Forum:Title bar for registered GECK users

This forum page has been archived. Please do not make any further edits unless they are for maintenance purposes.

Forums: Index > Wiki discussion > Title bar for registered GECK users

Hey all, Slinger here. As you know we have had an influx of GECK users coming in lately and I feel the need to address this. I have been thinking of a new way to show these great people off...A new GECK title bar. This would be listed on the user page of any user who has ready-at-hand access to the GECK. While most title bars are given to those with "Special Rights" also known as SYSops, this one would be similar as while not having Wikia Tools at their disposal the have the GECK which makes the unique in the betterment of Nukapedia's future and present. These users should be given the same way to show off their unique tool access such as our patrollers.

Requirements

• Ready-at-hand access to the GECK.
• Maybe a certain number of weeks or months before user shows their skills and commitment.
• Registered user here before the implementation of this new title bar would receive it.
• Registered and Active SYSops with Access to GECK receive it.

I would love to hear feedback and support (and reasons not to have it) and revisions to the requirements in the Comments below.

Comments

I already agreed with this as soon as I saw the name for this forum in the WikiActivity.   OfficialLolGuy  Talk  Blog  09:17, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

Title bars are shnazzy, I like having my moderator one and some extra recognition for users, as well as easier identification of users with this tool make itde a win-win in my book.  A Follower  Talk  09:20, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

A great idea to help support our more technical-minded users with the editing software we rely on so much here. A little personal appreciation like this never hurts, and I fully agree with everything here. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 09:35, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

Seems like a great idea to me - ^Greets 10:52, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

I approve. This way we know who to go to for retrieving and validating GECK data.
I call them Gexperts (get it?) 11:00, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

Oh you ;) "Some say this user is a Patroller..." 18:21, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

I don't know about this. A lot of people think they know the GECK but really don't. You said one of the requirements is that a user has to "show their skills" with it, but how exactly could we judge that? 69.l25 (talk) 11:22, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

A test, divised by those who would only know the answer to, if they had prior knowledge of the software, and the way it functions. Using baseID's, it wouldn't be too difficult to come up with something fairly solid IMHO

Jenkins87^Talk 12:13, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

The only reservation I had in this discussion was how we'd be able to tell a good GECKspert from a novice. As such, I feel a quick test (perhaps even a training session like the new User network?) devised by our current GECKsperts would accomplish this perfectly.

The only question I have left is, "Who are our GECKsperts and how do we, the users, decide on it?" --The Ever Ruler (talk) 16:35, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

I would want to see this tied with a few other things. Our own guide to learn how to use it (perhaps emphasised to what we do rather than modding), and a test. But yeah, sounds good. Agent c (talk) 12:24, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

I don't see that much use for a title bar. A bit easy to get one this way, you've got to do something special to earn it in my opinion. You can already indicate by a user box you play on a pc and that way people would know there's a possiblity you're familiar with the GECK. Right now I only see 69 and myself using it to add data to infoboxes and haven't seen others use it for months now (as I remember it anyway, correct me if I'm wrong). Maybe we could add a GECK userlist section to the administrators page varying from inexperienced from knowledgable, so people would know who to contact, but that's about it. Jspoel 16:53, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

I disagree. I think we under-use our titlebars. TES has ones for Member of the Month among other things, and I don't see anything wrong a little bit of extra recognition, and I think learning the use of the GECK, as complicated as it is, is enough to earn it. From discussion in Chat, I think we were able to discern around 5 users with GECK proficiency, with a few other up-and-comers, so I think it is notable enough to warrant the title.  A Follower  Talk  17:11, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

My only concern is whether or not we would differentiate between users with the GECK for different games. Do we make different titlebars for each game's GECK, one for FNV GECk and one for FO3 GECK or would we have just one userbar for having a GECK? Additionally, is it possible that this would be better served by having userboxes for each game's GECK? A userbox that only GECK equipped users could have, similar to how someone who's not a mod or admin or b-crat or patroller or chatmod can't have the userbox for a position they haven't attained. Richie9999 (talk) 17:18, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

I've seen the Elder Scrolls titlebars and it's the example of which I think it's been earnt to easy. If we did have a monthly MotM user, only a userbox should be allowed in my opinion. I've become NotY (yay) and I'm not even adding that as a title bar. Titlebars should be reserved for special rights or special accomplishments, like the Apprentice. That's how I think about it anyway. GECK users can add a GECK/pc userbox to their page and like I said, we can have a list on the admin page. Jspoel 17:23, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

Making a list would be best should we go through with this, but, again, I don't know how we'd go about compiling it. 69.l25 (talk) 17:29, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

(←)  We can make a gradation, from inexperienced - familiar - knowledgable - expert. Something like that. Jspoel 17:37, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but how could we measure how experienced someone is with the GECK? 69.l25 (talk) 17:39, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

We have honest users here I think when it comes to GECK experience. People can give their own gradation on that GECK list. I would list myself under knowledgable. If people start grading themselves as an expert and be checked on it (everyone is checked nowadays) they would be found out soon enough if they make mistakes. The list will not that extensive as it looks now anyway. Jspoel 17:47, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

Here are my comments to make this a singular message:

• @ Richie9999: We would list them with a GECK title bar which would ultimately state they use a GECK, on their user page they can list what GECK's they use.
• @ Jspoelstra: I disagree and think they should be given the title bar like how a Patroller is given it. They have Access to user tools that better the wiki, so we should let others know. Not everyone visits the Admin page to look and see who has certain rights so that would just be a waste to put their names there and not give them a Title bar to show that if someone needs help finding something with it, they can count on those users. Also, you and 69.I25 aren't the only users with access to the GECK, a new member has joined, Jenkins87 and he is extensively great with it. Leon also has access to the GECK and Follower has access as well and state that he is learning. As with the mention of the NotY title bar, that is your choice not to have it on your page as it could be anyone else choice to be listed as a GECK user.
• @ 69.I25: As stated above in my response to J, making a list is basically worthlless as no one visits the Admin and Mod page other than long time users and the SYSops themselves. Also said above is that there could be a test initiated to prove their skills with the GECK and they would have to meet certain requires with how long they have been around Nukapedia, How many edits they have, etc. So making a list and putting their names in it would be ultimately worthless unless they get a title bar in which say an ANON or Registered user/SYSop comes along and does and edit and a GECK user fixes it or redoes it, that user would go to their user page to write a message or check to see if they have a GECK title bar.

Now to my thoughts: Since their is much talk on this I believe we should throw this to a community vote. It's the right thing to do instead of letting 2 users make the decision on it. P.S.: If my comments sound dickish I assure you they are not. They are written out professionally to see that you understand what I am trying to get across. "Some say this user is a Patroller..." 18:03, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

Before we vote, I just want to clarify on the following:

• What will the test look like, and how will we create it?

• What are the requirements users have to meet specifically?

• How do you know basically nobody visits the admin page?

• Do we have enough "qualified" GECK users to merit a title bar?
  • How do we define qualified as of right now?

69.l25 (talk) 18:23, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

While I don't think that 'no one' visits the admin/mod page, I think identifying something with a user on their user page is better than putting it on a list, although both could easily be accomplished with little effort.  A Follower  Talk  20:01, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

How is putting a title bar on their user page better than a list? A list would, hopefully, be easy to find and show everyone that is knowledgeable. A title bar would only tell you if that one use has the GECK, would require you to find the user before you know if they're knowledgeable, and would not help you in the event that person is away or inactive. Paladin117^{>>iff bored;} 20:40, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

Whoa. Slow down. "Since their is much talk on this I believe we should throw this to a community vote.". This forum has been up for a whopping 11 hours or so. The "proper" thing to do is to allow plenty of time for folks to see it, become familiar enough with the topic to form an opinion and post it. Then discuss where we can find consensus. Let's not even consider moving anything to a vote until everyone gets a chance to comment. The Gunny   20:57, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

Im not sure we'd even need a vote. Lets see how all the cards lie after a few days and fill in the detail, if we get consensus without it we can go ahead I think - its seems like such a minor, noncontroversial change. Agent c (talk) 21:10, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Now that I've read all of it, I'll add my comments. For starters, what are we trying to accomplish? Are we trying to accomplish a reward or recognition for users familiar with the GECK? Are we trying to create a method by which users in need of said GECK expertise can easily find and contact a GECK user? Or some combination of the both?

If the answer to #1 is yes, then hell, I want a title bar that says I can write a 130K byte template. And one that says I know how to edit CSS. And what about the folks who can write javascript? How about one that says I know how to create a category tree? As you can see, there are many, many tasks that folks around here are accomplished at. Why single out geck users for extra recognition over the others?

Now, if the answer to #2 is yes, then I think that would be a very useful idea. Create a way to easily find and contact GECK competent GECK users. As already stated above, adding a user rights title (that's what those things are called, user rights titles) leaves us very limited to helping create that means to find them. Now there are other methods we can use to label GECK users that have the extra utility of easily grouping them in a list. We could create a simple template that users could slap at the very top of their user pages and that template could link them to a page listing all those GECK users, or a category of the same. We can then use this method to actually create a means for folks to find the GECK users, rather than, as mentioned above, having to stumble across them.

All of the other points brought up above, as far as determining familiarity, levels of ability, etc. are valid and would need to be thoroughly discussed and a consensus reached before we consider slapping those templates on pages. In the meantime, I'll be more than happy to create a GECK {{Userbox}} template (if there is not one already) so at least those who feel the need to inform others of the GECK abilities can do so. The Gunny   21:22, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Gunny. JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?" 21:37, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

This user is knowledgeable with the G.E.C.K. game editor.

Here you go. I can even add a parameter that can make it say something like ", and is willing to help users with geck questions. Just leave a message on my talk page." The Gunny   21:45, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with ideas expressed by Jspoel and Gunny. A user rights title bar does little to nothing except add unnecessary embellishment for a certain skill set (assuming there is an objective way to assess GECK knowledge and familiarity in the first place...). With the user box template, users can find GECK experts via instances of the template; they would display which users have the GECK user box. Hopefully users who add the template will all actually be knowledgeable about using the GECK... --Skire (talk) 23:36, January 17, 2014 (UTC)

While those are good idea's, to me it seems a lot of you didn't read through this but rather skimmed. It seems like a lot of you think we will just GIVE users the title at the mere mention of a user using a GECK. This is not the case as there would be set requirements need such as patroller. But if we just use the User Template we might as use that just for Patroller and removed the Patroller Title bar as the rights/tools that come with Patroller are practically meaningless. Rollback is just like a quick undo and mark as patrolled is simply just checking the page. In this case we remove the Patroller title bar and just use User templates on said users pages.

In order to have the GECK title bar we need requirements. Such as a TEST, how long the user has been on Nukapedia, their credibility and such, and how many GECK related edits they have. These are just a few draft thoughts on requirements.

Also, I never said "let there be no list" I was just saying there is no point in a list if they don't have a title. Also as for my comment about how no one visits the admin page, I meant some New users who need help don't even know where to find the page.

Frankly, in all honesty, I don't see the big deal with showing some respect to those users who go out of their way of basic editing to better the wiki with the GECK by giving them a Title bar. They are using tools that help the wiki like many of us. Even though they are external, they are very very useful. So a Title Bar, Template, and list would all be great together. "Some say this user is a Patroller..." 02:39, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

If we are going to have a verified geck users list, as Slinger seems to be suggesting, then we are going to need some way to verify, and self identifying on its own would be insufficent for this. I really dont see the harm in a title bar, but having a template would allow us to auto-create a user list by using which pages it appears on. Agent c (talk) 02:44, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

The problem with the title bar, as Gunny touched upon earlier, is what's so special about GECK users? Why not have a title bar for users who are good at css, JavaScript, etc.? And we have no way of judging qualified GECK users. If we're not concerned about being "qualified" and just want to say, "This user has a GECK," I think it's pretty pointless. 69.l25 (talk) 02:48, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

They are users which need to be identified to allow for easy verification - I would point out that your skill in the GECK made you a go to person for GECK verification. Good enough reason for me to make them more easily identifiable and more "special" if you like than being blocked, patroller, nukapedian of the year, wikia star, community councillor, or winner of the apprentice. As for Scripting, you know, thats actually a fair point. If we do have people that have high special skills or tools that people might ordinarily go looking for, making them easier to find makes sense to me. As for no way of judging, You are simply not using your imagination.... We can set information retrieval tasks and verify actual answers to expected answers. Agent c (talk) 02:56, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

As long as we can make title bars for people very qualified in areas of the wiki that don't just relate to the GECK, then I'm fine, but what areas would we want to create title bars for? And as for the "GECK-test," who's "we"? (i.e. who would make the test, and how could we make sure the answers are correct given the (I'd say) high possibility for error?) 69.l25 (talk) 03:02, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

The GECK is pertaining ONLY to Fallout. Javascript and CSS is used in every wiki, every computer application, etc. That would be something you make a user template for like the ones like....

This user plays on the Xbox 360.

That states "Hey, I know XBOX which also involves Fallout and other games."

"Some say this user is a Patroller..." 03:04, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

Isn't the point of this to help people have access to people who are qualified in handling the GECK? Why wouldn't we then take the opportunity to also help people have access to people who can code for this wiki? I don't care that every wiki uses JavaScript and css; we would benefit by letting people know who they can go to if they want to change content in the technical side of this wiki. 69.l25 (talk) 03:08, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

I thought the point of identifying GECK users was because its an easier way to find people who know how to use the GECK and can validate GECK-related data and information. In this case the smartest thing to do would be to create a category to group GECK-confirmed users under. For example, if someone went around and changed all the SPECIAL stats of all the NPCs in Fallout New Vegas, I for one would have no idea if the information is right or not. So in that case I could go to the category page and contact one of the GECK users and ask them to double check the data. It would save time and trouble asking around for someone who knows about the subject if we had a page that identified them all clearly. Nor should there really be much of a debate considering I can see absolutely zero harm in making a category. 03:14, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

It is an easier way to find people Yessie. But it also shows recognition and appreciation such as the NotY title bar, Wikia Star, etc. "Some say this user is a Patroller..." 03:18, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

It's not that easy though. My original edits were shot down when users with the GECK were asked about them; they said I was wrong, and I was blocked a few times. How do we know we won't make this type of mistake again? 69.l25 (talk) 03:18, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

That argument can be made against anything. Administrators have made mistakes in reverting edits in the past. Should we get rid of administrators to prevent it from happening again? Answer is no. 03:20, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

@ 69.I25: That was because of many reason. One, you were an ANON at the time. Two, during that time Vandals were changing stats for no reason. And lastly, some admins took it too far. "Some say this user is a Patroller..." 03:23, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

Editing as an anon shouldn't be a problem. If people immediately revert anons' edits simply because they don't have an account, what's a tab going to change? This title bar won't fix anything; it's not necessary. The scenario wherein my edits were reverted and I was blocked would have just played out the same way if we had GECK title bars. I know we're trying to help people verify info here, but this won't change much. 69.l25 (talk) 03:30, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

You are taaking that too much to heart as it's in the past. The other reason was that you didn't specify where your edits came from in the Summary. But can we get back to the topic? "Some say this user is a Patroller..." 03:32, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I absolutly specified what source my edits were coming from. 69.l25 (talk) 03:40, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

I never saw the edit summary come up for you. But that's not the point here. "Some say this user is a Patroller..." 03:43, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

You're right; it't not the point, but to be clear: 1 2 3 4 5 69.l25 (talk) 04:00, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

A verified expert system would actually solve the problem you have in mind. We'd be sure of the skills who we do go to for geck advice, making the chance of your edits being reverted slim to none. When we had confirmed yours skills, your edits wouldn't be in further question. Agent c (talk) 03:35, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

Again, the "GECK test." How would we even make this possible? It's not like we'll be able to cover all GECK values people would need to know, and how do we know we're not making any mistakes in evaluating peoples' GECK skills? 69.l25 (talk) 03:38, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

If we are to have a test, then I would propose the test of time. Worth is not measured by particular points of interest. Worth is determined after a period of time has passed, and the editor in question has done what was necessary to earn the trust and attention of their peers. If a talented editor with access to the G.E.C.K. editing software comes to Nukapedia, then we will know sooner or later. We don't need a written test to determine this. We don't need some established list of deeds that they need to suck up to, first. It really will be as simple as knowing them when we see them. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 03:42, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

Well 69, I had actually you in mind to write the test. Im sure you could come up with a dozen or so values to check that we can verify. As for the Test of time argument leon... I would have thought Geckanon's early days editing here were proof of the weakness of that. Had self identified strong geck users (and indeed, some others thought of as strong incorrectly) had their skills verified... I imagine many things would have happened differently. Agent c (talk) 03:46, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

There will always be exceptions. But what I propose is looking at this matter as the Bureaucrats look at appointing Patrollers. Exceptional G.E.C.K. users will be noticed. G.E.C.K. users that excel at what they do will definitely be pointed out and possibly even nominated. It's certainly not like we're going to put up a 'G.E.C.K. expert' pinata, where any user can take a whack at it and find themselves with an inappropriate title. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 03:50, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

I gotta say, an actual test is simply overly bureaucratic. Over time, the community will be able to tell which users are real GECK experts. Maybe a quick message to a bureaucrat asking for the userbox (if that's even necessary) can suffice, and then we can list the "approved" GECKers somewhere. Again, a title bar doesn't quite help anything and is not appropriate for such a function. I will not support it. --Skire (talk) 03:52, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ And what of users such as myself who don't really use the GECK to enter information on the wiki, but to verify it when users request such verification? I'm fine with no title bar (though I wouldn't mind one, either), but I do like the userbox, and I'd like to keep it on my page. I'll admit that I'm nowhere near 69.l25 or J's level of skill with it, but I'm certainly not a novice by any means. When it comes to finding information, I'm as proficient as anyone. _{Into the wild blue yonder...} 03:55, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

How is a titlebar in any way different to a user box? Agent c (talk) 03:56, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

We've been associating the title bar with this League of GECKsperts with whom all GECK-related data can be verified. The user box just says this user knows about the GECK. I don't see a problem with that. 69.l25 (talk) 03:59, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

We wouldn't be able to have a problem with userboxes. Unless someone is using a userbox to claim authority or using it to falsify their identity such as pretending to be in the Military, people can create just about any type of userbox they want and slap it on their user/talk-page. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 04:00, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

Well, I dont see the issue with titlebars. Its a minor thing that can help identify people who have a certain skillset in a verified way... I'm really suprised people are arguing against it so hard as if it was proposed that we delete the wiki or something. Agent c (talk) 14:01, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

Chad, a title bar won't help any user in need of GECK assistance. The title bar is not linked to anything, and if a user should see it, he is already on the GECK expert's page, meaning a userbox would work just as well. A list of verified GECK experts along with userboxes will fix the problem. --Skire (talk) 21:17, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

Arbitrary header because the section is too long

It's not that we're all against making note of those skillsets (I'm assuming for others here a bit), but rather why single out geck users? They, while being a great asset to the wiki, have no more import than those who code templates, can create category trees, create portals, code css and js, know all the guidelines, and a plethora of other wiki specific, important and in demand skills. The real question I have that has not been adequately answered is why use the user rights titles when the use of a banner template at the top of user pages has more utility? If you look at the {{bot}} template, it adds utility by adding that bot account to a category of bot users, which in turn, can then be linked to by a category page or a page using category list. Try to click on the fancy tags in the title bars. Does that do anything at all? Nope. Just looks pretty. So I'm back to are we trying to just show off some fancy bar, or are we trying to do something functional here? The Gunny   16:34, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

Gunny, you make a very good point. There isn't enough time or database space to account for all the skills/skillsets of all of the 'knowledgeable' users here. However, having a way for an editor (not a normal reader) to contact an experienced G.E.C.K user when in need would be a good idea. What about user groups? Could there be a mod-assigned usergroup that these "GECKsperts" could belong to? Moderated by a Snr GECK mod or something? Jenkins87^Talk 16:51, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

I can only think of 3 groups we might need on a technical level - Geck, Wikicode/CSS/JS, and Bot operators. Any others? Agent c (talk) 16:58, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

We have to petition Wikia to create new user groups. We can't do that ourselves. And, from what I understand, they are loathe to do that. Best to keep save that bullet for when we really need another user rights group. The Gunny   17:56, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

I'm with Gunny, a go-to reference list for users with access and expertise with the GECK, as well as willingness and availability to help, serves a reasonable practical purpose. A cosmetic titlecard does not.
Limmiegirl ^{Talk! ♪} 21:07, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

What about a page with a list of the GECK users and a link linking such page from the related various policy and guideline pages?--Kingclyde (talk) 02:29, January 22, 2014 (UTC)

I've been thinking about this a bit. The idea of finding users with geck knowledge is essentially a help function. If a page were to be made listing user with any type of specialized skills, I think it should be in the help namespace and linked in the help section of the navmenu. That way it will be visible to those who need it, in a likely place they would look for it. That page can easily have a list populated by a category of users with a template like the bot template, so any group, geck users, template masters, code wizards, whatever.  The Gunny   02:41, January 22, 2014 (UTC)

Would we have some way to simply not be included with this GECK listing? I'm not that proficient at using the GECK for much of anything except making my own weapons, and modding enemies to be stronger, etc. I've never once found cut content in my GECK, but then again, I've never looked. (Though entirely possible I've come across cut weapons and armors, just didn't know it.) I am going to be looking up tutorials to mod my own companions soon, but aside from that, I'm not a master of the GECK. Deadling (talk) 20:51, February 1, 2014 (UTC)

At this point, I don't think anything is going to happen here. The idea seems to have run out of steam. But, if we do end up doing something, participation would be entirely voluntary, I'm sure. The Gunny   21:44, February 1, 2014 (UTC)