FANDOM


  • Dragonboy6491
    Dragonboy6491 closed this thread because:
    Discussion finished.
    01:52, March 17, 2015

    Hello fellow users, as you may or may not have noticed, the Administrators of this site have been inactive and I find this to be unacceptable. One of them, Raurauslly.music even has an INACTIVE tag. Two of the Administrators have extremely poor contributions as well:

    Bella8991 has just 8 edits to actual articles on the wiki, out of a total of 297. The last mainspace edit Bella8991 did was on June 28, 2014. As if this isn't bad enough, Bella8991 is also a Bureaucrat. I don't think someone this absent from wiki affairs should be trusted to give rights to other users...

    Rarauslly.music has more edits...197 edits to actual articles, out of a total of 583. But the last mainspace edit Raurauslly.music did was on September 6, 2014...this is better than Bella's record but still falls short of active status.

    Though Dragonboy6491 and Mojojojo13579 have done a better job than the above, they haven't been all that active lately either. I'd like to also add that only ONE admin bothered to participate in a discussion that could have had wide ramifications for the wiki.

    I'm not going to call for the immediate removal of these users' rights since I've barely been here a week. But I do think it's necessary for the community to evaluate all the Administrators and determine whether or not each is fit to have his/her rights. There are real life obligations, but the community selected these individuals to possess a few extra tools for a reason, so they must be held accountable if they do not fulfill their responsibilities...this is even outright stated in the policy. Sorry if this is a controversial topic...but I feel something needs to be done.

      Loading editor
    • If an admin (irony much?) could highlight this for the community to see...that'd be great.

        Loading editor
    • The policy states that six months of inactivity is inadequate, so this is what should be used as a guideline for when admins should be considered in having their rights revoked.

      I don't know the other administrators very well, but I know that for Dragonboy his absence is only temporary. He is still mediating discussion, and he certainly hasn't abandoned the re-write. Should it come to it, I will defend him and his position on this Wiki.

      May we also look at the admins and their main areas (what they focus on). So, because Mojo is not resolving conflicts, and hasn't done for a while now, her main focus should be changed. Or if she has no focus and is not fulfilling her duties as an administrator, then her rights should be removed because she is inactive. It is bad when it says "go to this person for this" and then that user has an inactive template or simply does not respond. Although Mojo has responded to me before, it's just that's the only time that she is active.

      I am all for review of the admins, but I will reiterate that I think, if not exempt from this, I will defend Dragonboy and his rights on this Wiki.

        Loading editor
    • May I just say that there is nothing controversial about highlighting such an issue, so long as the case is founded, which in this case, it is.

        Loading editor
    • 6 months is a lot of time and yet, Bella8991 has managed to go past that time without any actual editing. Raurauslly.music is at the 5 month mark, but again, I feel 6 months of inactivity to be too generous. So for one, I think that part of policy needs tighter restrictions.

      Admins shouldn't have a focus. There can be one part of the wiki they work on more than the others, but they still need to be involved everywhere. Even so, focused on "site maintenance" tells me Bella8991 should be active across every part of the wiki, which is not the case. Focused on "social dimensions" tells me Raurauslly.music participates in discussion and the like, which is not the case.

      I do not think Dragonboy6491 should be exempt from review. Yes, he is relatively active compared to the other Admins, but he should be reaching out to the others in an attempt to, per policy, "correct behavior". Mojojojo13579 is also similarly relatively active, but as the other Bureaucrat, she definitely should be enforcing proper activity levels.

        Loading editor
    • It depends on how "inactive" a user is being. It also depends on what time scale we are evaluating them on. I will say though that 6 months of no (or at least no significant or constant - say an average of an edit per week - activity also applies) activity certainly is the maximum an administrator should have off, and then after that period they should have their rights removed.

      That's what I mean by a focus. Obviously as an admin they should crop up all over the Wiki. And again, I agree fully with what you are saying. They are not fulfilling that role, so they have no place in an admin role.

      And like I say, I will defend him should he not be exempt from the challenge. Funnily enough, he has in fact contacted the other admins in an attempt to discern their current status just recently. He has seen this thread, and he shall comment when he has a moment (he's doing his internship right now). Mojo is only active when someone talks to her, so it's not really the same as Dragonboy.

        Loading editor
    • I'm against, completely and utterly, removing Dragonboy's rights. He is one of the most active members here, has been for months, and also one of the best. His contributions are always high quality and he genuinely cares for the wiki. I haven't seen any of the others' around, though I'm not adverse to Mojo retaining their rights for the time being. I simply ask this:

      What would be the benefit of them losing their rights? How does that help the wiki? If the answer is 'well, it doesn't, but still, 6 months!', then I am against this change at the moment. Dragonboy should be given 'crat status and Bella's taken away, though I see no reason for them to be removed at the moment.

      Just think about what this wiki needs.

        Loading editor
    • I think that as things are, there are no adverse effects to the Wiki with the current situation, so it is not of high priority. It would be more of a problem if we were a huge Wiki which had lots of activity constantly, but we just aren't like that.

        Loading editor
    • All right, the thread has been highlighted so that all can see and participate.

      Well, first and foremost, I do want to apologize for my activity levels being low as of late. I still give it my best effort to come on the Wiki and check up on things, but if it isn't enough, I can only say that I'm only human. If the community deems it necessary to assess my performance, then by all means. However, I just want to clarify some things. For one, it would be nice to give a friendly poke to the admins regarding activity instead of going straight to a forum post like this. Personally, I have reached out to the other admins (both on and off-wiki), and with the exception of Raurauslly.music, I have heard back from the others with (I think) valid reasons for their inactivity.

      I also want to point out that the policy was written that way because we thought of it in the context of this particular Wiki. Seeing as this Wiki is small and doesn't get a large number of contributions per day, I don't see why we need a large team of active admins. And if you're going to argue that one day we might, we can always change policy. But given the present, there's really nothing beneficial that would result from stripping us of our sysop rights. I'd also like to add that even though the policy says 6 months, demotion should be considered on a case-by-case basis.

      But if you and/or others feel that something needs to be done (changing policy, demoting some/all admins, or both), then I can't and won't stop you. I'll respect whatever decision the community comes to.

        Loading editor
    • Removing incompetent Admins is for the wiki's benefit because it clears the path for individuals more suited to the responsibilities to take their place. I'll admit that maybe considering Dragonboy6491 and even Mojojojo13579 for evaluation might be much, but I definitely stand by considering Bella8991 and Raurauslly.music for removal of rights.

      Going off of Dragonboy6491's statement that the wiki "doesn't need a large team of active Admins", I agree...if we don't need such a large team, we should relieve those who have no use of the extra tools from their positions. If they ever want to become Admins again, it's not like that's not a possibility...they'll just have to go through a vote.

        Loading editor
    • There is nothing stopping said individuals applying anyway. We don't have a 'maximum admin number'. There are wikis with less anyway—the Frozen Fanon wiki doesn't have //any active admins at the moment.

      As long as Dragonboy retains his rights I don't really care so much about the others. He is the most active.

        Loading editor
    • Considering how Administrator/Bureaucrat nominations aren't open, I would say that there is something stopping individuals from applying. I'm assuming they aren't open because there's an...implied maximum Admin/Bureaucrat number so to speak.

        Loading editor
    • Admin/'crat nominations were left closed at the time we revamped policy since the other admins and I didn't see adding more staff as necessary. Regardless of what we thought, the thread was still highlighted so that the community could propose changes as seen fit, including the possibility of adding more admins, but there was no input for changes to be made. However, if the community ever sees the need to change policy/take on more staff, then it will be done.

        Loading editor
    • I had a say on some policy amendments :-)

      I was going to say that if you wanted to discuss being nominated for such positions, you would talk to an admin directly. Don't just take the policy for it. Talk to those who wrote it.

        Loading editor
    • Well then I propose opening up nominations.

        Loading editor
    • I understand that I'm inactive and my rights should be taken away but I'm sort of emotionally unstable (definitely not an excuse or a way to receive sympathy) these days and I am aware of my lack of legitimate edits on actual articles. Before the wiki's merge, I have been perhaps much more involved with contributing and editing such articles but I do not know how to look at my actual history from the other wiki, which is now closed so I have no validation of my assumption. But I know myself if I really wanted to keep my rights, I would try and have effort to make real edits for the wiki. I will try my best to actually edit the wiki and not just hit the edit button on a page and press the spacebar and click publish. If I fail to meet the goal of making 100 edits on actual articles by the latest of March or in April, then I believe that I should be removed of the rights of being a bureaucrat. Unless you believe I should do something else to redeem myself.  

        Loading editor
    • I've heard about the merge, but I don't think any of the admins should be judged on past contributions. Activity needs to be based on the present time.

      Is anyone opposed to opening up nominations? I got no responses to that comment, so I'm guessing it's a "silence is consensus" situation?

        Loading editor
    • Silence isn't consensus, actually. I see no need to open up admin spots and, frankly, see no one (except for perhaps Humphry) who could be an admin. Everyone else is too new and too inactive.

        Loading editor
    • Oh of course admins shouldn't be judged on past (I don't even like that). I'm just stating how I used to be with this wiki and how I should try to become more involved with it again like before.

      And I think that Humphry very much deserves to be considered as a nomination despite the fact we may not need admins right now, but like I said, a consideration of her being an admin should be kept in mind anyway.

        Loading editor
    • I don't think admin/'crat nominations should be open either. Above all else, we should consider what the Wiki needs. Opening up positions would suggest that the Wiki is so swamped that the team of four admins is not enough to maintain the site, which is certainly not the case. Also, like Fruipit said, there's a lack of suitable candidates; I'd like to remind you that rights are given in a successive manner, meaning only rollbacks are eligible for adminship, and only admins are eligible for bureaucratship.

        Loading editor
    • I don't like this use of the whole "what the wiki needs"...it makes it sound like admins can circumvent what is stated in the policy. There are no suitable candidates at the moment for Admins or Bureaucrats but I think they should be open so that we can quickly fill the position should someone acceptable make their presence known.

        Loading editor
    • I'm not an admin and I'm advocating for no new admins. Actually, I was the first one to bring up that point, so I'm not sure how it relates in any way to "admins circumvent[ing] what is stated in the policy". There are no suitable candidates, so why would we open them up? And as Dragonboy said, a user needs to be a rollback first. To my knowledge, we have no rollbacks. To my knowledge, rollback requests are always open.

        Loading editor
    • Okay, I know that I haven't been actively participating in this discussion, but I do have something to say. I do see why some of the admins should be re-evaulated. I admit, there are things on this wiki that need to be fixed; it is the admins' responsibility to help correct these issues, but their prolonged inactivity inteferes with the maintenance of this site. Re-evaluating the admins may not be a bad idea, as it would be going by policy and would, as you say, relieve the admins who have no use for their "extra tools". However, I do agree that a solution must be reached, and I will continue to further elaborate on this situation if I have more to say.

      As for opening up nominations, there really is no user eligible for admin rights, since there are no rollbacks, which is a prerequisite for adminship.

        Loading editor
    • You should get new admins.

        Loading editor
    • And why should we? Unless you give actual input with a justification, we can't take you seriously. Your opinion won't be counted,

        Loading editor
    • I brought up opening nominations because in the event Admins are demoted as a result of this discussion, it will be good to have someone take their place. However, I do see the sense in waiting for suitable candidates to appear first.

      Now, for evaluations...I think Bella8991 and Raurauslly.music are the Admins that require taking action against (due to the 6-month inactivity limit). Bella8991 has tried to make an effort by commenting here and editing recently, but that's hardly enough to account for a lack of edits since June. I move to relieve Bella8991 of her Bureaucrat rights, but since she has shown interest in maintaining her activity, her Admin rights should stay...for the time being. For Raurauslly.music, I move to remove her rights after March 6, if she has not come back at that time (she is currently sitting at 5 months inactivity).

      I also propose amending policy so that Admins are held to a higher standard. I think a 3-month period of inactivity would be more appropriate.

        Loading editor
    • We need a bureaucrat on the wiki. And I don't ever believe we should demote admins because of inactivity when there is no one to step up to those positions.

      Heimr Arnadalr, excuse me for saying so, but... you're new. You've spent a total of 10 days on Wikia. I don't see the need for 'evaluations' of the current admins when, as I said above, there's no one to step up. I can only see it doing more harm than good.

      There is no point having such a policy when this wiki is so quiet. I'm against doing anything at this time.

        Loading editor
    • If we remove Bella8991's Bureaucrat rights, Mojojojo13579 is still around to be a Bureaucrat. Mojojojo13579 isn't too active either, but still certainly better suited for the Bureaucrat role than Bella8991. But if you're concerned about just having a single Bureaucrat, you even gave a solution to that several posts above: Dragonboy6491, while not active lately, would definitely make a better Bureaucrat than Bella8991.

      I am new here but I don't think that should prevent me from voicing my concerns about the Admins, especially when it's obvious that most of them do not have an active role around here. Only one Admin commented on the OUAT discussion and only two of the Admins have even bothered to post on this thread...I think this lack of engagement speaks volumes about their incompetence. There's no one at present to replace Raurauslly.music but like you say, rollback requests are always open...sooner or later, someone will crop up.

      This is a quiet wiki, but allowing for half a year of inactivity is way too lenient. I think at the most, Admins should only be allowed four months of inactivity.

        Loading editor
    • Woahh hold on, inactivity does not, in any sense of the word, mean incompetent. At all. On Avatar Wiki, an undeniably bigger and more established wiki, we have several admins who have rather extended periods of inactivity. Does that make them incompetent? Not at all. The //reason we haven't removed them is because they are so skilled at what they do there is no way any other user could replace them and do as good as job.

      I bring up how long you've been on wikia, Heimr Arnadalr, and while it doesn't prevent you from voicing your concerns I am hesitant to just agree with you //because of the lack of experience. I once again point to my above point; removing all the admins would do far more harm than good, as per your first proposal.

        Loading editor
    • You can't remove bureaucrat rights unless you contact a staff member. That being said, she IS the founder of the wiki and is actually very active, she just doesn't always contribute on this wiki. This wiki is a very complete wiki, so it's not always easy to contribute to.

        Loading editor
    • There is always things that need doing. Her being the founder has little bearing on the issue. And edit-wise, no, she isn't the most active.

        Loading editor
    • What is a complete Wiki? Besides, we are going through a huge rewrite currently. And the thing about Wikis is that they are active communities, so although main pages may be "done", there is always other stuff to do.

        Loading editor
    • Yes, I agree that inactivity doesn't equate to incompetence...on Avatar Wiki. From what I see, every Admin on Avatar Wiki was chosen by the community after careful consideration of what they had to offer to the site. This is not the case here. For one thing, none of the Admins here were chosen by the community since the whole policy page was just made a few months back. As I skim through the Admin contributions on Avatar Wiki, it's clear some of them are a little more focused on the coding aspects of the site, while others are more editing-oriented...as you say "they are so skilled at what they do..." However, the contributions of the Admins here don't suggest such...specialization. I've already pointed out the mainspace edits of Bella8991 and Raurauslly.music, but refer to their edits as a whole...

      http://frozen.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Editcount/Bella8991

      http://frozen.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Editcount/Raurauslly.music

      Neither has significant contributions for coding either...most of their edits seem centered around threads, which leads me to believe they aren't offering anything substantial and their positions are not of benefit to this wiki. I cannot ignore that Bella8991 has made an effort by commenting on this thread, which is why I proposed only removing her Bureaucrat rights, but Raurauslly.music has been absent from the wiki and doesn't seem to offer skills that another user couldn't replace. There isn't any harm that could come out of this, it would simply be enforcing policy. I may be new, but it's not hard to see a clear difference between the Admins at Avatar Wiki and the Admins here.

      Another thing...I see that this wiki has removed rights before due to inactivity:

      http://frozen.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:11113

        Loading editor
    • I have to be honest, I believe Heimr is right. Although I've been trying my best to make actual edits, as we all see, I'm not doing a good job. I would like to keep administrator rights but I feel as if have bureaucrat rights is something I really do not deserve.   

        Loading editor
    • Then we need to give them to someone else because we can't //not have a 'crat. The obvious choice is Dragonboy.

        Loading editor
    • I thought Dragon already had the rights of a bureaucrat.

        Loading editor
    • No. A community discussion, like this one, needs to be held. Only Staff can give or take 'crat rights.

        Loading editor
    • Yes, I understand. All I'm saying is that I thought that he already had those rights but I stand corrected. 

        Loading editor
    • According to this, a Bureaucrat can give Bureaucrat status to others...unless the page was written incorrectly.

        Loading editor
    • Oh I know. I thought that I've already given the rights to him but I did not. I will do it now unless I need consensus to do so. 

        Loading editor
    • There absolutely has to be consensus. We cannot just ignore policy. If anyone becomes a Bureaucrat, it needs to be through nomination and voting as stated on Frozen Wiki:Obtaining user rights.

        Loading editor
    • Well. Then what are we waiting for?  

        Loading editor
    • Unfortunately, while I myself cannot vote, Dragonboy should definitely be nominated as a bureaucrat. He is the most active contributer to this wiki and knows what this wiki needs.

        Loading editor
    • Bella8991 wrote: Well. Then what are we waiting for?  

      Well, we haven't spoken about Raurauslly.music...and nominations are closed anyway.

        Loading editor
    • Okay, there's following policy because it's the right thing to do, and there's being a stick in the mud. This is a 'stick in the mud' moment. No one is disputing that Dragonboy should be a 'crat, and if Bella is having their rights removed, they //will go to Dragonboy because he is the only user who could have them. Pick one or the other, Heimr.

        Loading editor
    • All right, let's slow things down a bit here. In the event that Bella steps down and the community agrees to make me a 'crat, I have no problem with taking up the role; thank you for the vote of confidence. But Bella, there's nothing forcing you to step down. If it's a decision you made from a purely personal standpoint, I can't stop you, but know that the community hasn't asked for your rights to be removed. From this discussion, it seems only Heimr is in favor of removing rights, and I guess Jjuser appears to be in the middle ground. But currently, everyone else seems fine with the state of things.

        Loading editor
    • I second what Dragonboy says. I see no need for any change right now.

        Loading editor
    • Fruipit wrote: Okay, there's following policy because it's the right thing to do, and there's being a stick in the mud. This is a 'stick in the mud' moment. No one is disputing that Dragonboy should be a 'crat, and if Bella is having their rights removed, they //will go to Dragonboy because he is the only user who could have them. Pick one or the other, Heimr.

      Okay, when you put it like that...I suppose Dragonboy6491 can just assume the position when Bella8991 steps down.

      @Humphry: Something needs to be done...even Bella8991 agreed to my proposition, and she's one of the "guilty" party, so to speak.

        Loading editor
    • Nothing necessarily needs to be done. There have literally been no adverse effects to the site from the current situation. Yes, Bella agrees, but we are a community, and that means community census. Bella can give up her rights, sure, but that would have to be done voluntarily. Should it come to it, I would vote that there is currently no need for a change. A change may be needed soon, however, as we plan to reform the homepage. We don't need to think about it for a while, but once the rewrites are "done" we could do with some more community involvement, so to speak. Although, who knows what the future holds.

        Loading editor
    • Should it come to it, I would vote that there is currently no need for a change. A change may be needed soon, however, as we plan to reform the homepage. We don't need to think about it for a while, but once the rewrites are "done" we could do with some more community involvement, so to speak.

      ...If you see this as an issue that we have to deal with eventually, what good would come out of delaying action? I stand by what I said, both Bella8991 and Raurauslly.music have not shown themselves to be neither dedicated to content nor the coding aspects of this site, so their removal will have literally no effect on maintenance.

      Besides, I've said this earlier, there's even a PRECEDENT for removing inactive Admins/Bureaucrats:

      http://frozen.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:11113

        Loading editor
    • Obviously I'd like to keep my rights but if my removal seems as if it is better for the wiki, as I see it will, then I'm willing to give it all up. Content-wise, yes, I've definitely been inactive but I have been trying my best to promote the wiki and make sure that everyone on here is enjoying their experience here too. But now, it is all up to the community and the policy. I've already said that I will give up my rights for the better of the wiki, so now, I think that is the only thing I need to say. 

        Loading editor
    • I say delay because we still have loads to do... Also, their rights staying again has no effect on the site either.

      Bella, are you the admin who is good at coding/knows how to code?

        Loading editor
    • I think my proposal is rather lenient. I only proposed removing Bureaucrat rights for Bella8991 due to her involvement in the present and Raurauslly.music has some time to make a comeback before her rights are removed. An admin should be a trusted member of the community...you can't be a trusted member of the community if you're not there. If there should come a time where they return to full activity, reinstating their rights is always an option.

      I thought Dragonboy6491 was the coder...he's making the infoboxes after all.

        Loading editor
    • Only Wikia staff members can remove bureaucrat rights.

        Loading editor
    • A Bureaucrat can remove their own rights...

        Loading editor
    • I don't mean to be barging in like this, but...why is there a sudden proposal to remove the admins' rights all of a sudden? I'm all down for users like yourself, Heimr Arnadalr, to get involved to communities and such, but I doubt demoting admins and opening up community nominations is really all that necessary. For one thing, the users are pretty aware of the admins on here and have not complained about any one of them. I've been an admin ever since early 2014 and I had no problem merging or adapting to the new system around here. As a matter of fact, I love working with the admins we have now and it would be terrible if we have to go that far to replace any one of them for the "benefit" of the wiki, which I believe otherwise. Yes, I know how opinionated this post of mine is. Coming from me, I personally don't think that it's right to re-evaluate the admins, especially Bella. She's now the co-founder and we shouldn't be pushy about real-life situations.

      Also, the reason why we decided to remove Littlerat's bureaucrat rights was not only because of past issues such as promoting random users to fit the title of admins (even before the merge, I was not picked by Littlerat but by AnnoyingOrange who had a chat interview with me. He also had ties with the Frozen Disney Wiki back then, so then other admins got involved, and now we're here), as well as Littlerat being inactive for an extremely long time. Littlerat has made no edits on articles for months, most of them were responses to messages left on their wall and comments. On April 2014, Littlerat tried to remind us of returning sometime soon, but that time never really did come. The admins and I have been here for a relatively long period of time, and I'd gladly welcome the new people, Fruipit and Humphry, to the department. I say a no for re-evaluating.

        Loading editor
    • I wasn't suggesting removing all rights but rather evaluating all of you Admins so that we could work from there. Bella8991 may be "co-founder" but like Fruipit said above, that has little bearing on the issue. Besides, from the thread I linked, it seems Littlerat1 was the actual founder and literally everyone on this thread agreed to remove her rights. You say Littlerat1's case is different from Bella8991's, I disagree. Their contribution history is very similar. There's a low count of both content or code related edits. For both, thread edits are predominant...I've even provided concrete PROOF of Bella8991 having poor edits. You say you enjoy working with the Admins but Bella8991 and Raurauslly.music are hardly around enough for there to even be a working relationship. There are real life situations, but there's a reason the policy even lists out a time where enough is enough.

      Having inactive Admins hurts the site. I haven't been here long, but in the time I have, I've seen only one Admin doing any reasonable amount of work. Quiet wiki or not, there still is a lot of work that needs doing and with only one user actually using their site maintenance tools to the fullest, progress is and will be slow.

      Another thing, you say the current Admins shouldn't be demoted, which suggests you think you guys are capable on your own. Yet, you suggest opening up nominations so the "department" has some extra help.

        Loading editor
    • It sounds as if Littlerat1 was also being irresponsible, not just inactive.

      "Having inactive Admins hurts the site. I haven't been here long, but in the time I have, I've seen only one Admin doing any reasonable amount of work." That doesn't sound like the site is being hurt, just because one admin is active. Right now, there is no need to change. When I say "looking at the homepage soon", I mean a few months down the line.

        Loading editor
    • The admins have extra tools to aid in editing. Does not mean it automatically makes them "better" editors.

      I haven't seen you "do a reasonable amount of work", either. The admins are no more or less important than any other user on the wiki, and until such a time as the editing of the other users can't keep up with the work needed, that point is moot. What is 'reasonable amount'? Is it, like you, adding categories to images and debating everything? Is it like Dragonboy, who is around and making small but needed changes to articles? Or is is like me, only coming in when I have a chance and leaving my opinion of ongoing issues and perhaps editing if I notice something?

        Loading editor
    • I'm happy that Mojo has my back but I do not want to bring in "co-founder" either. I was formerly possessive of that title and took advantage of it but as I see now, I should be characterized as just an admin, who is no more or less important than any user. And every user here is very important. I was surely involved with being a promoter here more than an editor, which I am aware is completely unacceptable.

      As for coding, which I believe Heimr is having mixed thoughts about, usually it is I that is the one that takes care of coding but due to my somewhat inactivity, I haven't been doing much and now it is Dragon that is learning, doing a fantastic job, and making the infoboxes and other things. As I say, hoping I am correct, most of the homepage and let's just other features were either made or added in by me while other things such as the background and the logos were added by other admins and other more experienced coders from other wikis who wanted to assist us. But, that is not needed for any more discussion now.

      I know that everyone here is doing something for the wiki to benefit it. There is no such thing as editing a more "reasonable amount" of work. We all do different things to help this wiki grow and having to say one user is doing more reasonable amount of work on the wiki than others seems as if it is (I can't think of the right word) objectified (I guess).

        Loading editor
    • I know that an Admin isn't necessarily a better editor than a regular user and I'm certain I never said that. An Admin is someone given maintenance tools to help the site, nothing more.

      It's hard to define "reasonable work", but that doesn't matter in this case since both Raurauslly.music and Bella8991 have not done any work. Sure, Bella8991 has tried to make edits recently, but I find her edits almost laughable. One of her recent edits was even REMOVED by another Admin on the grounds that files are used sparingly. I'm new and I even know that...surely an Admin should know policy better.

      Again, I already feel like I'm being very lenient with Bella8991. In the months that Bella8991 and Raurauslly.music have been absent, the wiki has been undergoing a major overhaul...this is even stated in the community messages. With all these policy and style changes, how can you possibly expect the Admins who are absent from community affairs to continue serving in an administrative capacity? Why should they be trusted to be able to serve in the site's best interests?

      The fundamental question here that I want to direct to the Admins is, do you NEED your tools? What have you been doing recently that an ordinary user could not possibly have done? All I do is "debate everything" but my discussions are to help improve the wiki, which is a lot more than what some of the Admins can say. In fact, they are usually absent from these sort of talks...I wonder what that says about their interest in the site.

      You want to see who actually uses their Admin tools? See here: http://frozen.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Log/delete

      What do you know...no Bella8991 or Raurauslly.music to be seen.

        Loading editor
    • I understand that you are rooting for my demotion and I will not argue, as I am aware of my inactivity and laziness too and you have just enough proof of my history. But as you see, now I notice how much my inactivity has done to the reputation of me being an admin and I ask all of you, even the one active admin on here, to please give me a second chance to try my best and help improve this wiki the RIGHT way as I forgot the one detail apart of the policy, which seemingly made an edit of mine a "laughable" change. And obviously, I understand that I seem way behind on being an actual admin but people can have more than one chance and I believe I deserve another one.    

        Loading editor
    • Bella, we all love you. Just stay ^^

        Loading editor
    • I personally think you should give her a second chance. Now that this has been brought to her attention, she will try harder to be active and more admin-like. Everyone deserves a second chance and in this instance, she deserves one.

        Loading editor
    • ...I've been saying to give you a second chance at Adminship. All I've called for was removing your Bureaucrat rights. You've made an effort to return and that counts for something but we can't completely ignore the fact you've been inactive. Which is why I keep throwing around the word, "lenient."

        Loading editor
    • (What edit, did soemone actually describe it as that?)

        Loading editor
    • What do you mean by "that" Humphry? I understand Heimr.

        Loading editor
    • Laughable?

        Loading editor
    • The someone is Heimr but there is no need for any further discussion on that. 

        Loading editor
    • Naw :-(

        Loading editor
    • The laughable edit I'm referring to was this:

      http://frozen.wikia.com/wiki/Frozen_Fever?diff=next&oldid=26652

      An Admin should know policy in and out. So I think I'm being very lenient when all I've proposed is relieving Bella8991 of Bureaucrat rights.

      Another thing...did people miss this deletion log? I only see one Admin making use of their tools: http://frozen.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Log/delete

        Loading editor
    • Haha, I don't get it...

      There's no point mocking. We build people, not knock them down.

      And Heimr, you're so lenient in all of this. Although it doesn't matter what degree of lenience you show, but what we as a community decides as a whole.

      ...I only see one admin ever deleting anything.

        Loading editor
    • I'm saying that Bella8991 should have known files are used sparingly. Not really good of an Admin to forget policy like that.

      "...I only see one admin ever deleting anything."

      That's my point...ONE Admin.

        Loading editor
    • Well, we all make mistakes. It wouldn't hurt for her to give the policy another look.

        Loading editor
    • As I've said, I'm willing to give Bella8991 another chance...all I've proposed is she lose only Bureaucrat rights since she is making some kind of effort. Only Raurauslly.music should be left without rights due to a complete lack of engagement with the community.

        Loading editor
    • Also, I understand your concern for this wiki, but there's no reason to call people out unless they are vandalising or spamming the wiki. I see that removing Bella's bureaucrat rights and transferring it to Dragonboy would ensure the maintenance of this site, but it doesn't make Bella an unsuitable admin. Yes, she deserves a second chance, but let us learn from our mistakes instead of pointing them out and deeming them as "laughable". Please keep in mind I'm not trying to reprimand you, I'm just sharing my thoughts to help this wiki. I know that you're trying to help as well, but please keep in mind that we're here to help out the wiki and not condemn other users unless they are vandalising this wiki.

        Loading editor
    • You're quite right...the "laughable" comment was unnecessary and I apologize. But I still stand by my proposal to relieve Bella8991 of Bureaucrat rights but leaving her Admin rights. Raurauslly.music should be relieved of Admin rights. If I had my way, all the Admins would be demoted so that we could start from scratch and actually have a community vote about who really needs the tools, but I see that's not happening.

        Loading editor
    • I don't see how demoting all the admins would help, since there would be no one to regularly maintain the site, but I do agree with Raurauslly.music being relieved of her rights, and Bella deserves a second chance and should remain an admin.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, that's why I said it's "not happening." However, I am glad someone agrees with my proposals.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, but I just don't want to put people in a bad position when they really mean no harm. Sometimes, life just gets ya.

        Loading editor
    • It's not really a bad position. An Admin who doesn't use their tools wouldn't even realize a difference if they were demoted, unless they view it as a status, which is its own problem altogether.

        Loading editor
    • I agree with relieving Raurauslly.music of admin rights. An admin should e a little active, and definitely should not have an Inactive tag. I'm surprised she was even left an admin for that long.

        Loading editor
    • It has now been six nmonths since Raurauslly.music has made an edit to a page. I think the time to remove her rights is now.

      As for Bella8991, I'm not so sure about retaining EITHER Bureaucrat or Admin rights. Her inactivity and poor edits has proven to me that she is not nearly involved enough for Bureaucrat status, but after some thinking, a recent issue has caused me to cast doubt on my previous assessment that she was at least deserving of keeping Admin rights:

      http://frozen.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:13976

      That is some great impartiality right there. I ended the edit conflict as presented in the policy but Bella8991 makes the automatic assumption that I sabotaged the page? It was ridiculous to say the least, especially when two users agreed on my behalf on a separate message (http://frozen.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:13973). An Admin should take the time to consider the whole situation, not jump on the user who is giving them a hard time about their activity, especially when EVERYTHING I've said here has been supported by proof of edit histories. It hasn't even been a month for me and I've edited more articles than Bella8991, which is pretty crazy.

      I was willing to make concessions before, but this event has seriously hurt those chances.

        Loading editor
    • Please look at my reply in the "Edit war" thread. I would like for you to read it because I see you are dissatisfied of my actions.

        Loading editor
    • I'm still dissatisfied. It's just another thing to add to your poor history as an Admin and Bureaucrat here. It just sounds like you're making excuses at this point. First you claim that you're sorry for jumping to conclusions, then you say that it's a technique you use to evaluate the situation...doesn't add up.

        Loading editor
    • Look, I don't think Bella meant to be of any harm. She made a mistake, as we all do. It was a mistake on her part, but we should give her a second chance. She has just returned to this wiki, so all she needs is some more time to "recuperate" on this wiki. Her rights will only be removed if she once again remains inactive, but seeing as how she has just returned, I see no reason to remove her rights.

        Loading editor
    • An Admin shouldn't need adjusting to how a wiki runs. Ensuring things run smoothly is their job so I find giving Bella8991 a chance to recuperate to be a little ridiculous.

        Loading editor
    • Maybe we should give Bella some more time, and if she proves to be as incompetent as you say then, maybe then we shall question her rights.

        Loading editor
    • I feel as if I should leave. Seeing how things are now here with me, I'm not enjoying it at all. I miss when I used to enjoy my experience here but now I see it as a way to just make me see bad in myself. It doesn't help especially when there are things that are mentally happening with me. Now that I see it, me not being an admin really is for the better. I understand seeing that one person is dissatisfied with me but seeing how making one mistake can seem as if it has done so much harm to my reputation and to others and I don't want to deal with that any longer. Heimr is trying to be "lenient" with me and I'm trying my best myself but I see that isn't working out.  

        Loading editor
    • This is getting a bit ridiculous now... This thread is being completely counter-productive. We are not going to lose members over stuff like this.

      Heimr only seems to be putting across his view; he starts of basically everything with "I think..." or "I have been..." This is not always a good way to put something across. Although ultimately everything is "what you think", the things that you write should be put across objectively and with full reasoning.

      I was going to put a post up here earlier questioning how productive this thread is actually being for the amount of time that it has been up. It has not been productive. Heimr is the only one calling for this change, and by persisting there has been a lot of upset and animosity, whether intentional or not. Bella, I feel really bad about the whole "edit war" saga, but please don't allow that to get in the way here. Only Heimr is holding it against you. I think that I can talk for Jjuser and I when we say that we are willing to put that aside. I read what you posted, and it seemed reasonable to me.

      I also feel bad about how you feel outside of the Wiki; if you are not mentally up to being on the Wiki, and don't enjoy the experience, then that is fair enough. That being said, we are all supposed to enjoy the experience here, but how can it be enjoyable when something like this persists for so long? Ultimately, you decide whether to stay or not, but it seems as though Heimr is the only one directly asking you to give up your rights. I do not see this as necessary.

      In fact, if you want to talk, I would like to say that - at least from a Frozen perspective - we are your friends, and are willing to listen. That's if you want to talk. If you are going to start editing again, I want you to be comfortable, and I want you to enjoy your time here.

        Loading editor
    • I definitely agree. Bella should be enjoying her experience here, and she's not feeling very comfortable in real life, so wouldn't it make it much worse if people were shining light on her wrongs? Everyone makes mistakes on here and any other wiki you find...it's natural.

        Loading editor
    • Consider this: This Wiki is for me somewhat of a sanctuary from the unrelenting, perpetual, pervasive, humdrum of life outside. Without the Wiki and its members, I would feel a part of me was missing. If I didn't have Frozen, I would be a mess. Frozen is what helps me get through the day, and so does this Wiki. I try to use other means which help, but Frozen is the jewel in the crown. I'm not sure if it does for Bella, but if it does help even a little bit, then let's ensure that we do our bit to help her. As I say, this thread has run its course, and now we are simply demoralising people, which is completely counter productive. Not just for the Wiki, but for our state of minds.

        Loading editor
    • I'm sorry for whatever real life problem Bella8991 may be dealing with but an appeal to sympathy hardly accounts for the poor contributions. I repeat myself, the important thing to ask here is: What are users like Bella8991 and Raurauslly.music gaining from their rights? What have they done for the wiki as of late that cannot be done by any other user? Bella8991 has even stated that Adminship isn't something to be treated as a title but that is exactly what is done with it. The Admin tools Bella8991 and Raurauslly.music have been provided are not being used, therefore they have no need of them and the position has no value outside of being a title of sorts.

      Mojojojo13579, asking me to not point out flaws in Administration here due to Bella8991's personal problems is hardly relevant. That just corroborates the notion that Bella8991 views Adminship as an elevated status. The only thing that will satisfy me is if you can empirically refute the proof I've given. Anything else is just a way to evade the fact that the Administration needs prodding. You say that I am not being objective about this Humphry02, but the funny thing is, I have provided a fair amount of evidence (see my posts above). If anything, you are the one letting emotions play into the situation. Currently, the burden rests on you to contradict my evidence but I can safely say you won't be able to.

      Also, I'd like to note that even though it seems like I'm focusing on Bella8991, I am just as concerned about Raurauslly.music and would appreciate it if I got more opinions on that. Mojojojo13579 and Humphry02, you both have yet to comment regarding Raurauslly.music.

        Loading editor
    • I haven't been commenting about Raurauslly.music because I wasn't able to contact her. Raurauslly.music has sent me an email a few days ago about her inactivity and she has real life things to do, such as several recitals and studying. She's not saying that she won't give up her admin status since she's been inactive for a long time.

        Loading editor
    • I have commented on Raurauslly.music before, and all I have to say is that the policy must be acted upon. I know that real-life activities can get in the way, but we must be consistent with the policy and its rules. We can't just abandon protocol and ignore it, since the rules are established for a reason.

      As for Bella, I say that it's really up to her. We can give her a second chance, and she can redeem herself if she is willing to commit to this wiki once again. As you've been saying Heimr, adminship is not affiliated with rank, so we all are users...that make mistakes. I say that Bella should be able to pick herself back up and readjust to this wiki, since she has just rejoined. However, the decision really lies within Bella, and if she feels that it is best to leave the wiki for a while and give her duties to another admin, then that is that. Since Bella is not feeling comfortable in this wiki, and since she does lack the proper qualifications for adminship, as Heimr says, the policy must be acted upon in order to help keep this wiki running. Bella, if you feel that it's best to abstain from this wiki for awhile, remember that, if you ever decide to come back, we will welcome you once again and make sure that everyone is safe and comfortable in this wiki.

      So in conclusion (this just turned into some sort of short, mini essay xD), since Bella is not feeling her best, we should relieve her of her duties and pass on the "b-crat" rights to Dragonboy in order to keep this wiki up and running.

        Loading editor
    • We can't just abandon protocol and ignore it, since the rules are established for a reason.

      Truer words have never been spoken. Also, I didn't want to put it that way due to sensitivity, but since Jjuser has pointed it out,

      Since Bella is not feeling comfortable in this wiki, and since she does lack the proper qualifications for adminship...the policy must be acted upon in order to help keep this wiki running.

        Loading editor
    • No, no, I didn't mean that you haven't provided objective reasoning, I mean that the way you talk of yourself being lenient and all - it's just not always good to start a sentence with "I think..."

      "...starts of basically everything with "I think..." or "I have been..." This is not always a good way to put something across. Although ultimately everything is "what you think", the things that you write should be put across objectively and with full reasoning."

      Again, I wasn't saying that you haven't provided some objectivity. And what you have put across objectively, I don't deny. I am not going to say that you are wrong. All that I am saying is that after you have said that, you then start going on about how "lenient" you are being; it doesn't matter how lenient you find yourself - it's not your leniency that decides where we go from here. Plus I didn't say that you were playing emotions; I'm not playing emotions. I was just summing up the feelings that have been aroused from this discussion. Whether rights are revoked or not, there is no need to be insensitive and inconsiderate to how others feel, especially if Bella feel how she says she feels.

      And all what you have said doesn't go far enough to challenge that this thread has run its course, and now we need to stop discussing, and make some decisions. This is going on too long now.

      As far as Raurauslly.music is concerned, rights should be removed seeing as there has been no stirring, so not even an attempt to give reason for a lack of activity.

        Loading editor
    • Again, I hardly think that Bella8991's personal issues have any bearing on her evaluation. To use that as a crutch for her poor administrative skills is nothing more than making excuses. Call me insensitive, but truth be told, if Bella8991 really does have issues that are affecting her experience here on the wiki, it's for the greater good that her rights be removed. Jjuser essentially said the same thing and I agree wholeheartedly.

      The thread has not run its course. Rather, you have failed to reject what I've presented and are falling back on "please give Bella8991 a second chance." This is where I was being lenient. I presented the option of keeping Admin rights but removing Bureaucrat rights. This was perfectly reasonable especially since everyone here even agreed that Dragonboy6491 would be a suitable replacement. But Bella8991 refused to step down despite acknowledging her incompetence and has since gone on to worsen her case with her assumption during our edit war, which brings me back to my original stance of taking more extreme measures.

      Despite this, I am glad you accept that Raurauslly.music needs her rights removed.

        Loading editor
    • They sort of do because they are the reason for her absence. I wasn't making excuses for her, I was simply saying that she is not feeling great and that we should try and be slightly more understanding. If we are going to give her a second chance, then let's start considering that.

      I think that the thread has run its course. We have reached that point in a thread now where everything has been said, now we are simply finding other ways to say it. I wasn't the first to say that about "giving Bella a second chance"... I am not even saying that a second chance is what's best. It probably isn't from what she has said herself. However, if we do go with a second chance, then I am for that, but only if it is agreed upon. By this I mean if we decide to give her a second chance, then I will do my best to make that second chance for her worth it. I am not saying, "Yeah, I agree with you, but let's giver Bella a second chance anyway". And I never failed to reject what you were saying, I never disagreed with what you have said from an objective standpoint in the first place. We all agreed that Dragonboy could replace her, but does he want to? I don't think that she ever said that she wouldn't step down - we haven't got to that point of ordering her to through community census, and then her saying "no" then.

      As I say, I am all for the removal of Raurauslly.music's rights... We just need to contact her, or simply get them removed without informing her.

        Loading editor
    • If you feel the thread has run its course then perhaps we should vote on this: a) We can choose to give Bella8991 a completely new slate and let her off completely b) We can choose to give Bella8991 a second chance at Adminship but revoking her Bureaucrat status c) We can choose to strip Bella8991 of all rights. You all seem sympathetic to Bella8991's situation, but I honestly think she has to at least face option b). Violating policy is violating policy so Bella8991 has to lose something due to her track record. If she ever wants Bureaucrat status back, she can always apply.

      This voting should also be extended to Raurauslly.music, except we will simply vote to keep or remove Admin rights.

        Loading editor
    • That seems fair. I would say "b", but also say that we treat this with some sensitivity. i.e. if she starts to do more editing, then let's not mock or be too harsh if there are a few errors made to begin with.

      And I vote for the complete unconditional removal of Raurauslly.music's rights.

        Loading editor
    • I do agree that this has gone on quite long enough, so please vote on what needs to be done. Since there are four administrators, please clearly state what you believe should happen to each in the following format:


      Bella8991:

      Dragonboy6491:

      Mojojojo13579:

      Raurauslly.music:


      Remember to sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~).

        Loading editor
    • Bella8991: Removal of Bureaucrat rights, but keep Admin ones. The reasoning I've given is all over this thread at this point.

      Dragonboy6491: I've been convinced by Humphry02 and Fruipit that he has been active enough to keep his rights. He should also replace Bella8991 as Bureaucrat. However, he still has been inactive recently so we should keep an eye on his contributions.

      Mojojojo13579: Similarly, has been active enough to keep rights. However, Mojojojo13579 still has been inactive recently so we should keep an eye on their contributions.

      Raurauslly.music: Removal of Admin rights due to both a lack of edits and an unexplained absence.

      I also propose creating a page like the nominations page except it would be for demotions so that these kinds of issues can be brought up more easily. Heimr Arnadalr (talk) 13:59, March 10, 2015 (UTC)

        Loading editor
    • May I just say that admins should vote on the course of action to take regarding other admins. Wasn't sure if Dragonboy was going to vote.

      Bella8991: Removal of bureaucrat rights, but only if Dragonboy is willing to take up the new position because we need to have a bureaucrat. Bella should keep admin rights, but only for an indefinite period; if inactivity persists then I will advocate the full removal of rights.

      Dragonboy6491: I can't speak more highly of Dragonboy. Although he has an inactivity card up, he is still the only one doing all that he can to ensure that the Wiki stays running. I don't think that there is any reason to criticise "inactivity", because he has been active. May we also remember just how small this Wiki is, and 24/7 maintenance isn't necessarily needed. Dragonboy is here enough to make sure that nothing goes wrong. Keep admin rights, and if he wishes to he may take up bureaucrat rights.

      Mojojojo13579: Keep admin rights, but I recommend that we revise Mojo's activity in one month. If inactivity continues, further action may be required.

      Raurauslly.music: Complete removal of all rights.

      Humphry02 (talk) 16:24, March 10, 2015 (UTC)

        Loading editor
    • Bella8991: Bella should be relieved of her bureaucrat rights, but should keep her admin rights until further notice.

      Dragonboy6491: Dragonboy should recieve bureaucrat rights as he is the most active admin on this wiki.

      Mojojojo13579: Mojo should keep her admin rights unless further (prolonged) inactivity ensues.

      Raurauslly.music: Removal of admin rights due to prolonged inactivity.

      Jjuser (talk) 23:32, March 11, 2015 (UTC)

        Loading editor
    • Bella8991: By the most, Bella should be demoted of her bureaucrat status and in agreement, she should keep her administrative rights.

      Dragonboy6491: Due to all the hard work he's been putting into his edits, I say he should be promoted as bureaucrat, if anything.

      Mojojojo13579: I, myself, believe that a bureaucrat should not be this inactive (a roundabout a month) - it was inexcusable and irresponsible of me to be gone for a lengthy time without a proper reason and this also meant that I didn't keep up with the updates. However expect no more long-term absenses from me, I'll try to stay active as much as possible.

      Raurauslly.music: Currently very occupied with real-life duties and probably has no time for Wikia until summer. I vote on a removal of her rights and Raurauslly.music understands what'll subsequently happen (she emailed me about this).

        Loading editor
    • Heimr Arnadalr wrote:

      I also propose creating a page like the nominations page except it would be for demotions so that these kinds of issues can be brought up more easily.

      I don't think that's necessary. Discussion forums work just as well, and honestly, how often do you expect such an issue to arise that warrants the creation of a specific page for it?

        Loading editor
    • I just want to preface this by saying that I still firmly believe that removing an admin/'crat requires consideration beyond their activity levels; these users were entrusted with extra tools for a reason and thus, there should be an equally compelling reason to revoke them. An inactive admin/'crat may not be good for a large wiki, but our community is small, so management is easier. To remove the inactive admins/'crats when the site is not suffering from their absence, and when the admins have been in touch with each other off-wiki and understand each others' situations, seems rather excessive to me. If there ever comes a time where the admins/'crats become inactive to the extent that there is absolutely no communication occurring amongst themselves and the users, I can understand considering removal, but this is hardly the case here. If this is about paving the way for new admins/'crats, I don't really buy into that either since nominations can be opened with just a click, and in cases of emergency, rules can be overlooked, and someone trustworthy can quickly obtain the necessary rights.


      Bella8991: No changes to user rights due to above reasoning.

      Dragonboy6491: No changes to user rights due to above reasoning.

      Mojojojo13579: No changes to user rights due to above reasoning.

      Raurauslly.music: No changes to user rights due to above reasoning.


      Should it come to it, however, I will gladly take on 'crat responsibilities ... thanks again for the vote of confidence.

      Regarding making a separate page for demotions ... I oppose per Fruipit's reasoning.

      Dragonboy6491 (talk) 12:46, March 12, 2015 (UTC)

        Loading editor
    • Since it has been three days, I took the liberty of contacting Wikia Staff so that the decision would undoubtedly be carried out. Bella8991 is no longer a Bureaucrat. However, they said that it is up to Mojojojo13579 to carry out the act of removing Raurauslly.music's rights and promoting Dragonboy6491 to Bureaucrat.

      Just thought I'd let you know :P. Feel free to close this up.

        Loading editor
    • There was absolutely no need for you to contact staff like that. I have no doubt that Bella would have stepped down of her own accord due to consensus ... but what's done is done.

      It has been three days though, so the results are as follows:


      Bella8991 will lose her bureaucrat rights but retain adminship: 4 votes for (Heimr Arnadalr, Humphry02, Jjuser, Mojojojo13579), 1 against (Dragonboy6491)

      Dragonboy6491 will be promoted to bureaucrat: 4 votes for (Heimr Arnadalr, Humphry02, Jjuser, Mojojojo13579)

      Mojojojo13579 will have no changes to her user rights: 5 votes for (Heimr Arnadalr, Humphry02, Jjuser, Mojojojo13579, Dragonboy6491)

      Raurauslly.music will lose her admin rights: 4 votes for (Heimr Arnadalr, Humphry02, Jjuser, Mojojojo13579), 1 against (Dragonboy6491)


      Discussion is finished; thank you to all who participated.

        Loading editor
    • Alright then, I'll remove Raurauslly.music's admin rights and promote Dragon to a bureaucrat.

        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+