Forum:Discussion: Former administrators archive

Forums: Index > Wiki discussion > Discussion: Former administrators archive

Hello everyone. Following the discussion of Porter's extra rights, and that of recognizing former contributors, I decided (mostly for my own amusement) to create and archive of former administrators here on Nukapedia. With the archive now complete, I brought up the possibility of adding the archive to the administrators page in chat, and while there was some support, there was also some resistance to the idea, so I'm bringing it to a discussion to try and gauge community consensus.

I would like to discern what this is about, and what it is not. The idea of this page it to have a historical archive of former administrators for those who are interested enough to peruse it. It is about preserving information, and not for recognizing or singling out the contributions of any one individual, or to diminish the contributions of the community as a whole. It is merely about conserving the information and providing access to it.

The way I would propose adding this to the admin page is via a simple link to an archive page, much like Halo Nation does. The other way we could display it is by listing them all on the administrators page, like the WoWwiki. Agent c also suggested displaying it on the 'About' page, so that is another possibility. While it is currently limited to only admins, we could also add any user who held extra rights at one time, including chat moderators, patrollers, and rollbackers. This would be some extra work, but I could do it if the community would like it added.

Considering two other major wikis have pages like this, I don't see a reason to not include the information. For those who want to see the archive in it's current form, it can be found in my sandbox here. I'm travelling at the moment, so I won't be as active as normal but I will do my best to respond to any questions and misconceptions if and when they arise. Thanks everyone.

 A Follower  Talk  21:39, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

Comments/Discussion

I, personally, have no problem with an archive of former extra rights holders. I believe it should be created as a sub-page of the admin page and could have a link to it on both the admin page (we could use the {{For}} template: "This page is for current extra rights holders, for past extra rights holders, please see.....) and the about page. And if we list any former extra rights holders, we should list them all. The Gunny   21:52, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with everything Gunny said. Hit the nail on the head for me. --The Old World Relics ^{(talk/blog/contributions)} 21:53, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

A solid idea. I can see it being a useful reference source in the future. --Skire (talk) 21:55, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

I think it should be on the about page... "About" features are often used in software as a credit page (or link to em). Agent c (talk) 22:35, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

I missed that bit... FW:ABOUT is indeed the appropriate place for such a page, not FW:ADMIN (or a sub-page thereof). --Skire (talk) 23:05, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

For what its worth I fully support this idea. --RAM 22:40, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

Would this mean everyone from Duck & Cover times, The Vault, etc would be in there? Or would this be strictly Nukapedia? "Some say this user is a Patroller..." 22:47, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure we need this. Our articles are our top priority, and I suppose community features are secondary. But individual users-- even those with special rights-- are really tertiary. How can we benefit from this idea, and is it really needed? The sandbox looks nice, but it's pretty useless. 69.l25 (talk) 22:59, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

I think we should just focus on the time this wiki was formed and not worry about the Duck & Cover stuff. As far as if its needed I'm sure there are newer users who are curious about past administrators and its always good to archive history. --RAM 23:03, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

Yes, people are curious about a lot of things, but what makes this special? 69.l25 (talk) 23:05, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

Its a part of what has made this wiki what it is and a part of its history. Plus we really don't lose anything by having it and most of the work on it is already done so I really don't see any reason why not. We archive so much on this wiki from Talk Pages to Forum Post to Blog Post to in part preserve the history of this site. Why should this be any different. --RAM 23:12, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with 69, we don't need this... I do however, understand the want for it. Archiving our past admins will appease those who believe that we should pay homage to the admins that helped shape our wiki. Kinda going off what Ram said, this is more of page to satisfy curiosity. I personally would like to know more about Nukapedia's past and would've liked a page like the one being proposed to have existed when I first joined the site. --MountHail (talk) 23:19, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a nice extra to have, but it's nothing more than that. People want it, and I'm sure it's going to get done, but the purpose of this site isn't to provide a history lesson (despite what my presidents blog may lead you to think). Though, since we have a "draft" it won't distract too much. My only other question is why we're listing only the founders, bureaucrats, and admins. Should we incorporate all former special-rights users? 69.l25 (talk) 23:49, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

The exchange between Kennynator and Garoux while he was logged out the other day comes to mind as a reason to list everyone. Great Mara (talk) 23:51, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

Yes we should include everyone who has ever had special rights. --RAM 23:53, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

I'm cool with that. --MountHail (talk) 23:58, February 21, 2014 (UTC)

Just to keep a record of who used to be an administrator so that their contributions aren't forgotten? Seems pointless, and that's coming from an ex-administrator. That being said it also doesn't cause any harm so there's no risk involved in creating such a page. 00:03, February 22, 2014 (UTC)

@69, "Those who do not know their history are bond to repeat it." I would like to refer you to "The Split" and everyone involved. I for one did not know there was a split until half-way into my involvement into this wiki, but when I found out I researched who was involved but it took way to long to find the name and such. This would be a great reference and help us out greatly. "Some say this user is a Patroller..." 00:05, February 22, 2014 (UTC)

You're not going to learn much about the split if you just look at a page about past admins. Oh and here's my quote: "We learn from history that we do not learn from history." (Quotes are just pick-and-choosey). And I don't know if it'll help us, but I don't see all that much harm coming from it, which seems to be enough for some. 69.l25 (talk) 00:15, February 22, 2014 (UTC)

No I wouldn't learn much by looking at ot, but I would learn about said parties involved or why people lost rights or why they aren't here. Example: Itachou resigned due to real life issues. I wouldn't know unless I asked members who were here at that time. (not many left.) "Some say this user is a Patroller..." 00:29, February 22, 2014 (UTC)

A page like this, then, may lead only to more questions, which seems pointless if we're trying to help people learn about our history-- a goal some have alluded to. 69.l25 (talk) 00:46, February 22, 2014 (UTC)

I support this, but when are we going to stop constantly talking about users who don't anything/much anymore? There are bigger fish to fry. Stars and Stripes (talk) 01:00, February 22, 2014 (UTC)