ArchWiki talk:Access levels and roles

From ArchWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

New additions

Active in ru:ArchWiki Translation Team

General rule for activity in maintenance team is to have at least 10 edits in the last 30 days.

-- Svito (talk) 16:53, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

There's a bunch more TUs missing. [1] Also note that we should discuss the translator role before adding more people to it. -- Alad (talk) 17:07, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
From my understanding we add translator role to active translation team members and this page is perfectly clear about that. Those 3 are members of the team, and they manage it themselves now that Kycok is no longer active. -- Svito (talk) 18:02, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
That's how I assigned the roles initially. Before continuing doing we should discuss some important points:
  • Some sort of active reward (e.g. a mention in ArchWiki:News), rather than a passive reward through assignment of a role;
  • An explicit definition of "active members", not implied from other roles such as maintainers (in particular, is the assignment of the "translator" role permanent or not);
  • Default access levels for translators;
For the latter point, I don't think we should assign additional rights to maintainers. If a translator wishes cosysop access, he may apply as maintainer as other users would. (Kycok is a good example of this.)
-- Alad (talk) 18:28, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Also want to notice that ArchLinuxUser is doing great a job reminding other translators of our contribution guidelines, effectively taking on the tasks of previous team leader. -- Svito (talk) 18:22, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
That's great to hear but I'm not sure how it is relevant to this discussion. -- Alad (talk) 18:29, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
I just wanted to note for the record that this team is not totally mismanaged and we can add roles which already belong to them (I checked few other teams and you have already added roles to their active members, although I guess your criteria was different). I leave this discussion to admins. -- Svito (talk) 19:32, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Guess this has been sorted by ArchWiki:News#2018/12/16_-_Official_translators. Closing -- Alad (talk) 15:05, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Some inconsistencies

With the last update of group rights I went over the relevant articles again and noticed the following:

  • The "disambiguation" page Roles does not mention this article at all. Arguably there is an overlap between both articles, and the little content Roles has could be merged back here or to Arch terminology.

-- Alad (talk) 15:19, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

About Roles not linking here, it can be an easy fix, for example we can disambiguate between Arch Linux (or the global community) roles, and the more specific ArchWiki roles, which have a more technical reason to be.
Merging Roles into an ArchWiki-namespace page like this one would reduce its scope to the wiki-specific pages, thus possibly generating another inconsistency.
I think Roles can make sense in the context of Category:Teams to give a place where to mention all the official staff sections that don't have their own wiki Team page.
Merging Roles#Package maintainer into Arch terminology finds me in agreement instead: "package maintainer" isn't a community role, in fact in its definition it already says that it's some kind of a more generic term to describe Devs, TUs and generic AUR maintainers (the latter not even forming a team).
Perhaps we may rename the article to something like "Arch Linux Teams"?
-- Kynikos (talk) 16:08, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

-- Alad (talk) 15:19, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

The legend says that the "Roles" column hosts "a human-readable representation of the most relevant access levels and roles", so not 1:1, for clarity (wiki user groups aren't intended to be directly human readable) and tradition ("administrator" is a globally recognized term to identify users with the main coordination responsibility).
Of course you only reported the inconsistency here, but it could be interesting to discuss improvements, for example changing Administrator to Maintaineradmin (I'm not endorsing that, it's only an example).
-- Kynikos (talk) 16:08, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
  • ArchWiki:Maintenance Team lists administrator as an "extra group", when the actual group is sysop. Moreover, other groups like archtu or archstaff are not included in the columns. (With latter admittedly only being relevant to me...)

-- Alad (talk) 15:19, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

I suppose the intention of "Extra groups" is more exactly to list the access level of wiki maintainers (that being the Maintenance Team page), i.e. "cosysop" is implicit (blank), "sysop" is called "administrator" by convention, and the highest access level for a maintainer is "bureaucrat". I think mentioning other wiki roles could be a bit out of scope in that table.
Maybe the column could be renamed "Access level"?
-- Kynikos (talk) 16:08, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
  • The archstaff group is given to users with "other roles in the Arch community", when this term is more generally used for any staff members, wiki admins included. [2] That non-admin maintainers are not included in aforementioned list, but do have a special title on the Forums, only adds to the mystery.

-- Alad (talk) 15:19, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Again, I wouldn't take the wiki group names with their literal meaning, perhaps we could have named archstaff archotherstaffroles instead, but I thought it would be neater to keep it short :)
Should we explicitly warn that wiki group names shouldn't be interpreted literally and are more meant to be configuration-file-friendly than realistic descriptions of the community roles?
-- Kynikos (talk) 16:08, 9 July 2019 (UTC)