eRepublik Official Wiki:Bar/Debate 5

From eRepublik Official Wiki
< eRepublik Official Wiki:Bar
Revision as of 14:23, 23 February 2010 by Andycro (Talk | contribs) (link correction)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
What should/shouldn't a sysop do


Give temp bans for page vandalism

  • 0 Are you sure it's a good idea that we give temp bans? How many days? +1 --Mini "Template boy" Bill Italian in the deep core call me! 20:25, 10 November 2008 (EET)
  • +1 - I am talking about specific, clearly defined vandalism. For example, a user last week deleted all of the content on another user's citizen page and replaced it with "He doesn't pay people". I reverted the changes and I gave the offender a 1 day ban with an explanation on his discussion page. The wiki is not a place for personal vendettas. Vandalism is totally different than a disagreement or edit war. Also, this is a power that should not be abused.--QJ Lincoln 21:25, 10 November 2008 (EET)
So how long are you going to ban yourself QJ Lincoln for trying to make fun of me in a talk page (which can be said, insulting) and that's one thing. --Aryamehr Flag of Iran talk 22:34, 10 November 2008 (EET)
What was that I called you again? I can't remember and it probably wasn't any thing worse than what I have called Agent, MiniBill, or anyone else here. Teasing is not vandalism. If I were to erase your entire page and write "... is a monkey's uncle then that would be vandalism and I should get a warning.--QJ Lincoln 05:53, 11 November 2008 (EET)
  • -1 No because of the bias and the past of the sysops it's not right as (not to name any) have taken sides plenty of times. Only if I weren't lazy I would go back and get everything but everyone deserves a chance. --Aryamehr Flag of Iran talk 20:57, 10 November 2008 (EET)
  • +1 A lack of active and fast discipline will incite potential vandals. Also, a temp ban is a warning, and not a permanent ban, so it should get the message across well enough. - –Dr. AgentChieftain Flag of the Crescent and Star PPP! B / C / D / F / P / S 03:13, 11 November 2008 (EET)
  • +1 Pierric Bross 02:41, 12 November 2008 (EET)
  • +1 Past is past! Like Aryamehr said, everyone deserves a chance. Being "sysop" does not mean you are "perfect", it only means that you are willing to forget about your grudges and you invest your time and and energy to "build" things. --Belea2008 00:39, 20 November 2008 (EET)
How many days? I think a one day block is enough. When a contributor receives more than that... he/she will probably receive a bonus from Admin (a.k.a. "in-game punishment"). --Belea2008 00:39, 20 November 2008 (EET)
+1I agree with 1 day. It is giving the person a wiki time out.
+1Just make sure they know it's coming.
--TheSupernatural Me, on a good day Who wants to be a Supernatural?The SaNdBoX 03:19, 20 November 2008 (EET)

Protect pages during edit wars

What do you mean by protect? --Emerick 06:43, 20 November 2008 (EET)

Using the administrative function that prevents people from changing the page. --QJ Lincoln 06:55, 20 November 2008 (EET)
  • -1 I'm going to say no. I think that just a moderator will be enough, and furthermore, we shouldn't lock a page just because a few people are being [omitted]. Why screw it up for everyone? --Emerick 06:59, 20 November 2008 (EET)
I'd protect the page for (let's say) one hour, put a message in the Talk page and ask people to reach a decision there. If people look inclined to do so, unlock the page, otherwise find a solution --Mini "Template boy" Bill Italian in the deep core call me! 18:48, 20 November 2008 (EET)

Help to moderate edit wars

  • +1 This requires a awful lot of attention --Mini "Template boy" Bill Italian in the deep core call me! 20:25, 10 November 2008 (EET)
  • +1 Specifically, I mean providing a neutral voice to an edit war to bring resolution. If the Syops is not neutral then someone else needs to moderate. --QJ Lincoln 21:25, 10 November 2008 (EET)
  • +1 YES. Sitting on the sidelines and then picking a "winner" is a horrible way of deciding things. You two should write up a neutral version, and have the conflicting parties add to it and then try to control the smaller disputes. Smaller arguments will be much easier to resolve than larger ones, after all. - –Dr. AgentChieftain Flag of the Crescent and Star PPP! B / C / D / F / P / S 03:13, 11 November 2008 (EET)
  • +1 Pierric Bross 02:41, 12 November 2008 (EET)
  • +1 --Belea2008 00:41, 20 November 2008 (EET)
  • +1 Edit wars are retarded. Some people obviously need help :/ --Emerick 06:46, 20 November 2008 (EET)

Delete stubs with a small number of revisions which are either

Blanked by creator (if he is the only author, the page is small, etc.)

  • +1 - –Dr. AgentChieftain Flag of the Crescent and Star PPP! B / C / D / F / P / S 03:13, 11 November 2008 (EET)
  • +1 Pierric Bross 02:41, 12 November 2008 (EET)
  • -1 This is not Wikipedia! :D Having a small page does not kill anyone... Maybe the author is very lazy and only adds one word/month to that page or someone decides to add content to that page. Adding content to a small page (even minor edits) is easier if the page is already created. Keep in mind that not all contributors are authors (only authors can create a page). --Belea2008 00:51, 20 November 2008 (EET)
Even if a page is blanked by the author, maybe others consider that the page is adding "value" to the Community. I consider that EREP:DEL should be applied in these cases. --Belea2008 00:51, 20 November 2008 (EET)
  • 0 Ok, this must be on a case-by-case basis of course. Suppose I create Template:Lang, it doesn't work, I blank it saying "it will never work, because of the way the wiki works", there's no reason in keeping it --Mini "Template boy" Bill Italian in the deep core call me! 18:45, 20 November 2008 (EET)

Not "expanded" in a reasonable amount of time, after warning the author.

  • 0 Depends on the topic of the article. There is a substantial difference of importance between pages like Shahanshah and China. - –Dr. AgentChieftain Flag of the Crescent and Star PPP! B / C / D / F / P / S 03:13, 11 November 2008 (EET)
  • 0 Same as AgentCheiftain Pierric Bross 02:41, 12 November 2008 (EET)
The deletion of stubs should be on a case by case basis. Some things that are marked stub really aren't. Such as historical party pages or just short articles. However, I think a page that has just a title and nothing else should be deleted. They are clutter. Also if an article is stuck in "orphaned pages" or "dead-end pages", and cannot reasonably be linked to other pages, then they need to be gone. --QJ Lincoln 21:25, 10 November 2008 (EET)
  • -1 Again, having "small pages" is not a bad thing. Think at it this way: everyone one of us is doing this based on his free will... some of us do not have a lot of time... others wish to do great things in small steps... I think the most important thing about this is to enjoy it! Deleting a page is (kind of) similar to saying that the contributors that "worked" on that page "did not do a good thing". --Belea2008 00:59, 20 November 2008 (EET)
  • 0 Case by case --Mini "Template boy" Bill Italian in the deep core call me! 18:46, 20 November 2008 (EET)

Delete old & unused images

No matter what, before deleting images or pages, we must remember to adhere to the eRepublik:Deletion policy --QJ Lincoln 21:25, 10 November 2008 (EET)
  • +1 You already do this by marking them for deletion, this will only increase the regularity. - –Dr. AgentChieftain Flag of the Crescent and Star PPP! B / C / D / F / P / S 03:13, 11 November 2008 (EET)
  • -1 Not so, the policy says to wait at least 2 days before deleting. +1As long as the policy is followed, delete it! --QJ Lincoln 05:53, 11 November 2008 (EET)
Mh... I'm deleting only unused images which are 7 days old, do you think we should mark them and wait for a couple of days? --Mini "Template boy" Bill Italian in the deep core call me! 15:54, 11 November 2008 (EET)
What does the policy say? I think 7 days is fine for an unused image. --QJ Lincoln 17:20, 11 November 2008 (EET)
  • +1 Pierric Bross 02:41, 12 November 2008 (EET)
  • +1 Old = 7 days old. --Belea2008 01:00, 20 November 2008 (EET)
  • -1 I don't want to come in here and find my picture that I used a week ago taken down. -- TheSupernatural (signature added by MiniBill)
Unused images appear in Special:Unusedimages, which is what we are talking about. This shows the images that have been uploaded but are not or no longer used on a page. If you want to keep an image but not on a template, add them like these two users Socrates and Q J Lincoln. --QJ Lincoln 07:00, 20 November 2008 (EET)

Patrolling edits

Helping others

 Because administrators are expected to be experienced members of the community, users seeking help will often turn to an administrator for advice and information, or in a dispute. In general, administrators acting in this role are neutral; they do not have any direct involvement in the issues they are helping people with. 


Assume good faith

Keep in mind that not all contributors read the Policies (old contributors included - no one checks the policies every day to see if they have changed) Also, some attitude/behavior policies from Wikipedia are applied in this Wiki and very few contributors know about this fact. Therefore, we kindly ask you to assume good faith in all the cases and keep (if not polite) at least a neutral tone when announcing a contributor of not respecting them. --Admin 13:16, 9 January 2009 (EET)

Advices, not rules

What happens when a contributor does not respect a policy?

  1. Write a polite announcement that he has breached a policy and give him/her a link to the exact section that is related to the subject.
  2. If he/she continues, write in their talk page a polite warning that insisting on not respecting that section will result in a block of the account. Remind him/her that blocking of the account will also add Forfeit points to their eRepublik account.
  3. In some cases, contributors will ignore your messages. Apply gradual punishments to that contributor. Do not give him/her a harsh punishment from the beginning.

May you wield the mop and bucket with equanimity... --Admin 13:16, 9 January 2009 (EET)

Heated debates

The most recent cases are Embed and Lewisism. Procedural advices:

  1. Move the page from the Main space to a subpage of the author.
  2. Add <center><big>'''''The following article contains the opinions and biases of the author.'''''</big></center> to the page.
  3. Let consensus be reached and the author or other contributors make improvements to the article so that the issues discussed in the talk page to be resolved.
  4. When the modified page is moved back to Main space, remove the tag above and add Unreviewed to the page.

Have fun at editing! --Geo "Talk Pages" Belea 18:23, 11 January 2009 (EET)

But Embed has already been reviewed by the admins in its current state. No changes have been made to it since then. It is only ONE user who is disputing the article and that user won't accept any evidence that destroys his claims. --~✭βƓЪ✭~ 02:04, 2 February 2009 (PST)