SmashWiki talk:Junior administrators (version 2)
Okay so. In the interest of focusing the effort (and also not inflating an already-huge talkpage), I made this "new version" of the junior admin proposal. Discuss. Toomai Glittershine 
El Pollo 15:53, 18 December 2014 (EST)
- I like this version better. It gives users some important tools, but not too much. The part about not allowing to edit fully-protected pages but allowing to add full protection seems weird, because I feel if a JA protects a page, they should be able to edit it. Rtzxy
Reflect! 16:07, 18 December 2014 (EST)
- Strong Support This should help combat vandalism and users can now delete their own userpages without tagging "Speedy Delete". They can also help deleting other user pages if they tagged them with "Speedy Delete". ZeldaStarfoxfan2164 (talk) is a never lover boy 16:11, 18 December 2014 (EST)
Oppose. I still see very little reason for this position to exist, and I continue to maintain that a standard RfA is over-stigmatized in the minds of the userbase. Miles (talk) 16:37, 18 December 2014 (EST)
- I agree with this and still don't really like the idea myself, but the userbase is practically demanding it for whatever reason. Toomai Glittershine The Loony 16:41, 18 December 2014 (EST)
- If we had traffic more analogous to somewhere like Bulbapedia, I could see this being more appropriate. As it is, though, we're already drifting out of the peak of SSB4 traffic and it's not like we're having major issues with the administration being unable to keep up with needed tasks. One or two more normal admins wouldn't hurt, sure, but the point is that for a whole user class like this to be made implies a much greater need than has been demonstrated. Miles (talk) 16:44, 18 December 2014 (EST)
Bump. Oppose I see this as a better compromise than the previous one but I changed my mind about having junior admins. I actually think were pretty good on admins anyways despite there only being two but there hasn't been much traffic recently aside from SSB4. Plus, this version is basically the same but without the ability to block users, which is understandable because its easily the most powerful and most likely to abuse action on wikis, but what happens when a vandal is vandalizing when no admins are here? So yeah, I would love to have Junior Admins but at the same time, I'm a little too uncomfortable having them at this time. Dots (talk) 
The Zerg Rush 19:31, 27 December 2014 (EST)
- What about a very weak block capability, such as for only a couple of hours? Any abuse would only be a minor inconvenience if directed at a legitimate user, but for a vandal it would keep them away for long enough for an admin to show up and take more decisive action.
VinLAURiA (talk) 11:03, 9 January 2015 (EST)
- From what I've seen, admins have the ability to block people for large periods of time, specifically, for the length of multiple weeks. I would recommend, as stated above, a weaker block capability, but for a length of days, not weeks. But that's just me.
BlueStreak Speeds By 11:09, 9 January 2015 (EST)
- From what I've seen, admins have the ability to block people for large periods of time, specifically, for the length of multiple weeks. I would recommend, as stated above, a weaker block capability, but for a length of days, not weeks. But that's just me.
- I strongly feel that jrs should not have any form of the block tool. I believe there are two main reasons for this: 1. At the present time, we don't really need any more blockers than we have. 2. The jr position should be lacking in more than one important tool to make it act as a proper "midstep". Toomai Glittershine The Brass 12:00, 9 January 2015 (EST)
- Oppose: what Dots said. Smashworker101 (talk) 13:15, 9 January 2015 (EST)
