Forum:Use a "probation" usergroup to control user/forumspace edits

The current modus operandi for dealing with users that abuse userspace and forumspace is to simply lock their user pages and/or block them. This is a bit inelegant; large userspaces have to be protected one at a time, and blocking for forum overuse is a bit too much in some cases. I'm thinking using something from Bulbapedia may help: a usergroup that revokes edit access to the User and Forum namespaces. Users that require it can be put into the group and they will no longer be able to edit such pages, but will remain able to edit the mainspace, allowing them the chance to be productive. It doesn't have an auto-timeout like protection does but would be a much cleaner solution overall, placing the limit on the user instead of the page. Discuss. Toomai Glittershine The Bold 22:15, 27 August 2012 (EDT)

I do see this as the better alternative to the way the things have been running, but I feel if we warned users rather than just blocking them editing them from editing the userspace, more problems would be solved easier. If I'm remembering correctly, I've seen OT protect user pages of users on whim without prior warning. Warning a user is more likely to make them productive then just blocking them from editing their userspace, as doing the latter usually just causes them to leave. DoctorPain99 {ROLLBACKER} 22:33, 27 August 2012 (EDT)

I support, due to the fact that it would be cool to have a tool that partially blocks users, not from editing at all, but from editing their userpages and forums.--Bandit 22:41, 27 August 2012 (EDT)

One major flaw I see with this is that admins would be unable to put users in probation, despite it being reasonable for admins to have this power. It forces us to have to rely on the only active bureaucrat Toomai to implement the actual probation. If this limitation could be bypassed however, I would support this.

Also DP99, users have been warned to stop editing their userpage excessively, and still left after their page got protected rather than actually do anything to get it unprotected. I also find it incredibly unlikely such users would actually stay if they got probation instead (and I think probation would encourage them to leave even more, as they also lose forum editing rights and therefore access to Smash Arena). Regardless, any user that would leave over userpage protection for not putting in any constructive work is not a user we would want around here anyway, and should not be a concern. Omega Tyrant 23:40, 27 August 2012 (EDT)

(edit conflict) That is the point that I am trying to make, that no matter how users are prohibited, whether it be by a probation userright or a protection of their user page, they aren't as likely to want to contribute than if they are warned to keep it to a minimum, so while I don't directly oppose this policy, I feel that it's not really necessary. And ah, I coulda swore there was at least one or two cases where you didn't warn, but alas, I might be mistaken. DoctorPain99 {ROLLBACKER} 01:47, 28 August 2012 (EDT)

I support this proposal, with Omega Tyrant's power considerations in mind. Mr. Anontalk 00:24, 28 August 2012 (EDT)

@DP99: Yes, in either case, the majority of offending users are going to just leave or ignore it. Regardless, it's more beneficial to the Wiki to have something in place that will prevent them from editing userspace/forums while still allowing them to contribute, than to just warn and then (likely) block them from contributing at all. Omega Tyrant 02:46, 28 August 2012 (EDT)

Yes the fact that admins are unable to change user rights is the big technical stumbler, and I'm pretty sure the ability to change user rights cannot be restricted to controlling certain groups. Still, the current state of the wiki is that users that require this action are pretty rare, so I would accept the fact that it has to go through a bureaucrat.

One option is for me to create a bot with bureaucrat powers, and when admins post the names of users on its talk page it probates/unprobates them. It's a bit beyond the near future but is certainly a possibility. Toomai Glittershine The Loony 10:29, 28 August 2012 (EDT)

Support. I myself have been restricted from editing other users' userspaces on another Wiki; it'll be great for the offending users to know just how I feel. RickTommy (talk) 01:43, 28 August 2012 (EDT)

I Support this, especially with the traffic system in place. ScoreCounter (talk) 03:37, 28 August 2012 (EDT)

Support Dots Ready for School 09:29, 28 August 2012 (EDT)

Support. I'm always irked by users who do nothing but edit their userpage and vote in the Smash Arena. Air Conditioner 15:45, 28 August 2012 (EDT)

Support. Hoverwind2 at your service dude! 17:20, 28 August 2012 (EDT)

Support. Mousehunter321 (talk · contributions) 01:45, 29 August 2012 (EDT)

Support PSIWolf The one and only! 03:31, 29 August 2012 (EDT)

Support. I might regret saying this, but it sounds like a good idea (even though i seem to edit my userspace most of the time, because it' hard for me to find any other articles). But then i will also have to stop editing my userspace too much.

However, i think it would be better to temporarily prevent users form editing userspace for like 1 or 2 months. SonicRules i like Sonic, Mario and Link August 29th 2012 (UTC 1+)

The only way to do that is to protect userspace as it is currently done, or put users in the planned probation usergroup (the latter of which is a more effective method). Omega Tyrant 11:04, 29 August 2012 (EDT)

Support ShupaRoeh 22:17, 29 August 2012 (EDT)

Total Support: This is a fantastic idea. Even I approve this, and I've done a lot of userspace editing recently. DarkFox01: Smashing in Summer 19:48, 30 August 2012 (EDT)

Support JamesHeartless 22:39, 30 August 2012 (EDT)

I Support as long as the users get a fair warning. ChuckNorris 16:23, 31 August 2012 (EDT)

Support --Havoc48 >:D!!! 18:02, 2 September 2012 (EDT)

I Strongly Support, this is a great idea!The Cheese 16:16, 3 September 2012 (EDT)

Support per Chuck Norris. Shanicpower Make it rain! 07:21, 11 September 2012 (EDT)

I Support per all of the above. The Awesome 15:40, 12 September 2012 (EDT)

This proposal had already been passed and implemented to the wiki long before you supported, please check these things before voting on anything. Toast ltimatum 15:54, 12 September 2012 (EDT)

As this has essentially-unanimous support, I intend to have it implemented soon should no sudden opposition occur. Toomai Glittershine The Xanthic 14:27, 7 September 2012 (EDT)