GTA Myths Wiki
Don't have an account?
Register
Advertisement
Register
GTA Myths Wiki
GTA Myths Wiki
1,460
pages

GTA Myths Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 4

< GTA Myths Wiki:Community Noticeboard
Sign in to edit

Inactive Requests[]

Closed July 22, 2016 as Successful. --Sasquatch101 (talk) 22:03, July 22, 2016 (UTC)

Parole Revocation[]

Hello everyone, now that I have reached over 2000 edits and 5 months of activity on the Wiki, I feel that I am now qualified to ask the Bureaucrats to revoke the parole placed on me when I rebooted my Wiki career. I have many achievements on the Wiki that will no doubt influence your decision:

  • The 9th most edits, excluding bots and banned users, which I have achieved in less than 6 months.
  • I have created over 20 pages on this Wiki.
  • I hosted the ever popular Video Contest series, and have more events planned for the Wiki.
  • I have been nominated for User of the Month every month I have been active here, and it seems very likely that I will succeed this month.
  • I have added multiple new additions to the Wiki that have helped it become modernized, such as colored, collapsable navboxes and the newly added Columns tab.
  • I gave the Wiki's official YouTube channel a sleek look and continue to upload high quality, professional videos for the Community's well-being rather than my own.
  • Myself and Xalbador have worked hard on aesthetic upgrades, such as the well received Forum and Chat updates.
  • There was a time when I ran for Patroller, and even with less accolades than I have now, it reached unanimous support.

These just so happen to be the accolades that I can think of off the top of my head, I have many, many more as well. So with this in mind, I request that the Bureaucrats revoke the parole that has been placed upon me.

Gunshow (T, E) 10:33, July 22, 2016 (UTC)

Bureaucrat Only Votes[]

Comments (optional)[]

  • Great or even the best editor on this wiki. You have done a lots of good edits, you created a bunch of high quality articles, you even started a video competition that was fun to a lots of users here.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mantiix (talk • contribs)
  • I think you deserve another chance. Prior to the events of August 2014, the wiki was actually a really nice place to edit, everyone was fine with each other, there were never any arguments (unlike lately) and as I've said plenty of times, we used to all actually get sh*t done. During the time you were blocked, the wiki became a dark place filled with constant vandalism and whatnot. In the time you've been unbanned, despite not being able to get another staff position, you have continued putting a lot of your time and effort into this wiki which I think shows something. I feel you should get another chance to prove yourself in a staff position, after all, if something does happen again it won't be too hard to stop. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 14:09, July 22, 2016 (UTC)
  • You have made good contributions since your return. I will admit some things have happened, but I think you have changed, so like vault said, you deserve a chance. User:Myth hunting master July 22, 2016. (UTC)
  • Jim is Jim MhM; people never change. But at the end of the day he has done a lot for the wiki since his return; and I think the good he has done here outweighs the bad. I'd believe he understands the consequences of breaking the Policy now, and won't try anything again. So I'll give you the privilege Jim, of holding staff position and the right to vote. Don't make me regret it. Boomer8 (Contact) 18:17, July 22, 2016 (UTC)
  • Jim has done a lot since his return. I try not to be a grudge holder in life, and I think even though Jim is still rough around the edges I can accept that. He's a good guy actually and the past is something we can get move forward from now. --Sasquatch101 (talk) 22:03, July 22, 2016 (UTC)


Closed as Successful by --File:Ghost pixel 1 by zombiepattyfag-d9c9wvw.gifAli Rocky: VC Myth Hunter 08:14, July 22, 2016 (UTC)

Columns temp/late on Portal pages[]

I figured I could make this change without a CNB request, but the page has been pretty dormant and this change will affect without a doubt our most popular pages. But. I am requesting that we use the simple Columns template on the Myths and Legends in X pages. An example can be seen here, from the Vice City page:

As you can see, this looks much, much better than the current scenario, and that is with just two columns. What do you think? --Gunshow (T, E) 13:58, July 18, 2016 (UTC)

Votes[]

Comments[]

  • Well, I'll be f*cked. I've spent about 30 minutes trying to make a template for this kind of stuff, to show you, and then I realise when I look at the source that you already have put it in a template. Really good. Monk Talk 14:25, July 18, 2016 (UTC)
  • This would make the page shorter and easier to read. Also less time consuming. Myth Hunting Master July 18, 2016 (UTC)
  • Looks good. --Sasquatch101 (talk) 05:33, July 19, 2016 (UTC)
  • Doesn't look good. - Mantiix 10:21, July 19, 2016 (UTC)
  • I suppose having two columns on the myth pages would be a good addition. I didn't even know that template existed. Boomer8 (Contact) 05:01, July 21, 2016 (UTC)

New Headers[]

Vote closed as Unsuccessful. - Boomer8 (Contact) 05:01, July 21, 2016 (UTC)

Alright, without wasting any time, I made this header and it needs some internal work but the outlook will remain same. The work turned out to be great this time and I hope everyone will like them. This will also modernize our wiki, meaning no more boring h2 regular headers.

Sample:

To check the layout on a page, see this: Georgio Forelli

File:Ghost pixel 1 by zombiepattyfag-d9c9wvw.gifAli Rocky: VC Myth Hunter 02:37, July 19, 2016 (UTC)

NOTE THAT THIS A B'CRAT ONLY VOTE

Votes:[]

Comments:[]

  • In the old request I said that I liked the concept but not the aesthetic. But now, I like the concept and the aesthetic. I think the b'crats would be making a good move if this was enacted. --Gunshow (T, E) 04:12, July 19, 2016 (UTC)
  • In a way I like them, but there is just something about how big, bright and bulky they are that I think doesn't suit the pages. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 08:22, July 19, 2016 (UTC)
  • I don't know why only bureucrat votes. I think all the users should vote. Talking about the heading, in my opinion it doesn't look good for pages. - Mantiix 10:14, July 19, 2016 (UTC)
    1. The template is way too big.
    2. The text inside is too small, and won't show up in the TOC.
    3. If you want to make heading changes (which nobody really does), you don't create templates, you make CSS changes, so it automatically updates and is further included in the future. Monk Talk 09:09, July 19, 2016 (UTC)
  • This is an unnecessary addition. All of the key points have already been summed up so whoever changed the header code without this vote being closed, change it back immediately. Boomer8 (Contact) 05:01, July 21, 2016 (UTC)

Custom masthead tags for Discussion Moderators[]

So ive just realized Discussion Moderator is going to be a big masthead tag for anyone who gets the role and for people with longer usernames or who use aka the tag its going to fall on the next line of their masthead and not look neat at all. so heres an idea, just like you guys have done with rollback here - give them a custom, shorter tag instead. Janitor perhaps? Biggest Ship 04:50, July 2, 2016 (UTC)

EDIT: just found out they arent content mods but Discussions Moderators - which is an even larger tag again... Biggest Ship 05:05, July 2, 2016 (UTC)

Comments[]

  • It won't take that much space either but as far as name changes are concerned, janitor won't be a good call since it somehow relates to page clean up and revamps. How about Forum Ranger or Forum Moderator? Again, I gave two tags to SuperMythGangsta including Chat Moderator and Patroller and they were working fine, no overlapping just in case. I am not sure if this needs to be implemented either. File:Ghost pixel 1 by zombiepattyfag-d9c9wvw.gifAli Rocky: VC Myth Hunter 04:58, July 2, 2016 (UTC)
  • I think we should call them Janitors, or simply Moderators. Also, what color will they be. Myth Hunting Master. July 1, 2016 (UTC)
  • I don't know that name matters so much. Forum Moderators fits the best. That's it.
  • I kind of like the sound of Forum Ranger. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 10:41, July 2, 2016 (UTC)

Replace Patrollers with Discussion Moderators[]

Closed as Successful by LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 21:44, July 1, 2016 (UTC)

It has recently been suggested by several users now that we replace Patrollers with Discussion Moderators. It is extremely rare lately that Patrollers have to do anything, and the admins and bureaucrats are perfectly capable of stopping vandalism. This wiki is a very forum heavy wiki now so I think it is best that we switch to content moderators, especially since most users looking to become a patroller lately have about 75% of their edits, which go way over 500, on just forums. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 17:43, June 29, 2016 (UTC)

Votes[]

Comments[]

  • As said multiple times, this wiki hits among the top wrt to the forums, and most the users reach the requirements on the basis of their work on forum threads and discoveries. The concept of patroller is acceptable for massive wikis like GTA Wiki but we need stuff that suits us. Anyways, I think this should be a b'crat vote since it's related to the promotion policy. File:Ghost pixel 1 by zombiepattyfag-d9c9wvw.gifAli Rocky: VC Myth Hunter 17:48, June 29, 2016 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure if this requires a B'crat only vote Ali. Its not exactly related to the Policy. As for the proposition, I think its a good idea to give the patrollers a few more powers. If no one knew what the difference is between patrollers and discussion moderators, discussion moderators can protect, delete, rename, and restore pages and images. My only concerns with this is how an inexperienced user just promoted to patroller should have all these powers. Immature patrollers could just end up doing harm to the wiki. But if that happens we can always get rid of this so its a yes from me. However if this proposition does go through, I would be completely against renaming the patrollers "content moderators". I like the current name; and we still refer to them as that name even though the "chat moderator" tag appears next to their name. I am saying yes to the additional powers. Boomer8 (Contact) 20:09, June 29, 2016 (UTC)
  • I dont even utilize the rollback staff position on some of my wikis. thats how useful it is. it seems to me that people want to become rollbacks just for the status. if this passes, id also say tighten up the content mod application review process because some people obviously arent going to be competent enough for the role. Also it shouldnt nessecarily hinge on edit count, more a display of their understandings of wiki adminship.  Biggest Ship 03:49, June 30, 2016 (UTC)
  • Sounds good. There's plenty of Sysops here anyway. Monk Talk 11:20, June 30, 2016 (UTC)
  • I think it is a good idea to replace them with patrollers. Content Moderators would be more useful since it's forum-based wiki. - Mantiix 19:08, June 30, 2016 (UTC)

Page Headers[]

Vote closed as Unsuccessful. - Boomer8 (talk) 05:42, June 7, 2016 (UTC)

I was thinking of putting headers up on the pages, and they look great. Hope you guys like them too so we can introduce them. Sample page: http://gta-myths.wikia.com/wiki/UFOs_in_GTA_Vice_City. Do take a look on the page, it looks great on it. This template won't be placed on all the pages, I just made this as a sample, I'll make a query on the CSS which will replace all the h2 and h3 headings with the template, so we there would be no need to edit all the pages. --File:Ghost pixel 1 by zombiepattyfag-d9c9wvw.gifAli Rocky: VC Myth Hunter 00:05, April 27, 2016 (UTC)

Sample:

{{{1}}}

NOTE THAT THIS IS A BUREAUCRAT ONLY VOTE

Votes[]

  • Unsure - LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 13:41, April 27, 2016 (UTC)
  • No - Boomer8 (talk) 18:02, April 27, 2016 (UTC)

Comments[]

  • I like the idea of it but I just don't feel like it suits the pages. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 13:41, April 27, 2016 (UTC)
  • I have to agree with VaultBoy (somewhat.) I like the concept but the template itself needs improvement. --Gunshow (T, E)
  • I don't like how it looks. Like Vault said it doesn't suit the pages. Boomer8 (talk) 18:02, April 27, 2016 (UTC)
  • It's a great idea. It has a good look. Fear The Thunder Enter Thunderland 20:39, April 27,2016 (UTC)


Ban Gunshow For Good[]

Closed as unsuccessful by LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 16:57, April 27, 2016 (UTC)

Since being brought back only two months go, he has gone from a being good, to back to his old tricks. He has posted a few good forum posts, but his recent activities, outweigh the good. http://gta-myths.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:41505 is a link to Ali's post on Sas's wall about Gun's talks in the chat recently. He was then banned from chat, but got back on as WhiteWolfGamer. He needs to go away, for good this time. Fear The Thunder 16:41, April 23, 2016 (UTC)

THIS IS A BUREAUCRAT ONLY VOTE. USERS MAY LEAVE A COMMENT.

Votes[]

  • No - Boomer8 (talk) 21:26, April 26, 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes (Ban) --Sasquatch101 (talk) 04:00, April 27, 2016 (UTC)
  • No - LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 13:39, April 27, 2016 (UTC)

Comments[]

  • I changed my vote, mainly because what he is doing right now is effecting a lot of people, racism and sort of "name calling" almost like bullying is not acceptable, I mean Sasquatch gave you a chance, and you'd willingly go against him? No loyalty man, I think the time is now at the place where you are becoming more and more abusive. MattMythMaestro 02:15, April 24, 2016 (UTC)
  • I thinking about something else.--007MH MythHunter 007 Talk 007MH 04:59, April 24, 2016 (UTC)
  • You should've put this as a bureaucrat only-vote. --SMG-20 •  SuperMythGangsta • 08:48, April 24, 2016 (UTC)
  • As of yet there is no proof they are the same person and the message in chat could have just been him fooling around, like he said in one of the threads. Most of the "wars" that have been started here by our own staff members have been caused by childish people who take the littlest joke as an insult and none of them have been banned for basically the same thing. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 10:44, April 24, 2016 (UTC)
  • Exactly, definitely what Vault said. AwesomeBoy (contact) 14:10, April 24, 2016 (UTC)
  • He alleged Sasquatch for being biased on the HOF, and this needs to be decided by Sasquatch himself. I don't think he needs the permission of anyone, since he is the founder. ;) File:Ghost pixel 1 by zombiepattyfag-d9c9wvw.gifAli Rocky: VC Myth Hunter 18:14, April 24, 2016 (UTC)
  • He made racist remarks on few users and this right here is a quote of what he said in the chat once: "i love you sasquatch gunshow is a nazi can I have HoF now?". Not only did he made this Nazi comment, but also insulted this wiki's Hall of Fame. Isn't that enough already? I can keep listing all the things he should be banned for if I have to. One True Slash aka "CREATOR" (talk) 19:52, April 25, 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep listing them then. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 19:57, April 25, 2016 (UTC)
  • http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:1031212. Even Wikia users insisted against his actions, particularly against religion, but I don't want to bring that sickness to our wiki. File:Ghost pixel 1 by zombiepattyfag-d9c9wvw.gifAli Rocky: VC Myth Hunter 20:01, April 25, 2016 (UTC)
  • Jim is done. He was let back on here in good faith based on the lies that he changed and wants to be a simple editor. He is nothing more than a troubled person who can't help but insult others religion, race and the wiki we all contribute to. He has no place here. I knew that if you gave Jim enough rope he'd hang himself. In this case he did just that. He got bored and decided to start targeting people for his own amusement. Do we really need someone like that around here? Someone who just wants to kick up dirt and create problems. According to this RfD Jim created another "sockpuppet" account so he could continue to edit chat. He broke the terms and conditions of the agreement of having him back which myself, Boomer and Vault voted on. I see no point prolonging this self-induced denial and insanity that Jim has changed when he clearly never will. --Sasquatch101 (talk) 09:26, April 26, 2016 (UTC)
  • I don't know why this originally wasn't listed as a bureaucrat only vote as everybody knows that every time this user's parole was brought up it was decided upon the bureaucrats. Now I have reviewed the links presented and there is no evidence of Jim breaking the policy. All I see is that he made a joke in the chat and got into an argument with Ali on Community Central. As for the suspected sockpuppet, the user was created last year; not even at the time Jim was allowed back. So I am not going to ban a user who hasn't broken any rules just because I don't like him. I am not biased against anybody and trust me, if there was clear evidence of Jim being racist, or abusive, then I would ban him in a heartbeat. But the reasoning given isn't qualifiable for a ban. I'll give both Sas and Vault a chance to rethink their votes. Boomer8 (talk) 21:26, April 26, 2016 (UTC)
    • Unfortunately, Boomer, the problem is whoever goes with Gunshow on this vote becomes his "trusted pal" according to Ali. Only Vault and I said yes and the others said no, because we both knew it was a joke and wasn't supposed to be taken so seriously. I was waiting for a Bcrat (along with Vault) to make sense, and there we have it folks. I just hope Ali will get this as a joke in his head now. People these days, I tell ya. AwesomeBoy (contact) 07:14, April 27, 2016 (UTC)
  • I have to get off this merry-go-round. The community petitioned for his banning and just a few weeks ago there was a vote on banning him after he caused problems. Jim can't get special treatment and get free passes for his insensitive remarks and twisted humor. We all know his past so I don't see the point in letting him get away with tongue in cheek "jokes" when it is just a way for him to disrespect the wiki and it's users. --Sasquatch101 (talk) 04:00, April 27, 2016 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.
More Fandoms
Advertisement