Quote from GM Kaikala: http://forums.play.net/forums/GemStone%20IV/Help%20for%20Players/WIKI%20Discussions/view/220
All I really want is some recourse when the mods are out of line. Right now the feeling is once a mod starts pushing you around you might as well go pound sand.
I replied at fair length on the wiki's Talk page of the template in question (since that's where this started) about the specific situation there. But to elaborate a little on that and then on some general items:
If something you put on the wiki is rolled back, or edited, or you're requested to edit in a specific way by any of the moderators -- the moderator is simply doing his/her job (i.e. moderating information of the wiki for both style and accuracy). If you want to discuss why that happened with the moderator, there's a Talk page for each page. You can also note -- politely and remaining within policies -- that you disagree with the edit. Just because you disagree with the edit doesn't make you "right" though.
If you've gone through the good faith communication channels, and you still feel that a moderator is out of line, then email both myself and Wyrom. Include a link to the relevant wiki pages and Talk pages involved. If some of the "talk" was done in the Slack wiki channel, include reference to that as well.
What you should NOT do is decide that you are the moderator's moderator. Re-rolling back a moderator's rollbacks and/or creating a "bypass" to essentially continue those rolled-back edits elsewhere is not an appropriate course of action. It's like going into a restaurant kitchen and taking the skillet out of the chef's hand -- so that you can cook the dish yourself -- because you don't like the recipe he's using for a particular dish, despite the fact that he's responsible for maintaining the restaurant's recipe standards and was cooking the dish in a manner that followed those -- i.e. that's not good behavior in any realm of reality.
What you should NOT do is decide that it's then also appropriate to throw that moderator to the wolves in a public forum. I have no appropriate analogy for this. But I am going to elaborate a little bit on the other side of things. I realize that people get personally invested in all of this (and I absolutely know and understand how time consuming some wiki edits are), but the amount of vulgarity and insults I've seen thrown at moderators in private communication sent to them for simply trying to do their jobs -- without those moderators ever responding in kind and yet somehow attempting to continue to work with these people -- is pretty disgraceful. Most wiki complaints that come in are people taking an edit personally rather than stepping back and looking at that what they had edited doesn't fit with the wiki style, or was against policy, or was inaccurate information, or was creating a ton of spam pages, etc. -- i.e. all things that moderators are meant to look at and attempt to correct. Moderators also suffer from that they don't have the shield of a Host or GM handle to help the players separate out their moderator responsibilities from their opinions/behaviors as a player and person -- and yet sometimes it seems like the playerbase forgets that the moderators are, in fact, people.
In this specific instance, the moderator in question (Allereli) rolled back the change and gave a specific reason for it, which she later elaborated on -- she was waiting to get some information confirmed on what was previously officially approved info. All you had to do was be patient until that info was confirmed. Your edits weren't lost -- they were still available in the History and could have easily been pulled out after the confirmation took place. Given that the page is a template used for several other pages and is part of a system that just underwent a major overhaul, it makes perfect sense that a moderator was and is keeping tabs on it.
While you may not like the answer that you're getting about this, the reality is that the moderators exist to do a specific type of work, and they're doing it. It's a lot of tedious work and dealing with a lot of different personalities. Allereli handles a massive amount of it, and yet she also manages to try and let people know when she's changed something they did and attempts to bridge editing knowledge gaps when possible. When she reaches out about wiki info/editing/etc., she's trying to help you, even if you aren't reading her words that way. The big thing here is that communication only works if all parties are engaging and understand where each party is coming from. Can we (the collective we) improve on how some of the communication for wiki work goes? Absolutely. It's a work in progress, and clearly the moderators are already well aware of that and regularly working on it (thus, items like the Research pages coming into existence).
In saying all of this, I also don't want to discount the huge number of people who help out with the wiki. A lot of of people show patience and compassion, and regularly communicate with the mods and with one another to see what needs to be done or ask how to do something so that it's fitting the wiki style, where you can contribute, etc. -- and that makes life go a lot more smoothly in wiki world.
~Kaikala, probably opening up a can of worms