Wiktionary talk:Administrators/Dishwashing

Most of these tasks are not necessarily admin tasks. I'm all for non-sysops to take on some of these tasks. Hence, maybe this should be renamed Wiktionary:Dishwashing or Wiktionary:Management or whatever. My dishwashing involves some serious expurgation --Expurgator t(c) 01:33, 27 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

I've begun this in the hope that admins will take responsibility for housecleaning tasks. The problem is not that nobody wants to do these, but that nobody knows who is doing them. Eclecticology 19:22:20, 2005-07-26 (UTC)

I very much like the concept. I question the introductory wording though...it seems to be implying that non-designated sysops shouldn't touch other sysop's arenas at all. Obviously that is not the case. Mind you, I didn't find a better way of wording it, or I would've been bold(er). Would a "primary"/"alternate" arrangement help convey that these are not sole providences? Unless I'm mistaken, the intent here is to inform people who to go ask about a particular section when they have a question, right? --Connel MacKenzie 02:22, 28 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

I'm flexible about how things can happen. The wording could probably be changed. The primary/alternate approach is a possibility. The primary intent remains getting people to do the work. Eclecticology 07:33:14, 2005-07-29 (UTC)

One task accomplished by having this list to to prevent people from stepping on each other's toes...and in the case of even a remote dispute, to easily say who "should" be doing it. But what about things that are so ongoing, that no end is expected anytime soon?

I strongly agree with WF that this should be moved somewhere non-adminish. --Connel MacKenzie 05:49, 27 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

I'm glad to see that this idea has had some response! The ongoing ones are the ones that I mostly had in mind. It was the slow loading of the Beer parlour page that inspired this idea. Many of these tasks are difficult at first, but when they are well maintained they can become pretty routine.

To some extent I agree that this can be a mechanism that prevents us from stepping on each other's toes, but this should not mean that the rest of us can't participate in the task. The really important job in this proposal is getting the things done that nobody ever gets around to doing. The person who takes on a particular task can also be seen as a sort of policy leader in his chosen area. This does not mean that he has carte blanche to set that policy; that would continue to be a community wide task. He would, however, keep that segment of policy organized, and would be sufficiently familiar with his area to make the bulk of the proposals. I haven't see Richardb around for a while. He had some great ideas for policy reorganizatioin, but doing it all can be a major energy drain for one person.

I have no problem with moving this to a less adminish page, but I would wait a couple months for this. Perhaps at the end of September. Right now this is experimental, and we may want to clear up a few bugs before we open it up. I do want to argue for keeping the name "dishwashing"; "management" is too pompous. "Dishwashing" emphasizes the point of everyday housework which has to be done.

I think too that some of these tasks can be offered to prospective new admins. Willingness to help with the chores can be good evidence of how qualified a person is to be an admin. :-)

Eclecticology 21:12:08, 2005-07-27 (UTC)

Reluctantly and with trepidation, I express my willingness to help clean up the Beer Parlour and as a corollary pick up where Richardb left off in policy "creation". But I'm higher maintenance than others and need a volunteer to hold my hand. --Stranger 14:59, 30 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Stranger, I'm sure you will do fine. We are all volunteers here and we will all be glad to help out or to point out how something (you do) can be improved. Cleaning up the beer parlour would be a great initiative. It's a chore and you'll get a lot of gratitude for it. You see where the need is the greatest and you volunteer to help out. Policy creation is indeed something that is a bit more sensitive, but you'll do fine. Just start (with) little (issues) and build up from there. Polyglot 06:26, 31 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

"Creation" is a bad word for it. "Indexing" is a better description. Moving conversations with policy implications from the Beer Parlour to Policy pages - that is a better description of Richardb was doing and where I would pick up. --Stranger 12:47, 31 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Wow! Nothing will be more appreciated than help with the Beer Parlour. When I raised the dishwashing project, that is the one place where I felt that the most help was needed. Some of it needs to be refactored and moved to a relevant page, some of it needs to be archived, and some other items that have outlived their meaningfulness can be deleted outright.

Don't be too concerned about Richardb's policy sort. It's the road to "burn-out city". I can't say for sure, but I suspect that Richardb's departure may be partly because he made great efforts that would be mostly ignored until there was a problem (not neceassarily of his making) with one of the policies that he had rewritten to be more readable. There are ways of dealing with policy pages that require a level of hard-headed discipline that could almost be viewed as anal. In the absence of that we need to view policy as a kind of constantly evolving set of guidelines with plenty of available alternatives for doing things.

So, go ahead with the Beer Parlour. When you feel that it is under ongoing control to your own satisfaction, and you know how much of your time is required for regular maintenance then maybe you can consider taking on a new set of dishes. Eclecticology 18:38:41, 2005-08-31 (UTC)

I think I've finished with the urgency of the BP. I realize I have more to do, but as I scan other areas I see other areas (RFC, Tea Room) that have more urgent problems. While I don't feel I can volunteer to take those over (time is limited), may I do at least a little filing/indexing/cleaning if I feel the urge? Cheers, --Stranger 17:49, 7 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

You're doing a fine job. I would say: go ahead wherever you see the need. Don't feel constrained by dishwashing chores and also don't feel constrained by the idea that because you do it once, you'll have to keep doing it. If you see the need and you happen to feel like doing something about it, go ahead. Don't get burned out though, we would really miss you. So take it easy. Consacrate the time you think it deserves, but don't let it take over your life :-) Polyglot 22:15, 7 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

At this point, I feel I am not dependable due to my health. Therefore, I would feel more comfortable if I weren't "signed up" for these. I still hope to be able to help out on filing BP discussions, but I don't just don't feel comfortable giving the impression that I can be depended upon to do so. Thus, my "resignation". Cheers, --Stranger 12:29, 10 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

What you can do or have the time to do is about as much as can be expected of anybody. We all have private lives to limit our level of activity; those that don't probably need one. Health problems can be a very serious limitation; that limitation increases with the severity of those problems. There is much to be said about anonymity in those situations. If you are criticized for an idiotic edit, or praised for a superior one, you know that those comments are founded entirely in that edit, and there can be no suspicion that the comments are somehow more reserved because of the illness. For others who are housebound with severe illness perhaps involving extreme fatigue contributions here may be the only way they feel that they can salvage any feelings of worth or self-esteem. The important contributions of the madman to the Oxford English Dictionary were not rendered less important because of his madness. I have no need to be informed of your health problems, I need only trust that you will do what can within the limits and priorities that you have set. Eclecticology 20:58, 10 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

I have other things to do, but as a matter of interest, I can't get my Recent Changes to display more than 500. I mean there's not a "show next 500" or anything like that. How can you go back 2 to 5 days? Cheers, --Stranger 16:33, 12 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

Go to your Preferences, and on Recent changes and stub display, insert X amount of edits you wish to display. Jon Harald Søby 16:45, 12 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

I actually set my preferences to a lower limit (particularly during slow times such as this) and edit the address bar/location bar/raw URL to change the 500 to 2000 only when I'm doing this particular task, and I know I'm days behind. (Adjusting your preferences seems to affect all special pages in this regard, not just recent changes.) I don't think more than 2000 recent changes are stored, at least not accessible from the Special: page. BTW, this particular task really is oriented towards sysops...the rollback button and delete feature are essential to this task...you'd end up using {{rfd}}, {{rfd}} or {{wikify}} otherwise. Unless someone gives you on the spot sysop rights, I'd recommend holding off on attacking this. (I'm pretty sure I've used up my nomination tokens at this time.  :-) --Connel MacKenzie 17:25, 12 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

Oh, I wasn't planning on doing it; I just wondered how it could be done. Thanks for the tip. Cheers, --Stranger 22:46, 12 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

I would appreciate help with this task. Any suggestions or eager volunteers? :-) Perhaps we could split the week up into 7 days and allow volunteers to sign up for a day or two out of the week. Rod (A. Smith) 03:54, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

I suppose one doesn't have to be an admin to do the stuff here? Volunteering for maintenance of the Tea room. Jon Harald Søby 15:04, 28 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

That is not a requirement, but for some of these tasks, not having delete/undelete, rollback, protect/unprotect and block/unblock make them pretty darn difficult. --Connel MacKenzie T C 21:11, 9 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

Could this page be reorganized into three sections, i.e. 1) "Under control", 2) "In progress", 3) "Open chores"? --Connel MacKenzie T C 21:09, 9 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

Anyone feel like beeing bold in this regard? --Connel MacKenzie T C 16:35, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yup, first thing when I'm back. — Vildricianus 16:41, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Done. Is this what you meant? — Vildricianus 12:30, 9 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yup! --Connel MacKenzie T C 12:53, 9 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

(Discussion moved from main dishwashing page):

Don't you mean Special:Contributions/newbies? Jon Harald Søby 20:24, 9 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

Not quite. I think that should be a separate section here. But the comprehensive review of the new users log is sure to turn up entries that should have been welcomed, as well as find nonsense that slipped through the cracks. --Connel MacKenzie T C 20:29, 9 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

Vild, very nicely done. Your choice of making is slightly harder to add a task is strongly offset by the whole page being so much easier to read. Thank you! --Connel MacKenzie T C 12:52, 9 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

As I monitor and renew Oldest pages, I just added this task in progress while there are many usually uncategorized pages that are more than one year old. Dear fellow admins, please add your usernames if you are interested in this task.--Jusjih 00:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)Reply