FANDOM


My resignation

Early this year, I contacted former Bureaucrat Tom to hold a private talk in a different Wikia to talk about my own resignation, which I've been planning since December, but never had enough, shall we say, courage to talk about it, as sometimes I felt ashamed about it. After two years here, I decided to say it openly. But first, let's go to the reasons why:

Since August I've been inactive due to a series of problems, which led me to stay away from the Wiki for few weeks. I planned to return editing around October, but I've been under pressure from school, and a lot of other problems and occupations. I was only able to use the internet between 20:00 and 21:00, the time where I should be editing, but the reason I didn't, I don't really know, to be honest. I just didn't have time for only oncentrate at the Wiki. And during the weekends where I was basically doing nothing, there's a bigger exception. I never said that but during the times when I've been very active, I basically didn't have a great social life, yes, that sucks. So that's why I use the weekends to hang out with friends. To be honest I don't know if I was just younger or if I really did nothing two years ago instead of sitting in front of the computer everyday. I changed the school curriculum now and I have more free time and I'll maybe still edit sometimes but I'm giving up the hold as administrator anyways.

During my inactivity time on late 2014, I started looking up the new active patrollers, what they do the Wiki comparing to what I was doing, so; it was time to retire. I'm writing it remembering the times back in 2013/early 2014 where I used to have like 100 edits per day and I wish I had enough time today like I did back in the day. All the projects I did with a bunch of other members from the Wiki, who most became my friends even outside the Wikia. All the respect and support I've been given and that I gave to others, but I can't resume everything more resumed than what I'm doing now. I don't think if I should apologize to the patrollers that wished to take my place, or thank for the patience. I've already felt the same when I was a patroller and there was an inactive admin and everyone wanted to take his place (old staff members remeber that very good). So, I think this was all. You can still contact me on my talk page, if you want to remember something or just have a talk. And plus, I really need to admit how amazing these recent staff members are and how hard they are working to build this community which is growing up everyday with no minor setbacks. And yes, the currently open vote vote for my demotion shall be closed, of course.

Thanks for the support. Bye Thomas0802 • (talkedits) 14:25, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

Comments

Bye man. Monolith Patch Rain - Talk SCS Freedom 14:37, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
And of course, I've read the entire comment section of the demotion votes and I need to admit that users like 558050, RainingPain17 and AndreEagle17 made really good points. If anyone wants to open a conversation with me, going deeper on the reasons including my school, social life, future life plans and problems, please do it on my talk page if it's too long or here if it's just a simple question so that everybody is able to know. Thomas0802 (talk) 15:24, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
All I can say is thanks for your good work here, and good luck. Farewell. DocVinewood (talk) 15:18, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
Thanks from me too Thomas. I hope you manage to sort your life out and can come back to the Wiki when you've managed to clear your head. Take care. SJWalker (talk) 15:25, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
Goodbye. Good luck. - Mikey Klebbitz
Thanks for all your help on here as an administrator and good luck with whatever you wish to do. Messi1983 (talk) 10:03, January 23, 2015 (UTC)


Inactive Staff and Promotions (moved from Blog Posts)

Resolved - Messi1983 (talk) 18:52, January 23, 2015 (UTC)

To anyone who doesn't know already, two Bureaucrats; Ilan xd and The Tom have stood down. LS11sVaultBoy an admin for the site will be taking over to run the site with Messi1983. I am going for admin rights so the following positions are available.

Bureaucrat (Only admins can apply): Tom has taken one position, we still need another position filled. If there is a user in particular, leave a vote for them in the comment section. My vote: Not sure...

Administrator (Only patrollers can apply): If another admin is promoted then we will need a new Admin, however Tom's position will likely be filled by yours truly. My vote: Smashbro8; nobody deserves it more than him, he's one of the most active Patrollers. CJ Jr. may apply for an admin position if any admins are demoted. *CLOSED FOR NOW AS MYSELF AND SMASHBRO HAVE GOTTEN POSITIONS TODAY.

Patroller (Any one can apply): As I go to be an admin, one position becomes available (now taken by 558050), and now that Smashbro has become admin, another person can apply (SJWalker has applied). We may need another if CJ Jr. is promoted.

* UPDATE: Demotion log:

Smurfynz, Smashbro8, Andre and myself have been discussing the demotion of inactive staff. This may leave a large gap. However, we cannot have admins (a majority of the inactive staff are admins) neglecting their duties and not working on the wiki. I am leaving a list of inactive staff, and you can vote and comment on whether or not they will be demoted or moved to inactive.

Votes: List user as keep position, demote or move to inactive e.g User: Keep Position/User: Demote or User: Move to Inactive.

As M.K. and Thomas announced their retirement, we are now left with Dodo8, JBanton and Tony 1998, who have not yet replied to the message on their talk pages. Monolith Patch Rain - Talk SCS Freedom 20:31, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

Votes

Dodo8

  • Demote and move to inactive - smurfy (coms) 03:06, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - Smashbro8-Sig-pt1 (Smashbro8-Sig-pt2) 03:31, January 20, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • Demote --Sasquatch101 (talk) 03:40, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - Leo68 (talk) 04:16, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - Carl Johnson Jr. (talk) 06:14, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote --558050 (talk) 10:30, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - SJWalker (talk) 11:37, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - Signature (talk) 11:58, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 16:42, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - MONKEYPOLICE188 (talk) 18:10, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote to patroller and move to inactive - Jeff (talk·stalk) 05:39, January 23, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - Messi1983 (talk) 08:16, January 23, 2015 (UTC)

JBanton

  • Demote - smurfy (coms) 03:06, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - Smashbro8-Sig-pt1 (Smashbro8-Sig-pt2) 03:31, January 20, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • Demote --Sasquatch101 (talk) 03:40, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - Leo68 (talk) 04:16, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - Carl Johnson Jr. (talk) 06:14, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote --558050 (talk) 10:30, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Neutral - SJWalker (talk) 11:37, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - Signature (talk) 11:58, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 16:42, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - MONKEYPOLICE188 (talk) 18:10, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote to patroller and move to inactive - Jeff (talk·stalk) 05:39, January 23, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - Messi1983 (talk) 08:16, January 23, 2015 (UTC)

Tony 1998

  • Move to inactive - smurfy (coms) 03:06, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Either Demote or Move to Inactive - Smashbro8-Sig-pt1 (Smashbro8-Sig-pt2) 03:31, January 20, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • Move to inactive --Sasquatch101 (talk) 03:40, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Move to inactive Leo68 (talk) 04:16, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Move to inactive - Carl Johnson Jr. (talk) 06:14, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Move to inactive - Monolith Patch Rain - Talk SCS Freedom 07:02, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote and move to inactive --558050 (talk) 10:30, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Move to inactive - SJWalker (talk) 11:37, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote and move to inactive - Signature (talk) 11:58, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote and move to inactive - LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 16:42, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - MONKEYPOLICE188 (talk) 18:10, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Move to inactive but don't demote - Jeff (talk·stalk) 05:39, January 23, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demote - Messi1983 (talk) 08:16, January 23, 2015 (UTC)

Comments

  • I have added Dodo8 to the list of inactive staff for the sake of consistency and fairness. All 4 inactive administrators are equally "guilty" of failing to perform their duties. I have been active 5 months, and in that time:
    • Mikey - has been active here a total of 4 days.
    • Thomas - even worse, 3 days of actual activity.
    • Dodo - 5 days in the same period.
    • Jonny - 6 days in the same period.
None of them have left any messages explaining potential absences on their user/talk page as far as I have seen. At least Tony 1988 had done that (and updated it again this month) to explain his absence due to internet problems. As much as this action will leave us short of Admins in raw numbers, in reality we've only had 1 effective admin for the last 4 months (Tom). UPDATE - I switched my Dodo and Mikey inactive votes due to Mikey's activity in last few weeks, got them around the wrong way initially. smurfy (coms) 03:06, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • I hate to sound harsh but honestly I believe all users don't have a good enough reason why they should have admin rights. JBanton is rarely active now. He used to show up often before the release of GTA V and Watch Dogs to create, improve and clean up vehicle pages, however, for even new vehicles in GTA V, he has never shown up to improve them. Thomas hasn't shown up in a long time either. He may be resigning so that is why I put demote. For Dodo and Mikey, they claim that they are in school. I can clearly understand that, however, there are 24 hours in a day. I do schoolwork online and work at a retail store on random days, however, I still manage to show up to help the wiki. Some users here actually work more hours than I do or go to college and still edit here often. I do not believe "I have school" is a good enough excuse. For Tony, he did say that he was having internet problems. He shows up rarely, and only does minor edits. From the time I have been here all 5 users haven't used much of their rights or shown up on the wiki after the release of GTA V. I honestly believe that having a few active admins is better than having many admins, several of which do not show up often, especially when we need them the most. Smashbro8-Sig-pt1 (Smashbro8-Sig-pt2) 03:31, January 20, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • I just want to start off by saying I have nothing against these staff members and commend they for all they have done for the GTA Wiki. There comes a point when people loose interest in what at one point in time really intrigued them. As it stands we have 4 very inactive admins and one patroller. The wiki as a whole is very vast and needs active staff to manage it as much as possible. So all in all I think it would be best if these inactive staff members leave there positions to more active members of the community. --Sasquatch101 (talk) 03:40, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Most admins should be demoted to Patroller and be moved to inactive. If they really want their rights back, they'll have to be active and work hard to gain their rights back. As for Tony, he should be moved to inactive because he explained his absence. Not explaining their absences should be the main reason the admins are demoted. Leo68 (talk) 04:19, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Inactive admins are a big no-no, obviously. In Tony's case, I'd say we would give him a pass. But the admins need to make sure that they have to keep doin their jobs and maintaining the wiki. I don't hold contempt for the admins listed here. Unfortunately, they have not shown much activity. Thus, demotion. Carl Johnson Jr. (talk) 06:14, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • I voted demote for Dodo and Thomas. As for M.K. and JBanton, they're sometimes active, but we should maybe demote them to patroller. And for Tony, we all agree on that. Monolith Patch Rain - Talk SCS Freedom 07:02, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Keeping inactive users as admin or patroller does not seems right to me. So I voted to everyone be demoted. --558050 (talk) 10:30, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • I don't think I've ever seen Dodo edit since I've been on the Wiki, and the others just seem to have disappeared off the face of the earth, but Tony gets a reprieve because he's explained his absence. Like Smashbro said, "school" is not a valid excuse as no-one is in school all day, and some editors have longer days and still manage to drop by the Wiki. I agree with Leo too, having fewer active admins is better than having seven admins when three or four of them barely show up. SJWalker (talk) 11:37, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • School is not a valid reason to be inactive, I have finished the school and I'm in college, yet, I still here, school is really not a valid reason to be inactive, also, I agree with 558050, I don't think keeping their rights is a good idea. Signature (talk) 11:58, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • After thinking about the situation a bit I decided not to vote for the four administrators. Basically you are all saying they should be demoted due to inactivity, something that I believe is extremely unfair - you cannot force the admins to be active when they cannot unless you live in the Soviet Union. I'm going to quote Jeff and Dan about similar situations a while ago:
"Just move him to inactive and forget about him [...] IMO if you kick them when they're losing interest by taking away the patroller spot, they're less likely to return."
— Jeff
"We don't punish people on here for having a life off the wiki. Just because some users live on this wiki, doesn't mean everyone should."
— Dan

Personally I don't feel there is a need to remove their rights. How about you do what many other Wikis do, i.e. remove their username color and add them to the "Inactive Staff" section of the GTA Wiki:Staff page? If admins go inactive, to fix the problem simply move them to inactive and promote someone else. If (yes I said IF) an inactive admin is active again, he'll still be able to manage stuff. Removing their rights is basically equal to kicking them out of the Wiki; I've never been demoted (except here and it was per my own request), but I think that someone who was an admin here and is demoted is less likely to return.

That being said, I agree that when requesting admin rights, if you know you're going to be inactive it's problematic. But still - demoting them is not the right way to solve the issue IMO. Monolith Patch Rain - Talk SCS Freedom 12:27, January 20, 2015 (UTC)

We are not asking anyone here to live on the wikia. No one works/studies/travels 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Is really asking too much for this users to just appear here once in a while to just make an edit? Or to see how is the wikia going? I don't think so. As Smurfyz already pointed out, this users have made 6 to only 4 edits in 5 months! I find really hard to believe that every single one of then was way too busy with their social lifes, during 5 months, to appear here. Its a very poor excuse, and I would personally find better if they just said that they are not interest in the wikia anymore, Hell, even Istalo was at least honest enough to say that he was too lazy to edit something.

--558050 (talk) 12:51, January 20, 2015 (UTC)

  • 558 is right, by saying "active" we don't mean that the user should be here 24/7/365, but at least three hours a day and at least during the weekends, is that too much to ask? I mean, they are ADMINISTRATORS, so their job is to administrate the wiki, they didn't came all this way to stay inactive for 5 months, what about the other competent users? I think it's better to have Leo, Smashbro and CJ Jr. as our admins, you see, Smashbro studies and works every day in the week (except weekends) and he's still here, that doesn't mean he has no social life, I think it's a bit unfair to have admins who doesn't show up in 5 months... Signature (talk) 14:06, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
    • Basically you both are implying they are inactive for the sole reason that they do not edit. Before claiming they are, please try contacting them and see what happens. Both Tom and Ilan never edited although they replied to messages on their talk page. Maybe that apply to them too.
      "They didn't came all this way to stay inactive for 5 months"
      There was that time when they were active. Their reason to go inactive is quite unclear (I doubt it is only "school") but still, "punishing" them by removing their rights is not the right way to take care of the issue. How about a message like this before proceeding to demoting? Monolith Patch Rain - Talk SCS Freedom 17:17, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • I think Dodo8 should be demoted but not inactive, I think JBanton is active but not really the admin type and Tony is very inactive so should be demoted and made inactive. I'll see what everyone else thinks before I do any demoting first though. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 16:44, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Final word: Demote the admins to inactive patrollers. Move Tony to inactive. CJ Jr. can take an admin spot and we'll stick with three until somebody else can be promoted. 2 'crats, 3 admins for now. Leo68 (talk) 17:51, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • These users are considered to me as inactive, their recent edits are only talk pages, with one or two having one article edit. I think they need to go, leaving space for other users. However, this will leave a worryingly large gap in the staff members page MONKEYPOLICE188 (talk) 18:12, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • That's why we should promote CJ Jr. We make the admins inactive patrollers and look to promote more users to admin. Leo68 (talk) 19:40, January 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Given this is now looking like a fait accompli, I've been doing some thinking about the staff page. In the past, the gallery tables have just shown the active staff, how about we show the vacant positions?
See my test layout here.
I don't personally think we need to be in any huge rush to fill any of the 3 higher level vacancies right away. All the active staff we would have on board are enough at the moment. That could change if the 4 or 5 Bureaucrats and Admins start to get overwhelmed, but I think in a month or two, we will be in a position to promote each layer up i.e. one of the 3 new Admins up to fill the Bureaucrat vacancy, a couple of the new Patrollers up to fill 2 or 3 of the Admin spots and another couple of new Patrollers can be promoted to back-fill those gaps. This would be in time for the arrival of the PC version which I predict will give us some issues with modded content very quickly.
Vested interest disclosure: Obviously I intend applying for one of those Admin positions when I have served an appropriate time at this level. When it was first suggested to me that I should apply for Patroller rights back in October, I made no secret of the fact that I am more accustomed to operating at the equivalent of at least an Administrator level. At the time, the admin layer looked pretty entrenched. Yes, I am kicking myself slightly for not having applied for Patroller much earlier as I may have been in a position to apply for Admin now if I had done so. smurfy (coms) 07:19, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
  • "School is not a valid reason to be inactive" - I think you'll find that school is a good enough reason to be inactive as education is more important than editing a wiki. Messi1983 (talk) 12:39, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
    • Dan, nobody is studying 24/7/365, Smashbro for an example, he study and work, yet, he's still here, also, I'm in college and i'm still here, that's why we say that school is not a valid reason for disappearing. AndreEagle17 (talk) 12:44, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
      • I'd like to hear from someone what is a "valid reason" to go inactive. You may be in school and find time to edit Wikia, some here don't. I assume school in Brazil is not the same as school in Romania (where Dodo lives) and in Portugal (where M.K. lives). Monolith Patch Rain - Talk SCS Freedom 12:48, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
  • In my opinion school is a valid reason to go inactive. Education is the most important thing in your life after your family because education makes or breaks your life. Messi1983 (talk) 12:59, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
  • Rain and Dan, I know and I agree that education is the most important thing in life, that's why i'm in college, but I don't think it makes them busy enough not to get back to the wiki, a very valid reason to leave was Ilan's reason, he's in his country's armed forces and The Tom wanted something to his life, it was sad to lose both of them, but they gave us very strong reasons, also, I think school does not take 24 hours of their days, appearing in the wiki sometimes will not break their lifes, i'm not saying basically that "they should forget about school", but they should take at least a few minutes of their days to see if the wiki is running smoothly. AndreEagle17 (talk) 13:09, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
    • "I think school does not take 24 hours of their days, appearing in the wiki sometimes will not break their lifes"
      You never know. On Tuesdays I start school at 8 AM and finish it at 6 PM. At home, work & stuff and I'm "free" at 8 PM, and I am in bed at 10 PM. Basically that means that on Tuesdays I do barely edit.
      Additionally, I believe there is more than the "school" reason. Personal life, etc. See how Mikey is 17 (nearly 18), who knows, he might've a job. Takes time as well. Monolith Patch Rain - Talk SCS Freedom 13:24, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
      • I use myself as a example, I work from 2PM to 5PM and then I go to college from 6PM to 10PM, that's 7 hours of my 24 hours day that I'm too busy to enter in the wikia, (although I'm on vacation from college until february, so I have more time now), that still leave some proper time to at least enter here too see how things have been going. Now, of course that there is cases in with the person needs to dedicate more time of his day to study, maybe to pass in an future exam of something, I also tend to leave wikia for some weeks to study for my own exams. But if that happens, is really asking too much that they warn the rest of the staff that they are leaving for some time? The inactive or semi-inactive tables in the user page are there for this, most of these people just vanished without saying anything, that is really frustrating. And today, with cellphones that can connect to the internet almost anywhere, this excuse of "lack of time" is even more weak (but I have to admit that editing something in the mobile version of the site is a real bitch). Also, in other forums and sites that I attend, I have seem people use this exactly same excuse, and yet still could find time to enter in sites like facebook or twitter! I'm not acusing these guys of anything, but you have to admit that theres something more going on here then just school or work. Lack of interest is my best guess. Anyway, maybe I was really too harsh in saying that they all should be demoted, I will revise my decision. --DLVIIIL Talk 13:40, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
  • Once again, I don't mean that they should leave school or their personal life, is it too much to ask to be just a few minutes in the wiki? Even if school takes 12 hours of the day, there's still some time for them, and you know what? Leon Davis has kids and he works hard, he is still here, but okay, I think i'm sounding like a dick right now, if I do, then sorry. AndreEagle17 (talk) 13:49, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
    • Or maybe schools in Romania and Portugal are really different then the Brazilian schools. Who knows? :P - DLVIIIL Talk 13:56, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
      • Basically this resumes well the situation. Monolith Patch Rain - Talk SCS Freedom 14:37, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
  • Actually, Andre IS right. Like some of the others said, school is a very poor excuse to not edit a wiki. Education is important yes. But even if school lasts 12 hours and you study for 2-4 extra hours that still does not complete a day on Earth. That means Dodo and Mikey could come if they wanted to, but I honestly believe they lost interest. I know some users here like Smurfynz, Leon, etc that work and have families to take care of and still show up here often. We all know that work lasts usually 9 hours depending on the job, but some can be longer. I do schoolwork online and go to work usually two to three days a week and still show up here. So school is a very poor reason to not edit a wiki. I bet I could look to see how long public school lasts in both Romania and Portugal and we'll see who's lying. I think it's a lack of interest, which is all they have to say. Smashbro8-Sig-pt1 (Smashbro8-Sig-pt2) 17:35, January 21, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • First of, I never claimed school to be taking 24/7 of my time. So, Smashbro, if you wanna see who's lying, then you can bet it's not me, because I said school was taking up time I could be using here back when I had tests most days of the week. Anyway, go on, go look at how long public school lasts here. You're naïve as hell if you think everybody has the same school schedule anywhere. I have colleagues who go to school at 8h am and have class until 17:30. And have homework. And have part-time work at night. Not my case, but know what you're saying before you say it. And know that you'll never know what's going on in other people's lives. I actually had a grandma to take care of as well because she underwent catarates operation, although that's not even one of the main reasons I didn't come here (read the next paragraphs).
Anyway, if you all want to demote me, you chose a poor timing for it. You could/should have done it last year, as I was even less active, and checked on the Wiki less times. And know that I still watched from the sideline, sometimes. If you wanted to do this, you've come late and chose a time I wasn't as "innactive".
And you know what? I did lose interest in the Wiki. I was coming over here every 2 days, seeing if I still had any interest but nope. And the changes in the editing didn't really help. And the people I used to speak to here aren't on anymore, either. If I was sure about leaving the Wiki, I would have told you. But yeah, you were quicker.
I hope this mass-demotion isn't related to someone having their eye on the prize (prize which would be admin-ship).
Go ahead. I'll not be coming back. Everyone I used to speak to regularly before I left (558050, Ilan, Dodo, Tony, VaultBoy, JBanton), good luck and happiness. - Mikey Klebbitz (talk), 19:51, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
  • @Mikey Klebbitz. Well, I didn't know all of that and my apologies if I insulted you. However, if all of that was happening, and you knew you could not edit here anymore, you should've told the community to move you to inactive or to demote you.It's keeping unnecessary space. Once again, I'm sorry to hear all of that and wish you the best in the future. Smashbro8-Sig-pt1 (Smashbro8-Sig-pt2) 20:05, January 21, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • @Smashbro I was feeling some bad blood between us in your post. Apologies accepted.
And as I forgot to write previously, I was coming back every once in a while to see if I really wanted to put myself up for demotion. I do now, while I did not, before.
It was fun while it lasted and I put myself to it. To you all, continue the good work me, Ilan, Tom (obviously not only us, but we're the ones leaving at the moment) and other have put in to make this Wiki as good and attractive to potential users as possible.
Out. - Mikey Klebbitz
  • Adding my voice to the agreement that school (or work) commitments are FAR more important than any volunteer "work" on the internet. The concern here is not that these staff members are too engaged in real life activity to be effective, it is that they have abandoned their "responsibility" (such that it is) here without explanation. Simply saying that School/Life is busy and "I might only be able to be here 1 hour a week" would have been enough. smurfy (coms) 21:23, January 21, 2015 (UTC)
  • Like I wrote on my user page, it's natural for users to get busy with new commitments and lose interest over time. As far as I'm concerned, any inactive staff are welcome to return to the wiki and apply for re-promotion - although that has never happened on any wiki I've been on. Graciously stepping down when you lose interest is, honestly, a tough thing to do, and I admire Mikey and Thomas for deciding to step down. However, people taking the administrator job do so knowing that activity is a requirement. This is why I've voted for Dodo and JBanton to be demoted to patrollers and, along with Tony1998, moved to inactive. Jeff (talk·stalk) 05:39, January 23, 2015 (UTC)
  • Demoted users are definitely welcome to return to the wiki and apply for re-promotion. This wiki is sad to see users such as Tom, Ilan, Mikey and Thomas resign. It looks like the community on here has decided that JBanton, Dodo and Tony should be demoted. I will go ahead and demote the three users now so we can now concentrate on getting new admins and a new bureaucrat. Messi1983 (talk) 10:29, January 23, 2015 (UTC)
  • I have demoted JBanton and Dodo. Tony will be moved to inactive users. Messi1983 (talk) 10:35, January 23, 2015 (UTC)
  • Since everything is done now, this discussion should be closed. Smashbro8-Sig-pt1 (Smashbro8-Sig-pt2) 17:04, January 23, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8

My Resignation

As you may have noticed I've been pretty inactive in recent months, I thought I might be able to find time for the Wiki again, but that doesn't seem likely. So I'm resigning.

I'll be keeping my rights for the time being so that I can promote whoever you all choose to become a bureaucrat. Then I'll be gone. I've been dedicated to rebuilding this Wiki for the last few years now, but I feel that I've gone as far as I can. I think I'm leaving the Wiki in capable hands.

So good luck everyone, I wish you all the best. Tom Talk 20:59, January 18, 2015 (UTC)

Comments

  • Oh man, it's a real shame to hear that. Now we've lost two bureaucrats. Well, good luck to you. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 21:02, January 18, 2015 (UTC)
    • Thanks mate. Good luck with your b'crat vote. Tom Talk 21:04, January 18, 2015 (UTC)
      • Did you see the message I sent you? LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 21:07, January 18, 2015 (UTC)
        • Sorry to see you go. Messi1983 (talk) 11:31, January 22, 2015 (UTC)

Patroller Probation (Bureaucrat-Admin Only Vote)

A message for our bureaucrats and admins, The Tom, Ilan xd, Messi1983, LS11sVaultBoy, Dodo8, JBanton, Mikey Klebbitz & Thomas0802.

To any other users, please leave voting to more senior staff members, that are listed above.

I immediately want to point out I'm not stirring up trouble to any new users applying for promotion, but events of the last few days makes me think this should be suggested. With the problems the community faced with RainingPain17 I propose the following;

Each user applying for Patroller rights with inexperience or 2 months of joining should go through a three month trial basis or probationary period if a majority yes vote is reached, to prove whether or not they can do the job. Due to a few inexperiences and disputes, Andre has agreed if his vote goes this way, as it stands right now this is the case. Please leave your votes tomorrow. If this goes towards a negative majority vote then please delete the post. If there is a positive majority vote then we could put this into the Staff policies. If there is more questions, please leave them on my talk page.

Vote

Comments

  • I agree that it would be a good thing to happen. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 17:20, January 9, 2015 (UTC)
  • This is a good idea, but 2 months would be enough. - Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 19:19, January 10, 2015 (UTC)
  • Dan has voted in favour on the blog post, so as it stands two admins and a bureaucrat are in favour. I'll leave a notice on the post to redirect all comments and votes here. Leo68 (talk) 00:22, January 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • CLOSED. SUCCESSFUL.

Character Navigation Templates

Hi all. I'm posting here to ask what do you all think about the current navigation templates for Characters. GTA's pre-TLAD use navboxes and GTA's post-IV use a navbars. I'm in favour of both, but we can't keep both together (See the Lazlow page, you'll know what I mean), so I'm asking about your opinions what should be done about this.

Navbars are cleaner and small in size, but don't have all characters or show whether a character is main, supporting, radio host, etc.. Navboxes are big in size but can have all characters listed and can show what type of character it is.

Choose!
 
6
 
0
 

The poll was created at 19:34 on December 24, 2014, and so far 6 people voted.

Happy Holidays, by the way. V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 19:37, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

Navbox, because navbars look ugly. AK-28 (TalkEdits) 19:52, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

Yup, navbars are definitely horrible. Monolith Patch Rain - Talk SCS Freedom 21:59, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

Navbox, they look better in full view, they are more informative AND they can be collapsed to take up less room. smurfy (coms) 22:52, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

GTA V/Online Template Colour Coordination

Hi everyone. Not sure whether this is the right place to post this (new to the Wiki community) thought I'd start a discussion here about the templates we use for GTA V and Online (mostly for Online) and say we need some consistency in the colour coordination. Like, all colours are the same across the wiki, as I think it'd be a lot more helpful to have it. So far, we have:
Aqua for Next-Gen Exclusives
Light Green for Special Collector's Edition/Pre-Order Bonus
Dark Orange for the Social Club items
Yellow for the Beach Bum Update
Violet for the Valentine's Day Massacre Special
Light Blue for The Business Update
#FF2400 for The High Life Update
#42A5AB for the I'm Not A Hipster Update
Red, White & Blue for the Independence Day Special
Lime Green for the San Andreas Flight School Update
Pink for San Andreas Flight School Jobs (separate to the update - the jobs were released 2 weeks later)
Dark Gray for The Last Team Standing Update
Indigo for the Festive Suprise Update
Olive for the upcoming Heists Update

I just wanted to see what everyone thought about making every colour the same for each template referring to each update. Also, if you'd change any colours (perhaps to make them more readable, personally not a fan of the Indigo colour against a black background) and what colours would be best for the future. Thanks!

ToJ (talk) 22:50, December 18, 2014 (UTC)

Carl Johnson Jr. changed the colors for Festive Update to #ED1C24 #00FF00 and for Independence Day Special to #B22234 white #3C3B6E on the GTA V weapons template. Festive Surprise colors look good IMO but the Independence Day Special colors are still a bit hard to see (though much better than before). Thoughts on this? V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 11:31, December 19, 2014 (UTC)

The Festive Surprise colour is great. I'm starting to realise that lighter colours usually work best against the GTA Wiki's black background. The Independence Day colours are better, I'm all in favour of keeping the red, white and blue-style to this update. Just what shade of each colour is what needs to be decided. ToJ (talk) 01:34, December 20, 2014 (UTC)

Weapons

Hey there, I'm AK-28 aka Kingrhem - a former staff member of this wiki. This wiki is one of the biggest wikis out there, however it's really messed up when it come to articles about weapons. Lately I've been editing around the Battlefield wiki, and there weapon articles are magnificent and they separate information into each game like this:


Grand Theft Auto IV

The Rocket Launcher or RPG (Rocket Propelled Grenade) is a weapon in Grand Theft Auto IV...



Grand Theft Auto V

The Shrewsbury Rocket Launcher or RPG (Rocket Propelled Grenade) is a weapon in Grand Theft Auto V....



Note: The weapons should be either sorted by in-game name or by weapon type. -AK-28 (TalkEdits) 10:16, December 7, 2014 (UTC)

Votes

Comments

Restoring GTA Myths Wiki as an Affiliate

Closed as Successful - iLan (XDEdits ) 18:49, December 29, 2014 (UTC)

For those of you who don't know me, I'm Boomer8 - an administrator on the GTA Myths Wiki and a former patroller here before I resigned. I'd like to begin to say that this wiki does not allow myths. Period. About a year and a half ago the rumors and speculation of myths in GTA V was a big problem here, so when the GTA Myths Wiki was created the problem was resolved very well. Its the most professional and reliable source of GTA Myths on the web to date, and has a strong following of its own. So I think it would be beneficial to both of our wikis, and the readers, to re-affiliate them. We would both gain new users and viewers; and there would be less confusion as to where to find both of our wikis. Now for those of you who don't know why we broke the affiliation, there was a disagreement between both of the staffs over a vandal. Because of this, the wikis were no longer affiliated with each other and the links to our wikis were removed from all pages from each wiki. However, the situation has been resolved for months now and both wikis are neutral towards each other. So in conclusion, I highly suggest that you vote in favor of this for these very reasons. Thank you. --Boomer8 (talk) 07:32, December 3, 2014 (UTC)

Votes

Comments

  • I think it would be a good idea.Hunter(Talk/Stalk) 08:43, December 3, 2014 (UTC)
  • First, to explain, I don't have anything against GTA Myths Wiki or hold any grudges against the active users there. I'm fully in favor of the wikis linking to each other where relevant (e.g. on this wiki's Bigfoot page). I do, however, think that the whole concept of "affiliates" is more of a social dance feature that mostly serves to give people and wikis a way to get back at each other for perceived slights by removing one another from affiliates lists - see the way Sasquatch removed the affiliation because he got blocked and GTA Wiki Staff responded by scrubbing the links to Myths Wiki, or the way people on both wikis antagonize each other with their "friends lists" on their user pages. Jeff (talk·stalk) 15:31, December 3, 2014 (UTC)
  • Affiliates allow users to access a network of sites without the hassle of scouring the internet to find what they are looking for. It builds a wider community of different interests and more users. Top wikis on Wikia implement affiliates as it is a fantastic tool for both independent wikis and it's users. I don't want to "dig up" the past, but the fact is Tom unilaterally removed the Myths links and affiliate tab from GTA Wiki before we did. I still am confused why he would do that since he was only hurting users who enjoyed a more cohesive linked network of information. Affiliating and expanding this wikis' user base is a good thing and should happen. --Sasquatch101 (talk) 00:44, December 4, 2014 (UTC)
  • In my opinion, the past is the past. We should never go over what happened in the past. GTA Myths Wiki should once again be an affiliate of this wiki. In life, we learn things from the past and I believe Sasquatch and Boomer can be trusted with their wiki once again being an affiliate of this wiki. Smashbro8-Sig-pt1 (Smashbro8-Sig-pt2) 01:24, December 4, 2014 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • The request should be closed by now.Hunter(Talk/Stalk) 19:52, December 19, 2014 (UTC)
  • Is a bureaucrat going to close this? It's been open for way more than a week. --Boomer8 (talk) 05:23, December 20, 2014 (UTC)

Staff: Cleanup assistance request

A user recently uploaded literally hundreds of Russian language videos - see Special:Log/Osmanas. It would be good if the administrators and b-crats could delete of his videos, maybe 10 per day or something, so that it doesn't have to all be done by one guy. Jeff (talk·stalk) 21:25, June 9, 2014 (UTC)

Abuse filters

Wikia Central has enabled abuse filters on this wiki, and I'm working on important them from Bully Wiki. Hopefully they'll work properly, otherwise I'll have to ask for some help with them (they're in a programming language I don't recognize, but I can sometimes figure out how to edit the code someone else wrote to make it do what I want).

Because this wiki has IP editing turned off, I had to create an account to test the filters. Ergo the User:Jeff the Vandal account.

I'll continue to update the community.

And I'd just like to thank Joshualeverburg for giving us a chance to permanently spoil his fun, and clean out the staff roster from the "promote anybody who asks for it and can spell words right" days in one fell swoop. Jeff (talk·stalk) 07:19, May 6, 2014 (UTC)

Boomer8 has resigned as a patroller

Following Sasquatch's demotion and banning, Boomer has decided to relinquish his patroller rights [1]. His actual resignation statement was removed as a personal attack/incivility. Jeff (talk·stalk) 03:18, May 6, 2014 (UTC)

He reposted it, and has now been blocked for a month. Jeff (talk·stalk) 06:34, May 6, 2014 (UTC)

New bureaucrat and administrator

I have decided to step down as a bureaucrat. Having discussed this with the other two bureaucrats (Messi1983 and The Tom), we've decided to forgo a formal election and make the following promotions.

  • Ilan xd is promoted to bureaucrat due to being the most senior non-bureaucrat administrator and unanimous agreement among bureaucrats.
  • Dodo8 is promoted to administrator - he received 100% 'yes' votes in the January 2014 Administrator Election, and that indicates that the community trusts him to be an administrator.

Jeff (talk·stalk) 22:28, April 2, 2014 (UTC)

Image sources remind

Between the 4th and the 28th February, I'll work in a project, with its goal to rename and add the license templates to several images here to keep the Wiki better organized and with copyrighted images. And just to remind, I'm asking all users something. If you are editing a page on source mode and you see images violating the image policy, don't erase it. They might serve as a redirect to several images I renamed or I'll rename. To be sure if the image follows the image policy or not, exit the editing mode and click on the image. If the image doesn't follow the image policy, rename it if you want (if you possess administrator/bureaucrat rights) to help me. Thanks for understanding. --Thomas0802 • (talkedits) 18:55, February 6, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

GTA 1 & 2 Cleanup

I noticed that the GTA 1 and GTA 2 missions pages are very small and/or require a lot of cleanup. I would try my best to clean them up and add to them myself, but I know next to nothing about those games since I haven't played them since 2004ish. Is there anyone who knows about these games enough and that is willing to add to them? LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 17:13, February 5, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

  • I'll take care of GTA 1 when I'm done with renaming images. --Thomas0802 • (talkedits) 19:45, February 5, 2014 (UTC)

Administrator elections

Anyone who is interested in participating, please go to GTA Wiki:Requests for Promotion/Jan 2014 Administrator Election and vote. It's going to be open for a week (at least) regardless so feel free to take some time thinking about it first. Jeff (talk|stalk) 21:43, January 10, 2014 (UTC)

Per the Election results, the new administrator is User:Thomas0802. Jeff (talk|stalk) 15:42, January 17, 2014 (UTC)