Harry Potter Wiki:Requests for permissions

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

ArrestoMomentum granted Chat Mod rights. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:21, August 9, 2016 (UTC)

So as many of the active community members will know, there is an ongoing vote concerning images in infoboxes at the moment. Naturally, I was intrigued as to how other Wikis went about this policy, so I ventured out into the wide world of Wikia to look for myself. Upon visiting other well-known Wikis, I found much more than I had hoped for. Wikis which were both much larger, and smaller than us had upwards of five or ten people in the Live Chat at any given moment, all happily chatting away, making an edit or two while waiting for a reply, and healthily debating on hot topics - I felt a real sense of community when I entered the chats. 

Over here at the Harry Potter Wiki, a few people might enter the Live Chat every now and then, but not enough. The conversations that I have been involved in have really enhanced my editing experience, both in terms of learning more about Harry Potter, the Wiki, and the community’s members. And it’s not like our community is a ‘dying’ one, we have so much to look forward to *cough, cough* Fantastic Beasts, Cursed Child *cough, cough.*

So with a bit of inspiration from other Wikis’ communities, I have decided to make an attempt to spark more of a sense of community back into our own community. For me, it’s starts with the Live Chat. Of course, there are so many steps that come after that (more discussions, more votes, more community projects) but I believe that this is where we must begin.

Now don’t get me wrong, the community over here is awesome, and in the (almost) year that I have been here, my life has changed completely for the better and I am enjoying life in general so much more because of it. All I am implying is that, along with making the Wiki more factual (like we already are), we also make it more fun. And it’s two birds with one stone really, because by making the Wiki a more desirable place to be, more work will get done.

Now that I’ve got all of that out of the way, I’ll actually explain my proposition. So, I am here to request Chat Moderator status. Why do we need a Chat Moderator you ask? Well, if we are going to make our community even more incredible than it already is, we’ll have to have someone watching over the Chat to make sure that things don’t get out of hand. Let me give you with a few statistics:

Currently, our Wiki has two Chat Moderators, one of whom has been inactive for more than two years, the other of whom has been inactive for more than four years. This is not the case when it comes to other Wikis. Here are a few examples:

• The Disney Wiki currently has 14 Chat Moderators, all of whom have been acitve this year, most of whom have been active this month 

• Elder Scrolls Wiki currently has eight Chat Moderators, all but one of whom have been active this year
• Fallout Wiki currently has 13 Chat Moderators, all but three of whom have been active this year
• Brickipedia currently has five Chat Moderators, all of whom have been active this year

The list goes on, but you get the general idea. I’m not implying that we need this many Chat Moderators (yet), what I am trying to convey is that we need an active Chat Moderator to govern the Live Chat. Saying that our community is free of unnecessary comments would be a lie; no community can eliminate that, but by having someone to watch over the chat we would be better able to sustain a friendly, healthy relationship between community members.

Now eliminating unwanted comments in the Live Chat is not the only perk to having a Chat Moderator. By having a well-known, knowledgeable member of the community constantly in the Live Chat, any simple questions that users may have could be easily, and instantly answered; not to mention the fact that they know that their question is being answered by someone who knows what they’re talking about.

When I first joined the Harry Potter Wiki community, I was a little confused as to where to go to ask questions and get a general idea of what I was in for. My initial instinct was to go to the Live Chat, but there was no one there. By having a Chat Moderator we could also recruit new members to our community with a higher chance of them staying, especially if we directed them to the Live Chat upon arrival.

So clearly, having a Chat Moderator would be very useful. But I know what you’re thinking, why should Arresto be our Chat Moderator? Well, I’d love to give you a few reasons why I think I’d be good for the job:

I am very knowledgeable when it comes to Harry Potter (I first read the books when I was five years-old), and having a knowledgeable Chat Moderator is obviously essential. I have also been here at the Harry Potter Wiki for almost a year now, so I am very familiar with the conventions and inner workings of the Wiki.

Now I don’t blame you, but you are probably wondering why an established admin who has been around for years does not take the job. Well, admins are very busy (I’m sure those of you admins reading will agree), so it would be highly unfair to place another demanding job on their already extremely long to-do list. I believe that the Chat Moderator has to be a member of the community who is trusted, but does not already have another job on the Wiki. I think it would be a pretty unique tradition if Chat Moderator status was handed down through ‘generations’ of Wiki users (like some sort of virtual invisibility cloak); so if a current Chat Moderator takes on another job, then the task is handed down to the next member of the community who seems most fitting for the job (although there could be more than one, of course).

You may have guessed by now (due to the length of my application), but I like to talk. As a Chat Moderator, I would not only be there to moderate the Live Chat, but I would also be more than happy to have a friendly chat to anyone willing.

I have also been consistently averaging ten edits a day since joining, so I am definitely not inactive, and have not been involved in any conflicts or vandalism to this date on any Wiki.

So I guess this is the time to take the opportunity to say a few things. First of all, I’d like to apologise for writing such a long application, there were just so many things that I had to talk about and it could not be compressed into a small paragraph-long application. Finally, I would like to thank all of you reading the application for considering everything I have written about, and for being part of such an awesome community (which we can hopefully make even better!).

Please owl me for any further questions or check out my user page for all of my information,

Hope you all have a great day,

  ArrestoMomentum | talk 

I think there are several good points raised in this (very thorough;) application. Although we voted down the threaded forums, I still feel that more user interaction could be beneficial for the community here, especially as Cursed Child and Fantastic Beasts re-enlivens the fandom. I think focusing on chat and having a "chat ambassador" helping new people find their way around, answer questions, or just talk about HP, would be a very positive addition. I have always found ArrestoMomentum to be pleasant and helpful on talk pages and in chat so I think s/he would be a great person for such a role! Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 04:30, August 6, 2016 (UTC)

I think this is a good idea too. It will make things easier when we have to resolve something. They have a good idea about what to do to make the chat more of option so if ArrestoMomentum wants to set it up, they should! They always do good work and making the chat more active would be a great addition! --Kates39 (talk) 09:45, August 6, 2016 (UTC)

If there's anyone that should be chat moderator right now, it should be him. He has well and truly earned it. I believe he is ready for the position. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 09:49, August 6, 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:21, August 9, 2016 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

ThanatodoraSage granted Chat Mod rights. Ironyak1 (talk) 01:29, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

Hello there! I'm ThantodoraSage, and I would like to apply as a chat moderator for this wiki.

My reasons for applying are thus: There hasn't been an active chat mod over a year. By this I mean the only Chat Mod on the wiki hasn't been active since late 2017, and I think that this wikia really needs one again. I say this because I recently encountered a troll, and with no chat mod to control them anyone could be a victim. Therefore I think the wiki needs a new active one. I think that I could do this because I'm in the chat almost daily, and I'm also familiar with the basic chat mod tools.

Hope you consider me, and have a good day!

Cheers, 민 태준 - 슈가 (Inconvenience me here!) 21:47, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

Comments

ThanatodoraSage is an active member of our chat, and is a very friendly user. It is true there has been trolls in the chat (I'm actively in there, also), and I agree there should be a Chat Mod to deal with this. I vote for.

 Harrypotterexpert101  Whats Up? 22:14, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

For: Joined her in chat for a few hours, a very delightful person. With the current Chat Mod absent, I think she is a suitable candidate. =D --Sammm✦✧(talk) 00:29, January 18, 2019 (UTC)

For The wiki needs a Chat Mod and ThanatodoraSage is willing to fill the position. She seems mature and hard working and the jobs a great starting position. Zane T 69 (talk) 23:25, January 29, 2019 (UTC)

As everyone is in support of this, myself included, there is no need for a formal vote. Congrats & happy chatting! --Ironyak1 (talk) 01:29, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

ArrestoMomentum granted rollback rights. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 20:46, July 3, 2016 (UTC)

As you can see, my first request was denied because only one person voted. It has now been a couple of months since then, so I have decided to request rollback rights on the Harry Potter Wiki once more. I feel as if I have now been part of the Harry Potter Wiki community for long enough to deserve rollback rights - seeing as I have made over 1500 edits and have been part of the Wiki for almost 6 months (which averages to almost ten edits per day). Nothing in my track record suggests that I am inactive or untrustworthy, and I am definitely going to be here long-term because Harry Potter is my passion and always will be. I would love to become an admin in the future but I am well aware that I will be needing more experience on the Wiki before I apply and I feel as if rollback rights is one important step towards that. Thank you all for your time and I hope you enjoy the rest of your day. -   ArrestoMomentum | talk 

I wouldn't recommend asking too often, or it'll look as if you are simply "desperate" for user rights. Personally, I think you should be a rollback, but I'd prefer the wiki to clear out the rollback flag from those who are clearly not active anymore on the wiki before promoting anyone else (plus, there really isn't that much vandalism that occurs that I don't notice :p) --Sajuuk 09:43, April 3, 2016 (UTC)

Asking too often creates the impression that you want rights to show off power, without really acknowledging what you will soon be responsible for. I have misused rollback many times in the distant past, and I am grateful that I very rarely misuse the tool nowadays, if at all.

@ SuperSajuuk - I think you mean "I wouldn't recommend asking too often", not "I would recommend asking too often". :P ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 10:06, April 3, 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I did. Thanks for spotting that typing fail. :p --Sajuuk 10:22, April 3, 2016 (UTC)

How many active RB's do we have? User talk:BachLynn2317:01, April 30, 2016 (UTC)

According to Special:ListUsers/rollback, 4 rollback users edited in the last couple of days (this doesn't include myself as I have the Content Moderator flag, which includes the rollback user right by default).

The vast majority of users with a rollback flag haven't edited since January 2016 (and much longer before that). I believe all of these inactive rollbacks should be demoted since they're cluttering the list (not to mention creating the false impression that these users are active). --Sajuuk 17:07, April 30, 2016 (UTC)

I don't have an issue with allowing inactive users to retain rollback rights. It's not like with admins, where there's a strong case for removing sysop rights in the event of prolonged inactivity, since a vandal could do some real damage if they managed to hack into an inactive admin account. People do return from time to time, and making them all go through this process to re-obtain rollback rights would be creating an unnecessary headache.

Anyway, I'm for rollbacking ArrestoMomentum.

★ Starstuff ^{(Owl me!)} 22:13, April 30, 2016 (UTC)

Sorry I haven't weighed in, both this time and first time around; I think the first time, I didn't know him well enough to make an informed decision. But he seems like a responsible, trustworthy contributor. Voting for. --Cubs Fan (Talk to me) 00:34, July 1, 2016 (UTC)

As this appears to still be open (?!) I also vote for --Ironyak1 (talk) 01:36, July 1, 2016 (UTC)

I vote for, too,  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 06:23, July 1, 2016 (UTC)

And so do I, for. Congratulations! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 20:46, July 3, 2016 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

ArrestoMomentum not granted rollback rights. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 20:55, December 21, 2015 (UTC)

ArrestoMomentum - I would like to request rollback rights on the Harry Potter Wiki because I have made almost 700 edits, all with very positive intensions. Nothing in my track record suggests that I am untrustworthy and I feel as though, although I am still quite new to the community, I have a lot to offer in the future. Thanks for your time and all the best. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ArrestoMomentum (talk • contribs).

Normal Voting Policy applies. Only autoconfirmed registered users with greater than 20 article edits may participate in voting. If there is no clear For majority, voting will be closed when the allotted time (1 week) has expired, with no changes taking place. Voting will end 21:00 PM, December 20, 2015 (UTC).
--  Seth Cooper  owl post! 20:50, December 13, 2015 (UTC)

For (+1)

1.  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 20:55, December 13, 2015 (UTC)

Against (-0)

Comments

Not done, due to lack of majority. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 06:01, December 20, 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

SuperSajuuk granted Content Moderator rights. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 11:02, February 23, 2016 (UTC)

Hi. I'd like to request Content Moderator user rights to help with wiki maintenance. You can see a list of user rights associated with this group here: Special:ListGroupRights#content-moderator.

The main purpose for me requesting these rights is so I can move files to better names. A look around the wiki shows a large number of files with terrible file names that need to be moved, but only sysops or content moderators have the ability to do this on the wiki.

I know I haven't been around for a very long time on this wiki, but there is a lot of maintenance to be done on the wiki and I feel that I have the experience to carry this out. I've managed multiple wiki's and had rights on other wiki's as well, so there is no issue of a lack of experience there.

Thanks! --Sajuuk 18:37, January 31, 2016 (UTC)

Bumping in case it was missed. --Sajuuk 10:28, February 3, 2016 (UTC)

Has not been here for that long, but seems to be responsible and has a good track record on other wikis. I'd vote For. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 17:10, February 3, 2016 (UTC)

Did this die out? I noticed a link was added here in Community Messages, but it doesn't seem to have had much effect on the activity of this. :/ --Sajuuk 07:57, February 12, 2016 (UTC)

You're currently under an active ban on the Elder Scrolls Wiki from the look of it. On the other hand, from what I can gather from the discussion, it was for allegedly making insulting comments in chat, not vandalizing articles, adding fanon, or generally making unhelpful edits. So I don't see a huge risk in granting you content moderator rights, given you seem to have a clean record on Narutopedia and Encyclopedia Hiigara. ★ Starstuff ^{(Owl me!)} 11:57, February 12, 2016 (UTC)

I had a look at the voting policy and it appears that 3 votes are needed for a majority consensus, but the way this is going, I will be surprised if any other user actually posts in favour of granting the rights (already has 2 supports)... --Sajuuk 13:01, February 16, 2016 (UTC)

Seems to have a good enough track record on all Wikis including this one, as well as some decent experience in this field. I vote For. -   ArrestoMomentum | talk 

Bump. --Sajuuk 15:58, February 20, 2016 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Sammm鯊 granted Content Moderator rights. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 01:18, December 22, 2018 (UTC)

Very self-conscious about this; I'd like to start by reassuring the deliberators: 95% of my editing time, I'm absolutely fine with just being a regular user, so I won't be upset if this request is not accepted.

My reason for requesting this User Right, all surround the same issue: images. I've seen a couple of Admins and Users remarked that, "there's no limitation on how many images a wiki can host, why the persistence on removing duplicates?" and I agree, the first statement is completely true, but I'd like to explain why personally, I'd really prefer there to be no duplicates.

Besides the fact that duplicates literally have no functioning purpose for there's already at least another image of the same thing lying around, for duplicates that have been diligently categorized, they'd consequently increase the inaccuracies of those categories they are in, most visible ones being the use of {{Imagecat}} on articles. For example:

The Harry Potter Wiki has 432 images related to Requests for permissions.

(Note: The template is styled to reflect {{PAGENAME}} no matter what, so ignore the "Requests for permissions" displayed in the template on the right; the example is {{Imagecat|Images of Ginny Weasley}}, purpose self-explanatory.)

As I'm sending this request, there's supposedly "442" images of Ginevra Weasley; that seemed like a lot, and I'm sure, after deleting duplicates, there probably would still be a lot of images left, which is not a problem. Having a lot of images is not the problem; having unnecessary duplicates mixed within, that, is what I considered problematic. I want to see a more accurate calculation of how many images there really is for a subject, not going into an image category and get confused because of the déjà vu the duplicates caused, "wait, have I already gone through this page?" etc. I'd like to browse images that are actually different, without constantly being interrupted by "wait, I have seen this already, right? Or was it just a similar image?"

To be clear, I do understand this is a very minuscule issue, it is in no way severe that needs immediate attention, if any attention at all. I wholeheartedly agree that, it effects so little that it makes little sense making it a priority to take care of, when there's so much more to be done on the wiki. I don't think anyone is to be blamed for anything, even the ones who uploaded duplicates, because frankly, it is rather unavoidable when it does happen: There's just so many images on this wiki, and if one is not properly categorized/named or being in use, it is very likely to have a duplicate uploaded because the existing file of it was hard to locate.

I'm not trying to set up some unrealistic goal of "no more duplicates", that, I think is just not possible. Rather, I'd like to do damage control at the first possible moment, just so they don't get left alone "because it's not that important", and eventually be forgotten about, and just sitting on this wiki, accumulating more duplicates of no purposes. I'm saying this, because, while I can do the only thing a regular user could do and tag {{delete}} on those duplicate files, they are rarely seen as any priority and just continue to sit there. As explained above, I understand that they really aren't urgently needed to be taken care of; however at the same time, I also feel that I'm going through an extra step just to get those duplicates deleted, and usually waiting quite a period of time until actually seeing the result. It does not reflect what's listed on HPW:IMAGE: Obvious duplicate images will be speedy deleted. It is rarely speedy. I reemphasize, I don't think the Admins are at fault, because they really do have other more important stuff to do, but as a bystander, I feel rather frustrated for not being able to actually help out with this matter, if not only adding more workload for them. I also feel that, I'm unnecessarily populating Special:Recentchanges whenever I do tag the duplicates. Should I have the User Right, they really could just be gone without the whole tagging-then-waiting-to-see-who-finally-has-time-to-delete-them business.

It may be a ridiculous reason to request for the User Right, but honestly, even if it's unimportant, it's not going to fix itself until someone does it. I'd rather be that someone, so Admins can focus on more pressing matters. I'd also like to say, no, "my help" isn't needed per se, but I won't be offering said help had I not still been seeing many duplicates lying around. I'm one of the users, if not the only user, who took issue with duplicates and is vocal about it. I'd rather be able to take action instead of being a nagging complainer.

I'm writing all this because I want it to be clear that I didn't send this request on some whim; it has been on the back of my mind, but seeing my tagging edits populating RecentChanges again today really made me feel that I might as well just pitch it to get over with it. Thanks for reading this.

(Friendly reminder: Each to their own; please do not attack my idiosyncrasy of wanting to get rid off duplicates. Much appreciated.)

--Sammm✦✧(talk) 19:50, October 25, 2018 (UTC)

Comments

For: This nomination request had escaped me until now; Sammm鯊 has proved to be a trusted user and more than up to the task of being granted Rollback rights. More than Rollback, I'd be content (haha!) with giving her Content Moderator rights. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 18:49, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

For: I quite agree with Seth on this one, she has proven herself worthy of Content Mod rights. Good luck! (Also funny joke Seth :)) Dave (talk) 02:37, November 8, 2018 (UTC)

For: Content Moderation is often a little-noticed, behind-the-scenes task. As Sammm鯊 has an interest, and a clearly proven aptitude for detail work, she most certainly should be given the chance to help out in this area! --Ironyak1 (talk) 04:03, November 9, 2018 (UTC)

For: I quite agree with Ironyak 1.  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 13:10, November 9, 2018 (UTC)

Against: I've had very little contact with Sammm so went to read her Bio.

I have doubts about the maturity of anyone who feels this is appropriate material for someone being considered for a position of responsibility.

"though currently I'm simply a person who's SICK of seeing a bunch of people taking the piss out of the roles of an Admin"

I vote No. The Dark Marc ^(talk)
 

Ok Marc, she may have different views from a  some of us, but there is no doubt she has a ton of experience. But after recent contact with her, and reading her bio, I have decided to withdraw my vote on the matter. Cheers, Dave (talk) 05:50, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

Hi Dave

I think perhaps your point about different views is especially important when we consider the position applied for. Being able to appreciate different points of view is crucial for anyone given the powers discussed. While other HP wikia leaders are ready to discuss options reasonably, you certainly won't find them complaining about members in their Bios.

You're absolutely right- we do have different views. The ability to respect those views and act appropriately afterwards is key.

NB- Thanks Ironyak1 for cleaning up my mess. My apologies for my dodgy phone edits 😆

The Dark Marc ^(talk)
 

Hi there, The Dark Marc (unsure what to call you, or is it just Marc?), I hope it's alright to add the "against" in front of your comment, so it won't look like you are responding to Ironyak1's vote. That aside; I'm curious with what people are seeing on the right hand side of the top part of my user page, what's next to "# EDITS SINCE JOINING THIS WIKI / # DISCUSSION POSTS" on my profile: because I do not have a bio there? I know some users do, and they even have the option to "[show more]", but all I'm able to fill out are the following:

• What's your name?
• Where do you live?
• When is your birthday?
• What's your occupation?
• What gender are you?

For the longest time, I answered the last question with simply my actual gender, but later found the perks of using it like a place to post status updates, so I did just that, and so far only did it once, which is the one on display. Unfortunately, or quite the opposite depending on how you view it, there's a word count limit to the answer. I am actually sick of a lot of things; had I started using the parameter to rant earlier, it'd probably be "I'm sick of seeing low quality images". While neither is pleasant, those are my feelings, and I'm not aware that it was inappropriate to express them.

Note that, the problematic statement is visible on all wikis I've ever edited on, which at the moment is at 73; it is "the act" I am sick of, and there's no personal attack, since I do see this happening on a lot of wikis. I'm pretty sure I'm allowed to dump my exasperation, as long as it doesn't contain too fowl of a language use, which it doesn't.

I'm responding to you, not because I take issue with your way of thinking, but because I feel the need to point out, the statement you have doubts about, is not in my bio, and you have now made this false statement twice; I'd like you to actually go read my bio, before spreading false info and mislead other people. My bio is honestly very long and I'd be surprised anyone would actually read it let alone finish it. I can understand the statement in question being registered as unpleasant and potentially putting people off from reading my actual bio to get to know more about me, which I don't hold against and can live with.

That being said, perhaps this is where I'm immature because I don't really understand what "my feelings" has anything to do with why I applied for this particular User Right, or how it's going to affect my hypothetical performance of carrying out actions should the User Right be granted. I don't see how the fact I'm sick of a lot things (and can't get enough of just as much a lot of things; but yes, there's that word count limit,) is going to hinder me from deleting duplicated images, which was, after all, basically the only reason I'm requesting the User Right.

I am not here to be the nicest person, but I don't believe I'm being uncivilized; you are of course free to judge me to be "not mature enough" base on one sentence that happened to be my honest opinion, when there's more than 20 sections and subsections on my bio, containing various bulletpoints and paragraphs should anyone is actually interested in getting to know me. I suppose first impression really mattered and I've utterly failed. =P No hurt feelings, but would like this nonsense about "I wrote this in my bio" to stop. Yes, I wrote it, no, it is not in my bio.

P.S.: In case a miracle happens and someone actually does finish reading my entire User page, I'm still not claiming to be a likable person lmao. Though last I checked, being likable is not a criteria for deleting duplicated images, which I emphasize, is all I set out to do. I never want to be some "leader", so I hope "my questionable character" won't be brought to focus again to be used as a reason that "I'm not suitable". Have not applied be a leader, and don't want to be a leader, hence, I'm really seeing the comparison as irrelevant.

-Sammm✦✧(talk) 16:25, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

@Marc I agree. We all do have point of views (about people, grammar, etc). I may have a different opinion about, let's say, Seth Cooper then a person who was blocked by him. I personally think Seth is a terrific person (hard to not after everything he's done for me 😆), but the user may think they're block was unfair, or uneeded, therefore disliking Seth. I hope to see other applicants on here in the future.

Cheers, Dave (talk) 18:12, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

Good answer, Sammm鯊, very good answer!  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 18:11, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

This isn't a vote against, I'd just like to ask how it matters if the section you wrote your statement is called "bio" or not, it has absolutely no correlation with the conversation. Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 09:32, November 13, 2018 (UTC)

In the phone app the area the comment I referred to is called the 'Bio'. Your answer completely misses the point and yet illustrates mine perfectly. You're not just dealing with edits from inexperienced editors. You're dealing with people. As soon as that tag of 'Moderator'is attached to your name you take on a social position of power which many will take as representing the leadership of the wikia. Like it or not you need some social skill to deal with new editors or you're damaging the wikia and driving away nww editors. I don't believe you're ready, and your response only makes this more clear.

The Dark Marc ^(talk)

I'm definitely strongly irritated now.  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 23:27, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

Your inability to accept alternate points of view or willingness to discuss them with any detail doesn't mean my opinion is any less valid

The Dark Marc ^(talk)

Marc's opinion makes sense. A content moderator isn't user rights that have tools for the benefit of the user, rather the benefit of the Community. While she may be a very experienced user, she needs to have some social experience to help new users.

Dave (talk) 23:38, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

@The Dark Marc: Do you mean me with inability or Sammm鯊? It's not clear for me to whom your words are addressed.  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 23:47, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Not granted; SuperSajuuk has been banned from editing. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 11:02, February 23, 2016 (UTC)

Hi there. I know I have only been here for an extremely short time and probably don't have a strong enough "trust" relationship with the community here, but I've noticed that there are no active bot accounts on this wiki. The last time a bot account was used was in 2013, which is quite some time ago, with a few other bot accounts long before that. I'm not sure whether these accounts are used by active members or sysops of the community though.

I'd like to propose that my bot, SajuukBot, be granted a bot flag on this wiki. I've used this bot on a couple of wiki's where I've been a bureaucrat and have a knowledge of how to use AutoWikiBrowser. Note that my abilities of the bot are limited, but it can be used for certain tedious tasks.

Please use this section to discuss whether SajuukBot should be granted a bot flag for this wiki. Note that only Wikia Staff would be able to grant a bot flag so any consensus here should be emailed to Wikia at the contact form for them to perform the rights change. Thanks! --Sajuuk 16:32, February 29, 2016 (UTC)

This appears to be going un-noticed. I'll give this an extra week, but if nothing happens, this will just have to be abandoned. --Sajuuk 09:39, March 6, 2016 (UTC)

Bumping this up after a whole month. This might be a better discussion to bring to the "threaded forums" where people are more likely to notice. --Sajuuk 09:44, April 3, 2016 (UTC)

I vote for User talk:BachLynn2316:58, April 30, 2016 (UTC)

Not done --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 21:12, August 12, 2016 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Ironyak1-bot's bot flag has been approved by the community. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 21:21, August 12, 2016 (UTC)

I think it's time to make a request for User:Ironyak1-bot to be granted a bot flag. The bot is written in python and uses [Pywikibot]. As you can see from my recent edits, I have been by cutting and pasting pages to work out the changes this bot will do, so it's been pretty well tested already. Adding a bot flag will allow these changes to be done quicker, on a wider set of pages, and without flooding the list of RecentChanges. The immediate tasks for the bot would be:

• Fix links to Pottermore that were broken by the re-design there
• Correct spelling to British English as needed
• Unpipe singular dates (such as 1926 as the redirect pages handle the single years and allow for decade pages to be broken down as needed in the future)
• Switch common sources and book references to short code templates (for consistent format and display) eg (Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone ch. 1 becomes Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, Chapter 1 (The Boy Who Lived))

Possible future tasks:

• Remove old templates (eg Template:Pottermoreold)
• Update Category names and the related pages (Like Category:Images of Mrs. Granger)
• Other wide-spread or tedious changes needed as determined by the community here

In addition, it is probably best if my main account is granted Rollback rights to quickly correct any hiccups should the bot run into trouble as I will still be reviewing changes to make sure things went as expected. Please discuss and let me know if there are questions or concerns. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 20:35, July 28, 2016 (UTC)

I like this idea.--Rodolphus (talk) 17:11, July 29, 2016 (UTC)

I think that's a good idea!  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 18:18, July 29, 2016 (UTC)

I like this idea too! --Kates39 (talk) 18:29, July 29, 2016 (UTC)

You've been a good contributor to the Wiki over the past few months, and I think you deserve this. I vote for.   ArrestoMomentum | talk 

Also for, and I'd like to suggest adding fixing redundant pipes to the list of tasks (e.g., for example, [[Muggle|Muggles]] to [[Muggle]]s). --Cubs Fan (Talk to me) 03:48, July 30, 2016 (UTC)

Maybe it could also be used to perform the task suggested for another noot before? Put short links in appearances? Just a suggestion.--Rodolphus (talk) 09:11, July 30, 2016 (UTC)

Haven't been much involved in this lately, but I'm here by request. and since I can see no objection, I support this idea. I think this would be helpful and good. ProfessorTofty (talk) 17:56, July 31, 2016 (UTC)

Ironyak1 has consistently made constructive contributions, shown good judgment, and embodied the community spirit of a wiki (i.e., helping and cooperating with other users) during the past few months. I don't have any reservations about the granting of bot rights in this case. ★ Starstuff ^{(Owl me!)} 10:58, August 1, 2016 (UTC)

I have been watching him and his contributions over the last little while, and I can say that he definitely has good experience with editing. Being an active member of the wiki with no obvious downsides, I see no reason why I shouldn't give his bot my support. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 11:02, August 1, 2016 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone for the support on this! Based on discussions with others, I've included some code to removed redundant pipes (eg [[Dragon|dragons]] becomes [[dragon]]s) and remove full stops/periods from image captions (along with making short links in appearances & refs). Let me know if there are other ideas for common clean-up or formatting tasks that would be useful to assign to this bot (or house-elf if you prefer ;) Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 19:12, August 5, 2016 (UTC)

I just got an idea. Could the bot be used to calculate death ages in the infoboxes? Perhaps even fl. dates? Though I assume the latter is difficult or impossible, because often dates unrelated to their lifetime are mentioned within articles.--Rodolphus (talk) 17:38, August 7, 2016 (UTC)

This could be tricky but I could see it working one of two ways

• From the born and died dates in the infobox, calculate the age at death and add it if missing (pretty easy)
• If born, died, or both dates are missing from infobox, find the earliest date and the latest date on the article and use that for a flourished range if it is not present (more difficult)

As you noted, other dates in the article may confound this process so it would probably need to be done as a separate set of edits that are reviewed closely for accuracy. --Ironyak1 (talk) 17:54, August 7, 2016 (UTC)

Could the bot also be used to add a place of birth to articles if it fulfills the requirements? If the article is Sorted into Hogwarts students and its subcategories, the place of birth is "Great Britain or Ireland." --Rodolphus (talk) 18:25, August 7, 2016 (UTC)

In thinking through this, yes, the birth place could be added for those individuals without it in the infobox but in the Sorted into Hogwarts category. --Ironyak1 (talk) 21:03, August 9, 2016 (UTC)

Then I assume the same can also be used for other wizarding schools. At frst, I thought we could also use it for nationalities, but on second thought, this logic doesn't apply. There are people with multiple nationalities (Tina and Fleur) so I thnk it can only be used for the Wizarding schools range.--Rodolphus (talk) 21:08, August 9, 2016 (UTC)

From the technology side it could be done, but do we know the range for the other schools? For Beauxbatons, they have students from all over Europe and Draco could have attended Durmstrang so I'm not sure what region of birth could be assumed by a student's attendance at a particular wizarding school. Also for the other schools, here are so few known students that it's probably easier to just check them by hand. --Ironyak1 (talk) 22:46, August 9, 2016 (UTC)

I'm also for. I see there's overwhelming support (I count 9 for, 0 against), and I shall contact the Community Team at once. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 21:21, August 12, 2016 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Harrypotterexpert101 not granted admin rights. -- Ironyak1 (talk) 11:50, November 16, 2018 (UTC)

Hi guys, I am Harrypotterexpert101, and I am requesting to become an administrator for various reasons. One is, our of the 20 administrators, only 3 are considered active, a few are semi-active, and the rest are listed as inactive. So that leaves 3 administrators to do a ton of work while some of the admins haven't been on in 10 years! I believe I am the best for the job because:

1. I have administrative experience.

2. I know when to hand out blocks and bans, and know not to abuse them.

3. I am familiar with administrative tools and technology, and therefore there will be less accidents if you chose me rather then another person.

4. I am familiar with the editing tools and guidelines, and know how to catch vandalism and how to deal with it.

5. I am familiar with dealing with wiki problems, in the discussions or in the editing part of the wiki.

I hope you will take me into considerstion, and thank you for reading this. Cheers, Dave (talk) 02:37, November 8, 2018 (UTC)

Comments

For You have my vote! Harrypotterexpert101 already's been tasked the responsibility of having to manage the Phoenix Files Wiki - are we really sure he needs (and deserves) this too? --Magnus

Sorry, but you need an admin to hold a vote, but before then you'll want to get User:Seth Cooper and User:Starstuff to weigh in on this as they are the active bureaucrats. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 16:57, October 4, 2018 (UTC)

FYI Seth Cooper also gave me permission to come here and post. It is in my talk page. Here:https://harrypotter.wikia.com/User:Harrypotterexpert101 --Dave 22:55, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

Too much time has elapsed without any significant response, so I'm closing this nomination. Cheers. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 18:40, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

On second analysis, per user's request, I'm reopening this nomination request. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 19:32, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

As per the wiki policies I don't have enough edits to take part in this voting but as a user I can make an opinion and make my voice heard by simply commenting. User harrypotterexpert101 also know as Dave is not the kind of admin that this wiki wants. He has recently adopted 2 wikis ( wiki 1 as of September 1, 2018) and ( wiki 2 as of October 23, 2018). As the wiki admin Seth Cooper says that admins are nothing more than janitors, he is right. Any user with rights is nothing more than a janitor. Even I am familiar with admin tools and bans doesn't mean I am born admin of HPW. Adminhood is something that is attained with trust and with proofs that decisions made by the to-be-admin will be unbiased and always in the best interest of the wiki. Other than this Dave has been falsely trying to win the votes by persuading his friend users to vote for him by messaging them on their talk pages and making posts on the discussion board. Moreover he is also using his recently adopted wiki "the Phoenix files wiki" as a zone to communicate with users to win votes ( link ). This is definitely not how I want to have an admin elected on this wiki. I am not saying that he cannot be an admin. At the end he has the best interest of the wiki at heart, but he isn't ready to take up the responsibility yet User:Reverb frost (talk)

Hello Reverb,

I am not persuading people to vote for me. I am simply asking if they support the idea of a new admin, and asking if they would like to vote of not. A user that voted for CosmicChronos offered to help me by offering me some advice. I contacted him in the first place to ask him if he thought I should be an admin, and to ask him what I needed to work on. He then approached me via the Phoenix Files Wiki to respond to the message (his phone was making it harder for him to do it via talk page). And me messaging people.

You can look throughout this pages history, and find multiple people clearly saying that they were there by the users request, and guess what? The vote went through! And when I messaged the people, I went for people who actually know the wiki and would like to have a day in the changes. As for my adoptions, please do not refer to them as a railroad to win votes. I spend hours everyday maintaining those wiki's, it's the dream job I always wanted. But I will gladly make time to be an administrator here at the Harry Potter Wiki. Dave (talk) 15:25, November 13, 2018 (UTC)

For. Dave shows the maturity, tenacity, experience and desire to make a great addition to the HP Wikia as an Admin. With the release of COG only hours away and having reviewed the increased traffic to the wikia during the last movie release, right now seems likes exactly the right time for this to happen.

The Dark Marc ^(talk) The Dark Marc 22:19, November 13, 2018 (UTC)

If I was already against the nomination due to the Harrypotterexpert101's manifest inexperience (has only been around for a couple of months, a total of 63 article edits in this wiki at present and even globally just over 300; not a very firm grasp of admin tools; the administrative experience cited is, as already pointed out, virtually non-existant at best), Reverb frost's pointer just seems to reinforce my opposition.

Canvassing is discouraged, especially when done off-wiki and in a stealth manner in what is essentially a mixture of campaigning and votestacking (would you think it fair if I started asking people around to vote against this nomination? You see how this is nothing short of gaming the system). It reflects very poorly on all those involved. The tone of that discussion was also particularly partisan and, at one point, personally offensive to me -- but I'll leave it at that.

If the Admins "are highly resistant to the idea of the Discussion area having its own Admin" then perhaps it's due to the lack of a suitable candidate, or specific want. This crusade for pushing an admin specifically for Discussions (there is no such thing; that's what Discussions Mods are for and their tools on Discussions are virtually the same as those of Admins) is without good reason, as I have already pointed out elsewhere. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 02:43, November 14, 2018 (UTC)

Hey Seth,

Thanks for your thoughts.

Just clearing up a few things regards the discussion off site.

The issue of being resistant to a discussions Admin is for the exact reasons you've mentioned. I was asked about what HPexpert should do to improve his chances of a successful application. My point was that I had no angle (including the Discussion Admin angle) that I thought was valid enough, and was making it clear I thought that was a poor platform to base his application on- as mentioned- I have NO angle which I believe effective for an Admin application.

"If your angle works, and current editors and Admins support you, I think you're the most qualified to do what has to be done to build the wikia in the best way

I also made my intent very clear - "As far as support- I am, and always have been, interested in building the discussions area by any means. I'm also keen to bridge the Editor/Discussions gap."

If a misunderstanding has produced results counter to that intent, then it is indeed a shame, and I'm sorry you felt any personal offence. There was none intended. I do regret using the term stanglehold. That was innapropriate. As a token of good will, I'd be willing to drop my 'Against' vote in Sammms application for Content Moderator.

As per Reverbs comments- it's very well known that he enjoys stirring trouble where I am personally involved and has been advised by BertH to avoid interactions in areas where we might clash. Reverb has made it clear on several occassions that he wishes to ignore that advice, and continues to cause trouble for me where possible. His toxic perspective, particularly on being overcommitted elsewhere are particularly hypocritical considering his own commitments elsewhere.

HPexperts explanation was accurate as to why the discussion occured where it did.

If you think I was 'gaming the system, I'd gladly wear a ban of any length you think appropriate.

My intention is- and always has been- to build the wikia --The Dark Marc ^(talk)

Hello again,

What Marc has said is accurate. My only focus here is to build a bridge separating the editing part and discussions part of the wikia. I also believe building the discussions into a more productive environment is something most people want. I am not trying to "game the system". My only intentions are to make this wiki a better place. As for Seth taking personal offense, I am sorry to hear that. Seth, you are a great bureaucrat, and I respect you. I never ment to insult you or cause you to feel upset. 

And I agree with Marc, if you think we deserve a ban, well then send me to Azkaban.

I'm sorry you feel that way, Seth, but I really ment no harm. If there is something else you would like to message me about, please feel free to.

Cheers, Dave (talk) 04:58, November 14, 2018 (UTC)

@TheDarkMarc aren't you giving yourself a little too much importance than what you deserve? Not everything I do or say is about you. As for what conversation happened between me and FANDOM staff BertH is none of your business and I am not at the liberty to quote him but he never said anything like that for sure. If I loosely translate his words without quoting him it would be like this "try to avoid interaction with marc. that is the only advice." I am not going to stop contributing to wikis just because there is a user who disagrees with me. especially on ones where I have been for more than 3 years and I call it as my home wiki. There are admins with worst issues than us and they administer wikis like community central. Stop using this voting platform and other discussion boards to spread negative words about me. I haven't even met Dave yet and he already hates me along with a few other users because you have been spreading toxic about me. And playing the victim card and gaining sympathy? really? "I'd gladly wear a ban of any length you think appropriate." You very well know that the admins aren't going to do that. I and FANDOM staff have time and again informed you to take my presence on any wiki as good faith , the idea on which FANDOM is based and time and again you have ignored that and made me look the worst person ever. Just remember you cannot clap with a single hand. I should be the one accusing you of making wiki environments toxic for me not the other way around. And if you really want a heated argument with me then be a man and leave a message on my talk page instead of attacking me passively and spoiling my image on various wiki platforms. You talk about wiki's good faith at heart and yet time and again you have abused FANDOM staff and HPW admins called them morons and accused the system of being flawed and corrupt and what not. I have screenshots. It is the big hearted nature of these people that they ignore those things. And as for Dave being an admin, I think him to have really great potential just not enough experience. Even though he hates me, but I am giving an unbiased opinion. User:Reverb frost (talk)

Thst's ridiculous on so many levels. I'd like to see these supposed screen shots. I've never abused anyone or called anyone a Moron. Keep spreading your poison- i love sending screenshots to FANDOM. TDM. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The Dark Marc (talk • contribs).

@TheDarkMarc I can only interpret your "token of good will" as a lack of seriousness when casting your vote. You're either for or against Sammm鯊's nomination, that's neither here nor there, and you're not doing me any favours by voting either way.

That said, I urge everyone to stay on-topic. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 23:04, November 14, 2018 (UTC)

For: Ethan wanted me to put his vote here, so here it is. If you do not believe me, check the Phoenix Files Wiki OT Post. Dave (talk) 06:10, November 15, 2018 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TheBoyWhoDied (talk • contribs).

You can't post comments or votes on someone else's behalf, nor use the {{unsigned}} template to sign for them. --Ironyak1 (talk) 06:20, November 15, 2018 (UTC)

Oppose: Administrative experience on another wiki is great, but when applying for rights on any wiki the responsibility should be earned on the wiki in question, and that’s simply not the case here. Not to mention the cloak and dagger nonsense on the Phoenix Files Wiki... a poor indication of character. - 08:31, November 15, 2018 (UTC)

@Xanderan the cloak and dagger? If you read through all of my responses, you would know why the Phoenix Files Wiki was even brought up. The Dark Marc's phone has trouble responding on people's talk pages, so he approached me on a wiki I am an admin for. We have been talking there since. There was nothing secretive about what we did, for I sent links to multiple users on their talk pages, so anyone who knew how could find it. A poor indication of character, we're starting that. I am not claiming to be the nicest person in the world, and know how to solve everyone's problems, but I am trying to bridge the editor-discussions gap on this wiki. I have both edited and discussed with people, something none of the active admins have experience with. Between two of them, they have 4 discussion posts, compared to my 1200! I am not trying to convince you to change your vote, but I am giving you the facts. Dave (talk) 15:23, November 15, 2018 (UTC)

Regardless of whether the forum is public or private - you’ve been trying to manipulate the course of the vote and force the wiki to take you on as an admin, which is unacceptable. Your intentions may be good... but seem more like thinly veiled justification because you personally want a promotion and are just dressing it up as being... well, “For the Greater Good”. What’s your plan for “bridging the editor/commenter divide anyway? Why is this something you need admin rights to accomplish? The other admins may have few discussion posts but you have few article edits... why are you the right person to do this? At the end of the day a promotion to admin is a responsibility that has to be earned through consistent hard work and you haven’t done that. It’s that simple really. - 16:07, November 15, 2018 (UTC)

Against Sorry, but I had to get involved in this. Your admin experience, as previously stated by Seth Cooper, is virtually non-existent. You citing your experience is actually quite amusing because of that. Not only are the wikis tiny; the Phoenix files has 8 users that edited in 2018 and the Westing Game has 5 who edited in 2018, but you've only been an Admin for a few months and already seem to demonstrate corruption: As seen here. An award named after The Dark Marc "for his spectacular help and advice." He has zero edits or Discussion Posts there. That is a possible bribe in my opinion and calls the listed user and your own integrity into question.

You know when to hand out block and know how to not abuse them? What about this person? Zero contributions, but was banned for inserting false information. No corresponding deletion of a page or revert on the same day. A spite block due to disdain for his actions on another wiki? As for number three, see my previous comments in this post and imagine laughter.

You know how to catch vandalism and how to deal with it? Like this? Specifically the Amandahorses user. You couldn't decide on a proper punishment and went from fives years, to a hundred years, down to one year, and even seemingly threatened her.

As for line five.... Does that include associating with someone who invades users privacy? As seen here. Oh look, the user also confessed to previously hacking; a crime.

In summary, several questionable acts in your recent past, that, while on other wikis also bring your character and judgement into question. Threatening users? Users can CTRL+F the word Patient to see the comment. I wouldn't trust you ANY position of power, especially not as an Admin. Zane T 69 (talk) 17:48, November 15, 2018 (UTC)

The Amandahorses user was a sock puppet account used to get on the wiki. After careful research, I found the CameronRavenclaw account was the same person as the Amandahorses account. And the person you refer to as invading user privacy was doing his job. He is a Content Mod on my wiki, and a Discussions Moderator here. He was looking into the Amandahorses account and it's similarities with the CameronRavenclaw account (as the Dark Marc did). As for him hacking, I was not aware of him actually hacking, and was surprised when he told me in the first place. And I am afraid, my friend, you cannot tell me how to run my wiki's. And threatening users? The users were trying to get past the IP block. I was getting a good bit of auto blocks, and was tired of it, so I told her to leave. As seen, I told (her?) that she was upsetting me and told her to leave.  And the Dark Marc deserved that award, he may not have had edits, but it said "advice", not contribution. And changing the Amandahorses block, I decided that it was a little harsh, so I changed it up. 

I except your decision, but what you are saying about me is ridiculous. It is a little offensive, and this request seems to be causing a problem (the last thing I want), so I would like an admin to close this.  Dave (talk) 01:20, November 16, 2018 (UTC)

Except for the fact that you had no real proof other than hearsay. The burden of proof is on you along with the integrity of your wikis. In my years of experience her claims of innocence were genuine, as were her arguments while trying to convince you. You are right that I can't tell you how to run your wiki, but I advise you to actually learn how to manage a wiki in the little leagues before wanting to play with the big boys here and destroy the wikis image. All it takes is one admin to ruin a wiki It said help and advice, and that award brings his judgement into account.

You cited experience, which you severely lack, and judgement, which is highly questionable. You tried winning support by citing qualities that you either completely lack or have too little of to be viable. I feel that you are too immature for adminship, but merely need a few years to grow before seriously being considered. If you want advice, hit me up on my talk page. I was nominated as a Bureaucrat on my home wiki and unanimously supported, which consisted of ten people. I think I can help you create some consistency on your wiki through advice. Zane T 69 (talk) 01:57, November 16, 2018 (UTC)

I vote For.  TheBoyWhoDied   Talk   Contribs 06:41, November 16, 2018 (UTC)

Per Harrypotterexpert101's request, I am closing this discussion. The tally appears to be 3 users for and 3 against so there isn't a clear majority per Voting Policy.

Given much of the recent commentary, I would like to gather ideas on how to work together to improve Discussions. Please feel free to leave a message on my Talk Page or reply to my Discussions post. Many thanks --Ironyak1 (talk) 11:50, November 16, 2018 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

CosmicChronos not granted admin rights. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 18:38, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

The Discussions need an admin. Why? Several reasons: Interaction between users and moderators will feel more real, more engaging and more exciting for the users, they're talking to an admin! One of those people who run the actual wiki! We (the mod team) seriously believe that having an admin managing the discussions would increase dedication to the wiki. Secondly, administrators have that yellow icon in the top left corner of their pfps, users will immediately notice that difference, once again making them think they're talking to someone that is important, that is more than a simple user/moderator. On another note, administrators have the ability to change categories, hide posts, give d/mod perms to users, etc. This will greatly facilitate the administration of the discussions, and remove some burdens from the current admins. Finally, I want to make it clear that I don't enjoy the way that the discussions are run, I believe that administrators should be more involved in the discussions than just seven posts between all of them. Seven! Between twenty admin (albeit some of them became inactive before the introduction of discussions). I believe that having an admin on our team (d/mods) would allow us to more closely connect and find ways together with the other admins to increase the quality, and rate of such quality posts on the discussions, AKA, the involvement of the editorial fanbase of this wiki onto the discussions (we already have some ideas on how we could work that out, in a way that wouldn't bother editors). These reasons and possible future projects and interactions with the wiki as a whole is why I propose that I be made an administrator of this wiki. Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 15:51, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

(I have been authorized by User:Seth Cooper to make this request)

I agree CosmicChronos, the Mod team needs an admin, and I think you should get admin powers. --Dave 22:59, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

Hi CosmicChronos - I really have nothing against there being an admin focused on discussions. While I periodically review the posts there, I rarely interact as most of the discussion seems unaware they are on a wiki that would answer their question with a simple search or are having personal favorite type talks (which is fine, but unrelated to the wiki as well). As Fandom has setup discussions as an almost completely separate product it would be nice to add a separate admin permissions system as well, but without such an option, granting full admin permissions seems to be the only way forward to help you improve that area. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 16:03, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

Hello Cosmic chronos and respected Admins.

I would disagree on this request mainly because of the basis of request. First of, it is not admin's job to moderate d/b, It is Dmods job to do so. And Dmods here have special block user permission as well as granted to them by Staff Bert hall upon agreememt with admin Seth Copper. So everything that a mod could possibly need is with him. Moderator says that having the admin cloud(which appears on d/b) will make him look like an important person. which is not the purpose of an admin title. It would in a technical way be violation if admin rights.(to use it solely for the purpose of its powers). Moreover admin rights mean something and there are other users who have righteously earned that title, to truly be an admin.  Whereas moderator on the other hand has d/b on his priority and nothing else. A d/b centric admin is not what this discussion board truly needs. If we do a proper break down of what other rights will the moderator get if this promotion takes place then we will find nothing that will be truly helpful for d/b. The only additional powers that he will get will be that of a content moderator.Currently the mods don't report the on going activity to the admins. Admin activity doesn't mean that the admin has to be active on daily basis. It mean that the admin should be kept informed about the changes that take place on his d/b so that the admin can stay in touch with it. User:Reverb frost (talk)

I was not aware that a special Block User permission was added to Discussion Moderators. Can someone (Seth?) confirm what additional permissions an admin has within Discussions that is not in Discussion Moderator with Block User rights? Wikia User Access Levels does not make this clear IMHO. Thanks --Ironyak1 (talk) 03:50, October 24, 2018 (UTC)

I agree for Cosmic to become an admin as the d board really needs it. @Ironyak, admins can delete/create/edit categories. I am pretty sure that’s the only difference.  TheBoyWhoDied   Talk   Contribs 05:32, October 28, 2018 (UTC)

Just checking how the voting operates. I note various comments in regards to being for or against, but wanted to verify the procedure. If comment here is all that's required, I'd vote 'For' the appointment. The Dark Marc (talk)

I agree with whatever user Reverb Frost has said. I, having spent a whole lot of time on discussions feel the same way. When I was a new user, I had the equal delight to interact with the moderators which I would have with an admin. So, having a star badge or a bubble badge doesn't actually make any difference. Discussions can be improved with a mod tag too. But yes, a badge is necessary to make changes.

But what the discussion will actually benefit from this change is that there will be a connecting link between discussion and the main wiki. There certainly always exists a troublesome user who literally enjoys trolling the discussion board or there are always expectations for such a user to arrive occassionally so if the user ever tries to extend his domain to main wiki mainly for the fun purpose and INTENSIONALLY then there might be a person to track the user and stop him from doing further harm by giving him an explicit warning. And that will be our discussion admin.

I had certain misunderstandings regards Cosmic Chronos but they are clear now and so I vote for him to become an admin.

It was related to discussion board so I came here to participate in the voting. If I'm not allowed to do this pls ignore my vote.

Newt Strike (talk) 12:46, October 30, 2018 (UTC)

While busy with Halloween, I've been thinking about this request quite a bit. As I noted before, I was unaware that Staff had implemented a custom Ban User permission for Discussion Mods. As such, it appears the only remaining permissions that an admin would have within Discussions is deletion/creation of Categories, a simple and rarely performed task and it would seem an insufficient need to prompt a change in permissions.

The main point raised is that "Interaction between users and moderators will feel more real, more engaging and more exciting for the users, they're talking to an admin!" As Seth likes to note, we all are really just janitors trying to keep things here cleaned up, and admins just have extra messes to attend to. The status of an admin is not one of importance used to influence or sway users - it just grants extra rights and responsibilities to handle more problems. Good ideas need to sell themselves, regardless of the user offering them.

As Discussion Mods already have the ability to ban disruptive users, it seems they already have the tools needed to keep things in check in that domain. The extra permissions granted on the wiki side, such as Content Moderation or tasks such as Voting Administration, requires more time and experience with the wiki than CosmicChronos has, as demonstrated by some of their recent actions such as deleting a comment from this very thread. In short, to me, Discussion Mods appear to have all the administrative tools necessary to manage that area, and CosmicChronos needs far more wiki experience to be acting as an administrator in that domain. As such, I will not be opening a vote on this request - however other administrators or bureaucrats may wish to do so. Sorry if that seems critical or unfair, but it is the conclusion I reached. Thanks --Ironyak1 (talk) 17:01, November 1, 2018 (UTC)

Have you even seen the message I sent on your talk page? Explaining my mistake, why I did it, why I was wrong in doing so. If not, please read it. Anyways, Seth may think that we are solely "janitors" cleaning this place up, but really? Does that seem engaging, fun, interesting to do? Persist with the status quo? I wouldn't think so. My co-mods and I want to make the Discussions into something interesting, something that people can genuinely engage in, that attracts both new people, and veterans from the ranks of editors. We want to make it a place where people can discuss, in a civilized, as well as mature matter. (Now this is only a thought) Perhaps it could even replace the Wizengamot? Frankly, us mods are sick of the admins' complete neglect of us. Seven posts out of 20 admins! You guys, you can see how low the quality bar for the discussions is within a post, and immediately give up! You cant even be bothered with maintaining conversations about moderation with us! I don't understand why you see it the way you do, but I'll respect your decision, whilst I may disagree with it. P.S. Admins can also (as I pointed out)give d/mod perms to users, as well as hiding posts. Cheers CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 19:31, November 1, 2018 (UTC)

I did see your message, which highlights the fact that you appear to be unaware of comment policies forbidding the removal of other people's comments (such as Harry Potter Wiki:Talk Page Policy), just as your creation of "Muggle at Circus" demonstrates your unfamiliarity with the Harry Potter Wiki:Layout guide (missing Appearances section, wrongly named sections, title not distinct, not using Reflist, etc). While these are not critical issues, these are common knowledge for most contributors and should be for anyone wishing to be an Administrator and help uphold these policies.

You keep saying that more attention is needed from administrators in Discussions - exactly what do see as needing to be done, that Discussions Mods such as yourself are not able to do? Thanks --Ironyak1 (talk) 20:06, November 1, 2018 (UTC)

Your concerns, as well as issues with my editing are well founded. However if I may just point out, the reason that I published the page incomplete was because I had gotten distracted with how Dave Simon would link to it and temporarily forgot about it. So then I published the page without rereading it to be sure my edits were complete. Which of course I should have, apologies. As for not using {{Reflist}}, I think that concern is no longer valid. User:Sammm鯊 contacted me because of my edits, a problem which I fully acknowledged, and told me to reread the Editing Policies, since them, I'm fairly certain I have used Reflist, instead of /references. As for the comment, here I'll have to defend myself. As I have told you, I should not have acted the police, that should've been you guys' job. However, on the Talk Page Policy, there is no mention about comments made on Perm Requests, and whilst this may seem like a petty try at "loop holing" the rules, I must raise this concern, so as to revise the Policies, to make this mistake doesn't happen again. As I said, I understand my mistakes, and work to improve myself, I'm a human, I make mistakes, perhaps more than most editors, due to my attachment to the discussions, and so less experience with editing, but Imho the mistakes I made have been explained well, and if you still doubt my intentions with the deletion of the comment, then you can of course tell me so, and I'll try and alleviate any of your concern. P.S. I'm sorry if my rambling may seem a bit everywhere, this often happens when I start writing long texts :/

As for your question about Admin attention in the discussions: As I have said, repeatedly, Administrators invoke a sort of respect, or awe, now this is definitely not my goal, but it rather is to connect the editors with the discussions. This may seem foolish, but I believe that it would allow this community to grow, it would also attract more users to the actual wiki, which most of the users on the discussions are unaware of. That's why I believe Admins are needed. They can actually do something, they can change things, try and engage people, to build a community! Outside of the discussions, who in the world cares about me? I'm insignificant, I can't alter the way editors think. I understand editors' concerns about the discussions, however little they speak of them, because I feel the same concerns, so the mod team and I are trying to fix the situation, we're trying to connect these two completely separate worlds, to do that, an admin would be a huge help. I wouldn't be asking for Admin rights if one of the already established admins would actually care about the discussions, but that clearly isn't the case.

Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 20:54, November 1, 2018 (UTC)

P.P.S. Mods only have the ability to block single accounts. Some time ago we spent almost four hours banning a vandal account (see 7 July@Block list) because we didn't have the ability to range ban. We also have no way to check IPs which makes it unnecessarily difficult for us to spot Sockpuppets. Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 22:57, November 1, 2018 (UTC)

Going in reverse order - Administrators do not have CheckUser rights either, and as you have to be logged in to edit here, I've never had the information needed to range block a series of IPs. The situation you dealt with is a case where contacting Staff is the best option for any user.

This repeated belief in using Administrator status to influence people is again misguided and, as mentioned, a possible violation of the permission itself. If you have ideas on how to better connect editors with Discussions then share them. Administrators simply hold up wiki norms and policies in a fair and neutral manner. They do not use their status to tell others how they should spend their time on the wiki. IMHO Wikia/Fandom has not done the work needed to integrate the Wiki with Discussions so I believe you have an uphill battle but one worth fighting.

As for edits and commenting, again, it is clear you have little experience in these arenas, areas for which an admin would is responsible. While you have gone back and partially corrected the page, an admin should be comfortable and consistent in their edits, something which is gained with experience. If you have an interest in being an admin and handling all the tasks that come with it, then keep at improving your editing and understanding of the policies.

Unfortunately, throughout all this you've constantly berated the lack of admin involvement with Discussions but not offered a single concrete example of what you would like to see done. IMHO this sort of empty criticism without any specifics does little to improve the situation. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 23:33, November 3, 2018 (UTC)

I personally believe that an admin for the Discussion Board is a great idea. Yes, the only extra permission for that area is making and deleting categories, but I don't see any active admins on the Discussion Board ever! I mean, Seth comes in sometimes, but he only really does it because the Mod team asks him to. An active admin at the Discussion Board would be golden, we don't always want to wait for a Mod to contact an admin or bureaucrat to fix a problem that is needed to be fixed quickly. Unless Seth or Ironyak become active on the Discussion Board, I see a purpose of CosmicChronos becoming an administrator. 

--Harrypotterexpert101 (talk) 01:00, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

┌─────────┘

"but I don't see any active admins on the Discussion Board ever!", you don't see any because they are not required to be active there, it is NOT an admin's job to be active on Discussion Board, it cannot be used as an argument because it is irrelevant. It is a fact, but an unrelated fact.

"An active admin at the Discussion Board would be golden", so what? Seriously, does this superficial comment sound like a legit reason? Because it sure doesn't imo.

"we don't always want to wait for a Mod to contact an admin or bureaucrat to fix a problem that is needed to be fixed quickly.", what problem is this? Please share. If it's a problem only an admin or b-crat can fix, pray tell, why are you contacting a Mod for them to relay the problem? That's on whoever that's reporting to the Mod; they basically are contacting the wrong person to begin with. No idea how to make it clearer: If you have a problem only admins/b-crats can fix, then you contact admins/b-crats directly; don't misdirect the issue and claim it to be a problem due to lack of admins when it is not; it will only be one if you contacted the wrong person. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 02:04, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

I never said that there was a problem, but if there was one, how would we know when the next admin or bureaucrat would be active? A lot can happen in 6 hours that one is gone. And let's be honest: how many of us pay attention to the little message "you have an owl"? Does everyone here check their talk page daily? If we had an admin on the discussion board, they could see what the problem was first hand, not the old fashioned "I have a problem, here is what to be done, fix it" way. and CosmicChronos has a great history of positive contributions. I feel an admin for the discussion board is needed. I am not saying it is required, but a mod willing to take the position for the discussion board is someone I want as an admin. I am NOT saying you have to agree, but this is my personal opinion, and you cannot change that. --Harrypotterexpert101 (talk) 06:08, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

Whilst I would still argue the point that an Admin could, and would be beneficial to the discussions, I think it may be better to focus on what we can do currently, and not in the future. I don't want this application to create strife here, when it most definitely isn't needed, so I'd like to ask an Admin to close this request and Archive it. Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 17:54, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

As things stand, and if my tally is correct, there would be 5 users for and 4 against (counting my own vote against, for the same reasons Ironyak1 pointed out above), so there isn't a clear majority per HPW:VP.

I'm closing this discussion by CosmicChronos's request (not that I think this is creating any strife, quite the contrary, civility has been mantained throughout the convo). At any rate, Discussions Mods are well advised to suggest what they would like to see done to improve the Discussion Board and to increase Admin participation. Cheers. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 18:38, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.