Battlestar Wiki talk:Think Tank/Move Squad: Difference between revisions
Discussion page of Battlestar Wiki:Think Tank/Move Squad
(→Final?: add support tag) |
Steelviper (talk | contribs) (→Final?: + vote) |
||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
:{{support}} I'm just gonna vote. I'll re-vote if this dosen't count. Mayber we can call this a two-day voting period in which people can still debate/call for delay/change their votes? Or is there intended to be a longer such period following the two days mentioned by Joe? --[[User:Day|Day]] <sup>([[User talk:Day|Talk]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Administrators' noticeboard|Admin]] - [http://hiver.swordofthestars.com/ SotS])</sup> 00:21, 18 July 2006 (CDT) | :{{support}} I'm just gonna vote. I'll re-vote if this dosen't count. Mayber we can call this a two-day voting period in which people can still debate/call for delay/change their votes? Or is there intended to be a longer such period following the two days mentioned by Joe? --[[User:Day|Day]] <sup>([[User talk:Day|Talk]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Administrators' noticeboard|Admin]] - [http://hiver.swordofthestars.com/ SotS])</sup> 00:21, 18 July 2006 (CDT) | ||
:{{support}} granting move privs to users after 100 edits. Suggest also considering a 2-3 day minimum registration period. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 14:56, 20 July 2006 (CDT) | :{{support}} granting move privs to users after 100 edits. Suggest also considering a 2-3 day minimum registration period. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 14:56, 20 July 2006 (CDT) | ||
:{{support}} Privs to the people! I'm not sure what kind of "restrictions" are easily coded, but Peter's suggestions sound reasonable. (Avoids granting move privs to highly productive vandals, and gives admins a day or two window to block them). --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 15:03, 20 July 2006 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 20:03, 20 July 2006
Suggestion: Automatically confer move priveleges on registered users after 100 edits? --Peter Farago 12:50, 12 July 2006 (CDT)
- I like that idea --Mercifull (Talk/Contribs) 13:44, 12 July 2006 (CDT)
- 100 "usefull" edits. Shane (T - C - E) 14:22, 12 July 2006 (CDT)
- Ugh. I'm loathe to count up individual edits to determine "usefullness". If by "useful", you mean non-spam/vandalism I would agree (although hopefully they'd be blocked long before they hit 100). --Steelviper 14:25, 12 July 2006 (CDT)
- Yes. Let us say "100 non-vandal edits". I don't know how we'd even define useful. Fixing a single typo is useful, especially if they fixed a single typo in 100 different articles. That's a lot of proof-reading. And that's a minor edit. As long as we're not looking at 100 edits to link Canadian drugs or whatever, I think we're in the clear. --Day (Talk - Admin) 15:40, 12 July 2006 (CDT)
- Let's not be too picky with the criteria here. 100 non-vandal edits should suffice. Obviously, we should probably make use of the {{move}} template and appropriate categories for users under the 100 edit mark, so new users can suggest moves. -- Joe Beaudoin So say we all - Donate 18:09, 12 July 2006 (CDT)
LocalSettings.php Settings
$wgGroupPermissions['trusted']['move'] = true;
Final?
If there are no other objections, comments, or concerns regarding this, I would like to get this rolling. Please comment within the next 2 days, thank you. -- Joe Beaudoin So say we all - Donate 14:52, 17 July 2006 (CDT)
Support Sounds good to me :) --Mercifull (Talk/Contribs) 17:03, 17 July 2006 (CDT)- We're "go" here. --Spencerian 17:10, 17 July 2006 (CDT)
- Support I'm just gonna vote. I'll re-vote if this dosen't count. Mayber we can call this a two-day voting period in which people can still debate/call for delay/change their votes? Or is there intended to be a longer such period following the two days mentioned by Joe? --Day (Talk - Admin - SotS) 00:21, 18 July 2006 (CDT)
- Support granting move privs to users after 100 edits. Suggest also considering a 2-3 day minimum registration period. --Peter Farago 14:56, 20 July 2006 (CDT)
- Support Privs to the people! I'm not sure what kind of "restrictions" are easily coded, but Peter's suggestions sound reasonable. (Avoids granting move privs to highly productive vandals, and gives admins a day or two window to block them). --Steelviper 15:03, 20 July 2006 (CDT)
