Bleach Wiki talk:Administrators/Archive 2

Inactivity
Im pretty sure that unfortunately Twocents is gone for good its been 6 months with no response or even log on which sucks but if there is no objection he should be dropped from admin status. The same for the inactivity of Maul Day who hasn't been involved at all that I can remember. Im still on the fence about Whitestrike I know Arrancar109 still goes to him for help but thats something a user could accomplish he is currently not involved at all on admin level and doesn't remotely edit anymore at all. I already put a message out to the committee members who are not as active as well to determine whats going on there. Any thoughts?

Also There is a previous issue of titles on the wiki. Before I had brought up the issue of the administrators. Well the issue is more of one necessity and contribution on the wiki. In other words if not making a contribution then no need to be an admin as one is just as effective being a normal user. In particular we have The Ultimate3, while he is the founder of the wiki he doesn't edit here any longer since i first join really. In light of that its not that he isn't available but his concern and edits are given over to the Narutopedia now. Then there is WhiteStrike he no longer makes edits and though he appears around he hasn't shown any interest in the admin side of things or engaging in any issues or development, nor does anyone look to him for admin help, hence he is just as capable as a normal user. Maul Day is not a contributor any longer either. Also unfortunately Twocents seems to be just gone hasn't been on this site nor his other wiki site where he's an admin since dec 2009.

The other issue is the Policy and Standards Committee. Normally we allow them to handle themselves but the issue is given some position or authority to those who can't contribute on more of a regular basis that the position would require. Just recently Nwang2011 was made the 2nd on the committee but has become increasingly absent with the fight articles he heads up not being touched. He has done other work but hasn't been on since the 5th currently. SerialSniper14 hasn't made an edit since april, he is also no active when asked about it he basically said he was busy and that he should be free this month and if not he resigns his position.

Basically I would suggest a shake up. drop the absent admin and bring in Tinni. Then drop the absent SerialSniper14 and determine whats up with Nwang2011. The head the committee normally it would go from that to the next one up but there was issue of someone taking the responsibility of the 2nd which no one wanted to do for whatever reason till Nwang2011 took it. So in that point we need someone to fill the role with good edits and understanding of the policies and is very active more then the current members. My pick would be Godisme. The whole point is that when you have nobody leading others into do anything nothing gets done. What i have noticed is alot not happeneing with the site. It doesn't seem to be improving. we get more new people but the more reliable people aren't doing to much and that needs to change. I dont want this to feel like a chore or anything but we are getting stagnant. Any idea or questions?--Salubri (Talk)  19:15, September 15, 2010 (UTC)

No disrespect intended to any of them, and I feel kinda bad saying this, but if someone is not contributing to the wiki, then I don't think that there is much point in them being an admin and so they should probably not continue to be an admin. They effectively are not an admin atm anyway due to their inactivity and thus the wiki is not going to suffer if their admin status is removed. The wiki is certainly not benefiting from it right now. If they ever return, they will have to reacquaint themselves with the site and policies which will take time, especially if they return after Wikia's New Look is implemented. We can review their case then, but in the meantime, well, times move on.

However, I think that if their admin status is removed, we should consider creating a section for them on the admin page listing them as former admins to acknowledge their past contribution to the wiki.

Tinni is the obvious candidate for a new admin and I would fully support her as an admin if she agrees to become one. We all know the work and dedication she has put in to this wiki, she is fully familiar with the policies and very helpful to other users, has good ideas and is good with the technical side of things. Unlike the recent flurry of user's asking to be admin in the mistaken believe that it will help them to edit, Tinni would actually benefit from the access to admin privileges and use them well. On top of that, with the New Look on the horizon, I think a fourth active admin would be quite good in case there are problems.

I have seen a number of people recently applying to be an admin saying that it will help them to make edits etc (see the request to be admin page and Forum:How to become an administrator). There seems to be a misconception out there that being an admin makes editing easier, with people not understanding that their edits are undone because they are poorly done, flat out wrong or against policy.

I also support Godisme for the Committee. He meets the requirements and would be good for the committee, imo. Looking at the discussion that was held over who should be the new number two on the committee to replace Minato88, I just hope that there is not so much trouble getting someone to be the new committee leader as there was then.

As sidenote, I started doing the beta testing for the wiki's New Look over the last two days. This basically involves editing as normal, while using the new look. So if you see any odd things in my edits, let me know so that I can fix them and report the problem to Wikia. You'll also see me making some edits at MediaWiki:Wikia.css. This is purely for the new look and will not affect anything related to the way the site is currently. I'm not allowed to say much about the new look other than what has been announced on Central Wiki, but my impressions are that presentation-wise it is a nice clean look, but there is much less space due to the fixed width, huge navigation bar at the top and fat sidebar on the right. There is a new blog post on central about the themes for the New Look. Going by that, the fixed width is there to stay and the empty space to the sides will be part of the theme/design and will be (relatively) easy to customize. Unfortunately I actually don't know anything more than that about it as they are not testing that bit yet. But I'm keeping an eye out for the hacks and mods that other users make to it for their own sites to get around things they don't like. I'll post about them if they're an issue for us here. There are already a couple of those popping up. 15:15, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

Ok where on the same page. Some of this is common sense so I doubt Arrancar109 will have an issue with any of this. As far as the introduction of new admin and committee member that will go along as usual. The old admin section will be made as well. --Salubri (Talk)  15:25, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

I don't feel I have to say all of the reasons, since Yyp said it already, but I'm in full support of Tinni becoming an administrator and Godisme being in the Committee.

I also like Yyp's idea of putting up a section of former administrators on the page, as I feel they each did some important contributions to the Wiki. I'm thinking we should probably close off the "Requests for Adminship" page, due to too many misconceptions. Obviously Yyp explained that part too, and I'm kind of getting tired people applying to be administrators just because their edits are undone, they're not reading the policies, or because they just hate the policies we have set up. Whether we get rid of the page itself is altogether, but I think we should at least close it off for now (and have it closed off indefinitely; I still see people trying to apply for adminship for these reasons after the theoretical reopening date comes).

As for the site design... Just go with whatever you want. I admit we need a new look, but I haven't been able to keep up enough with any sort of changes you had in mind since you pitched the idea on the Admin Talk page, which is why I haven't said much about it in the past. If there's something I missed afterwards, then please fill me in on the details I missed. Also, if you think our Favicon needs changing (the icon that shows up next the web address when on this site/the icon that shows up on your browser when the site is opened in a tab), let me know what you guys come up with, as I've been wondering about that part myself without copying either the Spanish Bleach Wiki or the German Bleach Wiki's Favicons. Arrancar109 (Talk)  15:52, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

Featured Article
Em, it seems that this has slipped under our radar again. The vote for feat. article is tied between Ukitake & Isshin. Tie-break vote needed. I vote for Isshin's article. 15:05, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

Yea i guess I can go for Isshin as well, Ukitake will more then likely have a more promote roll to be up again at a later date. Salubri (Talk)  15:20, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

I'll vote on Isshin as well. Arrancar109 (Talk)  17:06, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

Simple Change
Apparently its come to my attention. Godisme addressed me with "So Devilhand found where all of those people who wanted Gin's status changed. They all come from the bleach forums. Scrolling through their thread on it, I found that they are using Bleach Wiki:Simplified ruleset to justify their actions. They believe that rule 3 gives them free reign to do what they want because they believe it is helping the wiki. Seeing as all of our other policies are easy to find and well flushed out, is there even a reason to have the simplified rules?"

I personally dont see why we have that up, for a regular wiki thats fine but it undermines all the policies and allows people to act like vandals and allows them to attack other users. We dont claim to be like any other wiki and as far as how other wikis do things we stopped that long ago. The amount of false information and vandalism that occurs on the sight is far to much and its the policies not the rule set that has allowed us to be where we are currently. Some policies aren't perfect but that rule set is plain counter productive, i say we just delete it and move on. --Salubri (Talk)  22:44, August 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * If I'm right, that is something that comes with all new wikias as a basic guideline/advice to helping to set up the new wiki and leading it through the early days, outline how to edit in general, rather than being a binding policy. It would have been there since day one, but we have long since move on from that. We have no need of it. "Rule" 3 is most certainly not meant in the way that these people have been using it. The other "rules" (where useful) can be incorporated in the other policy documents if they have not already been, but the document as a whole can be scraped, imo. 23:05, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

Featured Votes (September)
Featured vote is a three way tie between Sōsuke Aizen, Hiyori Sarugaki & Kensei Muguruma. I vote for Kensei. 22:46, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

I too will vote for Kensei.--Salubri (Talk)  14:44, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

Kensei Arrancar109 (Talk)  15:52, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

Committee Nominations (Godisme)

 * 1)  - We have placed Godisme up for the nomination to become a member of the Bleach Wiki:Policy & Standards Committee. I affirm him in the appointment as in his time here he has a expert understanding of the policies of the sight. Is active in undoing vandalism, apprising others of the policies and making sure they are followed, he is a great contributor to the sight especially in the grammar department which he heads up on the sight. Also he is a great defender of the sight and the work that is done here and has taken on unnecessary attacks from those who would cause harm to the sight and even then he did not backed down. He isa great supporter and his accomplishments have not gone unnoticed. To bad alot of users arent as good or as dedicated. --<font color="4169E1" size="2px">Salubri  <font color="4169E1" size="2px">(Talk)  18:21, September 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2)  - Godisme has contributed a lot to the Wiki and has organized many articles, both summary-wise and grammar-wise. He's follows the policies we have established perfectly, and has tried to help others by informing them of when they are doing something wrong or breaching a policy. He's one of the most active users and contributors that I've seen on this site, and he does well to make sure each article we have follows the Manual of Style. Given everything he's done, he'll be a great addition to the Committee, and he has my full support. <font color="teal" size="2px">Arrancar109  <font color="teal" size="1px">(Talk)  18:37, September 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3)  - Well, not much that I can add to the above. Godisme would be a fantastic addition to the Committee. Regularly on, ever vigilant, helpful to new and regular users alike, knows the site and its policies very well and has made a huge contribution to the wiki and helped to maintain and improve its standards. I vote for adding him as a member of the Committee.  22:22, September 16, 2010 (UTC)