Forum:Star Trek Avenger related articles

Forums → Hailing Frequencies → Star Trek Avenger related articles (Reply | Watch)

There has been a lot of articles being written that appear to be attached to Star Trek: Avenger (an article yet to be written here). These articles are being written by unregistered users. I know ever time I see an unregisterd user pops on I try to seen them the standard welcome message and sometimes follow up with pleas to sign on or create an account.

• Rebecca Baker‎ (hum why isn't this link working?)
• Richard F. Grice
• Challenger (NX-03)

These seem to be the main three articles this user/users are working on.

It appears this unregisterd user is serious about trying to make something serious but no attempts to register as an "offical" user has been taken (to my knowledge).

On one hand I want to "protect" the pages from unregistered users to encourage this/these person/persons to become a full active member here, but I think that would be wrong. Just as wrong as blocking ALL unregistered users from at least sticking their toes in the editing pool that is wikia.

Thoughts?

-- Sneg ^Admin•Talk 20:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I see nothing wrong with requiring users to register before they can edit. Separates the dabblers from the doers. If they really want to stick their toes in, it is not some kind of herculean effort to simply create an account. It's easy as pie. Plus it shows commitment. Don't we want committed participants who take this seriously? (rhetorically speaking)

On the flip side, protecting pages does not send a clear message that they should register--that's the wrong way to go about it, and they might not "get" the message as intended. I don't think that's something we should do. – Sasoriza ^{Adm • Tlk} 11:02, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

re: requiring users to register before they can edit -- not the best idea in my opinion. anons are he basis of many wikis' most beneficial copyedits. we need the diversity presented by dabblers, so excluding them is not an option

however, you are right on target with requiring users to register and log in when they are creating anything that can't be verified by a regular user.

basically, we need anons to copyedit and to contribute bits and pieces, however we definitely need them to log in if they are adding their own fanfic that can't be verified by us. -- Captain M.K.B. 14:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

What Mike said.  ;-) --JusticeCEO 19:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Yup. (wow). --TimPendragon 23:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree too. -- usscantabrian 00:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

So how to we set that up? (I was going to use the word "enforce" but that's too harse of a term). -- Sneg ^Admin•Talk 00:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Is there any way that you can force a login for users creating a new entry prior to them creating the entry? (I think after the entry would be so annoying, especially if someone's put a lot of work into it.) I'm not 100% clued up on the permissions thing for wikias or anything else for that matter... --usscantabrian 02:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Design a warning, set a waiting period, delete unexplained contributions. it takes patience but sometimes new users need a couple weeks to come around and realize what you are asking of them. registered users or admins should initiate the talk, use a standard non-accusatory, unoffensive message (a template?), and then trust the admins to practice patience waiting for the anon to respond over a number of days, and then, when the time has elapsed, delete the offending material and additions if no response has been tendered. the trick to appearing mature and responsible is to set the time limit, and then follow through in waiting, if just to avoid misunderstanding. -- Captain M.K.B. 03:14, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

So how to we set that up? It could be done with permissions, but we might need access to LocalSettings.php. Luke or (nothing against Luke but this might be a better alternative) one of the Wikia honchos with access, who can handle PHP, could do it. (They're pretty busy, so there isn't a guarantee that asking them will get results.) (Unless Luke has a talent I don't know about and can do it). – Sasoriza ^{Adm • Tlk} 04:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Or we get you made into another bureaucrat? --TimPendragon 04:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

That's up to Luke, or Angela, or one of the other Wikia stewards. But it still wouldn't give me automatic user access to the database, which I would need in this case. – Sasoriza ^{Adm • Tlk} 05:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I think we shouldn't overlook the option i propose of using a form letter posted on the pages in question to warn anons and then giving them a couple weeks to find a way to register or cite the article. itd be easier than recoding the database IMO, to just try and communicate, then wait, then remove. -- Captain M.K.B. 05:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay... and this would apply to things like "Homesun's contributions"...? --TimPendragon 05:47, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

that's exactly the type of system i was suggesting. very astute, Tim. maybe have a more descriptive template with a form letter to explain exactly why we are doing it. -- Captain M.K.B. 06:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Template "flag" for articles like this

How about something like this to flag the articles with? Template:Sourceless I want to find a picture of Kirk giving McCoy the hypospray for the picture. Thoughts? (Feel free to change the wording. It was just a quick write up) -- Sneg ^Admin•Talk 07:48, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe instead of "sourceless" I guess maybe it should be "authorless" or "unknown author". thoughts? -- Sneg ^Admin•Talk 00:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

"Unknown author" or something like that sounds better to me. --TimPendragon 01:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)