[edit]

Admin Rights Edit

Hello Angela, I'm responding to your message in my Wikianswers talk page about being an admin here. I understand that such a popular answers wiki subject, such as the Pokemon Answers; requires a serious person who has dedication in everything they do. I think, I've shown I am dedicated in many of my edits around Wikia, and I would appreciate it if I am considered for this position. I will try to do my best to perform my job well. Thanks for considering me for such important job. If I should find in the future that I can no longer do this job I will certainly let you know (or any of the other wiki's admins) ahead of time so that they can find someone to replace me. --Liliana (my talk). 09:48, May 6, 2010 (UTC)

k --Charitwo (talk) 12:16, May 6, 2010 (UTC)

thanks, also bureaucrat rights --Charitwo (talk) 12:22, May 6, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Edit

I'll be checking often to make sure questions are appropriate. Since I know a lot about Pokemon (Indigo and Johto mostly) I can help a lot with questions like that. If you have any ideas about what would be best for the homepage please let me know. So far I see only one admin in Special:ListUsers (maybe Default which I know is a bot) are there any other admins? Please, let me know so that we can start to discuss how fix the wiki :) --Liliana (my talk). 10:45, May 6, 2010 (UTC)

Wikianswers message Edit

Thanks for the message on wikianswers. I am definitely interested in editing here as I'm interested in the subject (although I am no expert, I do know how to research =) ), and admin rights would be a great help in fixing the place up :) --Grynd (talk) 11:24, May 6, 2010 (UTC)

RE: Wikianswer widget Edit

Hello there. Pokemon Answers looks really nice, so I enabled the widget. Yeah, I'd like to join the admin team here, thanks. :) Regards Jargon ^~ 00:21, May 7, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for joining the team. I see Charitwo has made you an admin here already. Angela (talk) 01:16, May 7, 2010 (UTC)

He sure was fast- I haven't even noticed it at first, lol.

Regards :) --Jargon ^~ 00:33, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

Fixing Categories Edit

Hello Angela, I sent a question to your user board, I am sorry but I needed to do it like that because I don't want those particular links to be accidentally accessed by an inexperienced user. There are enough wrong categories that need to be cleaned up as it is, don't need any more accidentally added new ones. --Liliana (my talk). 10:58, May 15, 2010 (UTC)

And another, you can't remove, or add so I'm posting here: Category:SpoRts. Is deleting the user page the only way in this case? That probably shouldn't be done in a profile where a user has edited. --Liliana (my talk). 11:21, May 15, 2010 (UTC)

Needing some helpful advice Edit

I am afraid I recently made a couple of users here into admins (within the last 3 months) based on their edit counts. They both had over 100 edits and were very enthusiastic about being admins. Unfortunately, things didn't work out with them and they were just demoted by me this week. I made A F K When Needed into a bureaucrat shortly after I gave adminship to those two admins. Now there are two bureaucrats, and I believe we need extra admin help. There are many great people on the wiki that edit almost everyday. But I definitely don't want to have to keep demoting admins in case something like this ever happens. But to the point, please read this I posted to AFK, as you know this subject fairly well (and I honestly don't know who else to turn to about this subject).

• http://pokemon.answers.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:A_F_K_When_Needed#Approaching_50.2C000_articles...

Please, I need your advice. I thank you dearly. --Liliana (my talk). 21:42, June 29, 2011 (UTC)

I don't think adding extra user groups is a good idea. It didn't really work out at the main Wikianswers which is one reason I've now removed it. I don't think there's any harm in removing adminship if someone goes inactive, especially if you warn them in advance that they're expected to make x edits per month or whatever. Angela 04:15, June 30, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Angela. For the record, I didn't demote the admins for being inactive, because at the moment we don't have a set policy. But we have contemplated to make a policy of 1 year of inactivity could get demotion, unless they respond promptly (what do you think, should it be less, perhaps 6 months?). The exact reason for demoting those two though was that this user, was telling anon users to sign answers [1], plus didn't fix a signature after weeks of being asked; by both me and AFK, to change it into something clickable. Had this user not come back to edit, I'd have assumed they didn't receive the messages and would have left the issue dormant for a few weeks until his/her return. However the user was active and deliberately ignored our requests. Something similar happened to the other admin but a bit different. This admin was a bit more active, suggested bots be run on the wiki to delete hundreds of questions (Wikia ticket {16162}), suggested the wiki protected against anon users, spoke down at a bureaucrat, blocked an innocent anon user, didn't respond when questioned about his actions; and decided to ask the Wikia team to re-design the mainpage without consulting with the rest of the wiki. I've given admin rights in several wikis to several people and bureaucracy (only to 2 users that I remember so far though) and had never needed to demote anyone before. I can't help to feel I initially made a bad choice and I probably should have waited a bit longer. Like I mentioned before, admin tools are extremely powerful. When a new user makes a wiki they do not even have the experience to use them (not my place to talk I know); but the above users had quite a good number of edits in the Wikia network, and they were still not fit to carry their adminship properly. How am I supposed to trust anybody? And by the way, apologies for taking your time, do you think this is an issue that should be addressed through Special:Contact rather than here? --Liliana (my talk). 01:06, July 1, 2011 (UTC)

I can see that it's hard to balance getting more admins with making sure you get the right people. Perhaps rollback would be a good testing ground even though it's not used all that much. Asking non-admins to get involved by tagging pages for deletion can also be a good way to see if they understand what does need to be deleted. It's fine to post here instead of special:contact but I'm not always available, so you might not get a fast reply. Angela 04:20, July 1, 2011 (UTC)

Heya Angela :-)

I've been pondering making a guide for Admin hopefuls. Wikipedia has a number of pages on the subject; and our contributors don't necessarily realize any of the stuff found on those pages.

Since we have achievements activated, I figured we may as well use them. In addition to basic things like being polite, I was going to mention achievements that would strengthen a bid for Adminship; such as 250 edits, editing the wiki everyday for 2 weeks, et al. It's my hope that we could benefit from giving people a way to approach becoming an Administrator, so that they can see work that would be valued, and perform it; instead of thinking "it'd be nice" but being turned off by not knowing how to go about it.

Needless to say, that the pot at the end of the rainbow would be consideration and not a guaranteed flag; I'd be sure to make that quite clear when writing it. Would you have any concerns about either the achievements being used in this way, or the idea of a guide itself? The last thing I want to do is create something that'll be more trouble than it's worth. I'd greatly value and appreciate any response.

Regards, A F K When Needed 16:22, July 1, 2011 (UTC)

I think you'd need to be careful about unsuitable people thinking they deserved adminship just because they got certain badges, but other than that, I don't think it's a problem (no more of one than counting edits in other ways anyway). Angela 05:00, July 2, 2011 (UTC)

Deleted questions in search results Edit

Hi Angela!

I've often noticed and been unhappy with deleted questions continuing to appear in search results. Often questions are deleted for a very good reason; yet they are still semi-visible with both question and (at least part of) the answer appearing in relevant search queries.

I've frequently seen this with questions deleted over a month ago appearing. Would you happen to know how long we should expect such questions to permanently disappear, and if we can do anything (e.g. link them in a Special:Contact) to speed up the process?

There are several questions (example) where we really need to get them out of sight of children interested in Pokémon, yet after a significant period of time the database does not appear to be doing this by itself.

Thanks for your time, A F K When Needed 19:55, July 16, 2011 (UTC)

I'm away at the moment. I recommend that you report this problem via special:contact. Thanks, Angela 19:57, July 26, 2011 (UTC)