User:RRabbit42/Talk archive:Oct-Dec 2013

Archive of older Discussion items in October to December 2013. Any messages moved here from the Message Wall will include correct authors and timestamps.

Grabpics
Grabpics aren't official images, so I assume there is a plan to have them deleted down the road? If so, I'm looking around for replacement images for the a number of character pages. When I do replace the grabpic, should I add the delete template to the image?

  DJ MC CJ, THE VIGILANTE  |  Talk  . 03:49, October 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * As answered in chat, yes, once the grabpic is replaced, it can be deleted. Many of those aren't that good, so they're not really worth keeping, even if tagged as fan art. —RRabbit42 ( leave a message ) 04:17, October 7, 2013 (UTC)

When it comes to grabpics, are these considered grabpics?



ToyStory did mention that these are official, because they came from Tapped Out.   DJ MC CJ, THE VIGILANTE  |  Talk  . 19:57, November 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * Since those came from an official Simpsons product, they're official artwork. —RRabbit42 ( leave a message ) 05:40, November 11, 2013 (UTC)

Fan
Hence your avatar and name, are you a fan of Roger Rabbit? I'm 3D Homer 15:53, October 5, 2013 (UTC)


 * That's correct. I have been since the movie came out, and I still have the drinking cups and the Roger Rabbit stick-on stuffed animal that McDonald's sold. —RRabbit42 ( leave a message ) 04:19, October 7, 2013 (UTC)

Trouble on Foster's Home Wiki
I noticed you are an admin of the site, do you mind come by and helping resolve a problem?

http://fhif.wikia.com/wiki/Special:WikiActivity

Goji73 (talk) 19:52, October 26, 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for solving the problem.

Goji73 (talk) 19:59, October 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * I will clean the rest up later, but he gets a one-month time out for that kind of behavior. —RRabbit42 ( leave a message ) 20:00, October 26, 2013 (UTC)

Updates 2.0
Hi I'm back. For how long I'm not sure. For starters we have some loose ends I think need to be dealt with. User Randomno still had administration rights, which is a conflict of interest I think needs to be rectified since he seems to still he taking liberties that I do not think should be allowed. Granted he has been more hospitable than others from that wiki, but he shouldn't keep such a status. Furthermore, are you no longer a bureaucrat or have they just removed that from the profile information? --Jhonevan&#39;s signature. (talk) 12:03, November 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * As a bureaucrat on a few other wikis (and an admin on a few more), I think I can answer that. It seems that bureaucrats aren't usually shown as such on their profile page, but only as admins. However, there is "bureaucrat" markup buried in the MediaWiki namespace which provides the interface text, so perhaps if those who run a wiki feel the need to distinguish bureaucrats from admins, they can switch this on? Has this previously been on for this wiki, and turned off again? — RobertATfm (talk) 16:38, November 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * What liberties are you talking about?

I like to see myself as having admin status here in case something comes up. I'm not sure what would require me to be a Wikisimpsonian and an admin here, but stuff always happens. User:Randomno User talk:Randomno  22:06, November 15, 2013 (UTC)

Missing Pages
A lot of pages are being deleted rapidly. Is that Ferbot on a clean up mission? --Jhonevan&#39;s signature. (talk) 11:24, November 13, 2013 (UTC)


 * The deletion log shows that DJ MC CJ, one of our new admins, is cleaning up some unused files. Only two minor pages were deleted. —RRabbit42 ( leave a message ) 14:56, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

Request
Hi I'd like to become a bureaucrat. I feel like I've been with this wiki for a while and exhibit the appropriate determination to warrant the position. --Jhonevan&#39;s signature. (talk) 18:37, November 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * I second this. He certainly has shown dedication to the wiki.


 * ♫ Mr   Badger   Lol  ♫ 23:06, November 15, 2013 (UTC)


 *  Jhonevans was promoted to Bureaucrat on November 18, 2013.

Block
Oh please don't block me, I undid vandalism from pages!

JOEY310 15:47, November 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * At this point, I don't think it's necessary. I'm beginning to get a better idea about what is really happening. Stay tuned. —RRabbit42 ( leave a message ) 03:04, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

Why did you undo my edit?
Why did you undo my edit on Bart gets a f. Am I a vandal?

My name is JOEY310 16:22, December 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * If you look at the history of the page or even the Wiki Activity, you would see that I put "I don't think this is a sequel to another episode". So, if the episode is a sequel, you need to say what episode it is a sequel to.


 * But in general, don't be distressed if someone changes your edit back. They might have a little more knowledge about the show than you do. —RRabbit42 ( leave a message ) 16:40, December 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * Can you read the references page then? It shows the sequel. My name is JOEY310. 16:45, December 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * That was added by an anonymous person earlier this year and they didn't provide any references to show that it was an official sequel to an episode. It was probably a case of that person thought, "Well, these two episodes are both about Bart doing really poor/well in school, so they must be connected". I have now removed what they put. —RRabbit42 ( leave a message ) 17:14, December 1, 2013 (UTC)

Report these 2 users to VSTF
Hello RRabbit42, I know this was along time ago these users are active (this was in August), but I would like you to report these 2 users to VSTF. That's right, i'm on VSTF too.

These are the 2 users: User:Floating Mario Head and User:Floating Mario Head 2

My name is JOEY310 16:14, December 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * I switched those around so I could keep them straight. The first account has been globally blocked by someone at Wikia and it doesn't appear that the other account has been used since August when it was blocked on a few wikis. So it's likely that he gave up and we don't need to do anything further.


 * That's usually all that's needed in these cases. Don't make a fuss and take away their fun by blocking them, and quite a few give up. For the ones that don't, it actually gets easier to recognize them if they come back, which means they can be blocked easier. —RRabbit42 ( leave a message ) 01:21, December 3, 2013 (UTC)


 * Because of that, do you have to think "okay, playtime's over and you need to stop now" instead of "you did one thing bad so I'm going to stomp you into dust"?  My name is JOEY310 09:30, December 8, 2013 (UTC)


 * One of the basic values for dealing people on a wiki is "assume good faith", which means that if someone makes a mistake, that's all that it might be. They may not be trying to deliberately hurt the wiki. It takes time to learn to recognize the signs that it actually might be the start of a problem, if it isn't immediately obvious.


 * I've seen admins jump to the conclusion that even one poor edit is vandalism and will set a block for six months, a year or even permanently. Not even "guilty until proven innocent", but instead, "guilty and I'm applying an excessive block". I look at that and I think, "Really? For that minor of an edit? What they did justifies being that harsh with them?"


 * There's two other situations that happened to me that help me try to be a bit more lenient with people. The first was many years ago on one of the first online games I ever played. It was an old turn-based space trading game where you only got a certain amount of turns per day. I'd come back to it the next day and find my ship had been destroyed. I could never get anywhere because every day I would have to start over. Even asking the other players to just leave me alone for a little bit didn't help. I gave up within two weeks.


 * The second was a case where I made a suggestion to an admin on how to fix what appeared to be a problem. A different admin jumped in and said they didn't know how and weren't sure they wanted to do that. I then made a different recommendation on how they could try it out. The other admin then came back and started yelling at me: you're just a newcomer, who do you think you are, stop trying to push us around, stop bothering us with this or I'll consider it to be harassment. I took my time (45-60 minutes), thought out my reply and tried to show her that I was just trying to help and that her accusing me of harassment was out of line. She immediately erased my message. Didn't even read it. She just assumed I was still trying to cause problems. I made one more attempt to talk with her, but she became completely unreasonable, so I told her she might as well block me because we weren't getting anywhere in straightening this out. She did set the block, but another admin overturned it about eight months later.


 * Both of these are examples of "biting the newcomers". The first kind of soured me on online gaming, and due to the fact that an online game can be shut down at any time and you can't play it any more, I'm really not interested in them. The second was an admin that was abusing her power, and she never make the effort to see things from the other person's view. I learned afterwards that she had a history of bad behavior towards other users. Her account is now globally disabled, and while I don't know if she requested that or if Wikia decided to close it, the research I did into what she said over the years leads me to believe she didn't close that account voluntarily.


 * So when I deal with other people, I try not to bite them, but I may leave them a "knock it off" message if I think they might listen. If something looks a bit odd but doesn't require a block or a message to them, I will make a note of it in case it does happen again in the future. That way, if they really were playing around while learning how to commit more serious vandalism, I'm ready to deal with them.


 * But the last thing I keep in mind is that sometimes people want to be jerks and commit vandalism. A lot of them make it obvious from the moment they arrive. Usually, less than 15 minutes of research will confirm if they've done this sort of thing before. Any blocks I set as a result are accompanied by a reason like "vandalism-only account" or "increasing block after seeing similar behavior on other wikis". Then others can see that I am not being arbitrary or excessive if I have to get them off a wiki. —RRabbit42 ( leave a message ) 23:37, December 8, 2013 (UTC)

My template
I made a template about admins blocking vandals, you'll see it here:

User:JOEY310/New template

What do you think?

My name is JOEY310 16:39, December 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure that is really needed. An admin shouldn't brag about having to block users. It's just a part of the job of being an admin, and blocks should mostly be used to discourage someone from continuing bad behavior. If they keep at it, then the block gets longer because they show that they are deliberately causing problems. Also, having a template like that could be viewed as an invitation for vandals to try and provoke an admin. —RRabbit42 ( leave a message ) 01:27, December 3, 2013 (UTC)

Locked page
Why has the article on Terri been locked? I need to make an important edit on there. Sherri's page is unlocked... Magik2005 11:25, December 9, 2013 (UTC)


 * Never mind. I didn't realize I hadn't signed in. My mistake. :D Magik2005 (talk) 11:27, December 9, 2013 (UTC)

Changing Images
It's rude to remove images someone uploaded! My name is JOEY310. 15:55, December 9, 2013 (UTC)


 * What you had done was to take two existing pictures and change them both to different images. Then you uploaded those different images as separate files. In one of those cases, you also had taken the existing picture and mirrored it, then removed Matt Groening's signature. I was simply cleaning up the duplicates.


 * In general, it's best not to use the "Replace" option if you're going to change the picture to something else. Use it to upload a better version of the same picture. —RRabbit42 ( leave a message ) 04:20, December 10, 2013 (UTC)