}}
   
 
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with either your talk page template or four tildes ~~~~ -->
 
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with either your talk page template or four tildes ~~~~ -->
Line 24: Line 24:
 
|time=19:32, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 
|time=19:32, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 
|text=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.}}
 
|text=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.}}
{{ILHI|20:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)|<s>Opposite view point of BH in his first comment. I said about a billion (give or take) times that we should actually use the acknowledged/titled/credited users section on the Staff page, I seem to have been mostly ignored.<br><br>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.<br><br>As soon as we need a new rollbacker, then HenryA would be the guy I'd say without a doubt.<br><br>Heh, Xeno is about to pass HenryA's editcount. ^_^</s><br><br>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}}
+
{{User:ILHI/T|20:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)|<s>Opposite view point of BH in his first comment. I said about a billion (give or take) times that we should actually use the acknowledged/titled/credited users section on the Staff page, I seem to have been mostly ignored.<br><br>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.<br><br>As soon as we need a new rollbacker, then HenryA would be the guy I'd say without a doubt.<br><br>Heh, Xeno is about to pass HenryA's editcount. ^_^</s><br><br>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}}
 
{{8bit|time=20:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)|text= Henry deserves rollback rights, definitely. Also agree with all current titled user nominations.
 
{{8bit|time=20:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)|text= Henry deserves rollback rights, definitely. Also agree with all current titled user nominations.
   
Line 59: Line 59:
 
{{Yuanchosaan|time=11:30, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 
{{Yuanchosaan|time=11:30, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 
|text=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}}
 
|text=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}}
{{ILHI|19:24, 25 June 2009 (UTC)|@DSS: [[Special:WikiaStats]]. Xeno has done loads more than most users here, and been here far shorter.<br><br>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?<br>I also disagree with the staff template being added to their user page.<br><br>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.}}
+
{{User:ILHI/T|19:24, 25 June 2009 (UTC)|@DSS: [[Special:WikiaStats]]. Xeno has done loads more than most users here, and been here far shorter.<br><br>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?<br>I also disagree with the staff template being added to their user page.<br><br>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.}}
 
{{Yuanchosaan|time=05:56, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 
{{Yuanchosaan|time=05:56, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 
|text=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.
 
|text=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.
Line 75: Line 75:
 
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.}}
 
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.}}
 
{{ScatheMote|time=16:25, 29 June 2009 (UTC)|text=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.}}
 
{{ScatheMote|time=16:25, 29 June 2009 (UTC)|text=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.}}
{{ILHI|16:41, 29 June 2009 (UTC)|Nope, now I hate this idea completely. I think the wiki should stay as it should until we need to promote regular users to rollback, rollback users to SysOps or SysOps to Bcrats. Currently we have enough rollbackers, enough SysOps, and an active-enough Bcrat (based on what they can do that SysOps can't, which isn't that much, nothing needed often). We shouldn't need to title someone monthly, yearly. Titled users are meant to be to those that shine out but can't be offered rollback.<br><br>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.}}
+
{{User:ILHI/T|16:41, 29 June 2009 (UTC)|Nope, now I hate this idea completely. I think the wiki should stay as it should until we need to promote regular users to rollback, rollback users to SysOps or SysOps to Bcrats. Currently we have enough rollbackers, enough SysOps, and an active-enough Bcrat (based on what they can do that SysOps can't, which isn't that much, nothing needed often). We shouldn't need to title someone monthly, yearly. Titled users are meant to be to those that shine out but can't be offered rollback.<br><br>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.}}
   
  +
{{Talk
{{TalkTextTest2
 
 
|image=Exdeathbattle.PNG
 
|image=Exdeathbattle.PNG
 
|color=blue
 
|color=blue
Line 99: Line 99:
 
Henry should have been made a Mod a long time ago. {{unsigned|Drake Clawfang}}
 
Henry should have been made a Mod a long time ago. {{unsigned|Drake Clawfang}}
   
  +
{{Talk
{{TalkTextTest2
 
 
|image=Exdeathbattle.PNG
 
|image=Exdeathbattle.PNG
 
|color=black
 
|color=black
Line 129: Line 129:
   
 
Anyone else I missed who is really deserving?}}
 
Anyone else I missed who is really deserving?}}
{{ILHI|14:35, 5 July 2009 (UTC)|Rollback's supposed to be a power, not a mark of appreciation. A user doesn't "deserve" to have rollback. If we need a new rollback user, then the user most deserving should get it. Point being, you should give deserving user's rollback when we need rollback users, you shouldn't give the user's rollback when they are ''deserving''.<br><br>Wow, deserving doesn't even sound like a word anymore.}}
+
{{User:ILHI/T|14:35, 5 July 2009 (UTC)|Rollback's supposed to be a power, not a mark of appreciation. A user doesn't "deserve" to have rollback. If we need a new rollback user, then the user most deserving should get it. Point being, you should give deserving user's rollback when we need rollback users, you shouldn't give the user's rollback when they are ''deserving''.<br><br>Wow, deserving doesn't even sound like a word anymore.}}
   
 
{{DiabloText|time=16:34, 5 July 2009 (UTC)|text=I didn't do it out of appreciation, I did it because Henry and Xenomic have done a lot for this wiki.
 
{{DiabloText|time=16:34, 5 July 2009 (UTC)|text=I didn't do it out of appreciation, I did it because Henry and Xenomic have done a lot for this wiki.
Line 137: Line 137:
   
 
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. [[User:Drake Clawfang|Drake Clawfang]] 16:40, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 
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. [[User:Drake Clawfang|Drake Clawfang]] 16:40, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
{{ILHI|16:43, 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.}}
+
{{User:ILHI/T|16:43, 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.}}
  +
{{DiabloText|time=16:51, 5 July 2009 (UTC)~|text=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:
  +
*'''The ability to move pages:''' Seriously, anyone can move pages, but you need to be granted the ability to revert edits quickly? What the hell?
  +
*'''The ability to lock pages:''' Ok, only admins can do this, but it would be nice if I could grant this to users if need be.
  +
*'''The ability to delete pages:''' Again, an admin power, but it would nice if I could grant it on its own.
  +
  +
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.}}
  +
{{Drake|time=16:55, 5 July 2009 (UTC)|text=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.}}
  +
{{Faethin|time=17:33, 5 July 2009 (UTC)|text=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 [[Help:Rollback|here]] is basically abusing rollback.}}
  +
{{Drake|time=17:36, 5 July 2009 (UTC)|text=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.}}
  +
  +
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. [[User:Exdeath64|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? — <span style="font-family:Mistral">[[User:Yuanchosaan|<font color="skyblue">Yuan</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Yuanchosaan|<font color="#00BFFF">Saluto!</font>]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Yuanchosaan|<font color="#1E90FF">Acta</font>]]</sub></span> 11:23, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  +
  +
I nominate myself for most useless! [[User:SilverDragon28|'''<font face= "papyrus"><font color= "silver">Silver</font>]] [[User_talk:SilverDragon28|<font color= "blue">Dragon</font>]] XXVIII</font>''' 18:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 20:49, 27 January 2012

FFWiki forum logo
Forums: Index > The Labyrinth of Time > User nominations


Woton
Ffiiwhitedragon psp
BlueHighwind TA
T4HoL-Kuore
BlueHighwind TA

Opposite view point of BH in his first comment. I said about a billion (give or take) times that we should actually use the acknowledged/titled/credited users section on the Staff page, I seem to have been mostly ignored.

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)

Galbana-ffxiirw
VIIBCKatanaM

Can I get put down for most irritating? Exdeath64 00:25, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Woton
BlueHighwind TA
Woton

@DSS: Special:WikiaStats. Xeno has done loads more than most users here, and been here far shorter.

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)

Woton
VIIBCKatanaM
Freya menu
Woton
Galbana-ffxiirw
FFVI Terra Branford Menu iOS

Nope, now I hate this idea completely. I think the wiki should stay as it should until we need to promote regular users to rollback, rollback users to SysOps or SysOps to Bcrats. Currently we have enough rollbackers, enough SysOps, and an active-enough Bcrat (based on what they can do that SysOps can't, which isn't that much, nothing needed often). We shouldn't need to title someone monthly, yearly. Titled users are meant to be to those that shine out but can't be offered rollback.

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)

Exdeathbattle
TenzaDrakeKain(black)
TenzaZangetsu Special:Editcount/TenzaZangetsu 30 June 2009 (UTC)  -   "You know what? I’m not going to kill her. I think slow torture’s the way to go.":
Is this forum really necessary? I mean, if you want to thank those users's hard work, just tell them, there's no need to create a whole forum for this.
Galbana-ffxiirw

Henry should have been made a Mod a long time ago. ——Preceding unsigned comment was added by Drake Clawfang (talkcontribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~.

Exdeathbattle
Luneth-DarkKnight
TenzaDrakeKain(black)
TenzaZangetsu Special:Editcount/TenzaZangetsu 30 June 2009 (UTC)  -   "What kind of a house doesn't have salt? Low sodium freaks!!":
Henry will be a Mod, that's a fact but now I'll leave because I don't see any reason to keep talking here.
T4HoL-Kuore
T4HoL-Kuore

Rollback's supposed to be a power, not a mark of appreciation. A user doesn't "deserve" to have rollback. If we need a new rollback user, then the user most deserving should get it. Point being, you should give deserving user's rollback when we need rollback users, you shouldn't give the user's rollback when they are deserving.

Wow, deserving doesn't even sound like a word anymore.  ILHI 14:35, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

T4HoL-Kuore

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)

T4HoL-Kuore
FFVI Terra Branford Menu iOS
FFVI Terra Branford Menu iOS

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)

I nominate myself for most useless! Silver Dragon XXVIII 18:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)