GTA Myths Wiki
Don't have an account?
Register
Advertisement
Register
GTA Myths Wiki
GTA Myths Wiki
1,454
pages

GTA Myths Wiki:Community Noticeboard

Revision as of 14:27, 21 April 2018 by LS11sVaultBoy (Message Wall | contribs) (A wild appearance from myself...)
Sign in to edit
 Archives Archives: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

Welcome to the GTA Myths Wiki Community Noticeboard

Talk page rules apply here.

This noticeboard is for discussion and voting on changes to the wiki, reporting vandalism and wiki rule breaking, and filing complaints regarding GTA Myths Wiki staff.

For requests for promotion, please go to GTA Myths Wiki:Requests for promotion.

Voting Requirements

Since voting about a change can cause arguments, here are the rules.

  • Every User can cast a vote (exceptions may apply, see Bureaucrat Only Decisions.)
  • Anyone can start a topic for a community vote.
  • Please be civil when voting, and never condemn another user's vote.
  • Voting usually lasts 3 to 5 days.
  • To vote or add a request you must have at least 100 edits, have been an active user on the wiki for at least one month, and be in good standing with no Blocks within the past month on your record.

Active Requests

2018 Photographic Competition Voting

Here you can vote on what photo you think is best from the 2018 Photographic Competition. I'm posting this vote at Mantiix's and Andrew's request. - Gunshow (T, E)

Voting Rules

Unlike most CNB requests, the competition has special rules:

  • Voter needs to have at least 20 edits and needs to be logged in at least one month ago.
  • Voters can only vote once.
  • Competitors cannot vote for themselves.
  • After the results are through, a second vote will commence between the top 2 to determine a final winner.

Gallery

Votes

Inactive Requests

Request closed as Successful by Boomer8 (Contact) 22:33, April 19, 2018 (UTC)

Policy Change: Existence Labels on CNB

Okay, for my first rollout of proposed policy changes is going to be something simple. It's been an unwritten rule that existence labels on articles should never be changed unilaterally and instead must be discussed on the CNB. I propose a simple solution: add a new policy for it. In the event that the CNB becomes too crowded with requests, we can always create a separate page specifically for existence label changes.

- Gunshow (T, E) 13:39, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Votes

Sergant
 This discussion is a Bureaucrat Only Vote. Any user may leave a comment.

Comments

  • I am in agreement that we need a clear rule regarding the process for changing a myths' existence. I am however opposed to creating a whole new page for requests as there is just a handful of myths that have been called into question and had their existence upgraded/downgraded. I feel its a very slippery slope when we start heavily scrutinizing every single myth on the wiki. I am all for transparency and creating proper procedure but the wiki can't afford to have its database of myths purged by over-zealous myth hunters who just want a black and white answer to myths' existence. I'll draft a policy on this if Boomer is in agreement.--Sasquatch101 (talk) 05:55, April 15, 2018 (UTC)


Request closed as Unsuccessful by Boomer8 (Contact) 22:33, April 19, 2018 (UTC)

Policy Change: Image Policy Overhaul

This next policy change suggestion is a bit more complex, but not as overbearing as, for example, the GTA Wiki image policy. Keeping with the current policies already in place, I propose the following additions:

  • Images with logos or watermarks (primarily MyEpsilon or WikiGTA, but sometimes even GMW's own logo) should never be allowed, and in current situations, must be replaced immediately.
  • With regards to the names of files, they should describe succinctly what the photograph shows. I don't want to go to GTA Wiki levels of red tape, but it would be much better for the wiki if images had file names like "Plane in the sky.jpg", "Red County Truck Terminal Interior.jpg", or "Apartment 3C VC.png" instead of "Eweeweewewewhghghghgh.jpg" and "Gta-vc 2016-03-06 04-23-24-838.png".
  • With regards to infoboxes, files should simply be named after the page name itself, with a game identifier if needed, and the map should follow the format of "Page Name Map". I would be willing to let this policy slide should the need arise.

- Gunshow (T, E) 13:39, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Votes

Sergant
 This discussion is a Bureaucrat Only Vote. Any user may leave a comment.

Comments

  • It sounds good in theory but in practice would never work. Most users including myself pay no attention to image names and I don't see why an image name is necessary anyway. The logo and watermark issue is the same situation. Ideally, it would be nice to have clean, crisp images but a lot of images on here come from Mod sites, YouTube or other internet sources. Very few images are originals by the author. Also there would be no way to enforce this policy change without meticulously checking every single image uploaded. It would in the long run discourage newbie editors from contributing and be a huge waste of time changing all the image names. The GTA Wiki is A-N-A-L and are known for enacting pointless policies (Probation; WTF?). To be honest, this seems like a big boondoggle to gain thousands of edits. Common sense says stick with what we've got already.--Sasquatch101 (talk) 05:55, April 15, 2018 (UTC)
  • Seems like unnecessary bureaucracy. Boomer8 (Contact) 22:33, April 19, 2018 (UTC)


Request closed as Successful - Gunshow (T, E)

Mermaids - UNLIKELY to FALSE

I think we should use this CNB ability way more often. I've come to a conclusion that we should change this myth's existence label from unlikely to false. This myth is completely out of space, it is completely illogical. It is a MOD, mods can't be labeled as unlikely at all. You know, imagine a mermaid diving in the waters of GTA SA, that would be just too hilarious and it would make no sense. Waters of the 3D game like GTA SA are too transculent, that would mean severe of sightings would have been reported if it was somehow, true. I do not believe creators would waste time to create something like this. We need to wake up and this myth belongs to false category.

VOTE YES/NO

Mantiix (talk) 15:43, April 10, 2018 (UTC)

Votes

Comments

  • Well, I didn't even know that it was UNLIKELY... Good you noticed - Indep (Wanna map?|Wat I'm doing?) 16:04, April 10, 2018 (UTC)
  • Crap article, crap existence label. Let's change it. - Gunshow (T, E)


Request closed as Successful - Indep (Wanna map?|Wat I'm doing?) 11:34, January 21, 2018 (UTC)

Brad Snider's Ghost - FALSE to UNLIKELY

I bet you'd never expect me to want to raise an article's existence label :). Well, I'm not going to exactly write anything large, because unlike Trevor Philips' Ghost, I feel that raising an article's rating by a small margin requires a lower burden of proof. Also, check out my most recent contribution to the page, a 2,000 byte overhaul, to get a picture of the myth's recent developments. That's the main reason why I want the article raised; it has developed quite a lot recently with actual myth hunters choosing to investigate this one rather than clickbait YouTubers (kind of the opposite of TPG, in a way.) - Gunshow (T, E) 17:06, January 14, 2018 (UTC)

Votes

Comments

  • I personally think that this myth deserves the UNLIKELY status. The myth was interesting from the start of it. Indep (Wanna map?|Wat I'm doing?) 12:11, January 15, 2018 (UTC)
  • I've never read the page before but after reading it, it sounds pretty interesting. I think it definitely deserves Unlikely status. Boomer8 (Contact) 21:35, January 15, 2018 (UTC)


Request closed as Unsuccessful -- Boomer8 (Contact) 23:16, October 31, 2017 (UTC)

Evil Voice Myth (GTA IV) - Existence

So I came here after a long time and was randomly looking at some pages when I stumbled upon this one. I found that the status of this myth is stated to be unlikely. I don't know about the GTA Vice City part, but these voices do exist in GTA IV (I was the one who noticed it in case of GTA IV). The theory of this voice arising from a distorted sound file is not confirmed yet(I never thought about this though) but the existence of the myth is still confirmed in GTA IV even if the cause remains "undiscovered". So, should the rating of the myth be changed to "proven" for the GTA IV part? I was actually going to change it but thought that it would be a better idea if I post a discussion about this first. - Myth(Please leave your threats here/Wanna Stalk?) 01:46, August 31, 2017 (UTC)

Votes

Comments

  • I am absolutely willing to believe that this myth is real, but until it can be, ahem, proven that these sounds occur 100 percent of the time, or a video/soundbyte showing them off appears on the internet (and can't be debunked,) the myth shouldn't be proven until that point. If that happens (even if you yourself capture that video/sound) then I will change my vote to yes. -Gunshow (T, E)
    • The thing is the sound is more like a random occurance and does not happen 100% of the time(There are chances of it occuring even when the player is just standing). I think I noticed it 2 years ago and I never used to record my gameplay - At that time I only took photographic evidence of stuff that can be seen, but did not record things like sound and video. So in this case where the whole myth is just a sound, I did not record a sound or video clip. But I was probably not the only one, since there was also some other guy in the comments section of that page claiming to have heard those sounds. I was also playing the game last week and heard something like this once again, but it is not actually that common, since I heard it only once in a span of playing the game daily for a week at least(More like 10 days). Myth(Please leave your threats here/Wanna Stalk?) 02:31, August 31, 2017 (UTC)
  • I think we should close this request...--MythHunter 007 Talk 11:20, September 19, 2017 (UTC)


Request closed as Successful - Indep (Wanna map?|Wat I'm doing?) 10:52, August 6, 2017 (UTC)

Trevor Philips' Ghost - UNLIKELY to FALSE

The Trevor Phillips' Ghost page has quickly gone from a long forgotten relic of this wiki from 2014 to becoming the most viewed page on the wiki, having 20,000 weekly views at it's peak and still going strong with 12,000 presently. However, this article still remains in 2014 standards in many ways, including it's rating. After doing some research of my own, I have found some bombshell evidence that makes me believe the article's status should henceforth be changed to FALSE.

The Wiki's 10th policy states that "myths are not to be created by fans just for the fun of it." This page is a clear violation of that policy and is the biggest reason it should be marked as false, and I can back it up. On May 5th, 2014, a Wikia user named XTRA5 uploaded a video game creepypasta onto the Creepypasta Wiki. A week later, he posted about it here and also mentioned a haunted GTA copy, which is clearly an allusion to his previous creepypasta. Five days later, he created the Trevor Phillips' Ghost page on this very wiki. Now if we check his behavior elsewhere, it becomes apparent that XTRA5 really enjoys 2 things; writing fiction, and inserting false information on factual wikis. This fact alone casts a huge shadow of doubt on this myth, as it is a little suspicious that a brand new user, known for hoaxes, suddenly creates a page on a myth never before seen on the internet that features wild unsourced claims. He even went so far to upload this image, which is so amateurish you would mistake it for a troll or some kind of ironic humor. However, this is not the only reason why the page should be marked FALSE.

Another reason for the page to be considered fallacious is a complete lack of evidence. It is common for a myth to lack codes or models within the game, but even in this scenario there are plenty of references and as such it is marked UNLIKELY. Sadly, Trevor's Ghost does not have the same privilege. There is no major evidence, including video or photographic proof, audio, or even videos of strange behavior in the area. Neither is there small evidence. What does Trevor's Ghost have to redeem itself? Simply the fact that Trevor can be killed by the player. That is it - the only evidence of a ghost is that the person is dead. Even though the myth began three years ago (as it started on this wiki, created by the aforementioned user) there has not been a single shred of evidence, even if you were to stretch the truth as hard as you could. A complete and total lack of evidence whatsoever should also be why the page is marked as FALSE.

So there is Trevor's ghost. A page created as fan fiction with the sole intent of fooling players and getting a laugh out of the author, with absolutely no facts to back it up. I know this request is getting long, I certainly could have wrote more, but I must request that all you GMW editors agree with me that this page should be changed to FALSE once and for all.

Gunshow (T, E) 10:46, August 1, 2017 (UTC)

Votes (ends August 6th)

Comments

  • The page doesn't deserve to have the UNLIKELY status. Indep (Wanna map?|Wat I'm doing?) 10:58, August 1, 2017 (UTC)
  • The fact that the page was created by a guy a week after he posted gaming creepypasta's on the Creepypasta Wikia says everything. And the fact that it's credibility was just like with Michael De Santa's Ghost ruined by clickbait YouTuber's puts salt in the wound.
  • The myth of trevor could be false on this location featured on the page. We only search for him near his house and the location where he died. However, what we don't do is to search for other non-physical clues, like on the internet, Michael's, Franklin's house. Ghost of Trevor could easily appear somewhere of these places. I don't vote no or yes, because it's still some KIND of mystery to me. - Mantiix (talk) 12:28, August 1, 2017 (UTC)
  • I'm on the fence with this vote as there are other pages, namely Michael De Santa's Ghost, that are listed as UNLIKELY despite having very little evidence. I think the fact a creepypasta editor created the article only adds more suspicion that it is a hoax, but there has been more interest in Trevor Phillip's whereabouts following the article's creation... My worry is that branding this myth as False due to very little evidence will create a snowball effect with other articles' status being called into question as many pages on the wiki are built off rumors and little proof. --Sasquatch101 (talk) 23:43, August 1, 2017 (UTC)
  • I strongly think that due to the amount of people asking for it to be renamed to false that this should be done as times before we have had people changing the existence and being told off because they haven't gone through a CNB vote. - JakVenomHD (talk) 02:16, August 2, 2017 (UTC)
  • If there's no files, then it doesn't exist. Case closed. - File:527.pngSparky_321File:527.png 21:01, August 2, 2017 (UTC)
  • I agree as most "ghosts" are results of mods or just speculations of players. - IntenCity999

Request closed as Successful.--Sasquatch101 (talk) 06:08, July 15, 2017 (UTC)

Affiliate Red Dead Myths Wikia

Sergant
 This discussion is a Bureaucrat Only Vote. Any user may leave a comment.

Link to the wikia: http://red-dead-myths.wikia.com/wiki/Red_Dead_Myths_Wikia

So this wikia is focused around myths in the Red Dead series games. I created it in 2016, and basically there is another one out there, but 1) It is dead. 2) Mine has more pages. That being I said I ask the Bureaucrats to affiliate my wikia. --Slash (talk) 19:42, July 9, 2017 (UTC)


Votes

Comments

  • Your wiki looks great and has a lot of potential. I never was a huge Red Dead fan so I never could devote a lot of energy toward building up the RDR Myths Wiki. Anyways I look forward to helping out on the potentially new affiliate.--Sasquatch101 (talk) 06:33, July 12, 2017 (UTC)


End of the User of the Month

Request closed as Unsuccessful by Boomer8 (Contact) 18:50, July 9, 2017 (UTC) As said in the title above, I think having too many daily things for now is not good as a reference to what Gunshow said, "Why even have monthly things if we only update the home page every 6 months?". This just hugely proves the point that UoM is not required at all. - AwesomeBoy

Votes

Comments

  • First of all, USE SIGNATURES! Second of all, don't end it. Just start editing the damn page. Slash (talk) 15:05, July 2, 2017 (UTC)
  • I agree with Slash, don't close it, just start updating it again. After all, you have admin rights and can edit the front page, you should take initiative and do it. - Gunshow (T, E)
  • Well, I know it is not used, buy let's keep it. There are not many users active now, and of they are, they actually were before so... Indep (Wanna map?|Wat I'm doing?) 19:34, July 2, 2017 (UTC)
  • I don't know where Gunshow said this to you, but UotM should absolutely not be canceled. The wiki isn't bursting with activity at the moment, but that shouldn't give the green light to remove cool interactive tools that make the Myth Wiki unique. Boomer8 (Contact) 05:39, July 4, 2017 (UTC)
  • Unique only until someone on GTA Wikia copies it.  Slash (talk) 15:05, July 2, 2017 (UTC)
    • Without getting derailed, I presume you're referencing the HoF that the GTA Wiki employs; would you like to tell me how it was "copied"? Considering the fact numerous other Wikias, including the Wikipedia itself, host the same (or similar rewarding) feature, there is no 'copying' involved, especially when I get the impression that MW feel they own it as a feature only allowed for themselves. Whether or not Wikias with the same feature influenced the decision to employ such feature is perfectly acceptable, but 'copying' is a rather extreme word. Monk Talk 22:22, July 5, 2017 (UTC)
      • Funny how the GTA Wiki Staff only come here when something negative is said about them, You and Slash should keep your rivalry to yourself, not bring it out here, doing something like this will only bring damage to the wiki, which some of the GTA Wiki Staff want to do, Thanks. --AndreyFDTalk 22:35, July 5, 2017 (UTC)
      • I am not his 'rival'. And I am sure he does not consider himself my 'rival'. What I do hate is the GTA Wikia. But if you think I am the only one doing so, then you should visit the chat more often, thanks, Slash (talk) 07:08, July 6, 2017 (UTC)

Closed, as Indep won... again.Indep (Wanna map?|Wat I'm doing?) 19:52, May 28, 2017 (UTC)

Photographic Competition Voting (Final)

Hey there people! The first round of the competition is over. The winners of Vice City, San Andreas, and V sections are TheIndependent40, AwesomeBoy, and Mantiix, respectively. They are elected to the overall voting.

RULES

- No voting for yourselves.
- To leave a vote, user needs to have at least 20 edits and log in at least one month ago.
- Depending on the quantity of votes, voting will last from 2 to 11 days.

Leave your votes. Indep (Wanna map?|Wat I'm doing?) 20:05, May 17, 2017 (UTC)

Votes

Closed, as 2nd round begins. Indep (Wanna map?|Wat I'm doing?) 20:05, May 17, 2017 (UTC)

Photographic Competition Voting

Hey people, the competition time is over. Now the voting starts.

RULES

  • Voter needs to have at least 20 edits and needs to be logged in at least one month ago.
  • Vote can be left under every game once.
  • Competitors cannot vote for themselves.
  • Every 1st place of a game will be elected to the overall winner.
  • Depending of the quantity of votes, the voting will last from 2 to 11 days.

To leave a vote, type in the username of the author of picture you liked. Indep (Wanna map?|Wat I'm doing?) 20:01, May 12, 2017 (UTC)

Grand Theft Auto: Vice City

Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas

Grand Theft Auto V

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.
More Fandoms
Advertisement