FANDOM


Redirecting userpages

Can someone please take a look at this? He says Ron Ng is not the same person as Ron NG. However, capital G's userpage redirects to lowercase g's. Something's going on, either sockpuppetry or capital G is misleading people by redirecting his page to something else. Which I believe is against the rules. If it is I propose that the policy be updated to reflect this. --Macros 22:43, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Fixed, I guess. Thank PanSola. Entropy Sig (T/C) 02:15, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Phew....--Ron Ng 18:21, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Vandal

IP address 65.96.24.38 keeps adding "Gay Butt Sex" to the Halloween 2007 article. No other contributions. Ban please? --Kirbman sig Kirbman 04:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Dealt with. Thank PanSola. Entropy Sig (T/C) 22:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Ads

There's several ads for www.thecandyman.org peddling gold selling and powerleveling appearing on the site. Please stop. Reithan 23:00, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

As of today, Wikia is able to block bad ads on this wiki. I've requested thecandycaneman be blocked. If there are any others (eg: gold sellers, power levellers) that you see on this wiki, please let me know on my talk page and I will get them removed as soon as possible. Angela 08:33, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Wouldn't the proper place to notify the management/admins of a problem be the admin noticeboard? Reithan 16:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
"Admin" refers to the people with power to (un)ban, (un)protect, (un)delete. Admins in general do not have control over the advertisements. Angela is a Wikia staff, not a GuildWiki admin. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 21:05, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps we should create a "Wikia Noticeboard"? Or is Angela their only representative here? 70.43.98.34 21:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Actually, Angela's account here doesn't have the staff flag yet. I've created the GuildWars Wikia:Wikia staff noticeboard, and notified the three Wikia staff who has accounts here (see Special:Listusers/staff) on their talk page. Future gold ad reports can either go on the Wikia staff noticeboard, or on any particular staff's talk page. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 02:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm just more likely to see it if it's on my talk page since I get instant notification of messages there. I have thousands of pages on my watchlist (like every main page of every wikia created before September 2007) and there sadly isn't enough time to check them all. Blocking ads ought to be done as soon as possible to prevent readers ever seeing them, which is why it would be better for you to contact me directly rather than using the noticeboard for this. Angela 12:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Issues

on the mainpage of guild wiki the link to game updates has been redirected to a template : Troll

Thanks. it was done by a recent vandal attack. It's been fixed now.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 19:24, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


Disagree with banning of 10.10.20.183

Due to Wintersday content, I think we need the contributions of the general anon population without requiring them to log in. The only issue 10.10.20.183 makes is that we aren't able to tell casual one-time vandals from malicious multi-vandals. The malicious ones will probably just create an account anyways if they seriously want to vandalize, so I don't see the benefit of banning 10.10.20.183. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 23:20, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I will not oppose you if you unban the IP, but I also won't unban it myself. -- User Gem sig (gem / talk) 23:25, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Fact remains that if, par example, I want to say something to him/her, I can't because the talk page is protected. --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 23:29, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
If only everyone made an account...--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 23:29, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Vipermagi kind of has a point. I'll ponder a little bit more before deciding whether to do the unban. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 23:33, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Unblocked. In the end I feel we shouldn't penalize anons just because we are unable to talk to them, when the software problem is not their fault. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 23:40, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Weird. The "New Message" problem doesn't happen for my IP anymore. Mebbe it's fixed?--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 23:42, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
You sure it isn't because there haven't been more edits? --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 23:43, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
I have no idea. I could edit the talk page and see if it does anything, but I'm afraid it will just mess it up more.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 23:44, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't know if that would be the smartest thing to do.... --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 23:46, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, let's do a test since we need to amend that protetion template anyway. Ok, I'll edit now. -> -- User Gem sig (gem / talk) 23:52, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
I think the problem's fixed. I logged out and didn't get the "New Message" box, no matter what page I went to.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 23:58, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
I logged out too, no message box. --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 23:58, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Problem not fixed, but might be less severe (not sure). I still see edits from that IP on RC. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 00:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Let's keep the protection on the IP talk page and let the IP stay unbanned unless it starts mass vandalising. The protection can be undone when we get official word that the problem is solved. -- User Gem sig (gem / talk) 00:36, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
According a Wikia tech person, the issue *should* be fixed for GuildWiki now. However it's hard to test for sure. We'll see if any more edits come from it. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 00:53, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
<fingers crossed> :) --Wolfie Wolfie sig (talk|contribs) 01:02, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Didn't work. Reported. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 01:09, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Another Gold ad

[1]. In the ad it says gaia online gold, but as with most ads, they also sell GW gold. --Progr -- talkpage 23:32, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Belongs on the Wikia noticeboard, cuz admins can't filter the ads.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 23:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Spam

People keep saying that i'll be banned if i keep spamming, but, other people say they need spam, and on the other side. I'm in the spam crew. so Is there any way to resolve this whole problem with spam and the Spam Crew?--&quot;Burn Baby Burn!&quot;FireTock 05:00, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. Don't make pointless spam and there's no problem.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 05:07, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Well I didn't expect some kind of Spammish Inquisition --Macros 05:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
My suggestion is intelligent spamming. You can spew out enormous amounts of text that actually convey a meaning or purpose fairly easy and with no thought or effort; for a few hundred examples, check my contributions. Felix Omni Signature 05:09, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Nova

Now User:Fighterbitsj Gave permission to User:Nova to make that joke--Fighterbitsjsig Fighterbitsj--STALK MEH 21:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

comment talking about revision 1155118 of User:Fighterbitsj/Gallery [2] RT | Talk 21:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

An unusual ad

The Lost Haven

This was a google-placed ad on the bottom of my page. We don't allow guild pages and guild endorsements on GuildWiki; should this ad be mentioned on the Wikia noticeboard? Felix Omni Signature 06:31, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Looks more like a guide site to me, no probs as we are better. RT | Talk 06:34, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Well the exact text of the ad was "Join a good PvE GW guild" or something like that. It's a guild site, I looked through it a bit. Felix Omni Signature 06:35, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Saw it again, screenshotted it. Losthavenguildad
Felix Omni Signature 06:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I say report, if only one guild gets through, as it seems like we want everyone to join that Guild! RT | Talk 06:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Okey doke. Felix Omni Signature 06:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
It seems to be showing up on every page unless it's replaced by a stupid FlyFF or other crappy online RPG banner. D: Felix Omni Signature 06:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
What the hell? we have adds here? Adblock must be to good.--Alari 07:00, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
It is! :) RT | Talk 07:13, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Image Restore

Would it be possible if we could get this fixed?

No point IMO --Gimmethegepgun 23:06, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Resolved. Entropy Sig (T/C) 21:43, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

New template

I made a template for the game updates page that we could use to compress the entire page onto a single template use. Was wondering if we should implement it, and if we do I think the template should be protected to prevent vandalism. Making it would make it easier to add things to it and also deal with vandalism to some extent --Gimmethegepgun 23:06, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Neutral on whether to use it. The amount of easiness to add things to it is also the amount it becomes easier to mass-vandalize. I do agree that *if* we use it, it should be protected. Finally, I feel it should be split into two separate templates, one that auto-generates the bar on the right, the other deals with the content area. Again, neutral on whether to use it/them. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 23:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Compressing the whole thing onto a very short amount also makes it so that people can't screw with the formatting with all the boxes and stuff and make it takes 10 minutes to load the page and fix it, such as when someone went and vandalized it and the server wouldn't show the changes in either the editbox OR the page itself for nearly 20 minutes before I went and reverted it, though that might have been cause he murdered the Job Queue --Gimmethegepgun 23:30, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Doesn't really matter. The vandal only need to change one single byte of data (using your template system) to mess with the entire page. The more template and transclusions you use, the worse it is for the jobqueue (in this case you are really just calling one extra transclusion, plus five dozen parser functions, so the jobqueue issue only get worse by maybe 1%). I'm still neutral, just pointing out how this doesn't help with malicious vandals or accidental ppl who don't follow instructions. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 23:51, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I really don't like this idea. Even if we protted against all but registered users, it is easy to make a vandal account. And with the template all nice and clean and easy to use, like Pan says - it would become even easier for a vandal to cause lots of damage with little effort. Remember that most of the game updates come from either anons, obscure users, or the dedicated...so it also would be bad if it had to be sysop-only. Besides, I believe that the Game Updates page is fine as is...it is not an extremely popular target for vandalism and it is still not hard to make changes to it. Entropy Sig (T/C) 21:43, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


User:Lord Mexico

Has added a statement that he is an admin on his userpage, when this is not the case, do we remove it? (comments?) RT 18:23, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

He just C/P'd Karlos' page over to his. --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 18:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Did he? Odd RT 18:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Compare them if you must. --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 18:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
That's actually really funny. Felix Omni Signature 18:57, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


yeah guys sry i thought karlos userpage was nice and that if i copied and changed the names and titles of my chars and deleted some otehr stuff i might get a nice userpage but no...Lord Mexico 18:56, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Its fine. If he contributed here still I'd tell you to ask if you can use it, but AFAIK he doesn't contribute to any wiki anymore. --Shadowcrest 14:58, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Blocked by IP

Well, I seem to be blocked. It says my IP was used by shesonly12 in the recent vandalisings. I assume it was an IP range block so I won't bother saying I didn't do anything as I'm probably just blocked by coincidence, what I'm wondering is how long it'll be for. Ezekiel [Talk] 12:44, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Is your IP unblocked now? If it ain't, I /fail --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 12:52, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
It's doing something wierd. At first I couldn't edit anything (except my userpage and this one) then I tried to undo the mantid monitor edit and it didn't stop me, I tried editing random pages and it didn't say I was blocked (this is all before you unblocked it). The only page it now says I'm blocked on is when I try to edit my own talk page. Ezekiel [Talk] 12:57, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
What browser do you use? For IE and Firefox: Ctrl+f5 might fix your probs. Chaching issues :P --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 12:59, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Using Firefox, already tried clearing the cache and it didn't change anything. Ezekiel [Talk] 13:00, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
That's odd. No idea why it's doing that, then. --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 13:06, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't matter, I moved my talk and it's letting me edit the new page. So long as no-one messes with the redirect it should be fine. Ezekiel [Talk] 13:09, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
That happened to me agian...I e-mailed a Admin Timir222 13:12, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Crap, I got it too... Thoughtful Thoughtful Sig 13:59, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
I can edit sections but I can't edit the whole page at once... Thoughtful Thoughtful Sig 14:00, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
one last post: Seems to only block me from editing my whole userpage, and doesn't block me from sections of my userpage. If this helps at all my IP is 216.151.156.20 Thoughtful Thoughtful Sig 14:04, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm also getting this. Not sure why.
Your user name or IP address has been blocked by PanSola. The reason given is this:

Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "ShesOnly12". The reason given for ShesOnly12's block is: "multi-vandal" Your IP address is 216.151.156.20. Please include this address in any queries you make. --ParadoxicalAmbiance 14:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

How is our IP the same?? Thoughtful Thoughtful Sig 14:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
No idea, but I know for sure that's not my IP. Something screwy happened.--ParadoxicalAmbiance 14:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
I remember some time ago multiple people got the 'new message' message on ip adres 110.10.100 or something like that. Maybe this is a similar case? --Progr -- talkpage 14:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Pretty sure the same for me. AND GREAT I CAN'T EDIT MY USERPAGE OR MAKE A TEMPLATE FOR IT T_T Thoughtful Thoughtful Sig 14:20, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
This is Thoughtful, I'm seeing what IP comes up when I sign. 68.101.76.36 14:23, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
That's odd, considering Special:Mytalk goes to the 216 number Thoughtful Thoughtful Sig 14:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Indeed it does... very odd. o.O--ParadoxicalAmbiance 14:29, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps we should be alerting Wikia rather than the admins... Thoughtful Thoughtful Sig 14:30, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Who's "ShesOnly12"? Oh and it says my IP is the same, though its not. Could it be they have been taken over from us? Zulu Inuoe 14:32, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) ShesOnly12 was a vandal from a few hours back. Ezekiel [Talk] 14:33, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

As a temporary solution, try moving the page that you aren't allowed to edit, you should then be able to edit it, and if you really want you can try moving it back to where it was. Ezekiel [Talk] 14:36, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
I'd say notifying Wikia is your best bet. --Shadowcrest 14:36, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
By the way, I got the ban message trying to edit Warwick's talk. I then just clicked on the talk tab, tried to re-edit again, and I could. --Shadowcrest 14:53, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Anyone else notice it looks like a redirect? Zulu Inuoe 14:58, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRARGGH!!! CAN'T...EDIT...TALK PAGE!!!! Thoughtful Thoughtful Sig 15:13, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Re-editing doesn't work for me. Ban-notice keeps popping up when I try =/--ParadoxicalAmbiance 15:15, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Same thing hsppenin with my IP 216.151.156.20--Murderer Bomb 16:08, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Its simple enough, just unblock 216.151.156.20? —♥May♥ (♥Talk♥) (♥Contr.♥) 17:49, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Try looking that IP up in the Block log. It's not blocked... >.> Also, Warw, your sig is too long. --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 17:50, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

This is me http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/2980/melz5.jpg and this http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/4301/thevandalbt8.jpg is the vandal, so its likely a bug or the range of the ip block is beyound reason to me (i got the maps from http://www.ipligence.com/ ) 201.92.98.223 18:54, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

o.O Googled the IP and it came up in a Wikia e-mail log Email Log here.. (IP in log is highlighted. Following the link the IP is in goes to Wikia.)--ParadoxicalAmbiance 19:07, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Same thing happening to me. My IP is _NOT_ 216.151.156.20, but it says the same thing other users have noted above. I can edit most pages, but not my talk page. --Franzwald 19:23, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I have the same problem...Fix plx--GatessMoebius Strike IconThe Gates Assassin 19:29, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok. It should be resolved. If anyone is having problems as of this moment, I'm all out of ideas. --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 19:34, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Woot, it's fixed for me.--ParadoxicalAmbiance 19:36, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
yay me too.--GatessMoebius Strike IconThe Gates Assassin 23:52, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Fixed, whatever you did, good work. Ezekiel [Talk] 01:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Use of code to change name of pages on userpages

Is annoying, it dosn't allow links to be clicked if near (for example redirected from x has to be clicked in a very precise way) and it is misleading, I suggest that it should not be allowed, any commments RT | Talk 20:59, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think all of the cases are misleading, actually. --OrgXSignature 21:00, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Can be. I cannot click the redirected from User:Maywick on User:Warwick's page, when it redirects RT | Talk 21:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I suppose that's annoying. But are there any other cases of it? --OrgXSignature 21:04, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I can click the redirect from it.. No problems on my side? Yet another case (Similar to the Position:Absolute vandalism) where AOL owns FF. —♥May♥Wick♥ 21:05, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
It is misleading, imo, wich is bad. Hard to bypass? Meh. Click a random link below it, esc, shift-tab. --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 21:07, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, but I am maywick/may. —♥May♥Wick♥ 21:08, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
You're Warwick, you just call yourself Maywick. --OrgXSignature 21:09, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
I'd consider it similar to the trick new message boxes. Its annoying. Lord of all tyria 21:10, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
It is, but should we really bother about these few cases? --OrgXSignature 21:11, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
There were also only 3 or 4 new message boxes... --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 21:12, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Unlike this, that was real vandalism. --OrgXSignature 21:13, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
How is it vandalism when someone puts a fake new messages box on their page? It is near exactly the same case, except now the name of the page is changed. --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 21:15, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Because the name edit pretty much still shows the username. --OrgXSignature 21:17, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
"User:Warwick"=/="User:May♥Wick" If I wasn't aware of that screwy business this would be confusing. --AlariSig 21:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't like the idea of everyone's userpage headers saying "Marcopolo is awesome", "Vipermagi is teh shizzle", "Warwick May" or whatever. That is not the actual pagename, it isn't the real username, and if you're not a wikicode know-how then you will be confused. Argument for: well it is just the userspace, and it's my userpage, can't I do whatever I want with it? Okay, but that is only true to some extent. For the same reason we no longer allow fake message boxes (that was precedent even before the Pos=Abs stuff), stuff that is confusing, misleading, fake, etc. about your identity can't go on your userpage. For example, we also disallowed redirecting your userpage to a random page, or even to a mainspace article in general. Having no userpage (redlink) is better than one that confuses new users. The point of a userpage is to have a small piece of the Wiki to yourself where you can tool around with code, show off your characters, etc. But it is also for educating people about you, and is the first point where one goes if they would like to contact you. (Some people click User and then the "discussion" tab because they don't know to go straight to User talk:X).

Basically. I don't care if you make your header in some cool new font, or bolded, or colored, or whatever. But the same as with the signature policy, it must reflect your actual username, easily enough that a newcomer could tell it is you. Does that sound reasonable? Entropy Sig (T/C) 20:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Changed mine accordingly.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 20:57, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Sometimes I wonder if people listen to me because of what I say or because I'm bcrat. :( Entropy Sig (T/C) 21:07, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
I just think you make good points.--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 21:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
What entropy said. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 03:43, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
I listen to entropy, coz it is wise (and she is wise) RT | Talk 18:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
It's too bad RT beat me to posting this, I wholeheartedly agree. --Shadowcrest 01:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I should have replied to this sooner but... I disagree entirely. You shouldn't be allowed to change the title text on your userpage in any way. We switched the title text to a serif to make it easier to distinguish between a true user who is mimicking them with a similar user name. The difference couldn't be seen in the address bar so it could only be seen there. If people canc hange that text all willy nilly it defeats the whole purpose. Additionally, if you arrive at the page via a redirect (from a user's signature image for example) the correct page name will not appear in the address bar. Instead the address of the page you were redirected from appears. If the user's proper name is not displayed in the title text then it makes it that much harder to determine who they are. So signatures don't have to reflect an actual user name and now neither do their user pages? How in the world do we know who is who if all these things don't actually say the correct user name? People get to chose a username when they sign up. If you don't like it, get a new username and contribute from there. Don't go changing everything around to obscure your identity. Its needlessly confusing. —JediRogue 20:02, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Umm, Jedi, I think that that would be agreeing with what is posted here, not disagreeing... unless I'm misunderstanding something...--Marcopolo47 signature new (Talk) (Contr.) 20:15, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Not quite. What you guys seem to be talking about is applying our signature policy to the user pages. Personally, I don't even like when people's sigs don't match their usernames because it makes it harder for me to identify people that are new (old users I'm familiar with). Because we already accepted them, it would be inappropriate to change the policy now in that light. The difference is that I'm saying that you shouldn't be able to change your header at all versus you can change the font or change it so that its not your exact username so long as it reflect your username. The difference is that based on what Entropy said, you changing your header to MP47 would still be okay because its short for Marcopolo47 and what I'm saying is that you have to keep it Marcopolo47 and no messing with the fonts or colors or whatever. —JediRogue 21:00, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
How about a sort of compromise? Eg if you have the user you are "Pretending" to be registered, then its okay to have it? (I mean you own the account). Or, you can add things onto it. EG for me User:Warwick aka May & Maywick? —MaySigWarw/Wick 21:03, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Part of the problem is that you are changing something that is technically outside the content of the page. It's changing the skin around the content. When I look at that part of the page, I want to see the actual page name. If you want to make a separate announcement that you can't pick a username, then put it below that "Hi, I'm User:Warwick but everyone calls me May" or whatever. But thats where teh title of the page shows up and you shouldn't be playing with it. —JediRogue 21:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Actually, thats an idea I think.. Give me a second.. —MaySigWarw/Wick 21:07, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Jedi Rogue raises a good point. Wikipedia has a new skin, called "Modern", and messing stuff with how page titles display in Monobook wouldn't work with Modern (not that we have the Modern skin here, but it's the general idea of separation of content vs interface that is important). -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 21:13, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I fully agree with Jedi on this issue; you shouldn't be using css hax to change page titles at all. It's messy, unnecessary, and confusing. Felix Omni Signature 22:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I forgot completely about the serif addition thing. Thanks for reminding me, Jedi...although I think merely color change would do no harm, still. Since you can't encode that into a username. (Or can you?) Entropy Sig (T/C) 05:17, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
It also screws up the title when editing, and with site notices, it also looks bad. --Shadowcrest 22:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
I know I'm a few days late to this discussion, but in the event that you do indeed decide to allow it to some extent, mediawiki does have a function that allows you to change headers without them interfering with sitenotices or the redirect links or anything. It's disabled by default (or it's an extension or something, I'm not sure), but it's possible to put {{DISPLAYNAME:New header}} at the top of the page. However, things like that are pretty confusing to new users. And ripe for abuse. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777 (talk) 20:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Displayname only works on "equivalent" names. Meaning if you copy-paste it into double-brackets, it'll produce a blue link going to the actual page. For example, iPod, IPod, :IPod, IPod (extra space in the front) will all link to the same location, so you can use DISPLAYNAME to change between any of them. But you can't change it to something that would produce a different link result. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 20:37, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Gotcha. Hadn't realized it only worked like that :( ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777 (talk) 03:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Making moves autoconfirmed only

Suggestion: As above, to stop the recent move vandalism RT | Talk 09:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Seconded. IP addresses and non-confirmed users probably don't need to be moving pages anyways; the past two days of move vandals seem to be on guy as well, forcing him to set an email should limit the number of accounts he can use. --GEO-logo Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 09:45, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
It'd just slow him down between accounts. The limit on the number of one-use email accounts you can create is pretty high. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 10:59, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Infinite, but adds another tedious step to his/her internet inferiority schemes.--AlariSig 19:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
On one hand, multi-account abuse does not seem that significant for this measure to be effective IMO; on the other hand, I imagine alot of GuildWiki users don't ahve email address confirmed (at least I don't). Thus I currently believe this restriction would do more harm than good. Feel free to attempt to persuade me otehrwise. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 20:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Can IPs move pages?--Gigathrash sig Gìğá†ħŕášħTalk 21:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
They cannot. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 21:13, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Then I also think that autoconfirm is not needed, it was one person using many accounts, and he eventually got tired and went away, and since someone is always on, there is always someone on to revert it.--Gigathrash sig Gìğá†ħŕášħTalk 22:26, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I thought the recent incident is just one person using one accout? -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 22:32, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
One guy, two accounts, it would seem. The last incident was the second one; either the same guy on a new account, or someone who's a big fan of his work and copying. --GEO-logo Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 01:35, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
#3 today. Revisit?--AlariSig 20:30, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
I can easily make 50 auto-confirmed accounts a day. So I personally don't even see this measure as being able to slow the rate of current vandalism. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 20:31, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, you'd have to wonder if the official wiki suffers from the same problems though. --OrgXSignature 20:32, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
They have manpower, though. —MaySigWarw/Wick 20:34, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Some of it maybe grudges against Wikia that end up affecting us. There were some attacks targets specifically at Angela previously. Glacier Wolf is another user from Wikia, though I can't really say if the recent attack really was picking on him or just a random user found in the RC. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 20:35, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Well, they may have more people, but we are more devoted. I think it pretty much evens out. --OrgXSignature 20:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
The vandal made references to other wikia wikis; it has to be spillover. Felix Omni Signature 20:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
More man power then us? I like to think the majority of players haven't been attracted by the shiny surface over there.
It would still slow and dissuade vandals tho. ECs....--AlariSig 20:37, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Please hop on IRC

All admins: please hop on to IRC today when you have a chance, and give me a shout when you are there (I may not be constantly paying attention so a shout helps catch my attention). -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 17:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Forgive my technical ineptitude, but what is "IRC" and how would I get there? Entropy Sig (T/C) 04:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Some kind of chat room using channels. Kind of stupid IMO.--AlariSig 04:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
You're gonna need to get the Chatzilla Firefox extension. Felix Omni Signature 04:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Uhh... please explain why you want us to go onto IRC? --Gimmethegepgun 04:17, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I get the feeling it was related to the April Fool's Day trick, since I got kicked out of the room when I snuck in. Felix Omni Signature 04:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Naughty, naughty, Felix! --Gimmethegepgun 04:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I was curious, so shoot me. Felix Omni Signature 04:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Okay! *Felix's body was later found in an alleyway punctured repeatedly by pencaps until death* --Gimmethegepgun 04:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
If you've got something too sensitive for normal users, Pan, then I suppose I ought to take some time and see what's up. But returning to my question: how exactly would I get onto this "IRC", especially since I don't have Firefox? Entropy Sig (T/C) 04:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, I guess it depends what browser you use. Opera has IRC built in, but it's kind of hard to use. Anything else, you might want to download a separate client program. Felix Omni Signature 04:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I have GMUD client that I use for MUDding. Is that sufficient? Entropy Sig (T/C) 04:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I have no idea, hahaha. http://www.mirc.com/ Felix Omni Signature 04:33, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I see, it's a...yeah. Okay. Can someone point me to the specific channel we are using? Entropy Sig (T/C) 04:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) irc://freenode/GuildWiki Felix Omni Signature 04:41, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The connection is timing out. I'm not sure this is going to work. Any troubleshooting tips? All Internet security is temp disabled, internet itself is running fine... Entropy Sig (T/C) 05:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Blah, sorry, that was a call to try to get consensus and get ppl to help out. It's no longer needed. BTW, I wasn't sure if we were actually gonna do this until about 12 hours ago. I proposed it to the WoWWiki folks a while ago but didn't get confirmation that we are definitely doing it (the humor value decreases drastically if only one of the two wikis end up doing it). -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 05:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
It works for me, but that doesn't really matter.--Gigathrash sig Gìğá†ħŕášħTalk 05:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Oh. Okay. Nevermind then...By the way, it's still March 31 for most of us Pan, which is at least part of where my initial cofusion came from. Entropy Sig (T/C) 05:10, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I was going start it at midnight UTC, but the WoW guys weren't ready yet so it was delayed a bit (I want to sync it with them). -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 05:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


Inappropriate Discussion

[3] Needs taking care of in my opinion as an editor here; lot's of irrelevant trash. Makes the community look bad.

Imo, irrelevance is all over the place. Bad community image? Gaile gave literal flamefests in Int 1 Kamadan, so a bad image is all over the place. And it's not like she'd look on this 'Wiki. --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 15:56, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Oh i'd love to have seen these "flamefests" gaile is repeatedly implicated in. Do we keep any transcripts of them here? Yes i am aware of the irony of posting an irrelevant comment on an admin notice board section about the problems of irrelevant discussion. Our community now looks that little bit worse ;)--Cobalt | Talk 16:00, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
A lot of what's there is borderline NPA. "Racial, sexual, homophobic, ageist, religious, political, or ethnic epithets directed against another contributor. Disagreement over what constitutes a religion, race, sexual preference, or ethnicity is not a legitimate excuse."
Except much isn't directed, though I'd argue that the bit about running a blade on the arm immediately following Alari's comment is pretty much directed at him.
And what someone else does doesn't excuse shitty behavior for anybody.
If you find someone crossed the NPA-border, talk about that. You first stated you'd like to see it all removed. Side note: Lost Blue repeadetly makes such remarks, and he knows how others think about it and what comments he can expect. I'm not approving of the comments that he gets, fyi. The slitting Blue talks about is not directed at anyone, but rather how he lives life (His real life is a livin' heck) --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 16:25, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
"And what someone else does doesn't excuse 'shitty</b></i></u></font>' behavior for anybody." I think that constitues indirect NPA--<B>Cobalt </B>| <B>Talk</B> 16:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
"You first stated you'd like to see it all removed." Where?

User:Warwick

Having just had an IM conversation with Warwick, wanting to be unblocked. Her reasons were: "His[auron's] reasoning was "Harassment/Threatening Behaviour". I didn't threaten him once. He threatened me for no particular reason, and his idea of "Harassment" is somthing that I call "Continuing a discussion". [Auron is a] Stupid tempermental, Self-centered, idiotic, immature childish brat."

The entire chat log will be posted at this location, please note that Warwick uses some foul language... I have not edited the logs User:Randomtime/Admin/Warwick <B>RT </B>| <B>Talk</B> 11:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I have a few things to say, so I'll use bullets.
  • You shouldn't have repealed the ban, Warwick deserved a longer one imo.
  • Although Auron's ban summary wasn't particularly enlightening, I followed the entire debate from start to finish and I agree with his reasoning.
  • Several times Warwick has told me that her brother still has access to the account, and then later told me she was only joking. It's become impossible to trust her at all.
  • The idea of Warwick's having 13 accounts fills me with rage and disgust. Sockpuppets in and of themselves are harmless, but she used one to get around a legitimate ban, which is also a bannable offense. Is there any way to run an IP check? Felix Omni Signature 21:03, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Sockpuppets? Nah, only shoepuppets. Most of them are redirects to my page. I've also got 2 accounts I previously contributed to but decided to stop. And No, I don't really have 13. At most 4. May, Maywick, Warwick =D and... nope, thats all of them. —MaySigWarw/Wick 21:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Warwick's/James'/May's flat out self-contradictions confuse and slightly disturb me, first of all.
  • IP check- I don't know if we can or not. I think Auron once told me that it was possible, but I don't know now.
  • Imo, James/May/whoever they are need to create separate accounts, stop using User:Warwick, contribute only from their own accounts, and get on with their lives. As for losing contributions- I personally don't see why it's important since you don't know who contributed when/to what. If you can't lay claims to specific ones (and you'll never be able to prove it was you anyway), it doesn't really matter. --Shadowcrest 21:21, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I kicked my brother off of the GuildWiki account in March. —MaySigWarw/Wick 21:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Sounds to me like you're missing the point. We don't know who's edits were whom's before March. Thoughtful-new-sig Thoughtful 17:30, 13 April 2008 (EDT)
No, I'm not, I just wanted to clarify that all edits after the third of March were mine. —MaySigWarw/Wick 21:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Aaah, ok. Thoughtful-new-sig Thoughtful 21:33, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
We have no way of knowing that, and we clearly have no reason to believe you. Felix Omni Signature 21:33, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

This is BS. Thank you for posting the log, RT; it only helps to assure me that Auron and I are justified in what we say. Entropy Sig (T/C) 18:36, 13 April 2008 (EDT)

If it helps at all, here's what Warwick signed off with after harassing me on MSN for about half an hour:
May said:
Anyway, I'd love to stay and chat, but I've got some sleeping to do.
Felix Omni said:
You have some thinking to do as well.
May said:
Goodnight. And I think that it may have been your Sysoping that's made your ego increase a lot. I discussed it with Zulu. Its pretty funny just how good a thinker he actually is. I have no thinking I need to do, as I can flash a response up in seconds. Goodnight.
So apparently Zulu is a large part of this problem as well. As shown from his talk page, he likes causing trouble and conflict. At this point, I'd like to call for an additional ban for Warwick, for a) circumventing a ban, b) flaming Auron as an anon while banned, c) harassing admins on the wiki, in-game, and through whatever courses she can find, and d) "general asshattery." Felix Omni Signature 22:45, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
In my opinion, that would not help the situation at all. It would make May and Zulu angry, and it would not solve the larger problem. Circumventing a ban is bad. But so was Auron's justification (what he chose to explain anyways). Harassing Auron and you is bad. But you both can't be held blameless, since if I was in May's position (regardless of who is ultimately responsible) I would be in an angry and trolling mood too.
In fact, I would prefer if everyone who has been involved - you, Auron, and yes, me - recuse themselves and refrain from taking administrative action. None of us is sufficiently impartial to the issue to make an informed decision and I think we owe Warwick at least a fair chance to defend herself without getting blocked. If one of the other admins feels a ban is warranted, so be it. Entropy Sig (T/C) 22:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Probably should have a few of us think about it, rather than just one. I volunteer for it, but I'd prefer if I wasn't the only one --Gimmethegepgun 19:02, 13 April 2008 (EDT)
While I do not agree with May's actions. I am appalled at RT atm for posting a private converstaion on this wiki. I know there is no rules against it; but it just makes me appalled when a private converstation is exploited; whether or not it was ment to help get her unblocked or not, I find it wrong. (forgive me being utterly off topic but I felt as if I had to say something). --Shadowphoenix 23:15, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for editing your post, but to me it looked like you said "applaud" instead of "appalled," which are two very different things. --Macros 23:17, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Right at the end, RT says that he will post the log on the wiki, and May doesn't object --Gimmethegepgun 23:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
If required, I can go through the case and punish anyone who I think deserves it. ;) After a quick glance I'd say that Wawicks/Mays/whoevers ban was warranted and even though Aurons ban note wasn't the best, who cares? Most ban notes are crappy, and it's not surprising, there are better things to do than form elaborate ban notes. -- User Gem sig (gem / talk) 19:18, 13 April 2008 (EDT)
I think the problem, though, is that Warwick is not interested in defending herself because she believes she has done nothing wrong. I will admit that I'm not exactly impartial- I'm particularly angry with Warwick because I gave her chance after chance to redeem herself and she disappointed me every time. That's why I opened my proposal to the floor, so to speak, instead of exercising Captain's Prerogative and banning her outright. Plus it would be my first ban.
I don't want to take this outside of the wiki, but I do have some understanding of how Warwick thinks, unless she was lying about having Asperger's Syndrome. A normal person in her situation would act conciliatory to end the conflict as soon as possible, before heavier consequences were incurred. Warwick, however, believes that if she continues to make a fuss and stir things up with her righteous indignation, eventually a higher power will intervene and make things right by her book. Unfortunately, there is no higher power here, unless she were to appeal to Wikia, which of course would be futile because they don't care. Felix Omni Signature 23:36, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I vote for banning Auron, Entropy, Warwick, and Gem for good measure. Then I vote we get a "Party" namespace for me, Maui and MP47. Ban parties!!! —JediRogue 23:37, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
No Blue? Lost-Blue 23:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey now, Zulu is a large part of this problem as well. As shown from his talk page, he likes causing trouble and conflict. Zulu Inuoe 19:42, 13 April 2008 (EDT)
All of you forgot me :( I'ma go cry in the corner, /wristslit a bit, and then I'MA GONNA BANINATE EVERYONE! MWAHAHAHA! --Gimmethegepgun 23:46, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
IMO, this WHOLE ENTIRE THING was gotten way out of hand. Warwick/May/James/whoever makes a pet project and everything goes up in flames. YES, I don't think it was a good idea to make a Gwiki2 even though most said not to. But everyone is blowing this out of proportion. May, Entropy, Auron, Zulu, and whoever else involved CALM DOWN! It's not that big of a deal. End the high levels of wiki-drama. <u>NOW!</u> Thoughtful-new-sig Thoughtful 00:01, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
lol Zulu Inuoe 00:27, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Thoughtful, I'm afraid this has little or nothing to do with that wiki. Maybe you should gain weight before you try to throw it around? Felix Omni Signature 01:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I've read through the archives and come to a conclusion.

  • It was an unwise (stupid) move from Warwick to start a GuildWiki2 without consulting others and against the wishes of the GuildWiki community. This however does not have anything to do with the policies of this wiki and does not warrant a ban. People may dislike him for this, nothing more. In the discussions about the new wiki she has also shown that she does not properly understand licening and has stated that she is not good with policy related things, so keeping the bureaucrat position on GuildWiki2 instead of offering them to more suitable users shows a certain lack of understanding, or the need to feel important.
  • In the original discussion Warwick remained calm and proper, just like a user should, even though the discussion wasn't very pleasant for her.
  • When the discussion continued, Warwick started to surpress the discussion. Even though a user has almost total control over his/her talk page, it is bad etiquette to try to stop people from discussing. Your user talk page is the correct place to discuss things related to you, so you shouldn't try to stop that discussion.
  • Warwick also started acting aggressively as the discussion progressed, and so did some other contributors.
  • Warwicks ban by Auron was justified by the actions of Warwick in surpressing discussion and acting aggressively. (Note: I am not taking a stance on the behavior of other users. There might or might not be other users who would deserve a ban.)
  • Randomtimes shortening of the ban was not good etiquette. When a sysop disagrees with a block, please discuss it, don't remove or shorten it. Since no discussion has been held and I also partially agree with the original block, I will place the ban on Warwick again until proper discussion is over or the time has been fully served.
  • I'm not fond of Aurons way of presenting his opinnion. He says what he thinks, but more often than not his thoughts reflect the thoughts of many other contributors, who present their thoughts in a more diplomatic manner. This straight and direct attitude might be hard for some people to understand, but I think it works well for him. Most contributors seem to think like I do, and they also seem to realise that Auron really is very helpful for the wiki. There haven't been serious requests for removing his sysop priviliges or placing a ban, and I do not see a reason to do either.

If there's anything that you want to add to / comment on, please do so. -- User Gem sig (gem / talk) 02:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Why ban Warwick again? What's done is done. Retroactive punishment is stupid. --Macros 22:44, 13 April 2008 (EDT)
Well, if a reason is necessary, she DID circumvent her ban through a sock/shoe/WHATEVER puppet --Gimmethegepgun 02:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
True --Macros 02:47, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
All punishment blocks are always "retroactive" in the meaning that you use the word. You can never punish someone before he actually does something, and in some cases it takes the sysops time to decide wether a ban was warranted or not. The reinstated ban shoudl serve as a reminder to both Wariwck and the sysop team on proper etiquette.
edit conflict: yeah, I forgot ban circumveiton in the above list. -- User Gem sig (gem / talk) 02:47, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

This discussion is getting out of hand. You all need to take a few days to calm down, and then come back to it with a clear head and open mind, or get someone else to handle it entirely. I will do so if you want (As I didn't even know this discussion was going on until a few minutes ago.), or I could find someone uninvolved either in this incident or this wiki and its users. Lord Belar 03:02, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Gem is the party that's neutral in this discussion, she walked in on it just before you, actually. --Powersurge360 03:03, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
He, not she. :P Lord Belar 03:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
No such thing as gender on the interweb --Gimmethegepgun 03:07, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Finally somebody agrees Zulu Inuoe 03:08, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict) 2nd time too... Sorry, was thinking about the doll instead of the contributor --Powersurge360 03:09, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I am the neutral party here, since I had almost no clue about anything related before I read through the archives to solve the case. :) And yes, I'm a man. -- User Gem sig (gem / talk) 03:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
no ur mum iz! Zulu Inuoe 03:25, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Asperger's Syndrome is not May's problem, it's being an "attention seeker" (for not using the right, ugly word).Ereanorsignreanor 03:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for revoking block... It won't happen again, this situation is quite out of hand atm, so I'll refrain posting my thoughts further <B>RT </B>| <B>Talk</B> 01:48, 14 April 2008 (EDT)
Zulu, although I'm not quite sure what your role in this mess is, I suggest you to watch closely what you write.
RT, thanks. :) -- User Gem sig (gem / talk) 04:36, 14 April 2008 (EDT)
If you reffer to my posts here, I do think about what I say, but only as far as my attention can bare. If you are reffering to my private conversations with Warwick, they are nothing like the conversation RT had with her Zulu Inuoe 08:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
I just had a short, unpleasant conversation with Warwick in which she insulted GuildWiki people and vowed never to return. She also implicated Zulu again. Here's a concise version:
You people from GuildWiki are rather ignorant, arn't you?... The admin base is pretty much stupid ... Me and Zulu say that you're all a bunch of idiotic children on msn, but thats not what we say on GuildWiki. Regardless, I'm leaving GuildWiki because the whole lot of you are a bunch of dumbasses. Goodbye. <Warwick blocks me>
Whether or not Warwick is gone for good, this isn't showing Zulu in a particularly flattering light. Felix Omni Signature 08:43, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Not really all of you Zulu Inuoe 04:45, 14 April 2008 (EDT)
Zulu, I have nothing against you personally. I actually find you kind of refreshing. But I would suggest you tell Warwick to stop dropping your name, because it's just going to make matters worse. Felix Omni Signature 08:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Done I guess, though if this entire thing makes the community dislike me, the fact still remains that I'm here to contribute and enjoy myself, not to make friends Zulu Inuoe 08:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
If you make enemies, I guarantee they won't make your stay enjoyable. You're past the point of not making friends; you should now be concerned about who's going to lob grenades at you from the enemy camp. -Auroñ 09:09, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Enemies are more entertaining than allies Zulu Inuoe 09:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Up until you're captured and tortured to death, sure. Felix Omni Signature 09:11, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
..penis? Zulu Inuoe 09:11, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Absolutely not. Serious thread. Felix Omni Signature 09:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


I'd like to pseudo-ban everyone who has taken part in any related conversation from all talk-pages for 72 hours. Think of it as a unilateral chill-pill. This is a pseudo-Administrative Decision. There are some actions that aren't good, but the reactions to some of the actions had been also getting quite provacational to the point where some are very much troll-feeding.

As a clarification, I am not prohibiting anyone from discussing stuff, but please, try to state your thoughts in a way that works towards understanding and agreement, as opposed to shouting the other person down with the side-effect of getting the other guy to troll and be banned. I will hand out bans for behavior that I consider as troll-feeding. And for the next few days I might choose to err on the strict side instead of being lenient. So just to be safe, you might want to even avoid feeding the troll-feeders. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 09:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I fully agree with Pan and support any blocks that he makes in the following couple of days for these reasons. Also, I will not hand out any blocks for the above discussion because Pan made the decision not to and I want to honor his decision, but I am ready to do what is necessary to help people get over this drama. -- User Gem sig (gem / talk) 13:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

need halp

Prz mr/ms.admin my raw signature iz nawt wurking it sayz invalid html tags prz i rly need [[User:GW-Misfate|<font color=#ff44aa>'''♥</font><font face="vivaldi" size="3" color="turquoise">Mis</font><font face="vivaldi" size="3" color="orange">fate</font><font color=#ff44aa>'''♥</font>]] thats wut i put in the field. User:GW-Misfate 00:12, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Try un-italicizing the hearts. They break it. --Shadowcrest 00:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
mr.admin its still brokend. user:Misfate|<font color=#ff44aa>'''♥</font><font face="vivaldi" size="3" color="#4682b4">Mis</font><font face="vivaldi" size="3" color="#4682b4">fate</font><font color=#ff44aa>'''♥</font> 00:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Because your italics start before the first heart. put them after. --Shadowcrest 00:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[[User:GW-Misfate|<font color=#ff44aa>♥'''</font><font face="vivaldi" size="3" color="#4682b4">Mis</font><font face="vivaldi" size="3" color="#4682b4">fate</font><font color=#ff44aa>♥'''</font>]] User:GW-Misfate00:25, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

yarly. --Shadowcrest 00:26, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
forgot the nowiki tags. user:Misfate|<font color=#ff44aa>'''♥</font><font face="vivaldi" size="3" color="#4682b4">Mis</font><font face="vivaldi" size="3" color="#4682b4">fate</font><font color=#ff44aa>'''♥</font> 00:27, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

'''[[User:GW-Misfate|<span style="color:#ff44aa; font-family:vivaldi;">♥<span style="color:turquoise">Mis</span><span style="color:orange">fate</span><span style="color:#ff44aa">♥</span></span>]]'''

to get Misfate. Click the Raw Signatures thing too.

-- Brains12 \ Talk 00:27, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

ty mr brainztwelve <sarcasm>shadowcrest iz useless admin i ned to find admin demoshun tag.</sarcasm> Misfate 00:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Span is fail. Misfate, you bug me because now I won't be able to sleep until I figure this out. --Shadowcrest 00:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
mr admin maybee u can reedeem yoursalf by making sig nawt smawl liek mr barinztawelve did. Misfate 00:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
PWN. [[User:GW-Misfate|<font color="#FF44AA">♥</font><font face="vivaldi" size="3" color="#4682B4">Mis</font><font face="vivaldi" size="3" color="#4682B4">fate</font><font color="#FF44AA">♥</font>]]. Try that. --Shadowcrest (Misfate's sig is in my prefs atm)
omg mr admin i luv u. but the color sux, i don't liek it. Misfate 00:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
(ec) Add a ;font-size:size in px or % in the first span. Oh, and it's probably better going with span instead of font. -- Brains12 \ Talk 00:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Font tags are old school. —JediRogue 00:45, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, this is resolved. Misfate 00:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

no u --Shadowcrest 00:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
<notreally>GW:NPA</notreally>. Misfate 00:53, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Please don't use FONT tags. Use SPAN instead. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 02:29, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Are the SPAN parameters the same as FONT? Lord Belar 02:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Screenshot of siggy > long codes--AlariSig 02:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Span support everything Font supports, but the syntax is different. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 03:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Descriptions

Just how much is too much? As some of you would have obviously noticed, I've been going through and giving some descriptions to some EotN creatures that were missing out. As you would also notice, I tend to get some creative with them, sometimes being either somewhat sensationalised or slightly humourous. A recent one I did [[4]] is an example of both. Powersurge deemed it too much and removed the 'funny' part. If you want to see more examples of my descriptions then basically look at all the EotN Stone Summit, Undead, Modniir and some others to see what I've done.

Now my point isn't to disagree because this wiki in general tries to be strict, straight and serious in their articles which I've repsected. However after vising another wiki, namely this Transformers Wiki and seeing how they basicaly encourage humour in all of their articles, I was thinking why couldn't we have something to liven this place up? Look at this article and tell me that you didn't at least chuckle once (I know I lol'ed quite a lot reading that).

So really, is it alright to add some humour like what I did for the Restless Dead page or is that too much? If it is too much, I would like to know why? After all, some humour isn't that bad is it? Blue.rellik 04:41, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Anything regarding the sexual preferences of the monster in question is unacceptable. Skill puns are annoying but fine. Crap like "it's a necromancer, in case you couldn't tell from the name. It gets beaten up by warriors" is stupid and pointless. Felix Omni Signature 04:42, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
The B.O.T episode link takes me to a bad page. Misfate 04:43, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Try again Blue.rellik 04:45, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
I had fixed your link there, buuuuddy. To have text for external pages you don't need the pipe, just hit space. Powersurge360 Melancholia 04:48, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
tyvm Blue.rellik 04:49, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Worst.Episode.Ever Misfate 04:50, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Here is another another article. If you can read through that without smiling at least once then you are gay Blue.rellik 04:54, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
I am so glad this wiki isn't like that one... I'd never be able to handle that level of annoyance... Powersurge360 Melancholia 04:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

To link to the transformer wiki, you can do w:c:transformers:Main Page. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 05:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, let's move on from the fact that my ineptitude at wiki syntax is legendary and move onto the actual discussion. There is something god damn wrong with this place if I am the person advocating stay on-topic Blue.rellik 05:45, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Some humor is fine, yes, but too much is annoying and detracts from the factual basis of the wiki. I would've removed the same bit on the Restless Dead article that Powersurge did because of the swearing - remember that we have kids viewing this site, so sexual references and swearing are definite no-nos. And if I see any descriptions written in rhyme, I'll sic my chicken army on you. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 05:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Note to self: Write a limerick description for Charr Flameshielder. Maui sig 05:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm fine with being light-hearted. But those nicknames sound like random venting, instead of trying to be funny. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 05:54, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Yup, that kind of stuff belongs on talk RandomTime 05:31, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok I get the idea, you guys are all squares and aren't as awesome as your's truly. GW:NPA LOL!!!!11!!shift one !!11!! b.r // talk

Vandal

User:65.92.232.122
--Shadowphoenix 23:57, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not really a big deal unless they do major vandalism, they aren't worthy to be mentioned on this page.Entrea SumataeEntrea [Talk] 00:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Try Template:Ban next time <B>RT </B>| <B>Talk</B> 11:32, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

floating boxes

Floating boxes like the ones here are extremely disruptive and irritating, and they remind me of the position:absolute vandalism. They also break pages here. Would it be reasonable to disallow these boxes? --Shadowcrest 18:46, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Breaking it was intentional, I'll go fix that now. I agree, though. They are disruptive.Entrea SumataeEntrea [T] 18:48, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Jesus, people are using those now? Yes, we should definitely not allow those, since for example the one linked to above hides the navigation links in the top right corner. -- User Gem sig (gem / talk) 19:10, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I personally don't like it, but I'm gonna officially be neutral regarding its use on the user namespace. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 19:40, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Annoying as all hell. If we're not going to allow advertisements like this I see no reason to let users use it - unless there's one hell of a good reason. Userspace is OK as long as it's not on a) userpage itself or b) user talk page. Since those serve special purposes, and disruption there is bad. Entropy Sig (T/C) 04:26, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
As long as navigation is not hindered to any destination/function, a user page can have anything it wants (respecting other general rules of course). The floating box in that link is covering the edit buttons and dismiss button, so it should not be allowed in its current form. -- Xeon 16:22, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
These are highly annoying, they should definitely not cover up controls. --OrgXSignature 16:25, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
I think I started this trend. Sorry >.< Lann's is almost alright though, surely, because it doesn't follow you down the page. My old one did. My new one's just random :p Jamster 16:36, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Lann's one did follow you around.. Till I.. dealt.. with it.. —MaySigWarw/Wick 16:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
May pleads the Fifth :/ --Gimmethegepgun 16:38, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Eh? —MaySigWarw/Wick 16:38, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Yeah, May broke that code a few times and finally got it to stop stalking us. -- Isk8 User:Isk8 (T/C) 16:39, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't want to completely disallow it, it can have some very useful benefits as well. But definitely, if one proves to be disruptive or hinders other uses of the page, it should be fixed. --GEO-logo Jïörüjï Ðerako.>.c??t^ 22:58, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I feel the same way about this as I do about the changing of the title of your userpage. You can do whatever you want in the content section of the page. Anything that you do to your page taht extends out of the content is inappropriate. —?Jedi?Rogue? 03:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I believe if you make the margins the correct size, you can keep the floating box out of the way of the headers and tabs. I don't think it can do harm there. But if you need to scroll up and down just to reach basic parts of the page (tabs, menus, etc), then I'd consider that disruptive. --GEO-logo Jïörüjï Ðerako.>.c??t^ 04:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Just require all floating boxes to have a class, so one line of css can take care of them. Lord Belar 21:52, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Warwick

She claims she was banned, but I cannot seem to find anything in the block log that suggest she was :S. Can anyone justify that she was/was not blocked? --Shadowphoenix 15:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Blocklog for User:Warwick. -- User Gem sig (gem / talk) 15:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
The block log for non-sysops -- Brains12 \ Talk 15:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Gem and Brains..... So this basically proves she wasnt blocked, odd why would she lie about something like that? --Shadowphoenix 15:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Lol, I failed with the link. No clue about why she would say something like that, especially since I don't know where she said it. -- User Gem sig (gem / talk) 15:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
User_talk:Felix_Omni -- Isk8 User:Isk8 (T/C) 15:49, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
She couldn't have been blocked or autoblocked. According to the logs, no one was blocked since before her last logged in edit. She's either lying or insane. —?Jedi?Rogue? 18:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
AGF? -- Isk8 User:Isk8 (T/C) 18:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, may be a bug <B>Random </B>|<B>Time</B> 18:42, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I assumed good faith when I checked the logs instead of assuming she was lying. I think the odds of a bug telling her she was blocked when we didn't block her right when we were talking about blocking her is really really weird. —?Jedi?Rogue? 18:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, well I'm unblocked now. I'm certain that it said that I was blocked.. :\.. What would be the point of lying about it? It'd be easy for somone to find out if I was or not.. —MaySigWarw/Wick 19:17, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, that's the thing. According to all available evidence, and especially because I've only issued two blocks in my career and I'm not delusional, you were lying. Felix Omni Signature 19:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
NPA me and all, but is there anything Warw won't lie about if pushed? Jamster 19:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
That is pretty much a violation. Shame on you, don't do it again. Felix Omni Signature 19:30, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
It wouldn't be the first time, in fact, it's probably around the 30th time when someone is effectively blocked when no one actually blocked that somebody. Please don't jump to conclusions about ops "stealth-banning" people, or jump to conclusions about people lying about being banned. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 19:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Well you see, Warwick claims that the ban summary was written by me and directly applied to her. So this wouldn't be a case of an oops-block. Felix Omni Signature 19:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

build articles

Would anyone mind horribly if I were to start manually going through the Special:Wantedpages list and modifying the links that link to those build articles to send them to the corresponding pvx articles? I'm bored and it could be entertaining for a little while. -- Isk8 User:Isk8 (T/C) 16:46, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you insist. Dr Ishmael wanted to let a bot do the work, but if someone else feels so damn bored like doing something so repetitive... Go ahead imo. --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 16:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
LULZ! Coding a bot for that would seem extremely complicated, imo. And I am in the mood for something boring and repetitive at this point. Just ate breakfast and I am just ready to lounge about for the rest of the day. -- Isk8 User:Isk8 (T/C) 16:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Only problem is if the build doesn't exist anymore. --Shadowcrest 16:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I could just be cruel and remove all those old links from peoples long forgotten user pages :P -- Isk8 User:Isk8 (T/C) 17:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Point deceased builds to the Main Page, or Special:Search :P --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 17:04, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Unless you want a heck of a lot of watchlists and recent changes to be spammed, leave it to a bot. -- Brains12 \ Talk 17:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Correct me if I am wrong, but wouldn't a bot do the same thing. -- Isk8 User:Isk8 (T/C) 17:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Bots with, BOT STATUS, I believe, can be/are automatically hidden from RC. Jamster 17:08, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
My God... there are 1000+ items in Special:Wantedpages. That is just insane. Second though, I'm not gunna get mixed up with that crap. lol. That would have me pulling my hair out I think. -- Isk8 User:Isk8 (T/C) 17:11, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I am going to bot it, one of the tasks.. waiting for approval <B>Random </B>| <B>Time</B> 18:02, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

GuildWars Wikia:Bot tasks/Builds redlinks rewriteDr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 05:07, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

User:½

That is going to be a pain in the ass to link to. (unless I'm missing something) --Shadowcrest 16:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[[User:½ ]] Felix Omni Signature 16:27, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

That failed. --Shadowcrest 16:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, the code [[User:{{subst:1/2}}]] doesn't work... looks like copy+paste or alt+something will be the only option. Felix Omni Signature 16:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
User:½ It's alt+0189, not too tricky. Felix Omni Signature 16:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
And you're going to remember this code should this user start to contribute on a regular basis? :P --Shadowcrest 16:34, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
ALT-Codes. Favorites it! Felix Omni Signature 16:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
My point is that it's not an easily accessable username, and people who haven't read this could spend ages trying to get there. I was going to suggest we request on that user's talkpage that he create a more accessable account. --Shadowcrest 16:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Have him create a shoe puppet, User:One Half, which redirects to his page. Felix Omni Signature 16:44, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
That would work. Does anyone else disagree, before I mention it to the user? --Shadowcrest 16:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Let's wait until the user actually makes addtional edits besides his own userpage. If he never uses the account again, it might not be worth the effort to take up another account name. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 17:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Warwick?

Um...yeah. I just recently found out she was banned by Felix. Why the hell did he ban her? Was it possible abuse of powers? I just find it kind of weird that someone would actually do some shit like that because Warwick is a good contributor and helper around the wiki. --Hellbringer (T/C) 18:51, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

She has also been warned numerous times and know that she should not troll. --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 18:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Alright...any other reasons, Viper? --Hellbringer (T/C) 18:54, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
(EC)I wouldn't say banning warwick is a step too far in general, since said user often ignores people, incites drama, etc. That said, I feel felix is generally too personally involved in anything involving Warwick, and things between them escalate very quickly. I'd appreciate links to the contributions causing this ban, or at least a rundown if pages have been deleted. Lord of all tyria 18:55, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
So basically Felix took the insults and drama too far leading to a lot of pages being deleted? --Hellbringer (T/C) 18:57, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I have no idea, I missed recent happenings on wiki, and I'm just saying what I know. Lord of all tyria 18:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Alright. I missed them too. I have just been messing around with a few things on here. Like User:Hellbringer/Weapon Skin Comparison...which takes so much time so I do it in school and when I have nothing to do. Thanks for the info. --Hellbringer (T/C) 19:05, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Yeah - links would be good RandomTime 19:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
The only thing I saw was a userspace page she made that said "/irritatefelix" x100 or so, which Felix deleted, but that doesn't justify a 1-week ban. If Felix banned her for stuff that happened outside the wiki, then that is definitely abuse of powers. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 20:08, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
According to may she sed that rt told her tht the reason felix banned her was:
Thts what May told me rt sent her as the reason Helllbringer ([[User_talk:Hellb 20:11, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I dont get why she was banned cuz of that, sinc she wasnt involved at all.. Helllbringer ([[User_talk:Hellb 20:13, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
If you post that again you will be banned as well. Felix Omni Signature 20:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
why? why'd u delete my stuff? May said rt said you said (lol) that was what u banned her for.. Helllbringer ([[User_talk:Hellb 20:19, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm going to respond to that in great detail, and I would appreciate everyone not editing this page before then, because I do not want to deal with edit conflicts. Felix Omni Signature 20:19, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Yeh but wat did may actually do? Helllbringer 20:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
After a conversation with felix on MSN - I agree with his reasons for blocking May - however a block of hellbringer for asking reasons is unacceptable RandomTime 20:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
You must have missed the huge block of comments hellbringer pasted here that brought up some stuff from about a week ago. JonTheMon 20:32, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I did RandomTime 20:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

OT but, you can block someone while already blocked yourself?--AlariSig 21:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

It would seem so. --Shadowcrest 21:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
And then unban yourself to explain, then reban yourself. Interesting.--AlariSig 21:43, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
You can't post while banned. --Shadowcrest 21:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Isn't it a fundamental flaw that a sysop retains all powers even when they get banned?--AlariSig 21:50, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Sorta, but part of being a sysop is abiding by discipline like blocks. If a block keeps on getting undone or bypassed, then that's grounds for removal of sysop powers. JonTheMon 21:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Listen up

[User:Felix Omni/Noobs] and the corresponding talk page were deleted by me because the conflict it detailed was a personal matter between myself, Maui, and blue.rellik- it was barely related to the wiki, and should never have been brought up here. I handled the situation spectacularly badly, by trolling rellik and losing my temper. Ideally I should never have made the list at all. I have suffered a good deal for that outburst- Maui has not spoken to me since then, and I wonder if she ever will, and I also returned from my miserable convention to find myself banned for a week. I maintain that the entire topic did not belong on wiki, and if anyone has any respect for me or my decisions, they will NOT attempt to revive it again.

Now, on to Warwick. Warwick has been harassing me in-game and on MSN for months, really- she spends more time on my block and ignore lists than she does off it. "But that's not on wiki!" you may protest. Take a look at User talk:Felix Omni#Suspension if you haven't already- Things that you say and do off GuildWiki may be invisible to the rest of us here; but they still reflect on you. This morning Warwick begged me in-game to unblock her MSN account, so I eventually did. She proceeded to taunt me in regards to the ban, and then revealed that she had the entire text of the Noobs talk page. Now, the only way she could have gotten that is by asking a sysop to procure it for her, and I'm quite upset about that as well- regardless of what you feel about my powers of judgment or my temperament, I made an administrative decision to remove that page from this wiki, and I would expect others to either abide by it or address their concerns directly to ME. Anyway, Warwick told she was going to repost that entire conversation on the wiki under requests for arbitration or some nonsense. I expressly forbade her to do so, because of the reasons above, and also because it's none of her business. She said that she was going to do it anyway, I warned her (again) that if she did, I would ban her for at least a week, because in her escalating series of escapades she's gone from a day to three days, and the next step is a week. She continued to say that she was going to do it, even when I asked her to shut up, because I was monking in the Fissure of Woe at the moment and it was extremely distracting. A few minutes later she MSNed me again with something like ":) /waits for ban," and sure enough I saw a very large post in Warwick's userspace with the title "felixban." As I decided that the situation warranted it, I banned her just as I warned. I then asked Viper to delete the page, since doing it myself would require unbanning myself, something I'd rather not do because Entropy clearly trusted that I would respect her decision in banning me. And I do feel horrible that I've broken that trust right now, but I really need to say all this. Now people are saying that the page was actually just irritating nonsense, and if that was the case, I apologize for jumping to conclusions, but while banned one cannot view deleted pages even if one has sysop privileges.

As for Hellbringer... I told May that if she or any of her friends wished to protest the ban, they could contact me on MSN or wait until Friday. Fairly promptly I was messaged by Hellbringer, who said several hundred times "OMG WTF why did u ban may" before I blocked him. I don't care what kind of a relationship you have with Warwick- don't repost that conversation, don't harass me.

Now, if anyone feels that the ban was unjustified after knowing what happened, please contact me via MSN, or even e-mail, because I will now be re-banning myself for the remaining time, regardless of what happens on this page or any other page. Felix Omni Signature 20:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I gave may the pages after this had cropped up - and after Felix asked me whether I had given the pages. Idk why I did this, looking back RandomTime 20:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Felix I have to say I'm sorry for being rude on MSN. I have no real idea why I did it. But thank you for explaining what all went down. May might have gone too far with that stuff she has done. I should talk to her after this. She will probably get mad at me. --Helllbringer 20:50, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The pages aren't terribly hard to get, I have access to them to, in that my computer has an archival program that stores copies of every site (in every revision) for up to two months. Google Desktop (the program I use) is also relatively common, so don't feel too bad about it. Powersurge360Violencia 20:51, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for explaining, Felix; I was very angry for a bit. I had given may the pages a while ago, for the same reason as Powersurge said; it wasn't exceptionally hard to get. Any user that had been on at the time could have copied it and given it to everyone they knew. Perhaps not the brightest decision I've made, and I'm sorry for it; but what's done is done. At any rate, I will not oppose the block. --Shadowcrest 21:03, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I still think that stuff that happens outside the wiki needs to stay outside the wiki. Yes, anything a person does will reflect on that person, but that in itself shouldn't be grounds for banning anyone from the wiki. If it is brought onto the wiki, though, then the overall issue should necessarily be considered when making administrative decisions against that user, but only if and when it is brought onto the wiki. If I go and start spamming, say, Vipermagi with random insults in-game, of course that's going to make me look bad, but Viper isn't going to ban me from the wiki just because I insulted him in-game (at least I hope not :P ). Now, if I were to reference said insultspam in any way here on the wiki, then it could be considered a wiki issue and I could be banned for it.
This case, of course, is more complicated because it sprouted from long-standing issues between a few people. It was brought onto the wiki through [User:Felix Omni/Noobs], and Entropy took action because of that. What happened since then, however, has mostly happened off-wiki except for [User:Warwick/Felixbanned], which in itself was really just spam (and a touch of trolling). Off-wiki threats a user makes to do something on the wiki should not be relevant to any administrative decisions against that user unless those threats are somehow made a part of the on-wiki issues against the user, which I believe did not happen here. This was made obvious by everyone's confusion immediately after Felix blocked Warwick.
I'm actually going to stand in Warwick's defense in this issue and recommend that she be unblocked, or at the least have the block length shortened (since she did post that spam/troll page). I also feel that Felix allowed his personal feelings against Warwick to greatly influence his actions in this matter, and I would agree with a decision to demote him because of this. He should have simply ignored Warwick both on MSN and in-game, instead of allowing her to continue harassing him. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 22:09, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Felix has since unblocked Warwick, on the basis that the spam/troll page Warwick made didn't contain the content of User:Felix Omni/Noobs, and thus grounds for banning weren't sufficient. --Shadowcrest 00:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Ishmael makes good points. I believe that...

  • banning Hellbringer was/would have been wrong
  • May cannot be banned for actions off the Wiki if they do not affect the wiki; i.e. the whole conversation on the Noobs page in addition to the outside knowledge was, I think, justifiable cause. But there was no such similar comments between May and Felix on the wiki (at the time, to my knowledge) which justify banning her. Yes, she has numerous warnings and such and such...nevertheless, banning for general asshattery is hard and I don't think there is sufficient harm done right now - if it was an admin other than Felix making such decision, Warwick would probably not be banned, since Warwick did not harass them on MSN or such.
  • It was a mistake to give the contents of the Noob page to May, and I feel it led directly to these later actions and reactions.
  • Felix is walking on thin ice with two strikes. Further actions on the wiki during the remainder of this ban will result to desysoption (I am upset about that); any actions after the ban which are of this nature will also result in desysoption. The only reason I am not desysopping right now for this incident is because I beliveve the other sysops are to blame (see above bullet), as well as May pushing it in harassment. It is true that "[Felix] should have simply ignored Warwick both on MSN and in-game, instead of allowing her to continue harassing him." But considering the situation right now, I believe it was rather inevitable even if Felix had strongly wished not to act, and I feel others would have done the same. This is the same reason I did not block Blue.rellik or Maui in regards to the original Noobs page discussion, even though they repeatedly broke NPA very clearly...I didn't think it would help to resolve the issue. Entropy Sig (T/C) 01:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
May I clarify- I didn't actually give that log to ANYONE other than Felix, until I was given it by RT apparently from Felix as the reason I was banned. —MaySig Warw/Wick 14:24, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Wawrick...again?

Erm, why did Wawrick get banned again with the reason given as "User Request" and an expiry time of infinite. An infinite ban based on "User Request" seems a bit harsh. User request by who, and based on what? Can we atleast have some explanation of that?--Cobalt6 - (<B>Talk</B>/<B>Contribs</B>) 18:53, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

And she just asked me on msn to unban her. Im laughing hysterically, so I would like to know what is going on too. -- Isk8 User:Isk8 (T/C) 18:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Warw requested it RandomTime 18:57, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
O Rly? About 5 seconds later I req'd unblock.. At which point you started ignoring me.. —MaySig Warw/Wick 18:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Ugh - I'm not here at all times of the day - I needed to go somewhere and my brother grabbed the computer before I could get back RandomTime 19:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
You don't always have to do what Warwick says, RT lol. And Warwick, if you really felt that you needed to have something banned, ask em to ban one of your other accounts to play. We are not here to pander to your every whim. —?Jedi?Rogue? 19:04, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Good call RandomTime 19:05, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes you are, you're all pawns to my magnificence and majesty. —MaySig Warw/Wick 19:06, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

GuildWars Wikia:Bots

Seems to be fixed that GuildWars Wikia:Bots is a copyvio, even after a major rewite she will not stop marking it for deletion and ranting about it. I am aware that it was a copyvio beforehand but I rewrote it so that it would no longer be one, I have said apolgized about it being a copyvio and did a major rewrite. Apparently Warwick thinks it has the same meaning so it is a copyvio. Admin intervention is needed imo --Shadowphoenix 17:17, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Petty things dont belong on the admin noticeboard. —MaySig Warw/Wick 17:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
The current issue doesn't seem to be about Warwick as much as it seems to be about whether or not the policy is a copyvio of the GWW policy. Warwick thinks it is and you think it is not. Now, I'm going to review the two policies shortly but firstly, lets keep in mind that they are both policies about the exact same thing and they are naturally going to be similar. Remember that GWW borrows plenty of things from us and based lots of their policies off ours. Also, our early policies were based off Wikipedia policies. Ladies, please don't let this discussion degenerate into a simple cat-fight. Don't take it personally, either of you. —?Jedi?Rogue? 18:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
I have reviewed the policy. A few sections could be construed as a copyvio but they have now be rewritten. In the future, instead of slapping the tag on, you should show quotes to places where you think it may be a copyvio and calmly discuss why you think its a copyvio. Additionally, if someone thinks that your edits are copyvios, don't take it personally and point out sections that you rewrote. I HAVE SPOKEN!?Jedi?Rogue? 18:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Felix Omni

I was looking at Mesmer armor today and saw that the Elite/Ascended/15k Luxon armor had a very poor gallery for the male armor. I left a message on the talk page asking for someone who is more experienced at wiki to help by adding a tag stating it needs to be conformed to a higher standard of quality, and a reason why (in language clearly intended to point out why without being used on the page itself). The result was Felix Omni adding a tag which I felt was rather sad and left me looking at the GW:NPA curiously.

He acted in an immature fashion, leaving a tag on the page he knew would be unhelpful, which I had to clean up myself.

My comments are on the talk page, I would be grateful if someone could look into this for me, the article's history will show you the tag. Thank you. -->Suicidal Tendencie 21:32, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

That does seem unhelpful (referring to [5] [6]) - I don't know if it's against NPA, and I need to go, but I'm sure someone else will check (if anyone's on) RandomTime 21:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, I checked and don't think it was against the GW:NPA, but was against the spirit of it at least, and thank you for looking at it and replying. -->Suicidal Tendencie 21:39, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Meh. I see it less as a violation of NPA (in spirit or otherwise) and more an instance of general asshattery. 85.71.168.42 21:41, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Which is also considered a bad thing and rather unhelpful? -->Suicidal Tendencie 21:43, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I struggle to see how him using your reasoning for wanting to add a cleanup tag as the reason on the cleanup tag is a problem. Clearly I'm missing something. Lord of all tyria 21:45, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The thing is, which I think is why the other 2 at least didn't approve of it, even if they thought I was wasting my time here, was that using my reason was being immature, 1) he knew he shouldn't [as you do not on actual articals start talking about epic phails] and also the reason I mentioned it here was that I took it personally as him having a go at me. -->Suicidal Tendencie 21:49, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Are you serious? You quite specifically asked for the template to be placed on the page, and you gave your reasoning. I certainly had no reason other than your request to place it there, so of course I used your rationale. Has the wiki truly degenerated so much that helping another user qualifies as a personal attack? What kind of bullshit is this? Christ. Felix Omni Signature 02:52, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Tame your temper there Mr. Omni. But seriously, this section is kinda funny. Powersurge360Violencia 03:01, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
So, you're upset at him for quoting you? I hardly think that qualifies as any kind of violation on his part that you aren't at least just as guilty of.Entrea SumataeEntrea [Talk] 03:03, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
It is unfortunate that ST misconstrued my attempt to help him as an insult. I have altered the template accordingly. I hope this matter, unlike so many lately, can end peacefully. Felix Omni Signature 03:23, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
You guys should see the comments I put in the image update tags. —JediRogue 03:28, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I have seen some - the one at issue here is tame compared to some of yours. :P —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 03:40, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Upset, no, annoyed, certainly. Felix you know different kinds of language all have their place, and for the record I'm the one who was left to fix the template; not you. I feel if a user who is not that experienced at wiki code asks for help, it should be taken seriously. And as far as your first statement here is concerned, you know you do not HAVE to give a reason on the template. Anyone who looks at the whole page will see the male gallery and understand quite easily. -->Suicidal Tendencie 08:51, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh goodie, a scandal. Because obviously it's plagiarism to move a quote from an article's talk page to its article page.  :D Quizzical 08:59, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Then clearly you have not bothered taking the time to look at it, the point is, a user asked for help, when trying to improve GuildWiki, the result was Felix mocking me and leaving a template that he knew would have to be changed.
I don't mind users trying to help with things that will have to be redone later with someone with more knowledge of codes, etc. but simply taking the piss out of less experienced users is not exactly having a positive influence on GuildWiki. -->Suicidal Tendencie 09:03, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
ST, I don't think Felix was trying to mock you. It seems to you he must be mocking you, because you can't see how anyone could seriously put that up on the real page. I agree it looks completely unprofessional - this isn't an edit summary or a talk page comment - but Felix doesn't. Felix's action was wrong because it makes the Wiki look like a kiddie's playground, not becuase it was NPA breach.Lurkerabove 09:27, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I think he was trying to mock me, but accept my position has an amount of bias and so won't force my feelings on others. He was unprofessional and I feel if he will be so unprofessional, on purpose, not having diffuculties with the English language itself, his contributions will suffer and be less helpful as a result. -->Suicidal Tendencie 10:40, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I was not. I apologize that it seemed that way. Felix Omni Signature 19:27, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Okay then, but from my point of view it seemed that way, I thought you'd know that tag would have to be changed, and therefore, from my point of view, a go at me was the only reason you could leave it there in the first place. Btw someone might want to archive this. -->Suicidal Tendencie 20:09, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
I really wasn't going to put my 2 cents in on this, but what the hell. I feel that this is being blown way out of proportion from what it should be. Felix was merely being a "smart ass" by using your exact chosen context of words in the image update tag. He was not violating NPA, nor was he trying to mock you. He was being humorous from what I can see. I don't see any evidence of this being his attempt to strike out at you in any way. I think this is an issue that should just be let go right now. -- Isk8 <u>I~sk8</u> (T/C) 21:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

You're telling me to let it go while restarting it after I said it should be archived? I see...->Suicidal Tendencie 12:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)