|
|
Line 32: |
Line 32: |
| {{yer mom|time=15:32, 24 June 2009 (UTC)|text=Personally I've found rollback useful only in one case in which I asked Guardian Soul to rollback some... rather crazy edits that included Mr. Burrows and the words ''rent boy'' in Mr. Smee's page, but other than that, you're right, I guess we don't need more mods after all. }} | | {{yer mom|time=15:32, 24 June 2009 (UTC)|text=Personally I've found rollback useful only in one case in which I asked Guardian Soul to rollback some... rather crazy edits that included Mr. Burrows and the words ''rent boy'' in Mr. Smee's page, but other than that, you're right, I guess we don't need more mods after all. }} |
| {{Guardian Soul|text=Of course you could always promote the mods to admins and hire a few more admins while we're gone. Then we can actually be more useful.}} | | {{Guardian Soul|text=Of course you could always promote the mods to admins and hire a few more admins while we're gone. Then we can actually be more useful.}} |
| {{ILHI|19:22, 24 June 2009 (UTC)|Errm? People who say Rollback isn't a good thing/isn't a very good thing: You're not using it right. Rollback is used for vandalism only. And it just hurries up the reversion process. If you watch RC, view an edit, see it's vandalism, you just have to click rollback and then be on with your day. It also means you can beat other RC watchers at the time to make you look like you do more vandalism revert work.}} | | {{ILHI|19:22, 24 June 2009 (UTC)|Errm? People who say Rollback isn't a good thing/isn't a verby good thing: You're not using it right. Rollback is used for vandalism only. And it just hurries up the reversion process. If you watch RC, view an edit, see it's vandalism, you just have to click rollback and then be on with your day. It also means you can beat other RC watchers at the time to make you look like you do more vandalism revert work.}} |
| {{yer mom|time=19:49, 24 June 2009 (UTC)|text=Exactly! and seeing we get like... one vandal a month, it's not really useful, at least on this wiki ''*shrug*''}} | | {{yer mom|time=19:49, 24 June 2009 (UTC)|text=Exactly! and seeing we get like... one vandal a month, it's not really useful, at least on this wiki ''*shrug*''}} |
| {{MM841|14:51, 26 June 2009 (UTC)|OK, firstly, its great to be back. Secondlly, I think we need to promote one of the active admins to a Bureaucrat, simply so we dont need to contact an unactive member of staff whenever there is a change in staff}} | | {{MM841|14:51, 26 June 2009 (UTC)|OK, firstly, its great to be back. Secondlly, I think we need to promote one of the active admins to a Bureaucrat, simply so we dont need to contact an unactive member of staff whenever there is a change in staff}} |
| | {{DTN|text=Well, isn't this quite the topic! Anyway, to those who are saying the rollback ability is apparently so "not useful," than why did you award it to TNE, GS, and Ultima? The idea seemed great back then, and now it's being attacked heavily. We do get vandals far more than once a month; it doesn't have to be one of those horrible "delete everything and replace with something perverted" edits to be made easier to fix with the rollback. Occasionaly, a User will add bad infomation, which could have much more easily resolved with the rollback strength. And with ''358/2 Days'''s NA release, vandalism and bad information is going to be '''way''' up. Surely adding the rollback to some Users would aid the Wiki in dealing with vandals, the upcoming information flood, and just regular bad or unnecessary edits. |
| | |
| | Also, what is the worst that could have happen if we give the rollback ability to some Users? Apparently, they will "feel a need to get on the Wiki more." Is that supposed to be a bad thing? Since when is spending more time working on the Wiki to make it better a '''bad''' thing? And if adding new mods isn't enough, than we could always make TNE, GS, or Ultima an admin! Or make Azul or BebopKate a buerocrat!}} |