Editing MarioWiki talk:Appeals
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==???== | ==???== | ||
Why was the article unprotected?--[[User:Holyromanemperortatan|Holyromanemperortatan]] 19:07, 5 May 2011 (EDT) | Why was the article unprotected?--[[User:Holyromanemperortatan|Holyromanemperortatan]] 19:07, 5 May 2011 (EDT) | ||
:So people can make appeals, which was the whole purpose of the page. [[File:Red_Yoshi_TTYD. | :So people can make appeals, which was the whole purpose of the page. [[File:Red_Yoshi_TTYD.png|30px]] [[User:Yoshiwaker|<span style=color:#F96300>Yoshi</span>]][[User talk:Yoshiwaker|<span style=color:#F00>waker</span>]] [[File:OrangeYoshiTTYD.png|30px]] 19:09, 5 May 2011 (EDT) | ||
::Also, the only reason it was protected was because it was under construction. {{User:Mario4Ever/sig}} | ::Also, the only reason it was protected was because it was under construction. {{User:Mario4Ever/sig}} | ||
:::Ohhh. Well thank you to both of you!--[[User:Holyromanemperortatan|Holyromanemperortatan]] 19:12, 5 May 2011 (EDT) | :::Ohhh. Well thank you to both of you!--[[User:Holyromanemperortatan|Holyromanemperortatan]] 19:12, 5 May 2011 (EDT) | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
::The first one isn't because that was for userspace '''and''' for making useless redirects and flooding the recent changes log. The valid warnings SFM have are: [[User talk:Superfiremario/Archive 1#Warning|this one]], [http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php title=User_talk:Superfiremario&diff=prev&oldid=985719 here], [[User talk:Superfiremario/Archive 2#Warning|this one]], and [[User talk:Superfiremario#Warning|this one]], so I don't think he should appeal to delete these because one of the last warnings is also for editing on archives! {{User:DKPetey99/sig}} 21:25, 13 May 2011 (EDT) | ::The first one isn't because that was for userspace '''and''' for making useless redirects and flooding the recent changes log. The valid warnings SFM have are: [[User talk:Superfiremario/Archive 1#Warning|this one]], [http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php title=User_talk:Superfiremario&diff=prev&oldid=985719 here], [[User talk:Superfiremario/Archive 2#Warning|this one]], and [[User talk:Superfiremario#Warning|this one]], so I don't think he should appeal to delete these because one of the last warnings is also for editing on archives! {{User:DKPetey99/sig}} 21:25, 13 May 2011 (EDT) | ||
:::To answer the original question, you are allowed to appeal anything; so long as it is a warning (this includes {{tem| | :::To answer the original question, you are allowed to appeal anything; so long as it is a warning (this includes {{tem|Lastwarn}}). {{User:Marioguy1/sig}} | ||
::::Yes, but those warnings '''are valid'''. {{User:DKPetey99/sig}} 21:31, 13 May 2011 (EDT) | ::::Yes, but those warnings '''are valid'''. {{User:DKPetey99/sig}} 21:31, 13 May 2011 (EDT) | ||
:::::It doesn't matter. If SFM disagrees, he can appeal them, though the final decision as to their validity is up to the administration. {{User:Mario4Ever/sig}} | :::::It doesn't matter. If SFM disagrees, he can appeal them, though the final decision as to their validity is up to the administration. {{User:Mario4Ever/sig}} | ||
@DKPetey99: No. Just wondering. {{User:Superfiremario/Sig}} 10:53, 14 May 2011 (EDT) | @DKPetey99: No. Just wondering. {{User:Superfiremario/Sig}} 10:53, 14 May 2011 (EDT) | ||
:Basically what they said, any reminder, warning, and or last warning issued by anyone other than admins is appealable, evne if it is painfully obvious that it's going to stand. {{User:Xzelion/sig}} | :Basically what they said, any reminder, warning, and or last warning issued by anyone other than admins is appealable, evne if it is painfully obvious that it's going to stand. {{User:Xzelion/sig}} | ||
== This is not very helpful... == | == This is not very helpful... == | ||
| Line 64: | Line 62: | ||
==Rule 1== | ==Rule 1== | ||
{{talk}} | |||
I honestly think it should be removed. Isn't there somewhere in the wiki where it explicitly says that administrators are just regular users with more tools? In fact, this is exactly what the administrator page says, "Sysops are not imbued with any special authority, and are equal to everyone else in terms of editorial responsibility. Some consider the terms "Sysop" and "Administrator" to be misnomers, as they just indicate users who have had performance - and security-based restrictions on several features lifted because they seemed like trustworthy folks. Sysops should not have power over other users other than applying decisions made by all users.". | I honestly think it should be removed. Isn't there somewhere in the wiki where it explicitly says that administrators are just regular users with more tools? In fact, this is exactly what the administrator page says, "Sysops are not imbued with any special authority, and are equal to everyone else in terms of editorial responsibility. Some consider the terms "Sysop" and "Administrator" to be misnomers, as they just indicate users who have had performance - and security-based restrictions on several features lifted because they seemed like trustworthy folks. Sysops should not have power over other users other than applying decisions made by all users.". | ||
Often the administration are wise folks who know what they are doing and will not give out warnings or reminders that are illogical, but if the said thing is possible to dispute (if ever at all), it should be possible to dispute. {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 21:20, 14 September 2013 (EDT) | Often the administration are wise folks who know what they are doing and will not give out warnings or reminders that are illogical, but if the said thing is possible to dispute (if ever at all), it should be possible to dispute. {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 21:20, 14 September 2013 (EDT) | ||
:The reason that rule is there is because administrators are supposed to be fully knowledgeable of the rules, but you're right, that doesn't mean we don't make mistakes. And actually, incorrectly giving a reminder also has consequences for us, but they are dealt with privately. Don't worry, we at the staff team make sure no incorrect warnings are given by an administrator; and, in case one is given, we will properly discuss it and remove it. --{{User:Tucayo/sig}} 21:25, 14 September 2013 (EDT) | :The reason that rule is there is because administrators are supposed to be fully knowledgeable of the rules, but you're right, that doesn't mean we don't make mistakes. And actually, incorrectly giving a reminder also has consequences for us, but they are dealt with privately. Don't worry, we at the staff team make sure no incorrect warnings are given by an administrator; and, in case one is given, we will properly discuss it and remove it. --{{User:Tucayo/sig}} 21:25, 14 September 2013 (EDT) | ||
