Board Thread:Wiki Discussion/@comment-4242472-20140816221856/@comment-4242472-20140817000948

What differs this site from say Halopedia, Wookieepedia or the FFwiki is that we handle a huge amount of user-created fiction on site. Those sites are databases; what is put on there is information that is sourced, disputed and catalogued. A creative site is different and most of our current admins are heavily involved in the creative process of fiction that doesn't have a story that can be cross-referenced with a line from a book or a scene from a film or an interview by an actor.

I strongly disagree that the criteria for adminship should be restricted to the mainspace. Because the vast majority of edits come from the fictional settings that have been created. A similar process goes on, arguments can occur and articles need to be catalogued. The main difference I can see between the mainspace and the fictional universes is that the former is written about something that exists physically in the world and has a copyright mark. Are we suggesting that fictionverse experience should be disregarded because it's technically a hobby with no real-world value?

If so, then I see we have a conflict of ideas. It also makes me wonder what's the point of me staying if all the site is is a massive time sink for the more creative sorts like myself.

This isn't just about promoting new users though. Most admins I'm aware of were originally chosen because they had skill, enthusiasm and did well to keep connected with the community at large. Admins can be demoted for abuse yes, but what about neglect of duty? Or behaviour that is unassuming of someone who is supposedly supposed to be an an example to the community? (all the admins are old users. Whether they like it or not their veterancy and experience means this is expected of them.) I never hear about those situations unless it comes under "abuse". Companies in real life - even family businesses - give warnings to or even lay off staff who neglect their duties, slip up or misbehave. And they do this for good reason, so the question is why is it so crazy for us to not consider a similar idea? We're still a collective, we're still working towards a goal and we still want to keep this wiki alive.

Give someone power and they will eventually exercise it. The admin hierarchy claims exist because even being given a few extra buttons and a sense of responsibility can change people for the worse. Sometimes one has to nip things in the bud before they get out of hand (if this had actually been done this whole mess could have been avoided, which proves the present adminship isn't a perfect team).