Wikia

GTA Wiki

Changes: GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard

Edit

Back to page

(Comments)
 
(842 intermediate revisions by 35 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
   
 
'''Archives'''
 
'''Archives'''
*[[GTA Wiki:Comminuty Noticeboard/Archive 1|Archive 1]]
+
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 1|Archive 1]]
*[[GTA Wiki:Comminuty Noticeboard/Archive 2|Archive 2]]
+
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 2|Archive 2]]
  +
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 3|Archive 3]]
  +
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 4|Archive 4]]
  +
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 5|Archive 5]]
  +
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 6|Archive 6]]
   
 
Talk page rules apply here.
 
Talk page rules apply here.
Line 10: Line 10:
   
 
For requests for promotion, please go to '''[[GTA Wiki:Requests for Promotion]]'''.
 
For requests for promotion, please go to '''[[GTA Wiki:Requests for Promotion]]'''.
 
We currently have a lot of staff so there will be no more Patroller requests for a while. Current Patrollers may request to be promoted to Admin status by voting on the Requests for Promotion Page.
 
   
 
'''Voting Rules'''<br />
 
'''Voting Rules'''<br />
Line 19: Line 17:
 
*Voting usually lasts 3 to 5 days.
 
*Voting usually lasts 3 to 5 days.
   
==Toning Down Obvious Trivial Points==
+
'''Please input your new requests above the old ones. That way, we can easily spot it rather than looking for it.'''
I been noticing some pages recently; when pages have Trivia, the trival points they have are so obvious that you can figure it out yourself rather than reading it. Most of the Trivias have points that are like "The sky is blue."  I been thinking: We get all the obvious trivial points and put them on their articles' sections. There is a policy on Wikipedia (and Wikia in general) where Trivia is not allowed, but it's rare to find one on a page because they have points possibly not known to others. I think the Trivia should be reserved for glitches, tips and unnoticed features in a GTA game, not for, "This is the first appearance of Mikhail Faustin." or "The car is unique to the mission".
+
== RfP Lock ==
+
 Due to recent events involving 'trollers' applying for positions, I have locked the Requests for Promotion page until another staff position comes up. The Requests for Promotion is a page that can't be vandalized due to how important it is on this wiki, so from now on, the page will be locked when staff positions aren't available. [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 04:36, March 30, 2015 (UTC)
[[User:Tony 1998|Mr. T., That&#39;s Me!]] ([[User talk:Tony 1998|talk]]) 01:32, April 17, 2013 (UTC) 
 
 
I agree with using the Trivia section to point out interesting facts such as puns in names (p.e. [[R.C. Hole]]), continuity errors, hidden stuff...
 
 
However, cleaning up ALL of the Trivia sections in articles of this wiki would be hard, time-taking and, therefore non-effective.
 
 
What do you suggest we do, T?
 
 
[[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 20:06, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
: I thought about something: We don't have to do it immediately. If we find a page with obvious trivia "facts", just remove them. Let's not start and GTA Wiki-wide clean-up. Just remove some points if we get time.
 
 
: [[User:Tony 1998|Mr. T., That&#39;s Me!]] ([[User talk:Tony 1998|talk]]) 01:41, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
::Maybe. What if we separed the articles into "Characters", "Vehicles", "Missions" and "Games" and distribute them by the GTA Wiki Staff?
 
::I think it could work...
 
::[[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 09:29, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
:::Guys, read [[GTA Wiki:Trivia|our policy on Trivia]], which states that you should try and intergrate good trivia points into the article itself first. If there is no room for a trivia point in the article, then it goes on the trivia list. "The sky is blue" trivia points, where you state the obvious, such as "Mikhail is Russian" is discouraged and deleted. [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 11:29, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
::::Go ahead and start a wiki wide clean up deleting all the "sky is blue" trivia points if you so wish. Be bold when editing :) [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 11:31, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
:::::Ok, let's do this!
 
:::::[[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 11:33, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
==Dealing with Vandals (For Staff and Current/New Users)==
 
When vandalism is going on, isn't it less necessary to confront the such users and tell them off, especially users with no staff ranks and that are patrollers? During the Joshualeverburg Incidents, staffs and non-staff confronted him and in result/retaliation, got their userspages vandalised, such as [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|M.K.]], [[User:Cloudkit01|Hi-Hi Puffy Bosco]], and [[User:Tony 4-2-8-1-9-9-8|myself]]. The average contributors and patrollers should report to an admin/b'crat first rather than acting like an admin or if the admins are active during these incidents, block them immediately. To my sense, if you write to the vandals, telling them to stop, you're more than likely making them say, "What are you going to do about it?", "Ha, Ha" or "I'm going to piss the guy off". I just don't want those vandals coming back attacking the users who told them to stop.
 
 
[[User:Tony 4-2-8-1-9-9-8|Mr. T.]] ([[User talk:Tony 4-2-8-1-9-9-8|talk]]) 01:07, April 1, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
::
 
I agree. I also think that most admins and bureaucrats should be online as often as possible because if we remember back to the 22 case, there were no admins online and his vandalism went on for hours until [[User:Ilan xd|Ilan]] finally came on. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|VaultBoy Tom]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk to me this way]]) 21:01, April 2, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
 
I wasn't active during the Zombie22 Incidents, so I have little knowledge of that. Now that we have five admins, at least one of you guys should check the wiki a couple times a day and always check the Recent WIki Activity page.
 
[[User:Tony 4-2-8-1-9-9-8|Mr. T.]] ([[User talk:Tony 4-2-8-1-9-9-8|talk]]) 21:10, April 2, 2013 (UTC)
 
<p style="margin-left:24px;">
 
</p>
 
 
 
:Read [[GTA Wiki:Vandalism]]. There is a section on how to deal with vandalism. If you come to the conclusion that you need to block a user for vandalism or any other incident, then read [[GTA Wiki:Blocking Policy]]. [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 06:10, April 4, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
Our '''Do not feed the trolls''' policy is important when dealing with vandals.
 
 
"Everytime we respond to those tryin to ruin the wiki, we are giving them what they want. The more we do that, the more they will be back for more. It's best to be calm, and limit contact with vandals. The less attention they get, the more likely they are to move on. Don't play games with the vandals as this makes it more fun for them."
 
 
See, those are words to live by :) [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 06:15, April 4, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
:That was epic :) -- '''[[User:Ilan xd|ILan]] (<small>[[User talk:Ilan xd|XD]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Ilan xd|Edits]] &bull; [[w:c:rockstargames|Home]] </small>)''' 13:04, April 5, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
Read and understood 'em. The "Do not feed the trolls" should be mentioned by any new/normal users should get that memo when they confront the vandal. Like my mom use to say, "Never care for a person if you have no idea of his or her intentions." The care part means anything that you do to the person good. bad or trying to stop his actions, i.e. vandalism. [[User:Tony 4-2-8-1-9-9-8|Mr. T.]] ([[User talk:Tony 4-2-8-1-9-9-8|talk]]) 06:31, April 4, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
==Background==
 
Since there is new artworks for GTA V, is the GTA Wiki background going to change? [[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 05:09, February 28, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
==With regards to Promotion==
 
Hey guys. When someone usually requests a promotion, the same reason keeps popping up time and time again. "I've been on this wiki for such and such time and have such and such edits"
 
 
Who agrees with me that this has never been a good reason to request promotion and who agrees that it should be stated on our promotion page? [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 20:48, November 22, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
:When I'm promoting someone, I'm most interested in the quality of their contributions, and after that their ability to get along with other users. Linking to work done on another wiki is fine, but saying "I'm a bureaucrat on somesuch wiki" alone doesn't impress me, because Wikia will let anyone found a wiki or adopt an abandoned wiki, and I've met a couple shockingly incompetent bureaucrats. <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 23:04, November 26, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
::Yeah quality of edits, if they've helped fight vandalism on the wiki, and their ability to get along with others is things I usually look for too. Not how long they have been editing here, how many edits they have, or even their status on another wiki. [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 23:14, November 26, 2012 (UTC)
 
:::Edit count doesn't mean that much really, I know many users that do a full character biography in one edit, something like that is a lot more impressive than 100 seemingly unnecessary edits. But experience on another wiki, so long as that wiki is of a good quality and they have actually contributed significantly to it, does get taken into account in my eyes. The length of time someone has been around on the wiki doesn't matter to me, if there are big gaps in editing or there edits aren't significant that is. So yes, maybe mention these things on the requests for promotion page. <font size="+1.5" face="Trajan Pro"><b>[[User:The Tom|Tom]]</b></font> [[User talk:The Tom|<sup><u>Talk</u></sup>]] 13:30, December 21, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
==Featured Article section==
 
Featured articles are a common feature on almost most wikis. Does anyone think we should have a feature article section on this wiki? [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 06:39, December 14, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
:I would love to see a featured article on the wiki. But I would only want it under the GTA games section; not replaceing it. Were "Rockstar Games Twitter" and "Helping Out" is would be a better place for it. I think a Featured Article would be much better than that. [[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 07:24, December 14, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
::Yeah, same here! I would love having a Featured Article section. -- '''[[User:Ilan xd|ILan]] (<small>[[User talk:Ilan xd|XD]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Ilan xd|Edits]] &bull; [[w:c:rockstargames|Home]] </small>)''' 16:20, December 14, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
:::Anyone else have any opinions or comments on this? I wonder what Tom and Jeff think. [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 19:25, December 20, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
::::I'm fine with that idea. But if we're going to do something like that we should to have stricter and clearer standards for articles. Official layouts and policies and the like. People usually don't like it when I try to make rules though, I get complaints that I'm making the wiki no fun. <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 21:10, December 20, 2012 (UTC)
 
   
:::::I think a Manual of Style is needed on this wiki. [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 21:33, December 20, 2012 (UTC)
+
== Enhanced Version Vehicle images in Infobox ==
  +
Hey guys, just wondering, since the cars look much better in quality and lighting in the enhanced version of GTA V, should we get vehicle images from the enhanced version for the infoboxes? I started this a while back, but I forgot to get the rear quarters, and I saved the images in their smallest format (Like an idiot). What do you think? Is it worth it? {{Monkeypolice188/Sig}} 14:23, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
   
::::::I agree with Jeff and Dan, it's a good idea but we could do with a Manual of Style, like Dan said. <font size="+1.5" face="Trajan Pro"><b>[[User:The Tom|Tom]]</b></font> [[User talk:The Tom|<sup><u>Talk</u></sup>]] 13:30, December 21, 2012 (UTC)
+
=== Votes ===
  +
*<s>'''Neutral'''</s> '''No''' - [[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 13:33, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''No''' - {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 13:39, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''Neutral''' - [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">stalk</span>]]/[[User blog:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">blog</span>]]) 13:47, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''Neutral''' - [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] ([[User talk:SJWalker|talk]]) 13:55, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''No''' - [[User:558050|<span style="color:#FF6600">'''DLVIIIL'''</span>]] [[User talk:558050|<span style="color:#00008b">Talk</span>]] 14:01, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Yes - eventually [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></sup> 20:26, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''<s>Yes</s> Neutral''' - [[User:Myth hunter|Hunter]]([[User Talk:Myth hunter|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Myth_hunter|Stalk]]) 20:42, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''Neutral''' - [[User:DocVinewood|DocVinewood]] ([[User talk:DocVinewood|talk]]) 21:04, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
   
::::::::Okay well us three crats all agree on the Manual of Style, so we'll have to start discussing that soon. Does anyone else have any comments on featured articles? [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 16:47, December 21, 2012 (UTC)
+
=== Comments ===
  +
*It's a good idea but it'll probably be better to wait for PC version - there's only two more weeks of waiting. [[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 13:33, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*That's what i meant, PC is part of Enhanced Version. [[File:MONKEYPOLICE188.png|100px|link=User:Monkeypolice188]] ([[User talk:Monkeypolice188|talk]]) | ([[Special:Contributions/Monkeypolice188|stalk]]) 13:37, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Much better? From what I've seen, vehicle images from PS4/Xbone barely look different. Furthermore, each attempt to swap the X360/PS3 screenshots with new ones resulted in lower quality screenshots. Unless someone is able to add nice images, don't see the need to change. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 13:39, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*It depends on the picture, not on the platform or quality, as Rain said, some attempts to swap the original version's screenshots resulted in poorer images. [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">stalk</span>]]/[[User blog:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">blog</span>]]) 13:47, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*As Rain and Andre said, the picture quality is the important thing. The current infobox pictures are clear enough and serve their purpose. [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] ([[User talk:SJWalker|talk]]) 13:55, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Not worth it. The upgrade in lightining is barely noticeable and even if it was, do you honestly think that the majority of people who come to the wikia to see images of the vehicles pay attention to this kind of stuff? They are here just to see the design of the vehicle and thats it, they will not stop to see the lightning or the polygons on the image. The images that we have already do the job, thank you. - [[User:558050|<span style="color:#FF6600">'''DLVIIIL'''</span>]] [[User talk:558050|<span style="color:#00008b">Talk</span>]] 14:01, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*The MoS is quite clear that the infoboxes should have the '''latest game appearance''' and there is no reason for that guideline to change. In the case of GTAV, the enhanced version of the game is the latest. The HD screengrabs DO show a lot more texture, lighting and model detail than the Snapmatic resolution shots, which is why I originally questioned whether they qualified as "fair use". However, that being said, the images should only be replaced when <span style=color:green>a better quality image</span> is available. A lot of the existing shots have far too much background interference and/or the vehicle is painted too dark/lighting is inadequate to show the design detail. I was guilty of replacing with some rushed shots taken in limited PS4 time that were admittedly worse in some aspects. I have also thrown away hundreds of PS4 screenshots because they were no better than the existing once they were examined on my PC. As has been discussed in several talk discussions, the Vehicles Manual of Style is being updated '''after the PC release''', along with the gallery design guidelines (I'm still undecided on using the gallery templates). The same rules applied to the character pages which have mostly all been replaced with enhanced version portraits with often very little graphical superiority over their low-res predecessors.  [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></sup> 20:26, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**''"the latest game appearance"'' - Yes, game, not edition. Going by this logic, then let's update the GTA San Andreas vehicle images because the latest edition has slightly better textures (oops I forgot San Andreas is too old).<br />I'm going to repeat what 558 said and that whenever someone checks out for vehicle images they are interested in design, they do not give two fucks about light effects which are, if you don't mind, barely noticable on PS4 and Xbox One - as shown in some of the screenshots that were uploaded to the Wiki. Most of the vehicle images (they come from either DocVinewood, WildBrick of a couple of others) are of pretty good quality.<br />Something that I would support, however, is that we upload "render" images - which means we take the vehicle model from the game files and upload a front quarter view of the model with transparency. Of course, that'll require GIMP/Photoshop knowledge to add semi-transparency (that ain't really easy), but it'll be the best we can get. Simply swapping the current images with images from an edition that will have probably small changes in the vanilla edition and they won't change the vehicles images neither. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 20:35, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**Whoa whoa whoa, not so fast, MoS says "latest appearance", yet, this is not totally applicable, see, we can't replace the [[Python]]'s main picture from a Vice City model to a Vice City Stories/Chinatown Wars model, as they came later than GTA Vice City, the same goes to [[Cuban Hermes]] and [[Diablo Stallion]], in adittion, as Rain said, the enhanced version of GTA V is not necessarily the latest appearance, as it's the same game, just more detailed, this case is different than those of characters (see [[Trevor Philips]], [[Michael De Santa]] and [[Franklin Clinton]]) which makes much more difference. [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">stalk</span>]]/[[User blog:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">blog</span>]]) 20:43, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**I'm with RainingPain and 558050 on this one. Enhanced ''edition'' also has this fog-like blur so instead of giving a sharp image, it looks a bit misty instead - even with a png format (can't describe it). It's not like you can even see a huge detail difference in these tiny infoboxes. [[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 20:49, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
***Am I the only person who uses the wiki that clicks on thumbnail images to see the '''full resolution image''' in a new browser tab? [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></sup> 20:56, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
***No, I do that too, but honestly, most people just want to search for information. They don't care about the shadows, lightning, reflections, etc. They just see image and "okay, so that's the car I saw" and move on. There are people who do look on full resolution images as well but they probably don't care about shadows/lightning/reflections, etc. Other than the image resolution messing things up, the detail on cars is extremely similar between both versions, if not the same. [[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 21:10, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
****I do the same thing, and, as well as the latest appearance/rendition rule applying to this, the quality is actually better, the reflections, lighting and shadowing makes the car look even better, as when the image is compressed to a smaller size to fit in the infobox, the detail stands out better, making it a very vibrant image. [[File:MONKEYPOLICE188.png|100px|link=User:Monkeypolice188]] ([[User talk:Monkeypolice188|talk]]) | ([[Special:Contributions/Monkeypolice188|stalk]]) 20:59, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*****I also see images in full size.[[User:Myth hunter|Hunter]]([[User Talk:Myth hunter|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Myth_hunter|Stalk]]) 21:03, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*{{rI}} Viewing image in full size is not an excuse to replace good quality screenshots such as Switch101's with crappier quality screenshot for the sole reason that they were taken on the PC edition. Afaik most of the previous titles have console screenshots, yet no one decided to complain about not being "pc ultra master hq" screenshots. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 21:08, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**Actually it should be which one is better. I am saying if a ps3 image is better than pc then keep ps3 image. The one that looks better should be kept regardless of edition.[[User:Myth hunter|Hunter]]([[User Talk:Myth hunter|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Myth_hunter|Stalk]]) 21:19, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
***Whoa, hold one a sec. The forum was initially about swapping ''every'' GTA V vehicle screenshot with a PC one. Something I highly disagree with because there is no purpose of replacing good quality screenshots with other ones that are usually of bad quality for the sole reason of being taken on PC. Now, if we talk about swapping screenshots that are of quite bad quality with better ones taken on PC, I fully agree with this. I had noticed multiple images that aren't so good. But we could do that, assuming that the provider takes good quality screenshots. I don't mean to single out the concerned users here, but I haven't seen ''any'' vehicle screenshot from next-gen that was better than the former. I don't say I'm a good vehicle photographer, and I know how hard it is, but I'm just saying that if we can't get better quality screenshots, the swap is pointless. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 11:40, March 30, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*The enhanced version(PS4 Xbox one and PC) has better graphics. So yes. But new images should be of good quality not bad. As smurfynz said images should be replaced only when a better one is available.[[User:Myth hunter|Hunter]]([[User Talk:Myth hunter|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Myth_hunter|Stalk]]) 20:42, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*It's very simple really. Images should be replaced if someone uploads a better one, regardless of the edition. Of course, a good PS4 image will always have preference over a good PS3 one, but for me, the photographer is more important than the platform. For example, check [[Special:ListFiles/Switch101|Switch101]]'s vehicle images (in my opinion the best vehicle photographer of the wiki), they're from last gen but of excellent quality. [[User:DocVinewood|DocVinewood]] ([[User talk:DocVinewood|talk]]) 21:04, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Smurfy is, in my opinion the best vehicle photographer, he gets shots of the above, underside, sides and front, as well as details on badging and crash deformation, that's alot of images that sum up a car's description, origin and durability. [[File:MONKEYPOLICE188.png|100px|link=User:Monkeypolice188]] ([[User talk:Monkeypolice188|talk]]) | ([[Special:Contributions/Monkeypolice188|stalk]]) 21:06, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**Quantity and quality are two different things. [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></sup> 21:51, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*No, I agree Switch101's are generally better lit and composed than most of my vehicle shots - apart from the occasional busy background. [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></sup> 21:13, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**Redact - It wasn't Switch that had the busy backgrounds issue. Although if you look at his earliest uploads, he did have lighting and "fish-eye" compositional issues until he learned how to use the snapmatic lens properly, similar to issues I had with PS4 depth of field etc. [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></sup> 21:51, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
   
:::::::::Yes, will the Featured article be marked with a template, like [[w:c:rockstargames:Edgar Ross|that]], or an 'Era' template (small icons at the top of the page, indicating games/groups/etc related to the page), like [[w:c:assassinscreed:Desmond Miles|that]]? -- '''[[User:Ilan xd|ILan]] (<small>[[User talk:Ilan xd|XD]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Ilan xd|Edits]] &bull; [[w:c:rockstargames|Home]] </small>)''' 16:58, December 21, 2012 (UTC)
+
==Transcript in mission pages==
  +
Closed as '''''successful''''' by [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 20:24, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
   
::::::::::Just an aside, I'm going away for about a week (give or take a couple days) for Christmas so I'll likely not be responding to this for a while... on the other hand I might end up with hours per day on my hands and put in some actual work on this place. But if I do go quiet that's why. <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 03:34, December 22, 2012 (UTC)
+
Should transcript be allowed in mission pages again? I remember there used to be transcripts but they were mass removed for some reason. [[User talk:Opasen#Transcripts|Apparently it is violating copyright]] even though this is kinda silly because this wiki has worse things than transcripts in pages. I fail to see how it violates copyright, considering we have images of pretty much everything, videos of every mission that have audio/walkthrough/transcript and snippets of game file code to help with many different pages. [http://pl.gta.wikia.com/wiki/The_Cousins_Bellic#Scenariusz Many] [http://reddead.wikia.com/wiki/Exodus_in_America/dialogues different] [http://maxpayne.wikia.com/wiki/Prologue_%28The_American_Dream%29#Transcript wikis] [http://mafiagame.wikia.com/wiki/The_Old_Country/Transcript also] [http://saintsrow.wikia.com/Canonized#Transcript have] [http://watchdogs.wikia.com/wiki/Bottom_of_the_Eighth/Transcript them] and ''noone'' complains about copyright even if it's a R* game wiki (or an actual GTA Wiki but in different language). And I'm pretty sure if there was an actual copyright thing made by R* to begin with, it would have most likely expired just like the "no cutscenes" in IV.
   
:I say we leave the discussion until after Christmas as I'll be busy over the holiday period aswell. [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 04:26, December 23, 2012 (UTC)
+
Should they be re-added again? (Ignore the fact that it takes up much space or any other technical difficulties. I can easily make it take up little to no space and fix said difficulties.) [[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 18:59, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
===Votes===
  +
*'''Yes''' - [[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 18:59, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''Yes''' - {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 19:04, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''Yes''' - [[User:558050|<span style="color:#FF6600">'''DLVIIIL'''</span>]] [[User talk:558050|<span style="color:#00008b">Talk</span>]] 19:39, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''Yes''' - [[User:Myth hunter|Hunter]]([[User Talk:Myth hunter|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Myth_hunter|Stalk]]) 19:44, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''Yes''' - [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 20:00, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''Yes''' - [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">stalk</span>]]/[[User blog:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">blog</span>]]) 20:05, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''Yes''' - [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] ([[User talk:SJWalker|talk]]) 20:14, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
===Comments===
  +
*As said above. [[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 18:59, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*[[w:c:callofduty:Executive Order/Transcript|One more to the list]]. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 19:04, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Yes please. I see transcripts in so many wikias and its ridiculous that we don't have any of these. Its helpfull and pratical so why not? - [[User:558050|<span style="color:#FF6600">'''DLVIIIL'''</span>]] [[User talk:558050|<span style="color:#00008b">Talk</span>]] 19:39, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Same as 558. [[User:Myth hunter|Hunter]]([[User Talk:Myth hunter|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Myth_hunter|Stalk]]) 19:44, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*I agree, they were one of the first things I edited before they were removed and I too do not understand their copyright. I'd help you make them too. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 20:00, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Request is closed as successful so let's do this. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 20:25, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Which way should we handle this? Write down what happens in the background (i.e. "Niko gets off the boat and Roman arrives in his taxi" quotes "Niko gets in the cab" quotes, etc.) or do it the simple way Saints Row wiki does (i.e. "cutscene" quotes "gameplay" quotes, etc.)? [[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 20:32, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**I'd say the first option. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 20:38, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**I'd go with the first one too. I'm starting to do the first mission of GTA San Andreas by the way. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 20:40, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**Also, should we include links in the transcript? [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 20:42, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**Noted. I'll start off with GTA III. And IMO, links should be only in the character and scenario. Not in quotes just like in the main page. [[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 21:36, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Are we 100% sure it's not a copyright violation? Why were transcripts removed? [[User:DocVinewood|DocVinewood]] ([[User talk:DocVinewood|talk]]) 20:44, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*They were claimed to be copyright to the new admins by the old admins after the community split. I don't think they are copyright, and if they are then [[User:RockstarPressUK|RockstarPressUK]] will let us know. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 20:49, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*The idea for transcripts being copyright violation is non-sense. If its true, then Rockstar must be the only developer concerned about this kind of stuff, since hundreds of wikias have transcripts and they never faced this kind of problem. Also, Red Dead and L.A. Noire wikia have transcripts and Rockstar never bothered neither of those wikias with copyright allegations. - [[User:558050|<span style="color:#FF6600">'''DLVIIIL'''</span>]] [[User talk:558050|<span style="color:#00008b">Talk</span>]] 20:56, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Regarding the GTA V transcripts, it's going to be a bit more difficult. The characters constantly taunt their enemies during gunfights, and there are multiple dialogue options (such as when you die, the dialogue's gonna be a bit differnt), and furthermore, there are missions where the dialogue changes depending which missions you completed first. For the multiple options things, we could use tabbers, although I don't know if it's worth keeping the taunting quotes as in some missions they will occupy more than a half of the transcript. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 11:02, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Not just GTA V, I played "Off Route" from TLaD last night and Johnny used a variety of quotes. With the HD Universe missions, I'd only quote the dialogue used in cutscenes or when the characters are "passive" (i.e. driving to/from a certain point in the mission), as that dialogue is almost always be the same. [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] ([[User talk:SJWalker|talk]]) 11:10, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*I agree with tabs for different quotes and instead of writing all of the taunts, I just wrote what was happening in the mission. You can see this on [[Sweet & Kendl/Transcript]] after the Ballas start their drive-by.
  +
*I had started drafting a comment along these lines earlier today but got sidetracked by IRL stuff. There is a lot of dialogue (and even alternate cutscenes) throughout the series but more prevalent in HD universe titles that depends not only on what mission paths you have completed before the current mission, but also what "determinant" decisions you have made. There can also be additional dialogue in GTAV missions depending on which character you are starting the mission with. That's why I'm standing back from this project and I'll leave you guys to deal with the headaches of how to present variable scripts. [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></sup> 11:33, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Unless it's part of the script, no taunts. Even if it appears in subtitles, if it's something that constantly appears over and over again (i.e. Niko shouts "motherfuckers" then he has civilized discussion with Roman, LJ, Packie, whatever and then suddenly shouts "motherfuckers" again as he starts shooting at enemies again.).<br /><small><small><small><small><small>Calling dibs on LCS and IV</small></small></small></small></small> [[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 11:38, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
   
::I think this discussion should begin again. The featured articles are also on the Red dead Wiki and they seem good on there, so I also think it's a good idea. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|VaultBoy Tom]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk to me this way]]) 20:09, March 28, 2013 (UTC)
+
==Who changed the theme?==
  +
And why?
   
:::We have the featured articles section, but it's been sticky on the ambulance for a long time. It would be nice if it changed only a weekly or bi-weekly rotor. [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 08:54, March 29, 2013 (UTC)
+
The previous colors were the best!! <small><small><small><small>pls change it back</small></small></small></small> [[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 16:18, March 28, 2015 (UTC)<br /><small><small>PS: The community noticeboard is a suitable place to discuss this, right?</small></small>
   
::::We can delete this section and make a new one. Also, a weekly rotor is such an annoying thing, as it would eventually repeat itslef too much. I prefer promoting articles to a "featured status" and then just show them 'randomly' each time when a user views the main page, like [[w:c:maxpayne|this one]]. -- '''[[User:Ilan xd|ILan]] (<small>[[User talk:Ilan xd|XD]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Ilan xd|Edits]] &bull; [[w:c:rockstargames|Home]] </small>)''' 09:23, March 29, 2013 (UTC)
+
===Comments===
  +
*I don't know, I've been trying to change them back. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 16:26, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**Main color was #222222 and buttons were #444444 (luckily I had a page open in another tab)[[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 16:29, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**Thank god for that. I've changed it back now. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 16:31, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**Anyone notice a change in the source editor? I'm getting highlighted words when I type. [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 18:18, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**@Leon Davis, I definitely am seeing this. The whole source editor is made up of highlighted words in different colors. [[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt1.png|90px|link=User:Smashbro8|Smashbro8]] ([[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt2.png|50px|link=User talk:Smashbro8|Talk]]) 18:20, March 28, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  +
***It's the new [http://community.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:Kirkburn/Syntax_highlighting_-_helping_you_read_and_write_code syntax highlighting]. [[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 18:21, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
***I like it, it's really helpful and makes it look less dull. It also helps to highlight if you've made a mistake. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 18:33, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
***I love the Source editor code highlighting, just like using Notepad++. I was trying to teach 558050 to use a text editor to highlight nested IF functions in a template this week, this does it for us! (almost) no excuse for missing closure tags now! [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></sup> 21:42, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
***I'm a bit neutral about this. I like the help with the highlights (shows me where I left out a tag or something) but honestly, it's sometimes more confusing and distracting than text without highlights. [[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 11:40, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
   
:::::I like the sound of that. [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 10:01, March 29, 2013 (UTC)
+
==Chat Moderators==
  +
'''''Closed as unsuccessful by''''' [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 23:22, March 27, 2015 (UTC)
   
==Wiki Reconstruction==
+
<nowiki> </nowiki>I have noticed that there has been an increased use of chat lately so I was thinking, should we promote 2 or 3 users who aren't already staff members to be chat moderators? I personally think it would be a good idea. What do you guys think? [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 20:15, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
I say we should bring to the wiki back to life a little bit. We are one of the best wikis, but we lack of new users (50 a month isn't that good). Here are my ideeas:
+
===Votes===
*Adding a new background (GTA V themed).
+
*'''Neutral''' - {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 20:16, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
*Based on the color of the background, we should change the wiki skin color.
+
*'''No''' - [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">stalk</span>]]/[[User blog:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">blog</span>]]) 20:50, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
*Re-writing the main article and making it more friendly for new users.
+
*'''No''' [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 21:06, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
*Adding "featured articles" and polls.
+
*'''No''' - [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] ([[User talk:SJWalker|talk]]) 23:27, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''No''' - [[User:DocVinewood|DocVinewood]] ([[User talk:DocVinewood|talk]]) 00:38, March 25, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''No '''- [[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt1.png|90px|link=User:Smashbro8|Smashbro8]] ([[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt2.png|50px|link=User talk:Smashbro8|Talk]]) 01:19, March 25, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  +
*'''No''' - [[User:Myth hunter|Hunter]]([[User Talk:Myth hunter|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Myth_hunter|Stalk]]) 20:11, March 27, 2015 (UTC)
   
Of course, this shouldn't happen that fast, but with GTA V on the way, we might catch some new users. We want them to stay, no? <span style="-moz-border-radius-topleft:15px; -moz-border-radius-bottomright:15px; border:2px ridge yellow; -moz-box-shadow: 0 0 0.6em black; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 0.6em black; box-shadow: 0 0 0.6em black; background-color:#000000">[[File:Dodo8_logo.png|35px|link=User:Dodo8]][[User:Dodo8|''<span style="color:yellow; font-family:Cooper Black">Dodo8</span>'']] [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:yellow; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]</span>
+
===Comments===
  +
*Most of the times there are people in chat there is at least one patroller/admin in. So I'm not sure we need more. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 20:16, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*When the chat is on, usually me, Sam or Smashbro are in the chat, we are chat moderators too. [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">stalk</span>]]/[[User blog:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">blog</span>]]) 20:50, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*As the others have said, since Patrollers are "security guards", chat moderation would come under "security", which all Patrollers are automatically promoted to. There's no need to create two roles for work which one Patroller can do alone. [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] ([[User talk:SJWalker|talk]]) 23:27, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*I don't think it's necessary, staff members are doing their work already. [[User:DocVinewood|DocVinewood]] ([[User talk:DocVinewood|talk]]) 00:38, March 25, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Due to me, Andre, and Monkeypolice taking over the Chat, we have the ability to ban and kick troublesome users in chat, which makes giving two new users rollback rights unnecessary. I constantly watch over the chat to make sure everything is running smoothly once I am in it. [[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt1.png|90px|link=User:Smashbro8|Smashbro8]] ([[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt2.png|50px|link=User talk:Smashbro8|Talk]]) 01:19, March 25, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  +
**Chatmod rights come without rollback rights. The question is about if we should give chatmod status to users that regularly come into chat. Not if we need two more patrollers. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 06:49, March 25, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*We have patrollers to do this job, two of which are normally on chat so I'm closing the vote as unsuccessful. [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 23:22, March 27, 2015 (UTC)
   
  +
== Administration Election ==
  +
Closed SJ Walker (5) 558050 (3)
   
  +
As I am now bureaucrat there is a vacancy for my former adminstrator position. [[User:558050|558050]] and [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] are the most qualified patrollers, due to the fact that two were recently demoted and two are on probation. Set up your votes below. Unlike a request for promotion, you should write the user's name and your signature as opposed to a yes or no.
   
:I do agree with you on most things but GTA isn't really the most brightest game so, I don't think changing the Wikis skin colour will do much but the other ideas are good. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|VaultBoy Tom]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk to me this way]]) 20:23, March 28, 2013 (UTC)
+
===[[User:SJWalker|Sam]]===
:All those things sound good, espesially "featured articles". The only thing I don't agree with is changing the wiki's background. Great ideas!  [[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 05:03, March 29, 2013 (UTC)
+
====About me====
:What this wiki needs is a GTA V background image. [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 05:54, March 29, 2013 (UTC)
+
I'm Sam, I've been a patroller for just over two months. I am still learning my way around in some areas and can occasionally undo correct edits, but I am also quick at spotting vandals, and can give advice to any user who needs it, likewise those who need a "talking to" in certain areas. I try to look at disputes from a netural point of view and listen to both sides before making a decision. I am aware that on occasions I can be seen as "picking on" certain users, but I try and treat everyone equally and attempt to come to a civilised and reasonable conclusion to any disputes. Positive and negative feedback is welcome. Thank you for reading this. Best of luck to 558050 as well. [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] ([[User talk:SJWalker|talk]]) 01:15, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
:: We should definetely change the Main Page. It looks "old". <span style="-moz-border-radius-topleft:15px; -moz-border-radius-bottomright:15px; border:2px ridge yellow; -moz-box-shadow: 0 0 0.6em black; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 0.6em black; box-shadow: 0 0 0.6em black; background-color:#000000">[[File:Dodo8_logo.png|35px|link=User:Dodo8]][[User:Dodo8|''<span style="color:yellow; font-family:Cooper Black">Dodo8</span>'']] [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:yellow; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]</span>
 
   
::: Something with all the three protagonist or a view of Los Santos would be nice. -- '''[[User:Ilan xd|ILan]] (<small>[[User talk:Ilan xd|XD]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Ilan xd|Edits]] &bull; [[w:c:rockstargames|Home]] </small>)''' 09:23, March 29, 2013 (UTC)
+
===[[User:558050|558050]]===
::::Yeah, that'd be nice. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|VaultBoy Tom]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk to me this way]]) 09:51, March 29, 2013 (UTC)
+
====About me====
:::::The main page is fine as it is. It's the background image that needs changing. [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 11:40, March 29, 2013 (UTC)
+
Hello, fellow wikia contributors. I have been contributing to this wikia for 17 months by now, almost one year and a half, during this time I acquired a lot of experience editing articles and dealing with other users. My contributions here include the creation of dozens of articles, plus major updates to already existing articles, more recently [[Fleeca Job - Kuruma|the]] [[Fleeca Job - Scope Out|online]] [[The Fleeca Job|heists]] [[The Prison Break|pages]].
   
  +
I'm always trying to be friendly with other users and resolve any kind of issue as polite as possible, but I'm not afraid to be a little rough if the situation demands it.
   
  +
My grammar was improved since my promotion to patroller, so I think that this will not be a problem anymore. Thanks for you attention. Good luck to Sam and goodbye. [[User:558050|<span style="color:#FF6600">'''DLVIIIL'''</span>]] [[User talk:558050|<span style="color:#00008b">Talk</span>]] 01:24, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
   
  +
=== Votes ===
  +
*[[User:558050|558050]] - [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 01:28, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*558050 - [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></sup> 02:24, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''[[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]]''' - [[User:Mortsnarg|Mortsnarg]] ([[User talk:Mortsnarg|talk]]) 02:44, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*SJWalker - {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 06:23, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*558050 - [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 19:55, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*[[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] - [[User:DocVinewood|DocVinewood]] ([[User talk:DocVinewood|talk]]) 00:38, March 25, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*[[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] - [[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt1.png|90px|link=User:Smashbro8|Smashbro8]] ([[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt2.png|50px|link=User talk:Smashbro8|Talk]]) 01:19, March 25, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  +
*SJWalker - [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">stalk</span>]]/[[User blog:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">blog</span>]]) 01:34, March 25, 2015 (UTC)
   
  +
=== Comments ===
  +
*I'm undecided at the moment, both Sam and 558 have awesome editing skills, I'll have to think about this for a while before voting. [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">stalk</span>]]/[[User blog:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">blog</span>]]) 01:23, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**After hours thinking, I finally decided and my vote goes to Sam, 558 has administrative skills, like asking to rename lots of pages, having a higher knowledge about the series (not to mention that he resurrected the GTA CW mission pages), however, Sam quickly detect sockpuppets and quickly report vandals, which for me is the best point to vote for him, sorry 558, but I can't vote for both. [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">stalk</span>]]/[[User blog:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">blog</span>]]) 01:34, March 25, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*I agree with Andre. I'm also undecided. Both of you are amazing editors. [[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt1.png|90px|link=User:Smashbro8|Smashbro8]] ([[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt2.png|50px|link=User talk:Smashbro8|Talk]]) 01:27, March 24, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  +
*I had to think about. SJWalker is an excellent editor and is great at cleaning up pages, however, 558050 is more active and has a higher edit counter. SJWalker may have better English, but that is because 558050 is Brazillian. Nothing personal, Sam. [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 01:28, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*This is difficult. Weighing up who I think would make the best admin right now (558) vs who I think would probably make the better admin in the long term (Sam). Another couple of months and this vote probably would have gone the other way. Whoever "loses" this vote in the end, you are both doing a great job and it will not be a reflection on your capabilities. [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></sup> 02:24, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*This is a tough one! You both are very good editors and I think both of you have made an excellent contributions to the GTA Wiki, but I gotta' pick SJWalker/ Sam on this one. In debates he's always had a good habit of looking at the situation (as he stated himself) with a neutral standpoint that doesn't really pick a "side" until he's seen the two reasons for why or why not. That's a good quality in a person higher up in the commmunity. He also has pretty good grammer and I almost never see mistakes in that area. If there's one thing I think he could improve on, it's looking into something a little more and doing a little more research, but the last time this was a problem was a month or two ago, and that was minor. That isn't to say that 558050 is bad, in fact it's pretty close and I appreciate 558050 just as much, but there can only be one, and that one is SJWalker for the reasons stated. Good luck to both of you! [[User:Mortsnarg|Mortsnarg]] ([[User talk:Mortsnarg|talk]]) 02:44, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Do we really need to rush on promoting a new administrator?<br />If it's important, then my vote goes for Sam. Pretty much for the reasons that were alreayd mentioned by Mortsnarg. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 06:23, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*This is a tough choice, I think both deserve the position. I will vote later. [[User:DocVinewood|DocVinewood]] ([[User talk:DocVinewood|talk]]) 10:34, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*:First of all I agree with Rain, is promoting a new administrator really needed now? In any case, I finally decided to vote for Sam. He spots and reports vandals, cleans up pages, has a very good grammar and is a level-headed person. 558050 is a great editor as well, but sadly I can't vote for both. [[User:DocVinewood|DocVinewood]] ([[User talk:DocVinewood|talk]]) 00:38, March 25, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*No offense to Sam, who is too a great staff member, but I feel 558 is more qualified at this moment in time. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 19:55, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*I agree with Rain and Doc, it's not necessary to hurry for a new admin. The wiki can run smoothly with vacant spots, like how it did when me, CJ Jr. and Leon Davis were the only admins. I just feel we need more rules and protections to the Requests for Promotion page so users don't troll and make a request thinking they will get promoted. That other user's request should be deleted. Anyway, since I sadly cannot pick both when both SJ Walker and 558050 do excellent work here, I'd pick Sam for the same reasons as DocVinewood's. [[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt1.png|90px|link=User:Smashbro8|Smashbro8]] ([[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt2.png|50px|link=User talk:Smashbro8|Talk]]) 01:19, March 25, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  +
*Our new administrator is SJWalker! [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 01:47, March 25, 2015 (UTC)
   
:Ok, Messi. I thought I could help, but I can't test backgrounds since I'm not an Admin. We might have to wait for someone with experience in making backgrounds. Any ideeas who could be? Maybe a Community Wikia staff? <span style="-moz-border-radius-topleft:15px; -moz-border-radius-bottomright:15px; border:2px ridge yellow; -moz-box-shadow: 0 0 0.6em black; -webkit-box-shadow: 0 0 0.6em black; box-shadow: 0 0 0.6em black; background-color:#000000">[[File:Dodo8_logo.png|35px|link=User:Dodo8]][[User:Dodo8|''<span style="color:yellow; font-family:Cooper Black">Dodo8</span>'']] <sup>''<span style="color:yellow; font-family:Cooper Black>Tal </span>''</sup></span>
+
== Mission Pages Cleanup ==
:[[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 03:33, April 1, 2013 (UTC) 
+
A notice to all users; a majority of the mission pages need a major cleanup. The quotes have links, the grammar is poor and the pages are poorly assembled. If you can, check over the pages so that they can be cleaned up. If you don't know what qualifies as a page needing cleanup, add the template so another user can clean up the page. [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 07:34, March 22, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Yeah, I noticed that, i'm checking out articles that needs a cleanup, [[User:SJWalker|Sam]] is working on it. [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">stalk</span>]]/[[User blog:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">blog</span>]]) 14:08, March 22, 2015 (UTC)
   
:Changing the backround to a backdrop of Los Santos would be a great face lift for the wiki. The wiki skin should stay dark though. 
+
==Updating policy: Trainers==
  +
'''''Closed as <font color= "green"> Successful</font>'''''<font color= "green"> </font> by''''' '''''[[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 01:23, March 25, 2015 (UTC)
   
:If the wiki is going to have a new background it should be the new protagonists. Like how the wiki currently has the IV Era protags. Not Los Santos.  [[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 02:16, April 3, 2013 (UTC)
 
   
::Agreed. Well if someone can make a background image, then I'll change it. [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 02:42, April 5, 2013 (UTC)
+
This has been on my mind for the last couple of days, as I've seen a couple of articles with posts relating to the use of trainers. Since the policy prohibits images of modified vehicles, I think this should be extended to include trainers and modification tools. As Leon clarified for me last night, any information should be related to GTA as Rockstar created it, so any modification or trainer-related posts should be removed. The way I see it, since only stock photos of vehicles are allowed, only information relating to the "stock" game should be included too. I hope I've written this in a way that makes sense, and I'd love to know what you all think about this. [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] ([[User talk:SJWalker|talk]]) 22:07, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
:::I have photoshop, but I'm not used to it. I think we will have to ask someone from the Community Wiki?<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
 
   
::::Well, who made the current background? [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|VaultBoy Tom]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk to me this way]]) 08:57, April 5, 2013 (UTC)
+
Question - Should we prohibit Mods/Trainers in articles?
::::::I am probably not meant to be posting here, but the background was made by [http://gta.wikia.com/User:JoePlay JoePlay].[[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=w:c:wildonesgame:User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=w:c:wildonesgame:Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 13:01, April 5, 2013 (UTC)
 
   
Since everybody seems to agree that the new protagonists should be the background, shall I post a request to Wikia? First we should probably decide on an image for them to use. <font size="+1.5" face="Trajan Pro"><b>[[User:The Tom|Tom]]</b></font> [[User talk:The Tom|<sup><u>Talk</u></sup>]] 16:48, April 10, 2013 (UTC)
+
===Votes===
  +
*'''Yes''' - [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></sup> 22:10, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*<s>'''Neutral '''</s> '''Yes'''- [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">stalk</span>]]/[[User blog:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">blog</span>]]) 22:17, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''Ofc''' - {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 22:21, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''Yes'''- [[User:Myth hunter|Hunter]]([[User Talk:Myth hunter|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Myth_hunter|Stalk]]) 23:59, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
   
:[[:File:The Trunk-GTAV.jpg]] and [[:File:Trevorfranklinmichael-GTAV.jpg]]. Can't think on other backgrounds than those. -- '''[[User:Ilan xd|ILan]] (<small>[[User talk:Ilan xd|XD]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Ilan xd|Edits]] &bull; [[w:c:rockstargames|Home]] </small>)''' 18:01, April 10, 2013 (UTC)
+
===Comments===
::On the left side a photo of Trevor in "The Trunk", and on the other side Franklin's in the second picture Ilan shown. And the background (of the background, lol) to have the skyline of Los Santos.<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
+
* It gets a little curly when you see what happened after the community split. For a short while, GTAwiki was thought of as the home of modded content. Thankfully that was stopped but there are still remnants scattered throughout the article content. I agree with Leon, the wiki should be "official content only" except for a small number of articles dedicated to [[Modifications]]. [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></sup> 22:13, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
:::I think just using the second image would be better, Trevor and Michael on either side. <font size="+1.5" face="Trajan Pro"><b>[[User:The Tom|Tom]]</b></font> [[User talk:The Tom|<sup><u>Talk</u></sup>]] 19:36, April 10, 2013 (UTC)
+
*This can be a bit rough, some vehicles such as the [[Andromada]], [[Brickade]] and [[FBI Truck]] can only be spawned with trainers, same with weapons and characters, so I agree to forbid pictures of mods, unofficial content and partially revealed content, but not content (vehicles, weapons and other content) which is in the game, but unavailable without trainers. [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">stalk</span>]]/[[User blog:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">blog</span>]]) 22:17, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**They are part of the vanilla game. It's official content. Mentioning that these are spawner mod-exclusives because they were cut is OK. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 22:21, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**I see your point there Andre. If the policy is changed, a link could be posted to the GTA Mods Wiki or GTA Fanon Wiki for anyone who wants to add mod-content. I'm probably going to contradict my argument here but a brief sentence explaining they can be spawned via mods would be acceptable, but not to reference specific mods or methods of modding (i.e. tweaking files). If the vehicles are in the files then they still exist in the game, so they technically aren't modded "into" the game because they're already there. [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] ([[User talk:SJWalker|talk]]) 22:27, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**Exactly, it's acceptable to say that the mentioned vehicles are only obtainable with mods or trainers, but it's unacceptable to say "The Dukes can perform a wheelie, but to do this, you'll need to mod the game". [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">stalk</span>]]/[[User blog:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">blog</span>]]) 22:39, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Yes and that's something that I was removing a while ago. The [[Modifications]] page has no purpose other than advertising. Saying that the graphics of San Andreas can be improved through modding is completely irrelevant. If anyone want to edit content about mods they should go to the GTA Fanon Wiki. This is GTA Wiki, aka ''official'' content, not fan-made content. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 22:21, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
  +
**Changed my vote then, I agree with you. [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">stalk</span>]]/[[User blog:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">blog</span>]]) 22:27, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
   
:::I was thinking that this wiki could be bright like GTA V. Having The GTA V cover or All Three Protagonists in the background image and having the colors being bright like the game looks. That would be great. [[User:Matt Seay|Matt Seay]] ([[User talk:Matt Seay|talk]]) 21:24, April 13, 2013 (UTC)
+
== Media Policy: A New-Look Image Policy ==
::::I'm not really sure how having all three would work, making two smaller and having them on one side would look a bit off. As would having a transparent background. <font size="+1.5" face="Trajan Pro"><b>[[User:The Tom|Tom]]</b></font> [[User talk:The Tom|<sup><u>Talk</u></sup>]] 08:43, April 14, 2013 (UTC)
+
''Closed as '''successful''' by'' [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 02:33, March 6, 2015 (UTC).
   
::::Yes this true, I guess just the Game Cover Art would be good. I mean technocaly GTA IV has 3 protags, and only two are on the background. I am more in favor of the cover art being the background but I want something that is kind of generic for the new game. [[User:Matt Seay|Matt Seay]] ([[User talk:Matt Seay|talk]]) 02:09, April 17, 2013 (UTC)
+
This has been lingering around the wiki for a few days. A policy about uploading videos to the wiki has been suggested by [[User:AndreEagle17|Andre]]. My idea;
   
==Help from the [http://es.gta.wikia.com/wiki/Grand_Theft_Encyclopedia Spanish GTA Wiki]==
+
We add info to the image policy about uploading videos and rename it the ''Media Policy''. It will be in one location for users to understand how to add both images and videos here.
  +
* '''ALL''' videos must have a clear picture and clean audio.
  +
* All videos must be copyrighted to show who the video belongs to, the video's site and Rockstar Games.
  +
** All videos have to be GTA related.
  +
* Videos '''MUST NOT''' violate other policies such as leaked information.
  +
* Videos must have an extra copyright if it features music.
  +
Feel free to add to the policy and vote on whether or not we should implement this. [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 09:02, March 1, 2015 (UTC)
   
So, I talked to this Staff member, who apparently is talented in coding and is also a GTA fan. His name is [http://es.gta.wikia.com/wiki/Muro:Bola Bola].
 
   
He agreed to help us. But first we will have to decide the background(s). Sincerely, I don't want anymore protagonists' faces looking at me all-day long.
 
I thought of using this:
 
   
[[File:BeautifulSunset-GTAV.jpg|200px]]
+
=== Votes ===
  +
* '''Yes''' - [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 09:02, March 1, 2015 (UTC)
  +
* '''Yes '''- [[File:MONKEYPOLICE188.png|100px|link=User:Monkeypolice188]] ([[User talk:Monkeypolice188|talk]]) | ([[Special:Contributions/Monkeypolice188|stalk]]) 11:25, March 1, 2015 (UTC)
  +
* '''Yes''' - [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">stalk</span>]]/[[User blog:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">blog</span>]]) 13:51, March 1, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''Yes''' - [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] ([[User talk:SJWalker|talk]]) 13:55, March 1, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''Yes''' - [[User:Myth hunter|Hunter]]([[User Talk:Myth hunter|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Myth_hunter|Stalk]]) 18:03, March 1, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''Yes''' - [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></small></sup> 21:12, March 1, 2015 (UTC)
   
Also, I tought of having a header like on tha Spanish wiki. You know, the navigation thingy with On The Wiki, GTA Games, GTA Info, Community. Maybe we could use the Skyline in this picture:
+
=== Comments ===
  +
*Absolutely, i've seen quite a few pages with videos which contravene these rules. {{Monkeypolice188/Sig}}
  +
*I would add that videos should not contain any form of self-promotion (audio or text) or advertising apart from a watermark (we obviously have to allow this since we are using GTASeriesVideos we can't really say it is prohibited like we do for still images). [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></small></sup> 21:12, March 1, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*The vote is closed and the image policy has been renamed media policy and updated. [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 02:39, March 6, 2015 (UTC)
   
[[File:Beachweather-GTAV.jpg|200px]]
+
==Missions in GTA 2==
  +
I was just writing this to let you guys know who want to get some edits that most of the missions in GTA 2 still need infoboxes and images. To get the images, watch GTA Series Videos play the mission on Youtube, print screen it while it is saying the mission name and then crop it in an editing application such as Paint.NET. I'm currently doing it as well but I'm going to have to continue tomorrow as I am going shortly.
   
I don't know, but we must take a decision, since Bola is ready to help us.<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
+
Also, the missions in GTA 1 are pretty much a lost cause because I can't find videos of the missions anywhere to get images or even an understanding of what happens in the mission. If anyone can do either of these things then that would be great.
   
:The skyline one is definitely more user-friendly. The bikini girl background would make the wiki more or less unusable for anyone who wanted to look at it at school or work, and I can imagine female editors not really caring for it too. <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 18:49, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
+
Thanks, [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 23:55, January 31, 2015 (UTC)
   
::The girl won't appear on the header, only the skyline beside her will do. Like this on the Spanish wiki:
+
==Patroller to Administrator Qualification Criteria==
[[File:Sp_Wiki_Header.png|300px]]
+
Closed as unsuccessful - [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 23:55, January 31, 2015 (UTC)
<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
+
===Background===
  +
A week ago, [[User:Leon Davis|Leo]] made an [http://gta.wikia.com/GTA_Wiki:Requests_for_Promotion?diff=740986&oldid=740933 update] to the [[GTA_Wiki:Requests_for_Promotion|RfP]] rules to add the probation period for new Patrollers as had been agreed by the Bureaucrats and Admins. At the same time he also changed the line relating to experience required for applicants to the Administrator role.
  +
{{q|To qualify for administrator rights, editors must have been active for four months with no rules violations.|Prior version}}
  +
{{q|To qualify for administrator rights, editors must have been active patrollers for four months with no rule violations.|Revised version}}
  +
This was probably an outcome of a [[User_talk:LS11sVaultBoy#Question|discussion]] [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|Tom]] had been involved in with with [[User_talk:WildBrick142#RE:_Question_2|Wildbrick142]] about that section but he had stated
  +
{{q|I think you would be best if you ran for Patroller first just to make it "fair" so that you get promoted in the same way as everyone else and then a month or two later you could run for admin.|Tom replying to Wildbrick142}}
  +
As I [[User_talk:Leon_Davis#Promotion_from_Patroller_to_Admin|discussed]] with Leo [[User_talk:Smurfynz#NG_Vehicle_Images|at the time]], I probably agree with the change (despite it directly impacting my personal agenda), but I don't believe it was an authorized rule update and it should be discussed and agreed by Admin/Bureaucrat staff before being added. Similarly to the Probation discussion, Patrollers and editors should not get a say in this discussion as we would have a vested interest in retaining the status quo. [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></small></sup> 01:43, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
   
I agree with Jeff.
+
===Bureaucrat and Admin only vote===
  +
====Votes====
  +
*<strike>'''Yes '''</strike> '''No'''[[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt1.png|90px|link=User:Smashbro8|Smashbro8]] ([[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt2.png|50px|link=User talk:Smashbro8|Talk]]) 02:00, January 28, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  +
*'''No''' - <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]·[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]])
  +
*'''No''' - [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 04:37, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''No''' - [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 10:01, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''No''' - [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 15:44, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*'''No''' - [[User:Carl Johnson Jr.|Carl Johnson Jr.]] ([[User talk:Carl Johnson Jr.|talk]]) 00:19, January 30, 2015 (UTC)
   
I don't, but if I happened to visit the wiki at school, it wouldn't be easy to explain that good-looking girl in the background...
+
====Discussion (all editors welcome) ====
  +
*I don't want to just say "if you've been blocked you can never be promoted" because it's not necessary. We've had multiple editors who got blocked, realized that this wasn't one of those online communities that doesn't actually enforce its rules, cleaned up their act and went on to be administrators. If there are outstanding behavior concerns about any editor running for promotion, those concerns should be brought up during the voting - that's what the vote is for in the first place, and that's why it's supposed to last for a week. As for length of time an editor has to be editing to be eligible to promote, I don't have much of a problem with such a thing but I don't really think it's necessary. Lack of being active long enough is always brought up when new editors go for a promotion too soon, and we've also had a couple particularly good editors show up and get promoted more quickly than usual. Basically, I feel it's better to consider every editor individually rather than try to make ironclad rules, because ironclad rules tend to do more harm than good in the long run. <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]·[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 02:25, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*After reading what McJeff said, I'm on his side. [[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt1.png|90px|link=User:Smashbro8|Smashbro8]] ([[Image:Smashbro8-Sig-pt2.png|50px|link=User talk:Smashbro8|Talk]]) 02:32, January 28, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  +
*Since Jeff is happy to include all editors in the discussion (but not the vote), I would suggest Leo's edit requires a minor semantic change: ''To qualify for administrator rights, <span style=color:orange>patrollers</span> must have been active for four months with no rule violations.'' [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></small></sup> 03:02, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*I agree about keeping the "four months as a patroller to become an admin" rule. Experience should be an important aspect to be promoted, and I was never a fan of promoting people who are in the wikia for one or two months just because their edits are good, It makes the promotion seems way too easy and insignificant. Making it take longer not just makes the person who wants to get the promotion work harder, but also make him valorize the position more when he finally get it, with also reduces the chances of him resigning too soom. [[User:558050|<span style="color:#FF6600">'''DLVIIIL'''</span>]] [[User talk:558050|<span style="color:#00008b">Talk</span>]] 03:19, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*To reitirate. I made an alteration to the admin area as it said ''Users must have been active for four months.'' I figured, being a first time users never usually make admin first, they have to become patrollers. I changed the word users to patrollers. I figured it would make more sense. I changed this when I added the information about probationary periods for patrollers to the Requests for Promotion page. If people were confused, tell me, and then if it made more sense then I could have changed it back. I don't think users should be allowed to skip Patroller and make admin. It just can't justified. I also believe we don't need to change anything about administrator rights. I voted no. [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 04:37, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
* Man, I really must not have been as clear in the way I had written this out as I thought I was.
  +
** I'm not suggesting I thought the rule wording meant editors could skip the Patroller step, although that was a little ambiguous and probably needed clarifying, as shown by the question Wildbrick posed to Tom. 
  +
::: Prior to Leo's edit, the way the rule was written and the way I understood it, any Patroller with a '''total of 4 months editing '''could have applied for Admin. (e.g. 2 months as editor to qualify for patroller, 2 months as patroller to qualify for admin). After the edit, that was now a total of 6 months "minimum" (e.g. 2 months as editor to qualify for patroller, 4 months as patroller to qualify for admin). That was what the change meant to the rule to me. 
   
The skyline background doesn't bring any heat, haha.
+
::: The vote here was: ''Should Patrollers now be required to serve a minimum of 4 months as a Patroller to qualify to apply for an Administrator position?'' '''not''' whether Admin positions should be open to non-patrollers. [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></small></sup> 05:12, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*I don't think that there should be a prohibition of not getting promoted if an editor was blocked. Some people who have previously been blocked, learn from their mistakes and work hard to qualify for a staff position. Hence in my opinion their should not be a rule like "If you ever got blocked, you can never be promoted".[[User:Myth hunter|Hunter]]([[User Talk:Myth hunter|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Myth_hunter|Stalk]]) 15:14, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*What everyone said. [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]) 15:17, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Jeff is right. Proof [http://gta.wikia.com/Special:Log/block?page=User%3AMikey+Klebbitz here] and [http://gta.wikia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=Thomas0802&year=&month=-1&tagfilter= here]. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 15:25, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*A vote within six monthss is justifiable. We're not going to promote someone who was recently banned, but we're not going to deny previously banned users from applying for promotion. [[User:Leon Davis|Leo68]] ([[User talk:Leon Davis|talk]]) 15:27, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*I agree with Leo. The applying person should not be banned in last 4 or 6 months.[[User:Myth hunter|Hunter]]([[User Talk:Myth hunter|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Myth_hunter|Stalk]]) 15:33, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*I agree with Jeff. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 15:44, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*I agree with Jeff too. Promotions should be considered on an individual basis, as some new users hit the ground running whilst others get into the swing of it gradually. When it comes to patrollers becoming admins, however, I think there should be a minimum amount of time, as the step up is a big one and some sink and others swim. With regards to welcoming back banned members, I think there should also be a minimum amount of time (four months to become patrollers, six to become admins) before they can apply for staff positions as that allows the rest of us to see if they've learnt their lessons. For users like Sasquatch, it's too early for him to be considered again as he's very inactive and we're having to remind him how to behave. I think returning users deserve second chances, but they must be earnt. [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] ([[User talk:SJWalker|talk]]) 15:58, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
*Promotions require special examinations of the users. I agree with Leo. [[User:Carl Johnson Jr.|Carl Johnson Jr.]] ([[User talk:Carl Johnson Jr.|talk]]) 00:19, January 30, 2015 (UTC)
   
[[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 20:16, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
+
== XPanetta ==
  +
Heads up to all the users, XPanetta is going onto other wikis to convince users to un-block him now that Ilan is gone. Ignore him, if the harassment continues, report him to an admin, or if you can block him from the wiki like I have. See [http://thebill.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:11869 the latest log] on The Bill Wikia, where I am a Bureaucrat (he has been blocked from said wiki). The first notice was in September, and the most recent was today. {{unsigned|Leon Davis}}
   
::Skyline one looks best I think. Bikini one is good for a male audience, but females play GTA too. [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 22:54, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
+
Thanks for the warning Leo. Considering Tom was one of the ones harrassed by X I can't see him unblocking X any time soon, but we'll all keep our eyes open for him. I think eventually Wikia will do an IP block on him if he continues his harrassment and gets blocked from wikis one by one. [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] ([[User talk:SJWalker|talk]]) 16:38, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
   
'''EVERYONE LISTEN:''' the girl won't appear on the wiki, only the skyline beside her will be the header. And the other picture will be the background. So, let's decide already. Am I telling to Bola?<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
+
I blocked him a month ago on another Wiki for harassing Smashbro. Ever since he got blocked he has so far only cross-wiki harrassed administrators to get unblocked. I'm thinking about filling a report to Wikia against him. I could read once that harrassment can lead to your account being globally blocked. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 17:17, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
   
:I think that if the woman isn't in it, like you say, then yeah, it will be more user friendly. However, I do like the skyline one a lot. I think it would be the better of the two. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|VaultBoy Tom]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk to me this way]]) 11:41, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
+
I'd file a report if I were you Rain. There's enough evidence of harrassment and he even helps us by listing what he was blocked for. [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] ([[User talk:SJWalker|talk]]) 17:41, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
   
:I prefer the skyline screenshot. It just looks better in my opinion than the bikini artwork, regardless the girl's appearance or not. -- '''[[User:Ilan xd|ILan]] (<small>[[User talk:Ilan xd|XD]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Ilan xd|Edits]] &bull; [[w:c:rockstargames|Home]] </small>)''' 12:59, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
+
I don't think our admin cleanout has been that drastic that trolls like this will get away with asking to have well-deserved infinite blocks overturned. His current harrassing and pleading and demanding is no different to what he has been doing constantly since he was first warned here, let alone after his block(s). Wikia staff have told him point blank he deserved the block and he should pull his head in, but he hasn't given up. Eventually I think he will get a global Wikia block. In the mean time, I do feel sorry for those of you who have your other wikia activity advertised in your profiles which makes you potential targets for him. [[User:Smurfynz|smurfy]] <sup><small><small>([[User_talk:Smurfynz|coms]])</small></small></sup> 07:50, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
:I quite like the skyline shot as well. I'm not so sure about putting the cover girl ahead of protagonists or main characters. [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 14:27, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
 
   
:<big>Ok, I'm going to tell Bola to use this image as the main background. We will think about the header later. </big>
+
:He messaged me on my talk page on wikianswers. I reverted the edit stating that I do not wish to discuss GTA Wiki on another wiki. If he continues such harrassment I will block him there. [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 11:33, January 22, 2015 (UTC)
<big>[[File:Optional Background.jpg|200px]]</big><span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
+
===Report===
  +
As I am busy today coupled with what appear to be internet problems (pages that take time to load and etc.), I'm putting here all evidence I could gather regarding XPanettaa harrassing others. If anyone can report him, they must do this through [[w:c:community:Special:Contact|this]]. One should provide evidence of it as I doubt Wikia staff would deal with someone without proof. If anyone has more evidence of it, post it below.
   
I think both of these are pretty good for the background. But I prefer the skyline picture rather than the bikini girl one
+
Evidence:
(and I know its only the background and not her included). Either way these both make great backgrounds. --[[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 02:53, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
+
*XP's thread on Community Wiki: http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:740624
  +
*XP's original request to be unblocked to Ilan (at least the only one Ilan replied to): http://reddead.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:Ilan_xd#Block
  +
*Ilan's reply to XP with a clear "NO": http://reddead.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:XPanettaa#RE:
  +
*Harrassment of Smashbro8: http://watchdogs.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:12995 and http://midnightclub.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:4308
  +
*Harrassment of Leon Davis: http://thebill.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:11869
  +
*Harrassment of The Tom: http://mafiagame.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:18856
  +
*Harrassment of Messi1983 mentioned above: http://answers.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:Messi1983?diff=5935870&oldid=5294604
   
::I decided to use the skyline beside the girl. I already sent Bola a message, now we just have to wait. Also I'll think about the header image at an other time...<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> <sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>[[User talk:Dodo8|Talk]]</span>''</sup>
+
I'll reply to any questions about it on my talk page. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 14:19, January 22, 2015 (UTC)
==Manual of style==
 
I have recently create a page to hopefully try and smoothen the operation of our vehicles department, however I do not want to press ahead with its implementation without community consensus. The [[Manual_of_Style/Vehicles|Manual of Style for Vehicles]]<span style="line-height:20px;"> has been created and I would like the Bureacrats and admins to have a look at it.</span>
 
   
<span style="line-height:20px;">Also I recently imported the {{Template:T|t}} from Drive Club Wiki, I probably should have asked this community first. Is there anybody who would like this template to be removed? [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 16:04, May 4, 2013 (UTC)</span>
+
He knows some of us are admins/bureaucrats of other wikis, he will be harrising us as soon as he knows which wiki we run, he has been in multiple wikis, such as the Midnight Club wiki, the Bill wiki, the Watch Dogs wiki, the Red Dead wiki, the Mafia wiki, he didn't attempt to visit my Scarface wiki yet, but i'll not even answer him, he'll be automatically blocked, he and Sean are a pain in the ass. [[Image:Signature.png|105px|link=User:AndreEagle17|AndreEagle17]] ([[User talk:AndreEagle17|<span style="color:black">talk</span>]]) 15:41, January 22, 2015 (UTC)
   
::If you need that template, it shouldn't be removed. You don't have to ask for things you have to do, you are an admin afterall. :) <span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
+
===Update===
  +
Report filed. I have sent a report including the evidence to Wikia, and received an email back saying they will look into the evidence and get back to me within two days if necessary. [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] ([[User talk:SJWalker|talk]]) 15:26, January 22, 2015 (UTC)
   
==Chat Problems==
+
I have received an email from the Wiki moderators. Here is the email in full:
  +
"Hello,
  +
Thanks for contacting us, and apologies for the slow response. I have communicated to XPanettaa that his actions are not reasonable, and that he should desist in his pestering about the block. Hopefully this will have a positive effect.
  +
With regards the other user, they do currently have a Wikia-wide block against those accounts - so you shouldn't be continuing to have issues with them. Has there been any recent activity around that? (http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:741274#38appears to come a little out of the blue, the previous response being in November).
  +
Thanks again for bringing this to our attention, and best regards,
  +
George Marbulcanti (Kirkburn)
  +
Wikia Community Support" [[User:SJWalker|SJWalker]] ([[User talk:SJWalker|talk]])
   
So you all know that I'm always on chat to see if anyone is there, but it's always quiet there and I'm always the only there, there has to be a staff here that's not busy with something should be in chat when I'm school, so I'm gonna figure out how to get more users to come on this chat. [[User:Cloudkit01|Cloudkit01]] ([[User talk:Cloudkit01|talk]]) 03:24, May 7, 2013 (UTC)Cloudkit01
+
:XPanettaa is still trying to get unblocked, and AK-28 is attempting to advise him on how to do that - [http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:787016]. <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]·[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 02:54, January 28, 2015 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 11:40, March 30, 2015

Welcome to GTA Wiki's Community noticeboard.

Archives

Talk page rules apply here.

This noticeboard is for discussion and voting on changes to the wiki, reporting vandalism and wiki rule breaking, and reporting bad or unfair behaviour from GTA Wiki staff.

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

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

  • Anyone can start a topic for a community vote.
  • Please be civil when voting, and never condemn another users vote.
  • Voting usually lasts 3 to 5 days.

Please input your new requests above the old ones. That way, we can easily spot it rather than looking for it.

RfP Lock Edit

 Due to recent events involving 'trollers' applying for positions, I have locked the Requests for Promotion page until another staff position comes up. The Requests for Promotion is a page that can't be vandalized due to how important it is on this wiki, so from now on, the page will be locked when staff positions aren't available. Leo68 (talk) 04:36, March 30, 2015 (UTC)

Enhanced Version Vehicle images in Infobox Edit

Hey guys, just wondering, since the cars look much better in quality and lighting in the enhanced version of GTA V, should we get vehicle images from the enhanced version for the infoboxes? I started this a while back, but I forgot to get the rear quarters, and I saved the images in their smallest format (Like an idiot). What do you think? Is it worth it? MONKEYPOLICE188 (talk) | (stalk) 14:23, March 29, 2015 (UTC)

Votes Edit

Comments Edit

  • It's a good idea but it'll probably be better to wait for PC version - there's only two more weeks of waiting. V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 13:33, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • That's what i meant, PC is part of Enhanced Version. MONKEYPOLICE188 (talk) | (stalk) 13:37, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • Much better? From what I've seen, vehicle images from PS4/Xbone barely look different. Furthermore, each attempt to swap the X360/PS3 screenshots with new ones resulted in lower quality screenshots. Unless someone is able to add nice images, don't see the need to change. Rain (Stalker) 13:39, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • It depends on the picture, not on the platform or quality, as Rain said, some attempts to swap the original version's screenshots resulted in poorer images. Signature (talk/stalk/blog) 13:47, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • As Rain and Andre said, the picture quality is the important thing. The current infobox pictures are clear enough and serve their purpose. SJWalker (talk) 13:55, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • Not worth it. The upgrade in lightining is barely noticeable and even if it was, do you honestly think that the majority of people who come to the wikia to see images of the vehicles pay attention to this kind of stuff? They are here just to see the design of the vehicle and thats it, they will not stop to see the lightning or the polygons on the image. The images that we have already do the job, thank you. - DLVIIIL Talk 14:01, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • The MoS is quite clear that the infoboxes should have the latest game appearance and there is no reason for that guideline to change. In the case of GTAV, the enhanced version of the game is the latest. The HD screengrabs DO show a lot more texture, lighting and model detail than the Snapmatic resolution shots, which is why I originally questioned whether they qualified as "fair use". However, that being said, the images should only be replaced when a better quality image is available. A lot of the existing shots have far too much background interference and/or the vehicle is painted too dark/lighting is inadequate to show the design detail. I was guilty of replacing with some rushed shots taken in limited PS4 time that were admittedly worse in some aspects. I have also thrown away hundreds of PS4 screenshots because they were no better than the existing once they were examined on my PC. As has been discussed in several talk discussions, the Vehicles Manual of Style is being updated after the PC release, along with the gallery design guidelines (I'm still undecided on using the gallery templates). The same rules applied to the character pages which have mostly all been replaced with enhanced version portraits with often very little graphical superiority over their low-res predecessors.  smurfy (coms) 20:26, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
    • "the latest game appearance" - Yes, game, not edition. Going by this logic, then let's update the GTA San Andreas vehicle images because the latest edition has slightly better textures (oops I forgot San Andreas is too old).
      I'm going to repeat what 558 said and that whenever someone checks out for vehicle images they are interested in design, they do not give two fucks about light effects which are, if you don't mind, barely noticable on PS4 and Xbox One - as shown in some of the screenshots that were uploaded to the Wiki. Most of the vehicle images (they come from either DocVinewood, WildBrick of a couple of others) are of pretty good quality.
      Something that I would support, however, is that we upload "render" images - which means we take the vehicle model from the game files and upload a front quarter view of the model with transparency. Of course, that'll require GIMP/Photoshop knowledge to add semi-transparency (that ain't really easy), but it'll be the best we can get. Simply swapping the current images with images from an edition that will have probably small changes in the vanilla edition and they won't change the vehicles images neither. Rain (Stalker) 20:35, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
    • Whoa whoa whoa, not so fast, MoS says "latest appearance", yet, this is not totally applicable, see, we can't replace the Python's main picture from a Vice City model to a Vice City Stories/Chinatown Wars model, as they came later than GTA Vice City, the same goes to Cuban Hermes and Diablo Stallion, in adittion, as Rain said, the enhanced version of GTA V is not necessarily the latest appearance, as it's the same game, just more detailed, this case is different than those of characters (see Trevor PhilipsMichael De Santa and Franklin Clinton) which makes much more difference. Signature (talk/stalk/blog) 20:43, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
    • I'm with RainingPain and 558050 on this one. Enhanced edition also has this fog-like blur so instead of giving a sharp image, it looks a bit misty instead - even with a png format (can't describe it). It's not like you can even see a huge detail difference in these tiny infoboxes. V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 20:49, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
      • Am I the only person who uses the wiki that clicks on thumbnail images to see the full resolution image in a new browser tab? smurfy (coms) 20:56, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
      • No, I do that too, but honestly, most people just want to search for information. They don't care about the shadows, lightning, reflections, etc. They just see image and "okay, so that's the car I saw" and move on. There are people who do look on full resolution images as well but they probably don't care about shadows/lightning/reflections, etc. Other than the image resolution messing things up, the detail on cars is extremely similar between both versions, if not the same. V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 21:10, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
        • I do the same thing, and, as well as the latest appearance/rendition rule applying to this, the quality is actually better, the reflections, lighting and shadowing makes the car look even better, as when the image is compressed to a smaller size to fit in the infobox, the detail stands out better, making it a very vibrant image. MONKEYPOLICE188 (talk) | (stalk) 20:59, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
          • I also see images in full size.Hunter(Talk/Stalk) 21:03, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • (Reset indent) Viewing image in full size is not an excuse to replace good quality screenshots such as Switch101's with crappier quality screenshot for the sole reason that they were taken on the PC edition. Afaik most of the previous titles have console screenshots, yet no one decided to complain about not being "pc ultra master hq" screenshots. Rain (Stalker) 21:08, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
    • Actually it should be which one is better. I am saying if a ps3 image is better than pc then keep ps3 image. The one that looks better should be kept regardless of edition.Hunter(Talk/Stalk) 21:19, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
      • Whoa, hold one a sec. The forum was initially about swapping every GTA V vehicle screenshot with a PC one. Something I highly disagree with because there is no purpose of replacing good quality screenshots with other ones that are usually of bad quality for the sole reason of being taken on PC. Now, if we talk about swapping screenshots that are of quite bad quality with better ones taken on PC, I fully agree with this. I had noticed multiple images that aren't so good. But we could do that, assuming that the provider takes good quality screenshots. I don't mean to single out the concerned users here, but I haven't seen any vehicle screenshot from next-gen that was better than the former. I don't say I'm a good vehicle photographer, and I know how hard it is, but I'm just saying that if we can't get better quality screenshots, the swap is pointless. Rain (Stalker) 11:40, March 30, 2015 (UTC)
  • The enhanced version(PS4 Xbox one and PC) has better graphics. So yes. But new images should be of good quality not bad. As smurfynz said images should be replaced only when a better one is available.Hunter(Talk/Stalk) 20:42, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • It's very simple really. Images should be replaced if someone uploads a better one, regardless of the edition. Of course, a good PS4 image will always have preference over a good PS3 one, but for me, the photographer is more important than the platform. For example, check Switch101's vehicle images (in my opinion the best vehicle photographer of the wiki), they're from last gen but of excellent quality. DocVinewood (talk) 21:04, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • Smurfy is, in my opinion the best vehicle photographer, he gets shots of the above, underside, sides and front, as well as details on badging and crash deformation, that's alot of images that sum up a car's description, origin and durability. MONKEYPOLICE188 (talk) | (stalk) 21:06, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
    • Quantity and quality are two different things. smurfy (coms) 21:51, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • No, I agree Switch101's are generally better lit and composed than most of my vehicle shots - apart from the occasional busy background. smurfy (coms) 21:13, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
    • Redact - It wasn't Switch that had the busy backgrounds issue. Although if you look at his earliest uploads, he did have lighting and "fish-eye" compositional issues until he learned how to use the snapmatic lens properly, similar to issues I had with PS4 depth of field etc. smurfy (coms) 21:51, March 29, 2015 (UTC)

Transcript in mission pagesEdit

Closed as successful by LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 20:24, March 28, 2015 (UTC)

Should transcript be allowed in mission pages again? I remember there used to be transcripts but they were mass removed for some reason. Apparently it is violating copyright even though this is kinda silly because this wiki has worse things than transcripts in pages. I fail to see how it violates copyright, considering we have images of pretty much everything, videos of every mission that have audio/walkthrough/transcript and snippets of game file code to help with many different pages. Many different wikis also have them and noone complains about copyright even if it's a R* game wiki (or an actual GTA Wiki but in different language). And I'm pretty sure if there was an actual copyright thing made by R* to begin with, it would have most likely expired just like the "no cutscenes" in IV.

Should they be re-added again? (Ignore the fact that it takes up much space or any other technical difficulties. I can easily make it take up little to no space and fix said difficulties.) V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 18:59, March 28, 2015 (UTC)

VotesEdit

CommentsEdit

  • As said above. V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 18:59, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • One more to the list. Rain (Stalker) 19:04, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes please. I see transcripts in so many wikias and its ridiculous that we don't have any of these. Its helpfull and pratical so why not? - DLVIIIL Talk 19:39, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • Same as 558. Hunter(Talk/Stalk) 19:44, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree, they were one of the first things I edited before they were removed and I too do not understand their copyright. I'd help you make them too. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 20:00, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • Request is closed as successful so let's do this. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 20:25, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • Which way should we handle this? Write down what happens in the background (i.e. "Niko gets off the boat and Roman arrives in his taxi" quotes "Niko gets in the cab" quotes, etc.) or do it the simple way Saints Row wiki does (i.e. "cutscene" quotes "gameplay" quotes, etc.)? V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 20:32, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
    • I'd say the first option. Rain (Stalker) 20:38, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
    • I'd go with the first one too. I'm starting to do the first mission of GTA San Andreas by the way. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 20:40, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
    • Also, should we include links in the transcript? LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 20:42, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
    • Noted. I'll start off with GTA III. And IMO, links should be only in the character and scenario. Not in quotes just like in the main page. V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 21:36, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • Are we 100% sure it's not a copyright violation? Why were transcripts removed? DocVinewood (talk) 20:44, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • They were claimed to be copyright to the new admins by the old admins after the community split. I don't think they are copyright, and if they are then RockstarPressUK will let us know. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 20:49, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • The idea for transcripts being copyright violation is non-sense. If its true, then Rockstar must be the only developer concerned about this kind of stuff, since hundreds of wikias have transcripts and they never faced this kind of problem. Also, Red Dead and L.A. Noire wikia have transcripts and Rockstar never bothered neither of those wikias with copyright allegations. - DLVIIIL Talk 20:56, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • Regarding the GTA V transcripts, it's going to be a bit more difficult. The characters constantly taunt their enemies during gunfights, and there are multiple dialogue options (such as when you die, the dialogue's gonna be a bit differnt), and furthermore, there are missions where the dialogue changes depending which missions you completed first. For the multiple options things, we could use tabbers, although I don't know if it's worth keeping the taunting quotes as in some missions they will occupy more than a half of the transcript. Rain (Stalker) 11:02, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • Not just GTA V, I played "Off Route" from TLaD last night and Johnny used a variety of quotes. With the HD Universe missions, I'd only quote the dialogue used in cutscenes or when the characters are "passive" (i.e. driving to/from a certain point in the mission), as that dialogue is almost always be the same. SJWalker (talk) 11:10, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree with tabs for different quotes and instead of writing all of the taunts, I just wrote what was happening in the mission. You can see this on Sweet & Kendl/Transcript after the Ballas start their drive-by.
  • I had started drafting a comment along these lines earlier today but got sidetracked by IRL stuff. There is a lot of dialogue (and even alternate cutscenes) throughout the series but more prevalent in HD universe titles that depends not only on what mission paths you have completed before the current mission, but also what "determinant" decisions you have made. There can also be additional dialogue in GTAV missions depending on which character you are starting the mission with. That's why I'm standing back from this project and I'll leave you guys to deal with the headaches of how to present variable scripts. smurfy (coms) 11:33, March 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • Unless it's part of the script, no taunts. Even if it appears in subtitles, if it's something that constantly appears over and over again (i.e. Niko shouts "motherfuckers" then he has civilized discussion with Roman, LJ, Packie, whatever and then suddenly shouts "motherfuckers" again as he starts shooting at enemies again.).
    Calling dibs on LCS and IV V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 11:38, March 29, 2015 (UTC)

Who changed the theme?Edit

And why?

The previous colors were the best!! pls change it back V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 16:18, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
PS: The community noticeboard is a suitable place to discuss this, right?

CommentsEdit

  • I don't know, I've been trying to change them back. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 16:26, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
    • Main color was #222222 and buttons were #444444 (luckily I had a page open in another tab)V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 16:29, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
    • Thank god for that. I've changed it back now. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 16:31, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
    • Anyone notice a change in the source editor? I'm getting highlighted words when I type. Leo68 (talk) 18:18, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
    • @Leon Davis, I definitely am seeing this. The whole source editor is made up of highlighted words in different colors. Smashbro8-Sig-pt1 (Smashbro8-Sig-pt2) 18:20, March 28, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
      • It's the new syntax highlighting. V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 18:21, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
      • I like it, it's really helpful and makes it look less dull. It also helps to highlight if you've made a mistake. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 18:33, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
      • I love the Source editor code highlighting, just like using Notepad++. I was trying to teach 558050 to use a text editor to highlight nested IF functions in a template this week, this does it for us! (almost) no excuse for missing closure tags now! smurfy (coms) 21:42, March 28, 2015 (UTC)
      • I'm a bit neutral about this. I like the help with the highlights (shows me where I left out a tag or something) but honestly, it's sometimes more confusing and distracting than text without highlights. V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 11:40, March 29, 2015 (UTC)

Chat ModeratorsEdit

Closed as unsuccessful by Leo68 (talk) 23:22, March 27, 2015 (UTC)

I have noticed that there has been an increased use of chat lately so I was thinking, should we promote 2 or 3 users who aren't already staff members to be chat moderators? I personally think it would be a good idea. What do you guys think? LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 20:15, March 24, 2015 (UTC)

VotesEdit

CommentsEdit

  • Most of the times there are people in chat there is at least one patroller/admin in. So I'm not sure we need more. Rain (Stalker) 20:16, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • When the chat is on, usually me, Sam or Smashbro are in the chat, we are chat moderators too. Signature (talk/stalk/blog) 20:50, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • As the others have said, since Patrollers are "security guards", chat moderation would come under "security", which all Patrollers are automatically promoted to. There's no need to create two roles for work which one Patroller can do alone. SJWalker (talk) 23:27, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • I don't think it's necessary, staff members are doing their work already. DocVinewood (talk) 00:38, March 25, 2015 (UTC)
  • Due to me, Andre, and Monkeypolice taking over the Chat, we have the ability to ban and kick troublesome users in chat, which makes giving two new users rollback rights unnecessary. I constantly watch over the chat to make sure everything is running smoothly once I am in it. Smashbro8-Sig-pt1 (Smashbro8-Sig-pt2) 01:19, March 25, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
    • Chatmod rights come without rollback rights. The question is about if we should give chatmod status to users that regularly come into chat. Not if we need two more patrollers. Rain (Stalker) 06:49, March 25, 2015 (UTC)
  • We have patrollers to do this job, two of which are normally on chat so I'm closing the vote as unsuccessful. Leo68 (talk) 23:22, March 27, 2015 (UTC)

Administration Election Edit

Closed SJ Walker (5) 558050 (3)

As I am now bureaucrat there is a vacancy for my former adminstrator position. 558050 and SJWalker are the most qualified patrollers, due to the fact that two were recently demoted and two are on probation. Set up your votes below. Unlike a request for promotion, you should write the user's name and your signature as opposed to a yes or no.

SamEdit

About meEdit

I'm Sam, I've been a patroller for just over two months. I am still learning my way around in some areas and can occasionally undo correct edits, but I am also quick at spotting vandals, and can give advice to any user who needs it, likewise those who need a "talking to" in certain areas. I try to look at disputes from a netural point of view and listen to both sides before making a decision. I am aware that on occasions I can be seen as "picking on" certain users, but I try and treat everyone equally and attempt to come to a civilised and reasonable conclusion to any disputes. Positive and negative feedback is welcome. Thank you for reading this. Best of luck to 558050 as well. SJWalker (talk) 01:15, March 24, 2015 (UTC)

558050Edit

About meEdit

Hello, fellow wikia contributors. I have been contributing to this wikia for 17 months by now, almost one year and a half, during this time I acquired a lot of experience editing articles and dealing with other users. My contributions here include the creation of dozens of articles, plus major updates to already existing articles, more recently the online heists pages.

I'm always trying to be friendly with other users and resolve any kind of issue as polite as possible, but I'm not afraid to be a little rough if the situation demands it.

My grammar was improved since my promotion to patroller, so I think that this will not be a problem anymore. Thanks for you attention. Good luck to Sam and goodbye. DLVIIIL Talk 01:24, March 24, 2015 (UTC)

Votes Edit

Comments Edit

  • I'm undecided at the moment, both Sam and 558 have awesome editing skills, I'll have to think about this for a while before voting. Signature (talk/stalk/blog) 01:23, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
    • After hours thinking, I finally decided and my vote goes to Sam, 558 has administrative skills, like asking to rename lots of pages, having a higher knowledge about the series (not to mention that he resurrected the GTA CW mission pages), however, Sam quickly detect sockpuppets and quickly report vandals, which for me is the best point to vote for him, sorry 558, but I can't vote for both. Signature (talk/stalk/blog) 01:34, March 25, 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree with Andre. I'm also undecided. Both of you are amazing editors. Smashbro8-Sig-pt1 (Smashbro8-Sig-pt2) 01:27, March 24, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • I had to think about. SJWalker is an excellent editor and is great at cleaning up pages, however, 558050 is more active and has a higher edit counter. SJWalker may have better English, but that is because 558050 is Brazillian. Nothing personal, Sam. Leo68 (talk) 01:28, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • This is difficult. Weighing up who I think would make the best admin right now (558) vs who I think would probably make the better admin in the long term (Sam). Another couple of months and this vote probably would have gone the other way. Whoever "loses" this vote in the end, you are both doing a great job and it will not be a reflection on your capabilities. smurfy (coms) 02:24, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • This is a tough one! You both are very good editors and I think both of you have made an excellent contributions to the GTA Wiki, but I gotta' pick SJWalker/ Sam on this one. In debates he's always had a good habit of looking at the situation (as he stated himself) with a neutral standpoint that doesn't really pick a "side" until he's seen the two reasons for why or why not. That's a good quality in a person higher up in the commmunity. He also has pretty good grammer and I almost never see mistakes in that area. If there's one thing I think he could improve on, it's looking into something a little more and doing a little more research, but the last time this was a problem was a month or two ago, and that was minor. That isn't to say that 558050 is bad, in fact it's pretty close and I appreciate 558050 just as much, but there can only be one, and that one is SJWalker for the reasons stated. Good luck to both of you! Mortsnarg (talk) 02:44, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • Do we really need to rush on promoting a new administrator?
    If it's important, then my vote goes for Sam. Pretty much for the reasons that were alreayd mentioned by Mortsnarg. Rain (Stalker) 06:23, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • This is a tough choice, I think both deserve the position. I will vote later. DocVinewood (talk) 10:34, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
    First of all I agree with Rain, is promoting a new administrator really needed now? In any case, I finally decided to vote for Sam. He spots and reports vandals, cleans up pages, has a very good grammar and is a level-headed person. 558050 is a great editor as well, but sadly I can't vote for both. DocVinewood (talk) 00:38, March 25, 2015 (UTC)
  • No offense to Sam, who is too a great staff member, but I feel 558 is more qualified at this moment in time. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 19:55, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree with Rain and Doc, it's not necessary to hurry for a new admin. The wiki can run smoothly with vacant spots, like how it did when me, CJ Jr. and Leon Davis were the only admins. I just feel we need more rules and protections to the Requests for Promotion page so users don't troll and make a request thinking they will get promoted. That other user's request should be deleted. Anyway, since I sadly cannot pick both when both SJ Walker and 558050 do excellent work here, I'd pick Sam for the same reasons as DocVinewood's. Smashbro8-Sig-pt1 (Smashbro8-Sig-pt2) 01:19, March 25, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • Our new administrator is SJWalker! Leo68 (talk) 01:47, March 25, 2015 (UTC)

Mission Pages Cleanup Edit

A notice to all users; a majority of the mission pages need a major cleanup. The quotes have links, the grammar is poor and the pages are poorly assembled. If you can, check over the pages so that they can be cleaned up. If you don't know what qualifies as a page needing cleanup, add the template so another user can clean up the page. Leo68 (talk) 07:34, March 22, 2015 (UTC)

  • Yeah, I noticed that, i'm checking out articles that needs a cleanup, Sam is working on it. Signature (talk/stalk/blog) 14:08, March 22, 2015 (UTC)

Updating policy: TrainersEdit

Closed as Successful by Leo68 (talk) 01:23, March 25, 2015 (UTC)


This has been on my mind for the last couple of days, as I've seen a couple of articles with posts relating to the use of trainers. Since the policy prohibits images of modified vehicles, I think this should be extended to include trainers and modification tools. As Leon clarified for me last night, any information should be related to GTA as Rockstar created it, so any modification or trainer-related posts should be removed. The way I see it, since only stock photos of vehicles are allowed, only information relating to the "stock" game should be included too. I hope I've written this in a way that makes sense, and I'd love to know what you all think about this. SJWalker (talk) 22:07, March 21, 2015 (UTC)

Question - Should we prohibit Mods/Trainers in articles?

VotesEdit

CommentsEdit

  • It gets a little curly when you see what happened after the community split. For a short while, GTAwiki was thought of as the home of modded content. Thankfully that was stopped but there are still remnants scattered throughout the article content. I agree with Leon, the wiki should be "official content only" except for a small number of articles dedicated to Modifications. smurfy (coms) 22:13, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
  • This can be a bit rough, some vehicles such as the AndromadaBrickade and FBI Truck can only be spawned with trainers, same with weapons and characters, so I agree to forbid pictures of mods, unofficial content and partially revealed content, but not content (vehicles, weapons and other content) which is in the game, but unavailable without trainers. Signature (talk/stalk/blog) 22:17, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
    • They are part of the vanilla game. It's official content. Mentioning that these are spawner mod-exclusives because they were cut is OK. Rain (Stalker) 22:21, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
    • I see your point there Andre. If the policy is changed, a link could be posted to the GTA Mods Wiki or GTA Fanon Wiki for anyone who wants to add mod-content. I'm probably going to contradict my argument here but a brief sentence explaining they can be spawned via mods would be acceptable, but not to reference specific mods or methods of modding (i.e. tweaking files). If the vehicles are in the files then they still exist in the game, so they technically aren't modded "into" the game because they're already there. SJWalker (talk) 22:27, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
    • Exactly, it's acceptable to say that the mentioned vehicles are only obtainable with mods or trainers, but it's unacceptable to say "The Dukes can perform a wheelie, but to do this, you'll need to mod the game". Signature (talk/stalk/blog) 22:39, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes and that's something that I was removing a while ago. The Modifications page has no purpose other than advertising. Saying that the graphics of San Andreas can be improved through modding is completely irrelevant. If anyone want to edit content about mods they should go to the GTA Fanon Wiki. This is GTA Wiki, aka official content, not fan-made content. Rain (Stalker) 22:21, March 21, 2015 (UTC)
    • Changed my vote then, I agree with you. Signature (talk/stalk/blog) 22:27, March 21, 2015 (UTC)

Media Policy: A New-Look Image Policy Edit

Closed as successful by Leo68 (talk) 02:33, March 6, 2015 (UTC).

This has been lingering around the wiki for a few days. A policy about uploading videos to the wiki has been suggested by Andre. My idea;

We add info to the image policy about uploading videos and rename it the Media Policy. It will be in one location for users to understand how to add both images and videos here.

  • ALL videos must have a clear picture and clean audio.
  • All videos must be copyrighted to show who the video belongs to, the video's site and Rockstar Games.
    • All videos have to be GTA related.
  • Videos MUST NOT violate other policies such as leaked information.
  • Videos must have an extra copyright if it features music.

Feel free to add to the policy and vote on whether or not we should implement this. Leo68 (talk) 09:02, March 1, 2015 (UTC)


Votes Edit

Comments Edit

  • Absolutely, i've seen quite a few pages with videos which contravene these rules. MONKEYPOLICE188 (talk) | (stalk)
  • I would add that videos should not contain any form of self-promotion (audio or text) or advertising apart from a watermark (we obviously have to allow this since we are using GTASeriesVideos we can't really say it is prohibited like we do for still images). smurfy (coms) 21:12, March 1, 2015 (UTC)
  • The vote is closed and the image policy has been renamed media policy and updated. Leo68 (talk) 02:39, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

Missions in GTA 2Edit

I was just writing this to let you guys know who want to get some edits that most of the missions in GTA 2 still need infoboxes and images. To get the images, watch GTA Series Videos play the mission on Youtube, print screen it while it is saying the mission name and then crop it in an editing application such as Paint.NET. I'm currently doing it as well but I'm going to have to continue tomorrow as I am going shortly.

Also, the missions in GTA 1 are pretty much a lost cause because I can't find videos of the missions anywhere to get images or even an understanding of what happens in the mission. If anyone can do either of these things then that would be great.

Thanks, LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 23:55, January 31, 2015 (UTC)

Patroller to Administrator Qualification CriteriaEdit

Closed as unsuccessful - LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 23:55, January 31, 2015 (UTC)

BackgroundEdit

A week ago, Leo made an update to the RfP rules to add the probation period for new Patrollers as had been agreed by the Bureaucrats and Admins. At the same time he also changed the line relating to experience required for applicants to the Administrator role.

"To qualify for administrator rights, editors must have been active for four months with no rules violations."
— Prior version
"To qualify for administrator rights, editors must have been active patrollers for four months with no rule violations."
— Revised version

This was probably an outcome of a discussion Tom had been involved in with with Wildbrick142 about that section but he had stated

"I think you would be best if you ran for Patroller first just to make it "fair" so that you get promoted in the same way as everyone else and then a month or two later you could run for admin."
— Tom replying to Wildbrick142

As I discussed with Leo at the time, I probably agree with the change (despite it directly impacting my personal agenda), but I don't believe it was an authorized rule update and it should be discussed and agreed by Admin/Bureaucrat staff before being added. Similarly to the Probation discussion, Patrollers and editors should not get a say in this discussion as we would have a vested interest in retaining the status quo. smurfy (coms) 01:43, January 28, 2015 (UTC)

Bureaucrat and Admin only voteEdit

VotesEdit

Discussion (all editors welcome) Edit

  • I don't want to just say "if you've been blocked you can never be promoted" because it's not necessary. We've had multiple editors who got blocked, realized that this wasn't one of those online communities that doesn't actually enforce its rules, cleaned up their act and went on to be administrators. If there are outstanding behavior concerns about any editor running for promotion, those concerns should be brought up during the voting - that's what the vote is for in the first place, and that's why it's supposed to last for a week. As for length of time an editor has to be editing to be eligible to promote, I don't have much of a problem with such a thing but I don't really think it's necessary. Lack of being active long enough is always brought up when new editors go for a promotion too soon, and we've also had a couple particularly good editors show up and get promoted more quickly than usual. Basically, I feel it's better to consider every editor individually rather than try to make ironclad rules, because ironclad rules tend to do more harm than good in the long run. Jeff (talk·stalk) 02:25, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • After reading what McJeff said, I'm on his side. Smashbro8-Sig-pt1 (Smashbro8-Sig-pt2) 02:32, January 28, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • Since Jeff is happy to include all editors in the discussion (but not the vote), I would suggest Leo's edit requires a minor semantic change: To qualify for administrator rights, patrollers must have been active for four months with no rule violations. smurfy (coms) 03:02, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree about keeping the "four months as a patroller to become an admin" rule. Experience should be an important aspect to be promoted, and I was never a fan of promoting people who are in the wikia for one or two months just because their edits are good, It makes the promotion seems way too easy and insignificant. Making it take longer not just makes the person who wants to get the promotion work harder, but also make him valorize the position more when he finally get it, with also reduces the chances of him resigning too soom. DLVIIIL Talk 03:19, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • To reitirate. I made an alteration to the admin area as it said Users must have been active for four months. I figured, being a first time users never usually make admin first, they have to become patrollers. I changed the word users to patrollers. I figured it would make more sense. I changed this when I added the information about probationary periods for patrollers to the Requests for Promotion page. If people were confused, tell me, and then if it made more sense then I could have changed it back. I don't think users should be allowed to skip Patroller and make admin. It just can't justified. I also believe we don't need to change anything about administrator rights. I voted no. Leo68 (talk) 04:37, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • Man, I really must not have been as clear in the way I had written this out as I thought I was.
    • I'm not suggesting I thought the rule wording meant editors could skip the Patroller step, although that was a little ambiguous and probably needed clarifying, as shown by the question Wildbrick posed to Tom. 
Prior to Leo's edit, the way the rule was written and the way I understood it, any Patroller with a total of 4 months editing could have applied for Admin. (e.g. 2 months as editor to qualify for patroller, 2 months as patroller to qualify for admin). After the edit, that was now a total of 6 months "minimum" (e.g. 2 months as editor to qualify for patroller, 4 months as patroller to qualify for admin). That was what the change meant to the rule to me. 
The vote here was: Should Patrollers now be required to serve a minimum of 4 months as a Patroller to qualify to apply for an Administrator position? not whether Admin positions should be open to non-patrollers. smurfy (coms) 05:12, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • I don't think that there should be a prohibition of not getting promoted if an editor was blocked. Some people who have previously been blocked, learn from their mistakes and work hard to qualify for a staff position. Hence in my opinion their should not be a rule like "If you ever got blocked, you can never be promoted".Hunter(Talk/Stalk) 15:14, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • What everyone said. Signature (talk) 15:17, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • Jeff is right. Proof here and here. Rain (Stalker) 15:25, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • A vote within six monthss is justifiable. We're not going to promote someone who was recently banned, but we're not going to deny previously banned users from applying for promotion. Leo68 (talk) 15:27, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree with Leo. The applying person should not be banned in last 4 or 6 months.Hunter(Talk/Stalk) 15:33, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree with Jeff. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 15:44, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree with Jeff too. Promotions should be considered on an individual basis, as some new users hit the ground running whilst others get into the swing of it gradually. When it comes to patrollers becoming admins, however, I think there should be a minimum amount of time, as the step up is a big one and some sink and others swim. With regards to welcoming back banned members, I think there should also be a minimum amount of time (four months to become patrollers, six to become admins) before they can apply for staff positions as that allows the rest of us to see if they've learnt their lessons. For users like Sasquatch, it's too early for him to be considered again as he's very inactive and we're having to remind him how to behave. I think returning users deserve second chances, but they must be earnt. SJWalker (talk) 15:58, January 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotions require special examinations of the users. I agree with Leo. Carl Johnson Jr. (talk) 00:19, January 30, 2015 (UTC)

XPanetta Edit

Heads up to all the users, XPanetta is going onto other wikis to convince users to un-block him now that Ilan is gone. Ignore him, if the harassment continues, report him to an admin, or if you can block him from the wiki like I have. See the latest log on The Bill Wikia, where I am a Bureaucrat (he has been blocked from said wiki). The first notice was in September, and the most recent was today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leon Davis (talkcontribs) Please remember to sign your talk page messages with ~~~~.

Thanks for the warning Leo. Considering Tom was one of the ones harrassed by X I can't see him unblocking X any time soon, but we'll all keep our eyes open for him. I think eventually Wikia will do an IP block on him if he continues his harrassment and gets blocked from wikis one by one. SJWalker (talk) 16:38, January 20, 2015 (UTC)

I blocked him a month ago on another Wiki for harassing Smashbro. Ever since he got blocked he has so far only cross-wiki harrassed administrators to get unblocked. I'm thinking about filling a report to Wikia against him. I could read once that harrassment can lead to your account being globally blocked. Rain (Stalker) 17:17, January 20, 2015 (UTC)

I'd file a report if I were you Rain. There's enough evidence of harrassment and he even helps us by listing what he was blocked for. SJWalker (talk) 17:41, January 20, 2015 (UTC)

I don't think our admin cleanout has been that drastic that trolls like this will get away with asking to have well-deserved infinite blocks overturned. His current harrassing and pleading and demanding is no different to what he has been doing constantly since he was first warned here, let alone after his block(s). Wikia staff have told him point blank he deserved the block and he should pull his head in, but he hasn't given up. Eventually I think he will get a global Wikia block. In the mean time, I do feel sorry for those of you who have your other wikia activity advertised in your profiles which makes you potential targets for him. smurfy (coms) 07:50, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

He messaged me on my talk page on wikianswers. I reverted the edit stating that I do not wish to discuss GTA Wiki on another wiki. If he continues such harrassment I will block him there. Messi1983 (talk) 11:33, January 22, 2015 (UTC)

ReportEdit

As I am busy today coupled with what appear to be internet problems (pages that take time to load and etc.), I'm putting here all evidence I could gather regarding XPanettaa harrassing others. If anyone can report him, they must do this through this. One should provide evidence of it as I doubt Wikia staff would deal with someone without proof. If anyone has more evidence of it, post it below.

Evidence:

I'll reply to any questions about it on my talk page. Rain (Stalker) 14:19, January 22, 2015 (UTC)

He knows some of us are admins/bureaucrats of other wikis, he will be harrising us as soon as he knows which wiki we run, he has been in multiple wikis, such as the Midnight Club wiki, the Bill wiki, the Watch Dogs wiki, the Red Dead wiki, the Mafia wiki, he didn't attempt to visit my Scarface wiki yet, but i'll not even answer him, he'll be automatically blocked, he and Sean are a pain in the ass. Signature (talk) 15:41, January 22, 2015 (UTC)

UpdateEdit

Report filed. I have sent a report including the evidence to Wikia, and received an email back saying they will look into the evidence and get back to me within two days if necessary. SJWalker (talk) 15:26, January 22, 2015 (UTC)

I have received an email from the Wiki moderators. Here is the email in full: "Hello, Thanks for contacting us, and apologies for the slow response. I have communicated to XPanettaa that his actions are not reasonable, and that he should desist in his pestering about the block. Hopefully this will have a positive effect. With regards the other user, they do currently have a Wikia-wide block against those accounts - so you shouldn't be continuing to have issues with them. Has there been any recent activity around that? (http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:741274#38appears to come a little out of the blue, the previous response being in November). Thanks again for bringing this to our attention, and best regards, George Marbulcanti (Kirkburn) Wikia Community Support" SJWalker (talk)

XPanettaa is still trying to get unblocked, and AK-28 is attempting to advise him on how to do that - [1]. Jeff (talk·stalk) 02:54, January 28, 2015 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki