45:
499:
The goal here is to not add to admin's work, but to give the moderator that ability to assess consensus, to handle content-related issues, without needing to run to an admin, because the moderator, in these situations, will be as trusted as an admin to perform them. Why? Because the mod went through
491:
And note: to not have the ability to delete and to see deleted, would leave the editor with this user-right package without the ability to perform the majority of the tasks noted at the top: XfD, RM, CSD, editprotected, etc. You can't close an XfD without the deletion tools to implement. That's been
180:
is essentially: "if you don't have the tools to implement a close, you shouldn't be closing the discussion". And also that non-admins shouldn't close "close" or "contentious" discussions. (This latter point is sometimes complained about by some experienced editors – who feel that they should be able
515:(which is what the admin package actually is) is pretty much a dumping ground for most new tools made. And what's left (mostly) deal with the ability of an individual to edit, and assessing an individual's edits, rather than handling content. Besides what I've already noted, I left out editing the
299:
Though of course, anyone doing this while under a cloud may still have this package removed, just as adminship can be removed, though restoration would likely require a community request. (In other words, switching to this package should in no way be considered a way to avoid or bypass anything,
328:
Forcing an editor to carry tools related to assessing editor behaviour, when they may merely want to help out on the content side of things, just seems wrong. Some editors just don't want to carry such tools or to have any of the potential responsibilities that go with it.
338:
may think they can be trusted with all of them, we shouldn't be "forcing" people to accept certain tools which they feel uncomfortable with, and/or clearly do not want, in order to receive tools with which they could clearly help with the encyclopedia project.
519:
namespace (which is broader than just content), and user-rights dealing with offsite things like importing. (I only added the user-right dealing with commons to grant the ability to implement that type of close at FFD, and other image/file-related things.)
401:
Part of the problem with picking a name for this is that for others' purposes elsewhere (bureaucracies/websites/governments/etc.), content and behaviour is usually lumped together. So most terms are going to have been used for both at some place or other.
346:
tool group includes a LOT of tools. And arbitrarily keeping trusted individuals from certain other tools because they refuse to carry "the whole admin package" seems foolish (counter-productive) on our part as a volunteer project.
188:
In broad terms, this means that those with this user-right package should have the ability to: delete/undelete pages (and related abilities); move most pages (and related abilities); deal with files; and edit protected pages.
118:
A new user-right package (aka user group) designed primarily to allow editors the option to help with content-related admin tasks (for which there is often a backlog), if they wish to not have the rest of the sysop package of
184:
So this user-right package would be helpful/useful by allowing the editor the opportunity to retain the tools to implement the close of such discussions, without requiring them to carry all of the tools of adminship.
523:
So with all that in mind, this is designed to be a rather clear definition of what types of work the moderator will do. One thing we don't want is a confusion about what a mod is able to do now (or in the future).
350:
And with that in mind, the tools in this package were not arbitrarily selected, they were particularly chosen due to their interdependent usage for various content-related tasks and responsibilities.
325:) who are happy to help with content, but really don't want anything to do with the block/protect tools, or being expected to deal with behavioural issues. For them, this would be a perfect fit.
209:-related tools. Semi-related to this, no tools which grant user-rights to editors. I also did not include a couple rarely used "mass-action" tools (mass message / mass delete etc.)
223:
is a user-right package which essentially deals with marking certain edits as patrolled/reviewed/viewable. All of these (and other such) tools are handed out by admins through the
231:
have these abilities. Though the editor is of course welcome to request such tools (through the standard processes), with the standard rules and restrictions applicable as normal.
173:
group. User-rights which do not deal with content issues, and in particular user-rights which are related to the assessing of user behaviour are specifically not included.
244:
the adminship-related
Knowledge (XXG) policies and guidelines, and so would also be subject to all the rules and restrictions which are also expected of adminship.
440:
If anyone has a better name, I'm all ears. But for now, that name seems to be understandable for the primary intent of this group: Someone who can respond to
527:
So this is about as "condensed" a package as we should do. The idea was to make the tools as useful as possible with as small a package as possible.
91:
723:
368:
97:
67:
63:
34:
165:, and other such content-related tasks which would be related to the tools granted in this user-rights package. But which does not include
305:
this all falls under all the various currently-existing policies and processes, and should not be considered any sort of exception to them
52:
496:
and links to a now moved or deleted page, or they may need to adjust a categorisation due to a renamed or a merged category, and so on.
83:
62:
for its implementation was not established within a reasonable period of time. If you want to revive discussion, please use
177:
253:
162:
405:
So, after a lot of thinking and researching names/titles, I'm calling the recipient of this user-right package a
181:
to close such discussions – however, as far as I know, it has been repeatedly upheld in community discussion.)
263:
465:
461:
The tools in this package were specifically selected due to their interdependency in application and usage.
413:
380:
seems unclear, please ask, I'm more than happy to clarify. I look forward to everyone's thoughts on this. –
353:
We have a tradition on
Knowledge (XXG) that people contribute at whatever level they are comfortable with.
322:
17:
452:(I did not call it "closer" because many non-admins close discussions, including clerks, CUs, and so on.)
59:
318:
Believe it or not, such a user-right group has actually been requested repeatedly for a very long time.
477:
Besides the deletion tools, there are only a few tools in this package which aren't already given to
493:
709:
Note: Indented items are currently available to most users, but may be needed for technical reasons
468:, by my count, there are currently 81 (plus two more to add and remove certain user-rights) in the
224:
284:
And just like adminship, anyone with this user-right package may request its removal. Removal of
121:– For example, to allow for implementing the close of certain content-related discussions like:
367:
Thank you for bearing with this and reading this all. I welcome your thoughts on this proposal
448:
in content-related discussions and has the ability to subsequently implement that consensus.
158:
427:
It's a universally known term online as someone who deals with discussions/text/"substance".
445:
267:
154:
150:
146:
142:
138:
134:
130:
126:
492:
the standard for a long time. Someone may need to edit protected pages in order to adjust
359:
And wouldn't it be great if this helped nudge a few former admins back into activity? : )
234:
To be clear, though this user-right group does not grant the user all of the tools in the
122:
201:: Any tools which directly deal with the assessing of editor behaviour. In particular:
195:– Only those tools which are directly related to the intended usage explained above.
717:
296:
was not "under a cloud", it may be restored by any bureaucrat per the normal rules.
386:
176:
While non-admins do help with some of this, our current policy/guideline regarding
23:
270:(RfM), similar to how adminship is requested there. (Note: Per past requests,
481:, and we shouldn't give those to someone who couldn't view deleted material.
382:
488:, the 22 user-rights below appear to meet the criteria established above.
82:
412:(The technical name of this user-right package (user group) as listed in
544:- Edit pages protected as "Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access"
277:
The editor may also request one or more admin-granted tools (such as
274:- that the granting be similar to how adminship tools are granted.)
444:
implement editorial requests concerning content, and who assesses
433:
It's easily abbreviated to "mod" (compare to administrator/admin)
33:
This page is about the 2016 proposal. For the 2013 proposal, see
254:
Knowledge (XXG):Administrator § Review and removal of adminship
39:
597:– View deleted history entries, without their associated text
550:- Edit pages protected as "Require extended confirmed access"
656:– Not create redirects from source pages when moving pages
603:– View deleted text and changes between deleted revisions
511:, but there's a lot more in the admin package than that.
500:
the same trust-assessing process that current admins do.
560:- Edit pages protected as "Require administrator access"
703:– Override files on the shared media repository locally
271:
292:. And so, just like adminship, as long as removal of
436:As far as I know it should translate fairly easily
591:– Delete and undelete specific revisions of pages
272:this has been said to be a requirement by the WMF
238:user-rights package, moderator still falls under
356:This is merely an extension of that tradition.
531:List of user-rights included in the user group
227:process, and there is no need for a closer to
193:What this user group may include in the future
8:
423:Moderator has a couple things going for it:
321:For one thing, there are Wikipedians (like
668:- Override the title or username blacklist
149:/ etc.; various talk page and noticeboard
311:So why would anyone want to request this?
219:are specific separate user-right groups.
199:What this user group should NEVER include
35:Knowledge (XXG):Moderators/Proposal/2013
7:
484:So out of 81 user-rights listed for
153:; and so on. In addition, assessing
503:What I didn't add were (of course)
628:– Move pages under pending changes
31:
724:Knowledge (XXG) failed proposals
650:– Move pages with their subpages
81:
43:
288:falls under the same rules as
1:
662:- Merge the history of pages
266:as a result of a successful
392:Moderator user-rights group
740:
693:– Overwrite existing files
674:- View title blacklist log
566:- Edit protected templates
430:It's a fairly neutral term
251:
32:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Moderators
374:Again, thank you. And if
387:20:31, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
281:) as part of their RfM.
66:or initiate a thread at
536:Editing protected pages
466:Special:ListGroupRights
414:Special:ListGroupRights
169:the user-rights in the
163:edit-protected requests
634:– Move root user pages
609:– Search deleted pages
369:on the discussion page
300:including sanction.)
268:request for the tools
303:Again, to be clear,
248:Granting and removal
397:Moderator as a name
24:Knowledge (XXG):MOD
632:move-rootuserpages
178:non-admin closures
107:
101:of this proposal.
98:ongoing discussion
711:
672:titleblacklistlog
585:– Undelete a page
548:extendedconfirmed
542:editsemiprotected
453:
315:Several reasons.
106:
105:
76:
75:
74:
22:(Redirected from
731:
707:
654:suppressredirect
571:Handle deletions
451:
85:
78:
77:
68:the village pump
47:
46:
40:
27:
739:
738:
734:
733:
732:
730:
729:
728:
714:
713:
701:reupload-shared
533:
459:
457:Interdependency
418:moderator-admin
399:
394:
365:
313:
256:
250:
112:
71:
44:
38:
29:
28:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
737:
735:
727:
726:
716:
715:
705:
704:
697:
696:
695:
694:
688:
687:– Upload files
680:
676:
675:
669:
663:
657:
651:
645:
638:
637:
636:
635:
629:
623:
615:
611:
610:
604:
598:
595:deletedhistory
592:
589:deleterevision
586:
580:
579:– Delete pages
573:
572:
568:
567:
564:templateeditor
561:
554:
553:
552:
551:
545:
537:
532:
529:
458:
455:
438:
437:
434:
431:
428:
398:
395:
393:
390:
364:
361:
312:
309:
249:
246:
111:
108:
104:
103:
92:the straw poll
86:
73:
72:
58:
57:
48:
30:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
736:
725:
722:
721:
719:
712:
710:
702:
699:
698:
692:
689:
686:
683:
682:
681:
678:
677:
673:
670:
667:
664:
661:
658:
655:
652:
649:
648:move-subpages
646:
643:
640:
639:
633:
630:
627:
624:
621:
618:
617:
616:
613:
612:
608:
607:browsearchive
605:
602:
599:
596:
593:
590:
587:
584:
581:
578:
575:
574:
570:
569:
565:
562:
559:
558:editprotected
556:
555:
549:
546:
543:
540:
539:
538:
535:
534:
530:
528:
525:
521:
518:
514:
510:
506:
501:
497:
495:
489:
487:
486:administrator
482:
480:
479:autoconfirmed
475:
474:
471:
470:administrator
467:
462:
456:
454:
449:
447:
443:
435:
432:
429:
426:
425:
424:
421:
419:
415:
410:
408:
403:
396:
391:
389:
388:
385:
384:
379:
378:
372:
370:
362:
360:
357:
354:
351:
348:
345:
344:administrator
340:
337:
336:
330:
326:
324:
319:
316:
310:
308:
306:
301:
297:
295:
291:
290:administrator
287:
282:
280:
275:
273:
269:
265:
261:
255:
247:
245:
243:
242:
237:
236:administrator
232:
230:
226:
222:
218:
217:autopatrolled
214:
210:
208:
204:
200:
196:
194:
190:
186:
182:
179:
174:
172:
168:
164:
160:
156:
152:
148:
144:
140:
136:
132:
128:
124:
120:
117:
109:
102:
100:
99:
94:
93:
87:
84:
80:
79:
69:
65:
64:the talk page
61:
56:
54:
49:
42:
41:
36:
25:
19:
708:
706:
700:
690:
684:
679:Handle files
671:
665:
660:mergehistory
659:
653:
647:
644:– Move files
641:
631:
625:
622:– Move pages
619:
614:Handle moves
606:
600:
594:
588:
582:
576:
563:
557:
547:
541:
526:
522:
516:
512:
508:
504:
502:
498:
490:
485:
483:
478:
476:
473:
469:
463:
460:
450:
441:
439:
422:
417:
411:
406:
404:
400:
381:
376:
375:
373:
366:
358:
355:
352:
349:
343:
342:The current
341:
334:
333:
332:Even though
331:
327:
320:
317:
314:
304:
302:
298:
293:
289:
285:
283:
278:
276:
259:
258:Granting of
257:
240:
239:
235:
233:
228:
220:
216:
212:
211:
206:
202:
198:
197:
192:
191:
187:
183:
175:
170:
166:
119:user-rights.
115:
114:
113:
96:
90:
88:
50:
601:deletedtext
472:user group.
264:Bureaucrats
262:is done by
666:tboverride
626:movestable
363:In closing
323:Wikignomes
252:See also:
213:Rollbacker
51:This is a
517:mediawiki
446:consensus
416:would be
407:moderator
294:moderator
286:moderator
260:moderator
225:WP:RFPERM
116:Proposal:
89:See also
60:Consensus
55:proposal.
718:Category
691:reupload
642:movefile
583:undelete
494:hatnotes
377:anything
279:rollback
229:directly
221:Reviewer
110:Proposal
509:protect
203:protect
685:upload
577:delete
513:+sysop
161:, and
157:, and
53:failed
505:block
207:block
171:sysop
16:<
620:move
507:and
464:Per
383:jc37
215:and
159:PROD
151:RfCs
95:and
442:and
420:.)
241:all
205:or
167:all
155:CSD
147:MfD
143:TfD
139:FfD
135:CfD
131:AfD
127:DRV
720::
409:.
371:.
335:we
307:.
145:/
141:/
137:/
133:/
129:;
125:;
123:RM
70:.
37:.
26:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
