AVID:Requests for Comment/Removal of the moderation extension

Remove the moderation extension?
I'm going to be really honest here; as efficient and successful the feature is, I highly think that its making editing on the wiki a lot more difficult. Not because the staff take their time (massive respect to them), this goes for the forums as well, it's very easy to get your edit mixed up with others considering there is so much sent to the queue and it can regardless get lost by mistake, meaning all the effort you put in your edit has basically been discarded and it is quite painful really. This may go for uploading images also in this same manner. I get that it's to prevent any sockpuppets and trolls from entering here, but I think implementing a feature that checks, detects, investigates and confirms your identity as you create a new account could work separately as well.

This is not a complaint. It's a kind of suggestion I wanted to bring out of my mind now considering it's been really quiet ever since the moderation extension had been enforced. I want to know what you all think! :) YouKonade (talk) 19:38, 23 April 2023 (UTC) 20:37, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

(P.S.: those of you formerly on Qualitipedia obviously know about this, dead on, ok I'll stop talking now)

Support
I agree. It is annoying now that we have to wait to see our changes. IdKid2027 (talk) 4:55 PM, 23 April 2023 (EDT)

Oppose

 * 1) No ForcedExcess26 (talk) 21:07, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * , as the best we can do in identity checking is thru stewards with AVID:Requests for CheckUser, and the only reasoning that you've provided is that it makes the forums harder to edit, with the only support vote literally being "I don’t like waiting". From our (staff's) perspective, the Moderation extension has done exactly what we needed it to do. We've cut back on vandalism significantly, and I've personally seen very little complaining beyond this RFC. In short, I don't think this proposal was thought out enough, leaving me with little choice but to oppose. Eternity Media Group Wordmark.png (Lets chat!) 21:20, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Understood. YouKonade (talk) 21:24, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 1)  per EMG. T807sig.png · Talk · Edits 21:23, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 2)  Why would you want to throw a perfectly good system designed to combat vandalism out the window? The staff team sees nothing wrong with the Moderation extension, and I see no one else complaining about the length of time it takes to approve edits. No edits are being "lost" here, there is no feasible way for this to happen unless some glitch with the extension (less than 1% chance of that happening) occurs. I must oppose with that reasoning. Compooper (talk) 22:25, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Comments

 * 1) I don't think I structured this well... Presentation6666666.gif 20:42, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) This extension brings mild inconvenience to end-users (less when they know about it) and to staff for doing a bit of review. In exchange red flags can be taken out at the start, people can be guided to refine their edits until they reach the point no review is necessary, and the abuse that has long stricken this wiki has been curbed massively. If the opposition doesn't make it clear, this tradeoff seems to strongly favor the wiki. A "feature that checks, detects, investigates and confirms your identity" would be absurdly invasive to user privacy if it was even possible and would be vetoed by Miraheze itself at a global level long before making it here. It's been really quiet because it's been working rather well. If edits with substantial effort are being 'lost' in queue though, that should be looked into and maybe approval practices should be improved so this doesn't happen if it has any frequency. --Raidarr (talk) 22:38, 23 April 2023 (UTC)