Forum:Rights restructure

< Index | Site-related discussion

For a list of who has what here see: Special:ListGroupRights.

Right	Description
Reading
read	allows viewing pages (when set to false, override for specific pages with $wgWhitelistRead).
Editing
edit	allows editing unprotected pages.
createpage	allows the creation of new pages (requires the edit right).
createtalk	allows the creation of new talk pages (requires the edit right).
move	allows renaming the titles of unprotected pages (requires the edit right).
movefile	allows renaming pages in the "File" namespace (requires the move right and $wgAllowImageMoving to be true).
move-subpages	move subpages along with page (requires the move right).
move-rootuserpages	can move root pages in the "User" namespace (requires the move right).
createaccount	allows the creation of new user accounts.
upload	allows the creation of new images and files.
reupload	allows overwriting existing images and files (requires the upload right).
reupload-own	allows overwriting existing images and files uploaded by oneself (requires the upload right).
reupload-shared	allows replacing images and files from a shared repository (if one is set up) with local files (requires the upload right).
upload_by_url	allows uploading by entering the URL of an external image (requires the upload right).
editprotected	allows to edit protected pages (without cascading protection).
Management
delete	1.5–1.11: allows the deletion or undeletion of pages. 1.12+: allows the deletion of pages. For undeletions, there is now the 'undelete' right, see below.
bigdelete	allows deletion of pages with larger than $wgDeleteRevisionsLimit revisions
deletedhistory	allows viewing deleted revisions, but not restoring.
undelete	allows the undeletion of pages.
browsearchive	allows prefix searching for titles of deleted pages through Special:Undelete.
mergehistory	allows access to Special:MergeHistory, to merge non-overlapping pages. Note: currently disabled by default, including on Wikimedia projects.
protect	allows locking a page to prevent edits and moves, and editing or moving locked pages.
block	allows the blocking of IP addresses, CIDR ranges, and registered users. Block options include preventing editing and registering new accounts, and autoblocking other users on the same IP address.
blockemail	allows preventing use of the Special:Emailuser interface when blocking.
hideuser	allows hiding the user/IP from the block log, active block list, and user list when blocking. (not available by default)
userrights	allows the use of the user rights interface, which allows the assignment or removal of all* groups to any user. * With $wgAddGroups and $wgRemoveGroups you can set the possibility to add/remove certain groups instead of all.
userrights-interwiki	allows changing user rights on other wikis.
rollback	allows one-click reversion of edits.
markbotedits	allows rollback to be marked as bot edits.
patrol	allows marking edits as legitimate ($wgUseRCPatrol must be true).
editinterface	allows editing the MediaWiki namespace, which contains interface messages.
editusercssjs	allows editing *.css / *.js subpages of any user. Split into editusercss and edituserjs in 1.16 but retained for backward compatibility.
editusercss	allows editing *.css subpages of any user.
edituserjs	allows editing *.js subpages of any user.
suppressrevision	allows preventing deleted revision information from being viewed by sysops and prevents sysops from undeleting the hidden info. Prior to 1.13 this right was named hiderevision (not available by default)
deleterevision	allows deleting/undeleting information (revision text, edit summary, user who made the edit) of specific revisions (not available by default)
Administration
siteadmin	allows locking and unlocking the database (which blocks all interactions with the web site except viewing). Deprecated by default.
import	allows user to import one page per time from another wiki ("transwiki").
importupload	allows user to import several pages per time from XML files. This right was called 'importraw' in and before version 1.5.
trackback	allows removal of trackbacks (if $wgUseTrackbacks is true).
unwatchedpages	allows access to Special:Unwatchedpages, which lists pages that no user has watchlisted.
Technical
bot	hides edits from recent changes lists and watchlists by default (can optionally be viewed).
purge	allows purging a page without a confirmation step (URL parameter "&action=purge").
minoredit	allows marking an edit as 'minor'.
nominornewtalk	blocks new message notification when making minor edits to user talk pages (requires minor edit right).
noratelimit	not affected by rate limits (prior to the introduction of this right, the configuration variable $wgRateLimitsExcludedGroups was used for this purpose)
ipblock-exempt	makes user immune to blocks applied to his IP address or a range (CIDR) containing it.
proxyunbannable	makes user immune to the open proxy blocker, which is disabled by default ($wgBlockOpenProxies).
autopatrol	automatically marks all edits by the user as patrolled ($wgUseRCPatrol must be true).
apihighlimits	allows user to use higher limits for API queries
writeapi	controls access to the write API ($wgEnableWriteAPI must be true)
suppressredirect	Allows moving a page without automatically creating a redirect.
autoconfirmed	used for the 'autoconfirmed' group, see the other table below for more information.
emailconfirmed	used for the 'emailconfirmed' group, see the other table below for more information.

The above is all the possible rights that can be dolled out, as well as a link to who has what here. There has been discussion of restructuring the rights, and who is in what group in order to facilitate better rule enforcement and conflict management. Who should have what, when? Tmtoulouse (talk) 01:50, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Everyone

read, edit, createpage, create talk. Obvious I know, but someone has to start. Тy^Talk. 02:20, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I think we keep everyone and autoconfirmed the same. I think sysops get block, vandal, delete, patrol, autopatrol, protect up to the sysops level, and the ability to create other sysops. Crates get the rest. Tmtoulouse (talk) 02:24, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah that sounds good to me. Keep Irrational Number and Ninja? Тy^Talk. 02:25, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I would disagree only on the "sysops can make other sysops" point. I don't think that's necessary. Hopefully, we'll have some sort of sysop-nomination procedure and/or RFA in which only sysops can vote, and then a crate can swing around and actually perform the promotion. Blue (pester) 02:40, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Okay. Тy^Talk. 02:41, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

what's the talkpage for, then, other than for making brxbrx feel silly for posting there?---brxbrx 02:30, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Pages in the forum namespace are meant to be used as discussion, not their talk pages. The forum talk pages are for discussion about the discussion. Blue (is useful) 02:33, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I hope I'm doing this right.---brxbrx 02:34, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

One of the frequent causes of griping is people unilaterally promoting/demoting another editor, so I agree with Blue about having some sort of consensus procedure for creating sysops. Генгис^marauding 11:11, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Also can anyone please explain what the 'createaccount' is useful for? If you need another account for some reason why not just sign up for it? Генгис^marauding 11:17, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

it's for places like CP that have closed account creation, or for people whose IP is blocked. Totnesmartin (talk) 11:36, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Deletion/restoring

I propose that auto-confirmed users have the right to delete and restore pages, and that sysops/crats are charged with deepburning the most offensive content. For example: brxbrx makes a shitty article, Z-Rex deletes it. Later, Maratrean decides to write on the subject, and uses brxbrx's shitty article as framework.
Another example: Occasionaluse uploads tons of kiddy porn and starts doxing random people. Ty deep burns the porn and the dox, then proceeds to notify the FBI. Z-Rex attempts to view the dox and kiddy porn, but cannot because it has been permanently destroyed under Ty's vigilance.---brxbrx 02:26, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

yea

---brxbrx 02:26, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

neigh

Auto-confirmed deleting articles? I dunno, seems a bit too easy. ħuman 02:49, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Bot. Script. bye bye wiki. Тy^Talk. 02:49, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I didn't think of that. So I guess a probationary period? Hmm... This is for coming up with new user groups, right? Like, if we desysop everybody?---brxbrx 03:13, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

My two cents

I am going to stay out of this debate completely; I am fairly indifferent both as to where the rights will fall and as to which ones I will wind up with. But whatever is hashed out here, the Wiki will need to end up with some method — rules, the right set of administrators, whatever — to kick trolls and troublemakers out and keep them out. And this discussion needs to be kept clear of trolling, of Dadaistic nonsense, of name-calling, and of other collective wheel-spinning exercises, which will reduce it to irrelevance as other discussions have been reduced before. That is all. ListenerX^TalkerX 03:16, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Sounds sane. Seconding. --Sid (talk) 11:17, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

These are core issues and I agree. However, I'd also add the need to restrict the use of sockpuppets in administrative affairs. As checkuser is a no-no it would have to be through some qualification of time/edits criteria. Генгис^marauding 11:24, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Agree with Genghis re: sockpuppets and I'd add that every single problem that's been raised in the last few days could be solved by minor modifications to our existing guidelines, including turning some of the more important exhortations into actual rules. Completely redoing a system that for the most part works with the exception of a very short list of issues that have repeatedly plagued us (sysopping, cratting, trolling, cranks) is extremely poorly advised when the community can't even get it's head out of its ass long enough to see that shit like the vote to decrat Human was a more horrid abuse than what he was accused of. I'm sure that last point won't be well received, but any serious examination of the complete lack of due process, including no direction on who could vote, how many votes would suffice, or even an indictment that actually stated a claim (LX and I were the only people discussing whether there is a "rule" that even prohibits what Human (and Blue!) did), reflects at least to me that when the community gets all lathered up it can't even be trusted to make a cup of tea properly. Whether anyone agrees with me on the example I've used they might nonetheless agree that people are proposing all these entirely new structures, including a "Consitutional Convention" when we've got our hands on a very few sticky but discrete issues that level heads can prevail over. A new system potentially fraught with its own unknown perils doesn't thrill me. Baby steps. Nutty Roux (talk) 12:10, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

What I think needs to change is not who gets different levels of rights, but the handing out of sysopships to all and sundry - that needs to stop. First of all, desysop anyone abusing their powers, second of all, new demotions to be by some RfA process. Third of all, anyone having a drama should be blocked for 24 hours. They can whine on RWW or the facebook group if they want, but not here. The good old days that other oldies hanker for are dead. Get over it. Totnesmartin (talk) 11:34, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Martin is right. Sysop abuses are a huge problem because they erode confidence in authority and lead to predictable and sometimes even legitimate cries from those on the receiving end. Let's get a real process for this. You know, not just desysop anyone who abuses his power, but say one with, oh I don't know, some protections that ensure it doesn't turn into a public lynching or a proxy referendum on issues that were already smoldering? Nutty Roux (talk) 12:10, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmm yeah, maybe a couple of warnings first. Totnesmartin (talk) 14:23, 10 May 2011 (UTC)