Talk:Requests for comment/Creating abusefilter-manager global group

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

@Huji, Daimona Eaytoy, and MusikAnimal:

Piniging Huji as proposer, Daimona Eaytoy as a supporter that was in most aspects of the conversation, and pinging MusikAnimal as he was involved in this discussion with sound recommendations and is involved with AF on a global level.

I have closed the RfC as "resolved" (see closing statement on main page) with no consensus to create the usergroup (too many differing opinions on restrictions, parameters, which wikis), however, there was clear consensus to move forward with a vote on creating the usergroup.

My recommendations are outlined on the closing statement, but I also want to see this RfC through so that it gets a fair chance of consideration.

I would proceed as follows:

  1. Determine usergroup name and create a page for it (i.e. Abuse filter manager), slapping {{proposed|status=development}} on it. Write similar to any other usergroup including description, userrights, permission usage, requirements, etc.). This will reduce any confusion about what the group involves.
  2. Dissect this discussion RfC and determine justifyable parameters that enable the group to effectively function in terms of userrights, parameters and restrictions while minimizing impact on local communities. Considerations should include community notification, when it is appropriate to edit a filter and to what extent.
  3. Create voting page, whether Abuse filter manager/vote (like Global sysop/Vote) or Requests for comment/Abuse filter manager (vote), and include previously recommended multi-section approach
  4. Notify shareholders as previously recommended

Please let me know if you have any questions and how I can help. ~riley (talk) 02:23, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

@~riley: thanks for your help. I think your summary is fair, and the next steps you proposed are reasonable. I will work with Daimona and MusikAnimal on the next steps. Huji (talk) 02:30, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Sounds good. I'm happy to help, just ping me. MusikAnimal talk 15:34, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, I agree with the closing statement. No clear consensus, and no clear proposal. I like the idea of opening a vote with various options re opt-out, scope, etc. I'm a bit short of time at the moment, but I'd be happy to help write a stub for the new proposal and get the ball rolling. --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 14:03, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
To unify with other global userrights (global renamer, global rollbacker, global sysop, global interface editor), I would encourage "global" to be in the name, with "global abusefilter editor" being the most standardized option. It is more dignifying than helper but less authoritative than manager. ~riley (talk) 20:54, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
  • @Huji, Daimona Eaytoy, and MusikAnimal: I have created Abuse filter manager and it is ready to be modified/fine tuned to meet the needs of this usergroup. ~riley (talk) 06:33, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
    Pardon the slowness, User:~riley. It has been a few busy weeks. I'll start working on this next week if not sooner. Huji (talk) 13:26, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
    Thanks! The page seems fine -- I've just fixed a couple of typos. I'll also be able to start working on this soon, please CC me for any doubt/question. --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 16:14, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
    No pardon needed, just wanting to see this through rather than letting it die. :) ~riley (talk) 21:38, 2 February 2020 (UTC)