Forum:Page creation rights

From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Forums: Index Proposals Page creation rights
Checkmark.png This is a closed discussion about an accepted proposed change on SmashWiki. It remains for archival purposes.

So recently a lot of newer users have been wondering why they are unable to create page or upload images. The reason for this is because page creation is restricted to autoconfirmed users only. Now, this was a necessary measure there for a while (and this was not the case when I first joined SW a year or so ago), but now, with Smash 4 done and over with, I think that we could possibly put it back to regular old users (Not IPs) without too many issues. Anyway, I wanted to see what you all had to say, so discuss here. Serpent SKSig.png King 21:19, 18 July 2016 (EDT)

Result: Yes passed Serpent SKSig.png King 00:36, 24 July 2016 (EDT)

Support[edit]

  1. I'd be fine with that. AidanzapunkSig1.pngAidan, the Wandering Dragon WarriorAidanzapunkSig2.png 21:21, 18 July 2016 (EDT)
  2. I see no real reason not to. BaconMasterBaconMasterSig.png 21:25, 18 July 2016 (EDT)
  3. User Consensus Kirby's Crazy Appetite ~ KirbysCrazyAppetiteSig.png 21:35, 18 July 2016 (EDT)
  4. Support: Bout time we got that back to normal anyway. Disaster Flare Disaster Flare signature image.png (talk) 23:03, 18 July 2016 (EDT)
  5. Strong Support To prevent spam pages. AlbumArt-Dixie.png TabuuandMasterCore 16:57, 19 July 2016 (EDT)
    Forget the last part, I meant to say that new users can create their pages and things is going to be when I was a non editor anon a few years ago. AlbumArt-Dixie.png TabuuandMasterCore 17:00, 19 July 2016 (EDT)
  6. I always felt that limiting new pages and uploads was a temporary measure, not a permanent restriction. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Pan-Galactic 22:51, 19 July 2016 (EDT)
  7. Can do. Dots (talk) Mega Man X SNES sprite.png The Portal 23:46, 19 July 2016 (EDT)
  8. Per others. I remember when I was a new user. I couldn't upload images, and I wasn't too happy. I want others to not have to deal with this. PenroImage.pngPenro 12:17, 20 July 2016 (EDT)
  9. Support per Toomai. Nyargleblargle.pngNyargleblargle (Contribs) 14:16, 21 July 2016 (EDT)

Oppose[edit]

  1. Oppose; the number of new pages we need is generally few, and it's not such an excessive obstacle to legitimate editors to warrant opening up the vandalism opportunities. Miles (talk) 23:35, 18 July 2016 (EDT)
    My main concern is uploads, actually. Serpent SKSig.png King 23:38, 18 July 2016 (EDT)
    More of a gray area, but if the two permission sets can't be separated, I'd err on the side of slightly more restrictive in this case. Miles (talk) 23:50, 18 July 2016 (EDT)
  2. Oppose per Miles. John John3637881 Signature.png PK SMAAAASH!! 13:15, 19 July 2016 (EDT)

Neutral[edit]

  1. Neutral AF. I don't have a strong opinion. On one hand, we have new people who want to make themselves known in the wiki. On the other hand, we risk people spamming recent changes with their user pages, and even if this means they'll get probated, I don't like the idea. That's why I am neutral. --BeepYouSignature.png BeepYou: is he leaving the wiki? (talk) 00:04, 19 July 2016 (EDT)
  2. Echoing BeepYou. 034.png DracoRexKing, Creator of the Land 00:33, 19 July 2016 (EDT)
  3. Support easing restrictions, oppose completely removing restrictions. While there may be fewer potential cases of vandalism in the coming months, the risk has not completely vanished. In 2011/2012ish, for instance, we had a repeat vandal constantly recreate a page on Geno, to the point where OT eventually salted the page.
    --- Monsieur Crow, Author Extraordinaire, 13:05, 19 July 2016 (EDT)
    The problem is that the upload permission requires the create page permission in order to work and there doesn't seem to be a way around that. Or did you mean something else by easing restrictions? Serpent SKSig.png King 14:11, 19 July 2016 (EDT)
    Was looking into lowering the requirements for autoconfirmed. 10 edits + 7 days is a bit excessive now, imo. Maybe reduce it to 3 edits and 2 days, or something similar.
    --- Monsieur Crow, Author Extraordinaire, 14:44, 19 July 2016 (EDT)
    I actually think that 10 edits; 7 days is a very reasonable period of time to restrict things like semi-protected page editing and such. Serpent SKSig.png King 00:55, 20 July 2016 (EDT)
  4. Not completely, maybe make it 10 edits OR 7 days, if it's possible PoultrysigSSB4.pngPoultryPoultrysigSSBM.png(talk) the God-Slayer 17:24, 22 July 2016 (EDT)

Comments[edit]

Could vandalism pages still be created by new users? Kirby's Crazy Appetite ~ KirbysCrazyAppetiteSig.png 21:27, 18 July 2016 (EDT)

Well yes, but with Smash 4 over, we are much more able to deal with that. Serpent SKSig.png King 21:33, 18 July 2016 (EDT)
The way I see it is this: Why bother giving the vandals a chance at all? John John3637881 Signature.png PK SMAAAASH!! 00:15, 20 July 2016 (EDT)
I think that is a very unhealthy and paranoid way to look at things. Think of it more like this: we are giving new legit users the tools they need to effectively edit our wiki instead of making them wait for 7 days; 10 edits... see all we are doing there is delaying potential help. Serpent SKSig.png King 00:52, 20 July 2016 (EDT)
You do have a point, but I think there's no harm in waiting a few days to get full editing rights. I mean, the first couple of edits I made were undone, and at this point, unless they're a user with lots of competitive knowledge, they don't really need to have the page creation ability right away. It was two months before I created a userpage (not to use myself as a "perfect example" or anything again lol) and while those are fun, they are also unnecessary, and shouldn't be the first action done by a new user, which is what would probably happen if they got page creation rights. John John3637881 Signature.png PK SMAAAASH!! 11:08, 20 July 2016 (EDT)
Lol fun fact, that's the first thing I did with mine. Anyway though, idk I just feel like such restrictions are hindering us more than helping. While I do see what you mean by not needing the page creation, all users (not ips) should be able to upload, and that is the main issue here. Serpent SKSig.png King 02:51, 21 July 2016 (EDT)
What do you suppose they will be uploading? I mean, it was some time before I uploaded anything to the wiki, and chances are people will just be uploading profile pics. Few people have the capacity to upload frame data pics for individual moves, which is what we need most imo.
This is a bit unrelated, but April Fools' Day is the main day where not just anyone should be allowed to edit. People make accounts on that day solely for the purpose of vandalizing without punishment. John John3637881 Signature.png PK SMAAAASH!! 15:10, 22 July 2016 (EDT)
What do you suppose they will be uploading?
Mostly from the smash scene. Smasher mugs, tournament logos, and such.
This is a bit unrelated, but April Fools' Day is the main day where not just anyone should be allowed to edit. People make accounts on that day solely for the purpose of vandalizing without punishment.
We can still take it back off for AFD of course. Serpent SKSig.png King 15:20, 22 July 2016 (EDT)
Eventhough I support it, people with inappropriate usernames if they create their userpage, they should be deleted. AlbumArt-Dixie.png TabuuandMasterCore 16:29, 22 July 2016 (EDT)
Nah, we give those people a chance to change their username to something more appropriate. Now if it doesn't seem that they are going to do that, then yeah it would get deleted. Serpent SKSig.png King 16:35, 22 July 2016 (EDT)
Well let's look at a example: this user hasn't have a rename, ever. It should of have been deleted a few months ago, but that user has never been renamed. That's what im trying to say. AlbumArt-Dixie.png TabuuandMasterCore 18:55, 22 July 2016 (EDT)