Forum:Should Administrators have the right to extend Patroller privileges?

Forums: Index > Wiki discussion > Should Administrators have the right to extend Patroller privileges?

Patrollers have always been an important position here at Nukapedia, helping us patrol our Recent Changes and clean up edits as they come in. While Patrollers do gain a couple of additional tools to help in this endeavor, the position is also a highly symbolic one, as it's our way of showing trust in promising editors and emboldening them to step up and contribute in a bigger way.

To keep this discussion simple and to the point, historically speaking only Bureaucrats have had the power to grant Patroller rights, but this isn't always the case on many other wikis, and with community consensus, Wikia Staff can broaden this power to the rest of the Administration as well. Regarding this, I would like to bring up two major points for consideration before I move onto a vote, and of course you all are free to express additional thoughts in the comments section as well: ^寧靜 15:13, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

---

Should Administrators be able to grant Patroller rights?

I support the option to allow administrators to grant patroller rights. To share my background, I am an active mentor within the Vault Academy, I patrol edits daily and as a result of both, am familiar with individuals' editing competencies as well as interactions with the community. Being on the factory floor daily, I would consider myself to have a good vantage point and judgment on determining whether an editor would be a good fit for the role, and the right timing for granting these rights. I am likewise confident in my compatriot for making these decisions.

Providing the option for administrators would serve to improve our community, adding additional individuals to those able to identify promising editors, increasing our pool of much needed patrollers. I think as far as operationally, we should maintain the process we have now, with interested users requesting rights via talk page, merely extending the option for users to make this request to administrators alongside bureaucrats. -kdarrow ^{take her for a spin!} 22:33, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

---

I'm not that keen to give admins that option. I'm slightly willing to, but the admins eligible to grant them, must be active in the article mainspace; they have the experience and (user) know-how there, and after all patroller is mainspace related. So Kate, Dave and AYF would qualify. Jspoel 12:58, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

---

Comments

Neutral thought: Would a change do much? Unless I'm mistaken, an admin can already go and suggest someone to become patroller to a Crat, who can then decide whether to agree with the largely-symbolic promotion or not. If admins were allowed to give users patroller, wouldn't a crat still ultimately have the final say on whether the patroller rank is approved?

Not arguing for or against this idea, as it sounds interesting in theory, just not sure if it'd actually alter much. |\| () |\/| /\ |) | Talk | Discord | NMC 02:56, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

I think that it would probably speed up the whole process of granting a promising user patroller rights. In my case, I had to be patient for two months - offered my services on October 27th, was promoted on January 3rd. I don't know if that is the usual evaluation period and I don't want to judge the whole process or any bureaucrats involved in it. My point is, that I could have easily lost interest in attaining that position during that waiting period. And of course I didn't inquired about it with the bureaucrats directly, my first point of contact regarding that matter was my former mentor, who happens to be an admin, which brings my story full circle. --Findabair^{The benefit of the doubt is often doubtful.} 05:34, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

This should be an admin-level privilege. Scribe-Howard (waster_93) (talk) 08:26, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

It's already sparingly given. If I hand out patroller rights, it's almost always with the potential prospect of that person eventually becoming admin in mind. That should generally be the grade measure. Jspoel 12:58, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

I think this is a good idea. It feels like there are more inactive staff members than active ones and this would help speed up the process of getting new staff members in place and trained. To piggy-back off Findabair's comment, I watched how long it took to get him and intrepid promoted and it seemed unnecessarily long when everyone involved had already approved it. Also, coming from being active in discussions primarily on Discord, it feels like there is closer collaboration and communication between editors and admins than with editors and bcrats. So I feel that admins will know the editors better. A counter point to Jspoelstra's concern, not every staff member will seek to continue moving up. Currently I don't have the time to devote to a staff position, but when and if I do, I don't see myself being interested in admin or above due to real life responsibilities. So holding potential patrollers up to the standard of an admin seems a little onerous to me. Take each step when it's appropriate to do so. However, I do agree that the admins that have this ability should be limited to those who are active in the main namespace. Seems only logical. Gilpo1 (talk) 02:27, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Do we have any additional thoughts before I move this over to a vote? ^寧靜 21:54, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

It's up to you if you want to include it, but if you don't restrict it to the admins I mentioned, I'd be voting no myself. Your discretion. Jspoel 13:07, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Just based off the comments, there's some serious discrepancies in the rationales between J's preferences for patroller rights being issued compared to the more liberal roll out of patroller rights being proposed. I would like to hear more from him on this front, if only because several folks have voiced support or interest for the propositions, and he's said relatively little, despite being one of the few people who is both against the preposition and is currently able to dispense such rights. If patroller rights are being handed out intentionally sparingly, the proposition aims to change that at a fundamental level. Are there any particular pit falls or complaints that lead to the no vote, at least for right now?

I just don't want an admin handing out patroller rights while he's not active in the mainspace himself and has little to no overview on how the prospect patroller has been doing in activity, talent and interchange with others. N.B. If an admin would become more active and wants to be able to hand out patroller rights, I'd suggest he'd ask a bureaucrat to judge him for giving those rights to others. Jspoel 16:22, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

• Looks like the current purpose being voiced is as a marker for growth in perspective future admins, so is the fear that larger numbers of patrollers or larger number of rights users able to dispense rights would diminish this purpose?
• And avoiding a mess with inactive admin having free reign to hand out patroller rights, when they may not be active enough to know the user base makes sense. But is there any more to it than that?

Looking at some of the other users comments, part of their rationale for favoring the proposition seems to be confusion at the time table and actual process for making patroller. If, by design, it is not an overnight process maybe one solution might be to better explain what to expect for prospective patrollers, just so they do not feel like they have been left high and dry, if there's a good reason for what's going on. The Dyre Wolf (talk) 03:14, 3 April 2021 (UTC)