Commons talk:Administrators

Userpages: red or blue?

Given the discussions going on at Günther Frager's RfA, I suggest that we could make an improvement (with text) to this page that whether an admin is required to have a user-page with some generic important information, the major areas they can help with and how they could be contacted (apart from the talk-page) or a redirect to their talk-page that mentions similar information at very beginning (and is also easily accessible i.e. not wrapped by templates which devastate mobile-view). Let's get done with this. _Regards, Aafi ^(talk) 09:37, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

I have dropped a link to this discussion on COM:AN and COM:VP. _Regards, Aafi ^(talk) 09:39, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Herd mentality, bureaucracy and counter-productive assumptions. RoyZuo (talk) 11:49, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Do you treat users equally seriously regardless of

1. if they are IP users or registered users?
2. if they are old or new users?
3. if they have or not have a userpage?
4. if they are sysops or users without any special user group?
5. if you and they share a language or not?
6. if they can be contacted outside this website or not?

if all the answers are yes, then why is it necessary to have a rule to make a sysop have a userpage that shows their languages and their status as sysop?

Unless... some answers are no. RoyZuo (talk) 12:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Also user pages are linked from Commons:List of administrators and other similar lists. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:40, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

As per my conversation with Queen of Hearts on that discussion, I'd be happy with either a redirect to their talk page or a signature that links to their talk page. I think a redlinked username infers an air of distrust for many users, and is inappropriate for an administrator. I realize this sounds stupid to some people as if "why should it matter?" As you can see, it didn't originally matter to me that the candidate had a redlinked name, but only because I had seen their work already. But it did matter to enough people that the decision to keep it redlinked that I considered an act of bad judgment. Should it be a policy? I don't know. But users find all sorts of reasons to vote against a candidate and this one seems to make enough difference to consider this. Bastique ^{☎ let's talk!} 15:19, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment @Bastique. My understanding is that the guideline should have a mention about if having a blue-linked userpage is necessary or not. Although I haven't seen such issues previously but it warrants a little addition. @RoyZuo, apart from what @EugeneZelenko has mentioned above: we should not demean other editors and always assume good faith. Userpages are for convenience. I do not feel that your assumptions ago merit a response. Sysops per COM:ADMIN, the community trusts certain people and makes them an admin, they do not become any better - but the community by its own consensus determines that they're experienced better. User rights/flags/ knowing additional languages does not make any user "superior" and "user-pages" have nothing to do with this notion: "Apart from roles which require use of the admin tools, administrators have no special editorial authority by virtue of their position, and in discussions and public votes their contributions are treated in the same way as any ordinary editor. Some admins may become more influential, not due to their position as such, but from the personal trust they may have gained from the community." I have not yet stated my own opinion about the userpage for an admin being necessary - so I won't touch on other parts of your comment (at the moment). Let the community which trusts editors and makes them an "admin" decide whether these userpages are necessary or not. However, for my ownself, I feel I should tell the community subject to the trust that it has on me - that what are the areas where I'm interested in, on which things I can be reached out for assistance, and else. _Regards, Aafi ^(talk) 15:42, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

I do not see the need for a change of the admin guideline. If we talk about making user pages mandatory I would discuss this is a broader way as if we make a guideline on users pages I would propose that a local or global user page with babel boxes is mandatory for all users with autopatrol rights. GPSLeo (talk) 15:59, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Agree with GPSLeo, but a simple redirect to the talk page with appropriate Babel boxes is also appropriate. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 16:20, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

I didn't participate in the RfA so may have missed this point being raised but my main concern about red user page links is that when a user clicks on it they land on the "Create a page" screen. On mobile you get a little grey icon and a warning that you shouldn't create it. To me it looks like an error page and a natural reaction is to click back. Not the best experience for new users, who I think need the smoothest encounter when dealing with an experienced user, admin or not. Commander Keane (talk) 16:42, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

@Commander Keane, something like Commander Keane as a sign would be appropriate? All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 16:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

@Alachuckthebuck, at first I thought you were questioning how obnoxious my user name is but I think you are questioning the usability of my user talk page. Well it is not perfect but it does currently have a bright blue "Add topic" button when you land on it on mobile. Queen of Hearts has the a better talk page usability with a "Start a discussion with Queen of Hearts" landing page with an explanation about how talk pages work. I will try archiving to achieve that in the future. Commander Keane (talk) 17:03, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion :), I'm just using your username for a hypothetical signature for a user without a userpage. No commentary or insults were intended about your talk page. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 17:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

@Alachuckthebuck, you raise an interesting point (I think I finally understood it). There are two distinct issues that are getting muddled up: the existence of a user page and the appearance of the signature. "Red vs blue" often affects the signature (with the majority of users linking to their user page in it) and always affects diffs/page histories/logs etc. My concern was with usability for new users.

I prefer a user page redirect ("blue link") when a normal user page doesn't exist. It aides new user usability when viewing (most) signatures as well as diffs/page histories/logs etc.

To discuss signatures, in your example of "--Commander Keane" I don't find it appropriate as diffs/page histories/logs still appear red and there is no "Talk" button - I prefer a blue user page link (redirect is fine) and internationalised talk page link.

Then again I prefer the system generated signature generally. We can delve into the murky waters of signature freedom of expression on Commons and its drawbacks elsewhere if you like ;-) Commander Keane (talk) 19:51, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

I also share @Commander Keane's concerns to a certain extent. _Regards, Aafi ^(talk) 17:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

So far we have just established that we don't have a policy on this, but that Babel boxes on a well maintained talk page suffice, and the only question left is do admins have to redirect their userpage to their talk page if they don't have a userpage. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 21:48, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

I think @Commander Keane raises a good point. And if we think about it, default signature including a red linked username is actually strange web design. It's as if mediawiki assumes everyone who signs would have a userpage and want to show other users that page (even IP users), but obviously most users never create a page.

Here're 3 more intuitive software behaviour:

1. default signature should become just [[User talk:Example|Example]].
2. users clicking any red links on commons should not open that page in the editor automatically. (unlike other wiki projects, commons users dont ususally create pages by writing a text but by uploading a file.)
3. a non-existent userpage could show either nothing, or some basic info about that user (like what com:adiutor does).

RoyZuo (talk) 11:55, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

2 would probably pre empt plenty of pages accidentally created, especially by ip users. RoyZuo (talk) 11:59, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm unsure of the feasibility of implementing #2, but Think that #1 is definitely the better option, if we can figure out a way for the logs to autoredirect to the talk page. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 17:28, 5 December 2024 (UTC)