Being active in the file namespace over 58% of the time, there’s many things I consider. I occasionally come across an image that might need to be deleted, or having to need it merged. Rarely I ask admins to protect a certain file when theres a revert war going on. I’m thinking about a new user group. I haven’t thought of the name yet, so in this thread I’ll refer to it as a File Admin.
I’ve spoken to some of the more active users and asked their opinion about it. I would prefer not to reveal the names, but here’s some key points I’ve found among the many active users I’ve spoken to:
- Asking for certain admin rights solely for the file namespace purposes might fail.
- If Custodial rights are a requirement, those specific requirements might have to change.
- Because sometimes admins either are not available/afk, or are paying attention to something more important than merging or deleting a file, a File Admin would be able to pay attention to that specific field and finish the job.
- Go for merge, since the technical limitations of delete are unsure, and increase the editcount for the tools if it would be included.
- Such rights would be handy for an active filemaker as admins are asked often to perform such tasks. However Custodial requirements might have to increase and in addition have to be nominated before they’re deemed trustworthy.
- If Custodial rights were a requirement, only a few out of the current 53 Custodians would probably be trusted and eligible, and a new user category with few candidates might not do too much good.
- Even if the thread passes, there’s no gurantee Wikia would consider creating File Admins, or handing out specific sysop rights to non-sysops. However there is a chance that they would make an exception.
The main thing I think is that a File Admin will be able to merge files, semi-protect/fully protect files, and possibly – be able to delete and undelete files, and that being a File Admin might require having Custodial rights, and in addition, have a nomination to be trusted with File Admin rights, but this might be subject to change.
--
SpineTalk
12:49, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
Discussion
Support - If we can manage to convince Wikia to allow us to have something like File Admins, I definitely think we should incorporate it. The extra tools would be the mentioned ones, i.e. merging, protecting, moving and possibly (un)deleting files, so in essence a file-only sysop. Having the rank of custardian seems a very logical prerequisite. In addition, I believe users who wish to become file admins should also have some 800 (just to name something) file edits and some 500 mainspace edits. A nomination process like the one for sysops should work out well IMO as it requires to state a reason for becoming file admin. Moreover, file admins have the tools to do some serious damage (all can be undone of course, but that takes time) so we shouldn't just let anyone become one. As for the need, I will use myself as an example. I have personally tagged a lot of speedy-deletion-worthy files, considerably more than articles, and, while a sysop usually deletes them within five minutes, I have seen those files not being deleted for, and I am not exaggerating, hours. I check Special:NewFiles more than Special:NewPages (simply because it has more activity) and I have often wished to have the tools to delete those files right away, instead of waiting for a sysop to do it. Because, after all, there are more important jobs and sometimes there are just very few or even no sysops active at the time.
So, in a nutshell, this should be done with a nomination process, requirements set in stone and I can see the need for it because I have often wanted to just delete crap images myself (to name something) rather than tag them ask busy sysops to delete/undelete/merge/etc. 
Fswe1 
15:08, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
Support - ^ Neitiznot ▸ Choose OptionMy userpage Talk to me! Spam goes here Sign here! 17:26, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
Support - I like that idea. Template:Signatures/Jr Mime 17:31, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
Support - As nominator's Q/A or something. Also, I do agree that we should have a Requests for File Admin thing. Hair 17:33, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
Comment - I asked Trellar that it is possible to do, and she said it was possible to do. Implemented, I don't know... but it is possible. Hair 17:57, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
Comment - I probably have no real stance on this, but I do have three suggestions, one less serious than the others:
- 1 - Filesop = Pro name
- 2 - No new RfFA page, I don't see why this can't be run the normal RfA page (Dunno if a new requests page ever came to mind, I'm just sayin)
- 3 - Filesopship should be held in a way similar to b'cratship for an admin in that a user must have been a successful, active custodian before they get nominated
That's all I'll probably have to say. MolMan 18:28, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
Oppose - Okay, here goes... First of all, what you're describing is an administrator. ._. If you want to be able to move/delete/protect/whatever, why not just become an admin so you could do even more things and help in even more areas? Second, I don't think I could trust anyone who just wants to do files with the admin tools. Most, if not all, of the people who I know would go for such a usergroup are too immature to become full-fledged admins, and therefore would resort to something like a file admin - which doesn't help considering they would still be too immature to be a file admin too... Edit wars resulting in protection to the file admin's preference, wars over a bad file to delete, undeleting crap that the file admin wants but other admins know isn't a useful file or whatever. If you want admin tools, become an admin. Spanning it out to a file admin or other usergroups like that just makes things muddy. I don't understand why these people just don't run an RfA. The majority of what I did was file maintenance and I became an admin. <.< User:Urbancowgurl777/Signature 18:53, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
Strong Oppose - I don't see what the point is. If you want those rights, go ahead and have a RfA, there is absolutely no point in seperating those tools. By that logic, we should have Blockers, Protecters, Mergers, Splitters, Deleters, Movers etc. bad_fetustalk 20:01, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
Oppose - There is no way to separate the usage of delete for Files from everything else, same for the rest of the requests for this group. I'd rather have sysops as it would be an annoyance to have a sysop grill a 'file admin' because they used ?action=delete outside of the file namespace. Anyone that needs those rights will get them in RfA as this boils down to the same agenda. The sysop group right is fine for those activities and it's fine to not use the other group rights supplied to the sysop group if you, and anyone else, wish to only maintain files. If you want support for a request of sysop rights, you don't have to ask. Ryan PM 20:41, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
- You could use an abusefilter - it's what we do at the Call of Duty Wiki for one of our user groups.
- REDIRECT User:Kerri Amber/s.js 21:52, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
Oppose - If you have a need for administrative tools, run an RfA, not some half-assed copy where hopefully the standards will be more lax. Ronan Talk 21:02, August 2, 2012 (UTC)