User talk:Redmin

Protecting interface messages in MediaWiki namespace

Hi R4356th,

While I can see your rationale for protecting interface messages, as you did with wanting to protect MediaWiki:Edittools at Consul level of protection in this log action, I do disagree with it, personally and philosophically, as this is, ultimately, a test wiki, with active consuls, bureaucrats, or even administrators, for that matter, with the technical ability to rollback or undo edits that are problematic in some way. This is where good common sense comes in terms for test administrators and mostly test bureaucrats. As such, I have reverted this protection for the following reasons, namely that:

1. If you felt protection at consul was warranted, then you should've reached out to any Consul via their locally user talk page, ideally, with your reason(s) why for them to effect. Protecting a page at bureaucrat when you feel consul protection is warranted doesn't make sense, and wouldn't be appropriate; and, perhaps more importantly,
2. This is after all a test wiki, so other than some CSS/JS files in MediaWiki namespace, protection isn't needed on most interface messages, as we have active consuls, bureaucrats, or even administrators, for that matter, where edits are problematic in some way.

Hope that makes sense.

Thanks,
Dmehus (talk) 17:14, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

My apologies for that. Please do note that this came after you referenced that page on Discord. And it should also be noted that you are the person who said that TestWiki does not have many active users. Thank you. R4356th (talk) 19:02, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

R4356th Yes, I realize that you protected the page because it was being discussed on community noticeboard on Meta, but I still don't necessarily see the need to protect the page. And, yes, I believe that's accurate that I said TestWiki does not have very many users, but that was in the context of activity community participation on TestWiki:Community portal. In terms of patrolling administrators, we have a very active community. I note that you have resigned your bureaucrat and sysop rights on TestWiki, which is certainly your right to do, but I hope you'll reconsider, as I do think you do excellent work here. If you do not decide to rerequest rights, would you like me to grant you an inactivity exemption strictly for your autopatrolled user group? This exemption would be removed should you ever rerequest sysop or bureaucrat rights on the wiki. In any case, please do let me know. Dmehus (talk) 19:13, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

@Dmehus: I do not plan to re-request or hold any right here in the near future unless forced to do so. Thank you. R4356th (talk) 19:18, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Also, you should update the Inactivity Exemptions page to update your rights. Thank you. R4356th (talk) 19:19, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

R4356th Thank you for pointing out this oversight. Consider this  done now. Dmehus (talk) 19:21, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Alright, that's fine. Please do let me know should your needs change. Thank you for your service to this wiki. Dmehus (talk) 19:20, 8 January 2021 (UTC)