Wikireligion:Complaints

From Wikireligion

This is the complaints page. Here you can report mess ups that may prevent certain things from happening here. Please leave a link to the problem (if the problem invoves a certain page), a description, and your signature below the line. Your complaints help us improve our wiki, so don't think it would be offensive.

---

Oh, where should we start: 1. No license or copyright policy.

Taken care of as of February 5th, 2007--RyGuy 10:32, 5 February 2007 (EST)

2. All admins have IP lookup/checkuser capability.

I've sent RobKohr and email regarding this situation and I've added a note to a personal page elsewhere to tell him that this needs to be removed. I'll tell you more when I have it. ForestH2 19:19, 7 February 2007 (EST)

And you can see the response at editthis.info/wiki/Feedback, seven of nine. Apparently everybody "loves it." ForestH2 16:17, 10 February 2007 (EST)

It is no surprise that those who have this ability "love it" - such is a nature of power. It doesn't make it right. --Seven of nine 13:34, 11 February 2007 (EST)

3.People automatically becoming admins without community vote (which complicates #2 even more).

Taken care of as of February 5th,2007--RyGuy 10:32, 5 February 2007 (EST)

4.Articles lacking proper citations. I'm sure I'll come up with more... --Seven of nine 06:54, 5 February 2007 (EST)

Sysops being able to look at users IP is something that I will try to get RobKohr to fix. It is a problem. People will not become sysops automatically any more. We just needed sysops so the system would work. Our articles do have citation, we will work on making it more clear. Also we are under a license, we have been for a while. --Sir James Paul 07:49, 5 February 2007 (EST)

And where is that license indicated? As I noted at Talk:Main Page, you need to publish and make explicit the license and copyright policy (and probably on each article, like in Wikipedia). You just saying it doesn't make it legal. --Seven of nine 07:55, 5 February 2007 (EST)

And you don't seem to understand the whole editthis thing. You don't understand editthis has a whole website for itself that says it copyright for all of the wiki's it holds. ForestH2 08:35, 5 February 2007 (EST)

Not surprisingly, you don't know what you're talking about. Read their Terms of Use, which state in part:

EditThis.info claims no ownership or control over any Content submitted, posted or displayed by you on or through EditThis.info services. You or a third party licensor, as appropriate, retain all patent, trademark and copyright to any Content you submit, post or display on or through EditThis.info services and you are responsible for protecting those rights, as appropriate.

Each site must maintain its own license and copyright policy. --Seven of nine 08:45, 5 February 2007 (EST)

Although I would normally not say this in the middle of a conflict, shut up you two. I don't mean that in a mean way, but just quit it. Forest, Seven of nine, we all know you hate each other and I'm sure you'd love each other to have some horrible accident that prevents them from editing here permanently, but you're not doing any good by exchanging insults at every possible opportunity. You're just giving me a headache, and yourselves a lot of stress. Sites should set their own licenses for content, but with the permission of all affected contributors, content can be distributed under any other license without restriction. For example, the site may be GFDL, but if you asked everyone in the history and they agreed for it to be placed on a site with a non-compatible license, it's fine. Archer7 10:26, 5 February 2007 (EST)

My comments

Here's a list of problems with the previous wiki projects you've set up, so hopefully you can learn from your mistakes.

1. Make policies as you need them, don't set up stuff like anti-vandal measures here yet. If there's a vandal here you can most likely block them for extremely long periods without affecting any other users, because you only have about 5 users. You can block IPs infinitely if you want, although I wouldn't really recommend it.
2. Make sure all sysops go through the RfA process, and only promote them as you need them. You need one sysop at the moment, and maybe another couple could find it useful in editing, but don't promote them if they're not going do much with it. Give them to those that really would do a massive lot of good with it, not just those that can edit absolutely fine without them.
3. Don't get power-crazy. No presidents, no court, no ArbCom, you get the picture. If a decision needs to be made, send round a couple of messages asking what people think and make your decision based on that. If you have a project discussion page, that's perfect. No need to set up an ArbCom etc. Also, being a sysop is nothing special, get it into your heads, no-one cares.
4. If you don't like another user, keep it quiet and don't let it interfere with your decisions. I don't want to have to take any more aspirin dealing with stupid things that don't make the slightest bit of difference to anything. If you're still tempted, take a wikibreak for a day or so and have a coffee or something.
5. Don't make sockpuppets. On Wikikids, I'm sure at least two admins were sockpuppets of other admins. It doesn't matter any more and I don't want it to turn into an issue, but you don't need them and it's extremely immature. Experienced users know how to spot sockpuppets without a CheckUser. Quit it.
6. CheckUser was a big deal on Wikikids, but it doesn't make it much of a big deal if every admin has it here. You just need to be ultra-ultra-selective about who you have as an admin, and make sure you teach them all about IP addresses or they won't have a clue what to do with the results. Also, the cut-down version where it just looks up the IP is not as bad as having the full CheckUser extension, but it can still reveal all the personal information and location information that the other one can. If I were you, I'd get a log set up so other admins can see who's been CheckUsered. I'm sure people have done it to me a few times on the other wikis just to try it out, but I don't want it done. Personally, I would turn it off for admins and just give it to one person. It's not as big an issue, but it's not really that good either. Also don't CheckUser vandals unless you absolutely have to.
7. You get vandalism because you're screaming around about protecting it from vandalism all the time, it's so tempting for vandals. Don't do it.
8. Don't protect things because you don't think people can improve it or should be editing it, like policies etc. Non-admins can make great contributions and say stuff that you haven't thought of. It's just incredibly annoying, and if you carry on at the rate you were going on the others you might as well turn off editing for all non-admins.
9. Don't delete all your articles. I'm sure half of Wikikids had been of RfD at one point, think twice before doing it.
10. Try to be open-minded. Taking for example the article 'Weed' on Wikikids where it was argued that it shouldn't contain references to marijuana (spelling?). Most of the kids that know how to use the site would know that, and stating it doesn't promote it's use in any way at all. Over here, that could mean not removing references to Christian attitudes to some sexual stuff. Sure, some people could be offended by it, and you may think that kids shouldn't see it, but it's FACT and it needs to be here for this project to be a good reference. Remember that most kids old enough to use this site won't be bothered in the least bit by that sort of thing and have a good understanding of human sexuality.

I'm sure I'll add some more as I remember them. Your thoughts, please. Archer7 11:07, 5 February 2007 (EST)

Support--You have a good point. RyGuy 11:18, 5 February 2007 (EST)

Support expect for 5. Who were sockpuppets? ForestH2 16:24, 7 February 2007 (EST)

I don't want to say, because it just doesn't matter now and it'll just turn into an issue. The people it affects know who they are. Archer7 08:46, 9 February 2007 (EST)