Talk: Community Portal/Archive 9

HB/TA Builds

I'd like peoples opinions on what to do with TA and HB builds when they're removed from GW (e.g. would you like to archive them all, archive only the great and the odd notable good or just delete them all etc.). ~ PheNaxKian talk 19:42, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Archive. Edit: Archive it all, with the vetting update we don't save much horrible stuff anyways. Also, I damn you for ruining my "First", I was waiting for you to finish editing before doing that. ---Ch aos- 19:42, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Archive most of the ones that actually saw play. Anything that was just vetted on theorycraft should be deleted. Life Guardian 19:43, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Just archive it all, HB was retarded.

Misery Says Moo 17:54, September 6, 2009 (UTC)

it was in fact so retarded that i could lose to 3 IW dervs and an IW mes :< Brandnew 17:57, September 6, 2009 (UTC)

bring more snares! also, i'd only archive great. who the cares about anything that wasn't abused to fuck? ···

18:33, September 6, 2009 (UTC)

Suppress Redirect

Suppressing Redirects is moving pages without leaving a redirect behind. Angela said here that it's possible, but allows for pagemove vandalism. My suggestion is to allow it to registered users who have made X contributions, and just banhammer people who abuse it.

Do we want Suppress Redirect?
Is limiting the authorization possible? I'd suppose it can easily be allowed to the same people that are allowed to vote.

---Ch aos- 20:43, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

Why exactly do we need it? If the admins do their jobs, then they should be able to do what GWW does and just delete the redirects (however, assuming that admins will do their jobs here is a pretty big "IF").

20:49, 8 September 2009

How many pages are moved on GWW? Honestly a LOT of pages are moved around here, and leaving a redirect is sometimes a good idea (for pages that have lots of links to them). Besides I bet GWW people tag every moved page for deletion, unlike here. --Frosty Mc Admin 20:51, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

I do it when I cba, but there's so many of them :> if people l2watchlist it shouldn't even be necessary. I move considerably less pages than I would, because I hate redirects over all. ---Ch aos- 20:55, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

Nah, fuck it. You don't need it. I don't even use it. Misery Says Moo 21:07, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

^

21:11, 8 September 2009

I can't think of a time I wanted to not have a redirect, except in the main namespace. Most of the time, I've created redirects, if anything. ··· 22:44, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

it would primarily be used for misnamed builds or something I would assume. You're still capable of leaving a redirect if you want (you just don't check the box that says "suppress redirect"). Ignoring point one in any cayse, it is possiable to restrict it to a certain degree; it's a case of saying people in a given user group can have it. In this case you're wanting people who can vote, which would be people in auto confirmed (so the account is ~4 days old and made ~4 contributions). ~ PheNaxKian talk 22:54, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

The only reason I see for not having it is not needing it, but I'd imagine, at least on this wiki, having it would probably do more good than bad in the end. ···

23:06, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

@KJ up there: Template:Miniskillbar. Over a month old tag. There's even older tags than that one, too. Big "IF" indeed. ---

-- (contribs) (talk) 14:41, September 9, 2009 (UTC)

We don't do our jobs :>

Misery Says Moo 15:18, September 9, 2009 (UTC)

Aye. Having Suppress Redirect will ofc and undoubtedly be useful, but do you consider it being available for autoconfirmed users a risk? The question shouldn't really be if we want it (yes, I know I asked it), but more like if the risks are actual and do we want to take themmmmmmmmmmmmm? ---Ch aos- 15:32, September 9, 2009 (UTC)

Jist take the 10 active users on this stupid site, throw them in a new group, and give them suppress redirect. Life Guardian 15:38, September 9, 2009 (UTC)

Probably more sensible, I wouldn't trust the masses with it. Athrun

Feya 15:40, September 9, 2009 (UTC)

I'm clearly missing something, but what are you all afraid they'll do with this? >.> ~ PheNaxKian talk 16:07, September 9, 2009 (UTC)

You're not the only one missing it :> Redirect suppression only makes reverting easier. ---

-- (contribs) (talk) 16:21, September 9, 2009 (UTC)

I don't actually understand how it is used for "move vandalism", you would then just move it back instead of having to delete all the redirects. But I oppose to be an asshole.

Misery Says Moo 16:30, September 9, 2009 (UTC)

being able to suppress redirects on a site people care about could be an issue because temporary page outages. here, no one's gonna give a flying fuck because in the 15 seconds it takes to move a build that anyone has watchlisted back, no one's going to visit it. ··· 20:10, September 9, 2009 (UTC)

If I move say, Relyk's userpage and all the subpages to "Category:åäö", you can't just move it back (because it's a category space), and I don't know how well they can be moved back if the vandal is good. ---Ch aos- 10:22, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

the problem there being only admins can "move all subpages". ~ PheNaxKian talk 10:41, September 10, 2009 (UTC)