Wikidata:Requests for comment/Restrict creation of properties to some users

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Discussion seems to have died down. There is no strong consensus for any option, but there is clearly more support for having a new group to make properties and close property discussions over any other options. Also, users creating a property should have a notice telling them the proper channel for making one. Ajraddatz (Talk) 13:04, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RFC related to this issue. --Ricordi samoa 04:39, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposals edit

Property creator

Weak support for now... I can't think of anything better. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 23:14, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Why don't we activate the editinterface permission for this wiki? Users in this group could edit all protected pages and in my opinion this is on almost the same trust level like letting users to create properties. Regards, Vogone talk 01:38, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I'm not sure I agree. I think editinterface needs more trust than a property creation. --Izno (talk) 02:05, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it would be a great idea to grant property creation rights to any user who might vandalize other pages. ;-) And if a user breaks accidentally something in ns8, it still can be reverted by several admins. Regards, Vogone talk 02:25, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Vacation9 (talk) 20:46, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Nightwish62 (talk) 10:29, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No restrictions at all edit

Oppose --Nightwish62 (talk) 17:42, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:33, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Toru10 (talk) 07:19, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Sixsi6ma (talk) 10:43, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Vogone talk 13:50, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Izno (talk) 18:58, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Matthiasb (talk) 21:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Rs chen 7754 22:00, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lukas²³ ^talk in German ^Contribs 00:42, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 01:47, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Stryn (talk) 08:09, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose --Ricordi samoa 08:14, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Property creation process must have post-discussion basis (same as item creation or article creation in Wikipedia). — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 17:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Йо Асакура (talk) 17:37, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Vacation9 (talk) 20:46, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 04:55, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strong alerts on related pages edit

Oppose --Nightwish62 (talk) 17:42, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:33, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support There should be alerts anyway … --Vogone talk 13:50, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Same as Vogone; we need this regardless of the ones above. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 21:18, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Vogone. Lukas²³ ^talk in German ^Contribs 00:42, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, there should always be alerts on relevant pages. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 01:48, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support --Ricordi samoa 08:13, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support, do not see how the alerts could harm.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:39, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Vacation9 (talk) 20:46, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Comment I am reopening this RFC as there is still no consensus about who can assign the property creator user permission. I have opened a new section for clarifying this. Regards, Vogone talk 16:11, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Who can assign property creation rights? edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Per consensus, administrators will be the ones with the technical ability to manage the 'property creator' user right. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 21:43, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators edit

Support per comment below. --Rs chen 7754 19:01, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I guess. Legoktm (talk) 19:03, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adminship should be required to add/remove Property creator. Vaca tion 9 19:06, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 19:33, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Nightwish62 (talk) 19:59, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Rschen. Frigid Ninja 22:58, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. More admin power mwahahahaha. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 00:25, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stryn (talk) 08:11, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators and Property creators edit

Oppose Adminship should be required to assign user rights. --Rs chen 7754 18:48, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Rschen7754. --Ricordi samoa 19:04, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Rschen. Vaca tion 9 19:07, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 19:33, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Nightwish62 (talk) 19:59, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Stryn (talk) 08:11, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Others edit

Comment, Bureaucrats is also a possibility? With/without administrators? --Nightwish62 (talk) 19:59, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, of course. We just need a consensus because otherwise the "Property creators" user group won't be created. Regards, Vogone talk 20:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Wikidata:Requests for comment/Restrict creation of properties to some users

Proposals edit

Restrict to admins/sysops edit

Restrict to rollbackers edit

Restrict to autopatrolled edit

Restrict to Autoconfirmed users edit

Restrict to a new group that has to be defined edit

Side poll on naming edit