Wikipedia talk:Administrators' how-to guide

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Deleting an image

Does this description need to be updated? My impression is that something has changed about this. Jkelly 05:46, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree. I'm an admin in Commons and if this is true, I've been deleting a hell of a lot of image description pages, and precisely 0 images... pfctdayelise (translate?) 05:48, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge page history

In fact, the mergehist function can be undone, see Wikipedia:How_to_fix_cut_and_paste_moves#How_to_undo_a_history_merge. The process is:

  1. Suppose A has been history merged into B.
  2. We want to get A's former history back into A.
  3. Delete B.
  4. Selectively undelete the revisions of B that made up the history of A before the history merge.
  5. Move B to A.
  6. Undelete the rest of the revisions of B.
  7. If A and/or B is now a redirect to itself or the other article, then revert or change the redirect target, as deemed appropriate.

I will change the statement that they can not be undone to that it can be done, but is a long process. Polonium 19:18, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Related pages

I'm new and trying not to be reckless. In that spirit, I'd like to suggest that the "Bureaucrats' how-to guide" link be changed from: [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Instructions for sysoping someone|Bureaucrats' how-to guide]] to [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats|Bureaucrats' how-to guide]]. --CiphershortTalk 00:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] merger with advice for beginners

I am opposed. The advice is more personal and informal in nature. This article is specifically on how to do certain tasks adminsitrators do. They are fundamentally different in nature. Slrubenstein | Talk 12:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

  • So? Both pages give advice to admins. The more such pages exist, the less the chance that any new admin will read all of them. >Radiant< 13:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Why not link the Adminstrator how-to guide with the Advice for new administrators and vice-versa to allow for easy and non-annoying navigation? --Mcfar54 09:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

agree with mcfar, have links but not merge.Rlevse 21:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is this thing about bot rollback right?

In cases of large scale vandalism that flood recent changes, you may use "bot rollback". Add &bot=1 to the end of the URL used to access a user's contributions. For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&target=Vandal&bot=1. When the rollback links on the contributions list are clicked, the revert, and the original edit that you are reverting will both be hidden from the default Recentchanges display.

I just tried this on the sandbox and my edit was not botflagged. Is this out of date or something? --BigDT 06:28, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Beta Wiki

I've removed the beta wiki link. We have testwiki. Navou banter 04:40, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What linked to deleted page?

Is there a "What links here" feature for deleted pages - or better yet, a "What linked here at time of deletion"? I just noticed a deleted page to which I think there were some links. If that is so, then I would ask deleter if they agrees with undeletion. — Sebastian 23:35, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Is there a "What links here" feature for deleted pages? YES. However, having links is not cause to undelete pages by itself. Undelete only on the merits of the page, not the links to it. NoSeptember 00:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you! (Regarding "However": I disagree. A page's existence can depend on links - especially when the page is a disambiguation or a redirect page, as in the case I'm asking about.) — Sebastian 18:32, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] How to see page move log?

Expo (exhibition) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) appears to have been renamed at least once, according to its talk page. However, when I click on "Move this page", the entry under "Move log" says: "No matching items in log." Is this a bug? How can I see if and when a page has been moved? — Sebastian 18:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Administrators' Study Group

Is there any interest in developing a study group to write more clear instructions on administrative actions and behavior? I propose having this group form in January and meet in February. Following discussions, an expanded how-to guide, including formulation of written policy, would be implemented. Much of the written policy would be existing written policy placed in one location. Archtransit (talk) 17:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)