You made me an admin at the Saiunkoku wikia awhile back; you are currently still an admin as well, though I understand that you've moved on. I'm dropping by here to ask for some advice regarding an editor who recently joined the Sainkoku wiki.
Recently, a user had made a lot of contributions to the wiki and had been requesting to become an Admin. I was not comfortable with giving Admin status to the user at this time and wanted to wait, given how the user seemed to be a new editor who was making a lot of edits all of sudden.
The user has elected today to make their own Saiunkoku wiki and asked for all the contributions they made to the wiki to be reversed (either hidden or deleted, so that their contributions never existed). While I agreed to remove all their images (there was over a hundred) and delete the pages they created (and had been the only editor of) as a courtesy and did so, I think I may have been overly generous with the offer.
I guess I'm asking for advice if refusing to remove a user's contributions (especially when they've made over 1000 edits in about a month) when they decide to leave is too demanding. Since a wiki is collaborative, I don't see an edit to change content information "belonging" to that contributor, but this user no longer wanted their content contributions to be on the wiki (at all, it seems, including in the wiki's history) so they could use it to build their own wiki. I don't want to discourage users, but this user's request was actually very disruptive and inconvenient (in some cases impossible, given they wanted to remove all evidence that they had had edited the wiki) to perform given the sheer number of contributions.
Thank you for any response you can provide.
Eikakou (talk) 08:31, May 1, 2016 (UTC)
Adminship is not necessary in contributing, unless there's no one around and you want to improve a particular wiki's wordmark, theme or background. Personally, I have been holding back on giving adminship status on everyone like candy just because of the bulk of edits one has made, and it didn't really matter to those who contribute for the love of the work. Consider a refusal of getting adminship status as a test of good faith for your contributors. If they suddenly grow horns after having turned down on an admin request, then you've probably exposed that user's true colors.
On another note, a user that wants one's traces be removed from a wiki is probably the weirdest request any admin would receive from a user. As you've said before, it's very disruptive, especially if the amount of edits are at the hundreds range, and it brings everyone to an earlier state that could affect contributor morale. You could talk to that contributor about keeping one's edits as long as they are made in good faith. Seriously though, I have no idea why such a drastic decision have to be made by a user just because of a plan to make a separate wiki.
I'm going to admit that I regret actually following through with the user's request (before seeking your advice) - deleting all their images alone was very inconvenient given they had uploaded 200 images, and had provided mostly cosmetic edits that were made in good faith (most of these I left after pointing out it would be impossible for me to remove everything). I did indicate that I couldn't revert all cases of editing because of interim editing by other users and the user seemed to concede in those cases (though their request to practically erase their own history of ever contributing so that someone couldn't access their edits from the wiki history would be impossible).
I also suspect that the user had wanted the ability to control the format of the pages and considered the content they were adding to be "their own content", which was why I was reluctant give the user admin status (especially if an edit war broke out and the user tried to remove other admins' status, which might be a rather extreme scenario to worry about). The user might have also had a false impression of what an administrator can do on a wiki (to be honest - deletion, renaming images, and locking pages have been the only tools I've used as an administrator myself).
I wasn't direct enough either with pointing out that their request would be highly disruptive and I was concerned with possible backlash from the user if I outright refused to remove their contributions. The user didn't give any reasons as to why they wanted to create their own Saiunkoku wiki (and out of curiosity, I notice they already have). I didn't ask, mostly because it's entirely up to them if they want to, I just felt shocked at how possessive the user seemed to be with their contributions.
Thank you for the advice (particular when new users request for admin status) - I'll keep it in mind in the future. Eikakou (talk) 00:35, May 3, 2016 (UTC)