Meta:Administrators' noticeboard: Difference between revisions

From Meta
m (Moving out of scope discussion from Meta:Administrators' noticeboard to CN.)
Line 20: Line 20:
 
:::: {{Ping|Dmehus|Reception123}} Thank you for reminding me about Twinkle, and while you may be right about there being very little vandalism on meta, I do not need Rollbacker with Twinkle existing. However, I do think I should mention that twinkle seems unreliable, and does not work on all my devices for some unknown reason. But for now I suppose I do not need Rollback. Thanks for the replies!{{:User:Universal Omega/Sig}}<span class="plainlinks">[https://meta.miraheze.org/w/index.php?title=Meta:Administrators%27_noticeboard&action=history&nbsp;<span style="color:#2c3e50">&nbsp;&nbsp;04:01,&nbsp;14&nbsp;August&nbsp;2020 (UTC)</span>]</span><span style="display:none"> ]</span><span style="display:none"> | </span></span></div>
 
:::: {{Ping|Dmehus|Reception123}} Thank you for reminding me about Twinkle, and while you may be right about there being very little vandalism on meta, I do not need Rollbacker with Twinkle existing. However, I do think I should mention that twinkle seems unreliable, and does not work on all my devices for some unknown reason. But for now I suppose I do not need Rollback. Thanks for the replies!{{:User:Universal Omega/Sig}}<span class="plainlinks">[https://meta.miraheze.org/w/index.php?title=Meta:Administrators%27_noticeboard&action=history&nbsp;<span style="color:#2c3e50">&nbsp;&nbsp;04:01,&nbsp;14&nbsp;August&nbsp;2020 (UTC)</span>]</span><span style="display:none"> ]</span><span style="display:none"> | </span></span></div>
 
::::: {{ping|Universal Omega}} Although <code>[[Meta:Rollbackers|rollback]]</code> is ''rarely'' needed due to the pseudo-rollback feature included within the [[Meta:Twinkle|Twinkle]] (which uses <code>undo</code>), you've articulated a clear ''purpose'' and ''use case'' (i.e., the Twinkle compatibility issue when mobile), and you are ''trusted'', so I'm inclined to grant this request, provided that you only use <code>rollback</code> when on mobile for obvious vandalism or for reverting [[Discord/auth]]. So, {{done}}. [[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 18:59, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 
::::: {{ping|Universal Omega}} Although <code>[[Meta:Rollbackers|rollback]]</code> is ''rarely'' needed due to the pseudo-rollback feature included within the [[Meta:Twinkle|Twinkle]] (which uses <code>undo</code>), you've articulated a clear ''purpose'' and ''use case'' (i.e., the Twinkle compatibility issue when mobile), and you are ''trusted'', so I'm inclined to grant this request, provided that you only use <code>rollback</code> when on mobile for obvious vandalism or for reverting [[Discord/auth]]. So, {{done}}. [[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 18:59, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
  +
  +
== Questions about Questionable Content ==
  +
  +
I don't know honestly if this is the correct place for this topic, but please help me.
  +
  +
My wiki has just been created, and I am currently writing the Content Policy for it. My wiki has a large scope (about animation), and I intended it to include ''all'' kinds of animation. This includes (please don't judge me) 'hentai'.
  +
  +
After all, the US also made some in the 60s until 80s (which I also intend to document as well), and if we have full extensive documentation regarding the Renaissance paintings which sometimes includes ''realistically drawn'' nude models, why the same doesn't apply to hentai and US erotic animations in the 60s until the 80s?
  +
  +
I know, I have read Miraheze's own content policy. I even read other wikis' policies. But, in my case, I want to include them because other sites don't. I want to document them because of the same reason. However, I know that this can cross some lines here.
  +
  +
My question is, is hentai allowed for "documenting purposes?" I already added a rule in my draft that no screenshots should be made nor links to the images that is NSFW inside the wiki (except of course, if the screenshot falls under the safe-for-work category). Content I may add for these pages includes plot (in as clean as possible wording) and an infobox for details. Also, I added a rule that these works should be tagged under NSFW. Of course, no links to the ''sites'' are allowed.
  +
  +
I also want to include hentai's ''serious questionable content'' (shotacon, lollicon), again for the purposes stated above, though I fear this may enter the red flag zone. Wikipedia has [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Boku_no_Pico this], so can I assume that this is also the same here?
  +
  +
Just to be clear, I have no bad intentions. I really want to also document them. If approved, these articles will be under strict observation. I am also writing a guidelines regarding NSFWs (not just hentai).
  +
  +
[[User:9Ations|9Ations]] ([[User talk:9Ations|talk]]) 04:57, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:57, 29 August 2020

OOjs UI icon pageSettings.svg Administrators' noticeboard
Shortcuts:
Meta:AN,
Meta:ANI
This noticeboard is for anything that requires administrator intervention on Meta only (anything related to global policies, global groups, or in some way involves other Miraheze wikis should be discussed at the Community noticeboard)

On the Meta Administrators' noticeboard, you can request...

If you would like to request...

To add your request, type in a title and click the "Add Topic" button below.

Archives of Administrators' noticeboard [e]   



Request for Rollback (Universal Omega)

Hello, I know I have not done much counter-vandalism here on meta, although I do feel I should have rollbacker, so that if necessary I am able to quickly rollback the edits of vandals. I am active here on meta and quite frequently check the wiki requests, and already patrol many edits on meta, marking then as patrolled, so it makes sense for me to have rollback so that I can use it if needed. I can live without it by just going back and publishing the last good edit, but the rollback would provide a better record, and make it easier to do it. Thank you for the consideration!
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: I'm not opposed to this, but I personally haven't even requested it as Twinkle's pseudo-rollback via "undo" and "restore to revision" has served me well (though, there has been one, maybe two, instances where rollback might've helped, mainly relating to another user's refactoring of other users' comments). Dmehus (talk) 15:26, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dmehus: Thanks. I actually think I have twinkle off, thanks for reminding me. In that case I do suppose this request is somewhat unnecessary. Thanks!
I also would see no reason to oppose this, though I personally feel that there is very little vandalism on Meta currently and that as Dmehus said, Twinkle would probably work. Reception123 (talk) (C) 15:52, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dmehus and Reception123: Thank you for reminding me about Twinkle, and while you may be right about there being very little vandalism on meta, I do not need Rollbacker with Twinkle existing. However, I do think I should mention that twinkle seems unreliable, and does not work on all my devices for some unknown reason. But for now I suppose I do not need Rollback. Thanks for the replies!
@Universal Omega: Although rollback is rarely needed due to the pseudo-rollback feature included within the Twinkle (which uses undo), you've articulated a clear purpose and use case (i.e., the Twinkle compatibility issue when mobile), and you are trusted, so I'm inclined to grant this request, provided that you only use rollback when on mobile for obvious vandalism or for reverting Discord/auth. So, Yes check.svg Done. Dmehus (talk) 18:59, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Questions about Questionable Content

I don't know honestly if this is the correct place for this topic, but please help me.

My wiki has just been created, and I am currently writing the Content Policy for it. My wiki has a large scope (about animation), and I intended it to include all kinds of animation. This includes (please don't judge me) 'hentai'.

After all, the US also made some in the 60s until 80s (which I also intend to document as well), and if we have full extensive documentation regarding the Renaissance paintings which sometimes includes realistically drawn nude models, why the same doesn't apply to hentai and US erotic animations in the 60s until the 80s?

I know, I have read Miraheze's own content policy. I even read other wikis' policies. But, in my case, I want to include them because other sites don't. I want to document them because of the same reason. However, I know that this can cross some lines here.

My question is, is hentai allowed for "documenting purposes?" I already added a rule in my draft that no screenshots should be made nor links to the images that is NSFW inside the wiki (except of course, if the screenshot falls under the safe-for-work category). Content I may add for these pages includes plot (in as clean as possible wording) and an infobox for details. Also, I added a rule that these works should be tagged under NSFW. Of course, no links to the sites are allowed.

I also want to include hentai's serious questionable content (shotacon, lollicon), again for the purposes stated above, though I fear this may enter the red flag zone. Wikipedia has this, so can I assume that this is also the same here?

Just to be clear, I have no bad intentions. I really want to also document them. If approved, these articles will be under strict observation. I am also writing a guidelines regarding NSFWs (not just hentai).

9Ations (talk) 04:57, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]