Last modified: 2014-01-03 16:08:01 UTC
At https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump&oldid=97614612#Allow_admins_to_assign_this_right some administrators found it bad that they were unable to delete pages marked for translation or even just containing <translate> tags. Most of them agreed that administrators should have this right by default since administrators are elected by the community in a proper process while translateadmins aren't. Frankly, I am unable to assess whether there is enough "consensus" for the following change. I count 6x support and 1x oppose for this proposal. I just know that Commons admins are usually familar with Commons and that the current issues with the translate extension were not caused by Commons admins. If the RfC would have been started at a new page, it would have been easier to announce and translate it. Patch follows.
https://github.com/Rillke/operations-mediawiki-config/commit/3c7315a24bbf5b09ea1db9280cab63522f73fc21 https://github.com/wikimedia/operations-mediawiki-config/pulls
If it is not possible to delete pages containing <translate> which are not marked for translation that is a bug. Have you tried blanking the page first? I would be cautious about giving 'pagetranslation' right to all sysops.
That discussion was started too early, I suspect users have a different opinion now that some more experience with the tool was gained: I suggest to close this bug and rediscuss when felt needed. Anyway, as you say consensus is not clear -> +shellpolicy.
(In reply to comment #2) > Have you tried blanking the page first? https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AVillage_pump&diff=97155768&oldid=97155269 > I would be cautious about giving 'pagetranslation' right to all sysops. We have high requirements for administrators and we have lots of multilingual administrators. What do you exactly fear? >I suggest to close this bug and rediscuss when felt needed. And I said, I will retire from Commons if Adminstrators there could not be trusted.
(In reply to comment #3) > have a different opinion now Yes, some of our sysops them would like to disable the extension completely: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Problems_with_existing_translations_being_overwritten
(In reply to comment #4) > >I suggest to close this bug and rediscuss when felt needed. > > And I said, I will retire from Commons if Adminstrators there could not be > trusted. It's not about trust, of course; anyway, there's little gain in making such threats on bugzilla, you'd better tell so to the community and gain clear consensus for what you request.
(In reply to comment #0) > Frankly, I am unable to assess whether there is enough "consensus" for the > following change. I count 6x support and 1x oppose for this proposal. I just > know that Commons admins are usually familar with Commons and that the > current > issues with the translate extension were not caused by Commons admins. It's 7x support. I did not vote there. (In reply to comment #2) > I would be cautious about giving 'pagetranslation' right to all sysops. If an admin cant handle the right he should not be admin anymore. Also assigning this right to all admins does not enforce them to use this; they still can decide on their own whether to use this or not. Currently the 150+ active admins would have to request this right on com:RFR which not only causes a lot of confusion but also produces unnecessary red tape. ( https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:RFR#Translation_administrators )
(In reply to comment #5) > Yes, some of our sysops them would like to disable the extension completely: > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons: > Administrators%27_noticeboard#Problems_with_existing_translations_being_overw > ritten (Skimming through the page I cannot find the word "disable" mentioned.) For general info on (and the current rules of) such requests, please see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requesting_wiki_configuration_changes
(In reply to comment #7) > It's 7x support. I did not vote there. 8x support. (Leyo did not use {{support}} and we overlooked him)
6 x support, actually: Rillke, Nyttend, Jameslwoodward, russavia, Leyo, Rosenzweig. This is in no way enough consensus on a wiki of the size of Commons, even if you only take into consideration the fact that there are 272 local administrators. In my opinion, the discussion should be re–started (since it's already been archived by the bot).
(In reply to comment #10) About 50% of the admins are nearly inactive; a lot more do never participate in Village Pump discussions; others prefer private blogging over on-wiki conversation. It's just the question whether bothering all people again is justified. Before even considering a broader RfC, I would appreciate a proper explanation by Niklas, why one should be cautious about it as he is one of the devs of this extension; especially if there are bad experiences or whether this is technically an issue or whatever.
(In reply to comment #11) > About 50% of the admins are nearly inactive; a lot more do never participate > in > Village Pump discussions; [...] And yet, you want to give them all one tool they never heard of or asked. :) (Just kidding.)
People who destroy the HTML output themselves (c.f https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:TN#Unordered_lists ) voted in the RfC against assigning the translate admin rights by default: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Requests_for_comment/Assign_translationadmin-right_to_admins "The reason it's been kept separate everywhere else is to make sure admins know what they're doing before they use the complicated extension" -- If it is not user friendly it should not have been activated in the first place.
Follow-up: Bug 54732
