1,767
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 496:
Line 496: + + + +
Conservapedia talk:Commandments (view source)
Revision as of 23:23, April 4, 2007
, 23:23, April 4, 2007→Rule against templates
*Well, I am glad you clarified what you meant. As to the number of Sysops, am I reading you correctly, you would prefer agreement of two as opposed to 5 or more? --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] <sup>[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]</sup> 19:11, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
*Well, I am glad you clarified what you meant. As to the number of Sysops, am I reading you correctly, you would prefer agreement of two as opposed to 5 or more? --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] <sup>[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]</sup> 19:11, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
::I chose the "group of sysops" wording because I didn't really have a value in mind. But the "Protected" thing sorta showed that "two" is not enough (Ed and David are both sysops and formed the "consensus" to use it). Besides, I don't think that two sysops alone have the same "decision-making power level" as one sysop in critical cases.
::I still have no fixed value in mind, and ''I don't think there should be one''. Some cases will obviously require more input than others (the higher the impact on pages, the more sysops should be consulted - I'd rank the Protected template relatively low, but a radical template like "This article misrepresents facts and should be rewritten immediately by a more competent editor" should have some serious discussion before usage), so it should be evaluated on the fly by the editor who gets the idea and by the sysops who engage in the discussion.
::(And no, I do not suggest that anybody actually creates such a template - it was an extreme example.) --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 19:23, 4 April 2007 (EDT)