Well, I'm going. I'm no longer a use here, and this place is dead; no one will even talk anymore and the staff (except Monk and a couple others) are becoming stupidly inactive and hog higher staff positions that other active users could be useful with and still remain active. It's known as lane-hogging, it's ridiculous.

End my probation. I'm leaving anyway. -- Guy A (Junior) - That Ferrari Guy (talk) 18:44, October 21, 2015 (UTC)

Wait, what??? Don't go! I understand (and support) your points, but this is pretty much how the wiki is man. That's no reason to leave. [1][2][3] 19:06, October 21, 2015 (UTC)
How rude! I can't believe you're calling most of us useless! Now I sincerely think you should blame yourself for that. Don't talk to me either. [4] AndreEagle17 [5] [6] [7] 20:18, October 21, 2015 (UTC)
  • This place is dead, yet we get nearly 200 edits a day, as compared to some other wikis like others I'm on that get less than 20 or no edits a day. And, as Andre said, it sounds like you're all saying we're useless. So we can't take a break an come back here? Is this a full time job? Does this pay bills? I'm sorry I didn't know it did. So if we seem useless and inactive to you, go call out other wikis but don't do it here. Just because you can edit every day doesn't mean everyone else can; the same goes with chat. [8] ([9]) 20:31, October 21, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
I'll apologise for this. We're both upset after a family matter (big matter), leaving us both in distress. I can understand if you've lost trust of him, but keep it light. Thanks. Overreaction on his behalf, but it's understandable to an extent. [10][11][12] 21:04, October 21, 2015 (UTC)

Damnit. I was busy this week and all that I see is this?! God. Something bad always happens when I'm not here. :( [13] SWAT Cam F [14] [15] [16] 01:22, October 22, 2015 (UTC)

Important Notice to all users and staff

Alex has discovered on the Manual of Style that multiple generation vehicles should NOT have their own pages,, so we all know what this means; all of the vehicle pages need to be merged again. This has been confirmed by an informal bureaucratic veto between Tom (as a two 2-1 majority as Jamal was in disagreement before). This applies to Buffalo, Coquette, Oracle, Sentinel, Rancher etc. If it has a stock car name; Buffalo S, Coquette Classic, Rancher XL etc. then it becomes part of the stock car page. As Wildbrick pointed out, the same will apply to the Police Cruiser pages. If you'll do one, please list it below to avoid edit conflicts. List them like votes, and comment below.

Selecting Page to Change


  • I don't get your point, are we merging or de-merging them? And what do you mean by just "Buffalo" on your vote, Leo? -- Guy A (Junior) - That Ferrari Guy (talk) 20:24, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm guessing we merge them again, and instead of voting under that tab you put which page you're going to merge, which Leo has done. Sam Talk 20:31, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
    • Merge it with what though? -- Guy A (Junior) - That Ferrari Guy (talk) 20:35, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
    • Sam got it spot on. Pick a car, and it's variants and merge. As I've selected Buffalo, I'll merge it with the S page. Leo68 (talk) 20:38, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • If Bobcat and Bobcat XL are merged, then so should Rancher and Rancher XL. -- Guy A (Junior) - That Ferrari Guy (talk) 20:48, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • So uh what about things like Granger and FIB Granger, Lifeguard, Park Ranger and Sheriff SUV?? -- Guy A (Junior) - That Ferrari Guy (talk) 20:48, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
    • Variants. Leo68 (talk) 20:56, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
      • So is that a yes, we are merging them, or a no, we're not? -- Guy A (Junior) - That Ferrari Guy (talk) 20:58, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
      • Yep, no need for infoboxes for all variants, just the main ones. Add an image and some info on them. It's the same car, just a different paintjob and there's a few extras. Leo68 (talk) 21:03, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • No way. We'll clutter the stock pages with their variant's pages, especially the Police Cruiser ones. Are we gonna put everything in a single page? Looks like the MoS needs a change instead. [24] SWAT Cam F [25] [26] [27] 20:52, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • We're actually de-cluttering the wiki, it's just expanding the other pages. If looking through it is an issue, we have the contents on the page. Leo68 (talk) 20:56, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • WOAH WOAH WOAH, WHAT THE F*CK IS GOING ON!!!??? Have we not discussed this already!!??? No!!! Im out. Peace. Cya. -- [28][29][30] 21:05, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • Chill Monk! Alex pointed out the fact on MoS, Tom & I did a Bureaucrat only vote, but it was because it had been brought up several times before now. See the other discussions, it was bound to happen again. Leo68 (talk) 21:15, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • Well if this is going ahead, I'm done. I've had enough, not keen AT ALL with merging the police articles, or Oracle, or Coquette, or any f*cking thing! [31][32][33] 21:17, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • Are we really going to do it again? Sean walked out over the same discussion, it's childish. It's only a wiki, it's not life and death. The Police Cruisers idea was WildBrick's but the Oracles & Coquettes are variants, that's why the stock car name is in it. If it was called the BlackFin, not the Coquette BlackFin, it would have it's own name. Leo68 (talk) 21:20, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • Look, I see your point, but it's just making the articles longer, more complicated and cluttered, as if the Buffalo snd Rancher articles weren't cluttered enough already. The current system is fine and keeps it clean and simple. [34][35][36] 21:29, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • Agreed with Monk. The way it looks is better. I'm so confused with the parameters of being considered a variant or not (name, performance, etc.), but this is ridiculous. [37] SWAT Cam F [38] [39] [40] 21:38, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • I think the obvious ones should be changed; Buffalo, Oracle, Rancher & Sultan, but the Sentinels have always been split, and the cruisers will just wreck the page. I say stick to the ones I listed and leave the others. We may want to merge at least one of the classic Coquettes with the original page. Leo68 (talk) 21:41, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • Look, I'm not falling out over this, but I'm refusing to support or take part in this. I demand a community vote (yet again). Can't believe you've already started without hardly any agreements. [41][42][43] 21:46, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • If Monk's leaving for good, I'm off too. Thats 1 of your finest patrollers (Monk) gone, and another new-comer (Myself). Maybe it's for the gest, as we'd just get in the way. -- Guy A (Junior) - That Ferrari Guy (talk) 23:03, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • I just followed what the MoS said, but given there was so many arguments over this, I felt it was better to go to a Bureaucratic veto, as opposed to a community vote, it was a calm and effective way of dealing with it. Leo68 (talk) 21:55, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • Leave them seperate, no need for extra complicated work. Let's try to avoid mass clutter of different variants' info in one page and rather update the MoS/V since ALL of the vehicles are like this.  --Tony42898 (Talker - Blogger - Stalker)-- 22:36, October 18, 2015 (UTC) 
  • Not enough thought. Say we got vehicle design galleries for all 5 grangers, are we seriously going to put them all into one article and make it complicated? This is ridiculous, you really haven't thought this through enough at all. The Granger has technically only appeared in one GTA game and its article is looking big already, haven't even added the trivia from the 4 other granger variants yet, not to mention performance and galleries. It'll be way too big by the end of it. Do yourself a favour and give up. --Guy A (Junior) - That Ferrari Guy (talk) 22:58, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • My opinion is that the MoS needs an update. Vehicles, like characters and weapons, have their own identity and nobody seems to be following the policy other than the basics. Also, the Granger page is too complicated now. And what about the others? Sorry, but the vehicles will lose their identities with this. --[44] SWAT Cam F [45] [46] [47] 23:23, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • What should be done, is that if it's a clear next generation car such as the Buffalo or the Oracle keep it the same, but the cruisers or Coquettes would get too cluttered. Having two cars on one page works (like the Insurgent or the Kuruma, but not three like the Coquettes. Leo68 (talk) 23:30, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • What's the point of policies if we don't follow them? If you're all leaving because you don't like it, I see no point of the wiki. Leo68 (talk) 23:57, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
    • I am SOOOO sorry for this. I've been thinking it through all day in college today, and I've been a big idiot, rude and stupid person for being like this. I hope you'll forgive me.
    • I've thought it through, and although I think it'll make articles bigger, I've seen my brother's completed "Buffalo" article which Leo started, and it looks alright as of now, and the Granger article turned out better than expected/ I'll be ready to start on any other suggestions, as I can now agree with this project. I apologize for my childish behaviour and comments. Sorry. [48][49][50] 14:26, October 19, 2015 (UTC)
  • I honestly think we should have infoboxes for the Police variants (such as "Police Buffalo", "FIB Granger", "Park Ranger", etc), as it's making it messier in places...such as performance and design areas. [51][52][53] 17:04, October 19, 2015 (UTC)
  • Wow, so I decided to take a break and you mean we're back on this sh*t again? Is it really that serious over vehicle pages being merged? Come on. If the vehicle has a different name, different performance and different design, keep it separate. So we're supposed to have five Grangers all on one page? That's untidy. It's like we're always going over and over on this discussion. Sean quit, over this, and this discussion causes a lot of drama. I suggest we leave the vehicle pages alone. Having vehicle pages merged is untidy to me if the cars are slightly different. The Burritos and Boxvilles I understand, everything else, just no. I suggest you all come to an agreement for good on this; I don't want to know that I'm taking a break here and World War III is happening here. #justsaying. [54] ([55]) 19:06, October 19, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
    • Yeah, I've started already, and the Granger, and Buffalo are some of the best examples of how untidy this looks. I'm really not liking this project...It's getting too complicated, not to mention my below comment on what to do with the Stanier, Taxi, Police Cruiser, etc... [56][57][58] 19:08, October 19, 2015 (UTC)
      • Are you guys for real? Or should I just say that these pages look like shit all crammed up together instead of separate. We need to go back to the original. This isn't working, is causing drama and overall just looks very untidy and unorganized. Plus it's not that serious. How hard is it for a player of GTA V to look up FIB Granger or Sheriff SUV? Or Buffalo XS? Guys this looks ridiculous. Let's just go back to the original and be happy. A new DLC is out or almost out (I haven't checked); that's where our focus should be not this. This new plan is causing unnecessary drama and as I said, no World War III needs to happen here while I'm gone for a little while. [59] ([60]) 19:18, October 19, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
        • I agree man, can you revert the affected pages back to the original copies? As you said, this isn't working, it's making them more complex, and as you also said, a DLC is coming up soon (literally tomorrow, I'll be busy collecting stuff from that). I thought it'd turn out well, but it's really not. [61][62][63] 19:21, October 19, 2015 (UTC)
          • I'll message Leo first for confirmation before I end up starting a scene for harsh actions. But this idea is totally ridiculous and needs to be a dropped topic. [64] ([65]) 19:29, October 19, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
            • He'll clearly disagree, plus I'm pretty sure Leo AND Tom agreed to the project, therefore the bureaucratic vote is 2 - 1. [66][67][68] 19:32, October 19, 2015 (UTC)
              • Well, even if he and Tom disagree, you've got me, you, TFG, Camilo and I'm pretty sure even Andre will agree on this. 4-2. If push comes to shove by tomorrow night, I'll be reverting all of this mess. #sorrynotsorry [69] ([70]) 19:34, October 19, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8

(Reset indent) Well, I'm pretty sure I've made everything 10x harder by getting a lot done on it, only now disagreeing with it. [71][72][73] 19:37, October 19, 2015 (UTC)

  • I'm closing the vote as unsuccessful. Also, as we've argued over this probably 5 times already, let's drop this discussion and all be happy with the pages as they are originally. Thank you. [74] ([75]) 20:44, October 19, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8

I've waited here, just seeing how this will go down after people spoke against it again; and honestly, I'm really not surprised. As Jamal said, we've been over this crap 5 times already; which is why I think reverting it back to the state (Both keeping and merging the pages) only causes problems.

I think, we should more accurately lay out the specifics of generations and/or/vs variants and have a good discussion, that'll close this topic so it doesn't come up again. No one's gonna like it either way, so might as well do the job well ONCE, instead of bringing it back up every few months. My proposal is: 

  • Vehicles with multiple generations, get one page if their second generation has been only in one game  (Burrito, Buffalo, Oracle) while vehicles that have two generations over multiple games, (Sabre/Sabre Turbo) get two separate pages, with a disambig template at the top. For vehicles between GTA V and GTA Online, the difference shouldn't count. 
  • Vehicles that have variants/modded versions (Primo Custom, Clown Car, Dragon Wagon) should share the same page regardless. 

In both situations, there should be a design, performance, customization (if applicable) and location tab for both vehicles. I just want there to be no more arguments over stupid shit like this, and I really think we should have ONE GTA Wiki community discussion about this, with as many members and staff as possible; to stress every possible direction it could be taken into. If you agree/disagree, or want to have a better discussion on this idea of mine specifically, I'll make it into a respective blog post. Mortsnarg (talk) 23:06, October 19, 2015 (UTC)

I'm not getting involved anymore; I followed the policy directions and they were ignored. Before I withdraw from the discussion, there was some important points raised;

  1. <p data-parsoid="{"dsr":[20902,21505,0,0]}">Custom being added to the name should not warrant having it's own page.
  2. <p data-parsoid="{"dsr":[20902,21505,0,0]}">Monk's idea of an emergency service Granger page is a great one. The performance is all the same, it's just different liveries, but it should be noted that the Lifeguard variant has a unique orange sirens.
  3. <p data-parsoid="{"dsr":[20902,21505,0,0]}">The focus right now should be on the DLC.
<p data-parsoid="{"dsr":[20902,21505,0,0]}">I'm leaving any further discussion to Tom and Jamal. Leo68 (talk) 04:19, October 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Are we back to this again? We were over this five or more times and it always ended and will end with a no. It's causing more trouble than it's worth (we've had an admin leave, and now we almost lost a patroller. Not to mention all the arguments in the past) and literally noone is complaining about how it is now, aside from the usual few. It's not broken, so no need to fix it.[76][77][78]­ 16:25, October 20, 2015 (UTC)


  • Granger Complete, I was about to move onto the Stanier, but if only the GTA IV and V Taxi's are variants of the Stanier, how will I add this to the article? How can I merge them? [79][80][81] 15:13, October 19, 2015 (UTC)
    • Buffalo (Variants) Complete. [82][83][84] 16:33, October 19, 2015 (UTC)

Adding Vehicle Image Table to Vehicles in GTA V Article

<p data-parsoid="{"dsr":[27687,28076,0,0]}">Closed as Successful by Monkeypolice188.

Okay, so, I've finished a temporary (placeholder for the moment) vehicle table which includes the original concept of displaying images of the vehicles. Each image takes you to the article of that vehicle when clicked on. Separated neatly into type of vehicle, and vehicle class.

Should this be added (not replacing current table) to the Vehicles in GTA V article? Yes or No.

PS: Any specific ideas/suggestions of how to add this into the article would be much appreciated; I'm not too keen on simply "shoving" it in there just yet. [85][86][87] 18:03, October 14, 2015 (UTC)



Enhanced Version Screenshots for Characters

From Andy's blog post. I though it'd be appropriate to have it here. --Tony42898 (Talker - Blogger - Stalker)-- 23:17, September 19, 2015 (UTC)

Hey guys. There are still some characters in Grand Theft Auto V who do not have an enhanced version screenshot (PlayStation 4, Xbox One, and Personal Computer versions are what I'm referring to). Can you guys get enhanced version screenshots for the following characters?


  • I've separated the names and added bullets to make it easier to read. Leo68 (talk) 23:19, September 19, 2015 (UTC)
  • Not sure if my statement is correct, but replacing their actual images with Enhanced Edition's counterparts is like, you know, replacing the vehicle images with the same Enhanced images, which was dropped some time ago. Maybe the semi-pixelated images (like the one on Elwood) needs a better image, or because it's too large. [107] SWAT Cam F [108] [109] [110] 14:44, September 20, 2015 (UTC)

My Resignation

Hey guys. Things have not been going very good for me lately. I feel like I'm not mature enough to be a Patroller on this Wiki. I feel like I must resign, and go back to being a typical user. Andy A. (talk) (Contributions) 18:08, September 17, 2015 (UTC)


  • Bye bye Andy! Enjoy life and don't worry about us, we'll be alright :D [111] AndreEagle17 [112] [113] [114] 02:28, September 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • It was nice having you around, great contributions, but your attitude wasn't right, and you didn't seem to be using your patroller tools at all. Goodbye Andy, we still appreciate your contributions. ;) That Ferrari Guy (talk) 06:34, September 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • You do seem a little childish in comments but still you are a good user. I hope to see you around. Myth(Talk/Stalk) 07:42, September 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • Too bad to see that, but well. What else can I do in this situation? Bye bye, Andy! [115] SWAT Cam F [116] [117] [118] 19:10, September 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • Well as I said on my talk page, I didn't see the probation ending successfully. Good luck in what ever you decide to do. Leo68 (talk) 19:18, September 18, 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Background

I myself had actually begun to forget about the wiki's background but now I am thinking about it again as I only just noticed it again (pat on the back for a great sentence). The background was taken down in May due to formatting issues with certain computer resolutions blah blah blah - I have no idea about that kind of stuff, I just write. Originally, Smurfy was getting someone to make one for us and, well, he isn't on the wiki anymore, meaning that we now have no one making us a new background. So all this is, is a statement asking if anyone is able to make a new background. Obviously no need for a votes section, just comments. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 08:35, September 8, 2015 (UTC)


  • Hmm, but first we need we need to figure out what kind of resolution it will take and how it will fit on newer computer screens/resolutions. Also, the second most and foremost, we need to come up on what designs we can implement on the sides (cars, characters, etc.). I'll be willing to create one, along with anybody who wants their contributions on there. --Tony42898 (Talker - Blogger - Stalker)-- 23:15, September 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • Just stick the old one back on there. We shouldn't alter it because certain people can't get it to fit with their computers. That's just selfish. Leo68 (talk) 23:23, September 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • Looks like Wikia wants to spread the 17 Global Goals by asking all communities to change the background. Since we do not have any background currently, I suggest we use the Global Goals background as of now until we find a suitable background. More information can be found here. MC My Computer Master Of Ceremonies 13:24, September 25, 2015 (UTC)

Articles for game-file data

Closed as successful by [119] ([120]) 19:11, September 7, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8

So, swinging by the files in GTA IV, I noticed a lot of files were NOT documented here, which I find odd and inconsistant with everything else being on the wiki. For example, Water.dat makes an appearance here, same with Carcols.dat, and Handling.cfg. I have tonnes more files that could be documented here, or we could scrap the current ones? What do you think we should do? Delete current ones, or expand further? Note that I'd only make articles for files which I find highly important or relevant, such as "clothes" files, "vehicles" files, "texture" files, "time" files, "weapon" files, "sound" files, etc. -[121][122][123] 16:53, August 28, 2015 (UTC)

Votes (Vote DELETE or EXPAND)


  • I feel it's a good idea to add more information about game files. It's better to get more information than to delete the existing ones. Myth(Talk/Stalk) 18:15, August 31, 2015 (UTC)
  • It's game terminology/structure/files/whatever you want to call it that what makes that specific thing in the game function. What we can do is delete anything that references modding to and for that file. --Tony42898 (Talker - Blogger - Stalker)-- 04:25, September 1, 2015 (UTC)
    • The plan is to expand on making articles for other files, but avoid/remove any mod-related content, that suggests ways in which the player can alter the game (modding). Maybe you can now reconsider your vote. [130][131][132] 18:40, September 1, 2015 (UTC)
    • I could help with this, I have access to the game files now. That Ferrari Guy (talk) 18:08, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
    • Changing my vote to Expand. Sounds like a great idea anyway :P --Tony42898 (Talker - Blogger - Stalker)-- 18:58, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
  • Since Monk has gone and won't be back in months, I will do what I can on taking over this project. I have a good idea on what he was planning on doing -That Ferrari Guy (talk) 19:34, September 7, 2015 (UTC)

Maps in Structures pages

Closed as successful by [133] ([134]) 17:17, August 28, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8

[135]Rotterdam Tower (green outline) in the Liberty City map.

When I'm working on the road pages, a thought came to my mind. I've been thinking, if road pages have maps in the infobox, why not structures pages have a map too? So, I'm going to start a vote here. The map of the structures would be shown similarly to the existing road pages that have a map. A map example, in this case Rotterdam Tower, have been shown on the right. Please consider this carefully before voting. Vote Yes if you want the pages to have maps, or vote No if you do not want the pages to have maps. Thanks for reading. MC (MyComputer) 12:31, August 11, 2015 (UTC)



  • I think it is a great idea to help out players who may be wondering where something is located. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 12:45, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
  • I had problems with building locations, so I guess that many players have problems too. That will help them a lot. In addition, the streets have map locations, why not buildings too? [148] AndreEagle17 [149] [150] [151] 14:34, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
  • Same as Andre, I could never locate many buildings, a map with a clear marker indicating its specific location would be really helpful. I'm presuming you'll be laying it out similar to roads, in which a map is in a separate section at the bottom of the infobox? [152][153][154] 14:37, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
    • Yep, it would be laid out the same as the road template. MC (MyComputer) 14:51, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
    • Speaking of which, maybe businesses can also have maps, but only problem is I'm not sure how to lay out the maps when there are multiple stores, for example TW@. Any ideas, anyone? MC (MyComputer) 17:04, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
  • I like the idea. Maybe a border around the building instead of an x on the building could be better? Just a thought, nothing against the x. [155][156][157] 17:12, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree with WildBrick, I like the "x", but having a border would be better for more complex structures that have different wings and extensions to the main outline (The Dilapidated Motel in Sandy Shores, as an example). It would be good if it was outlined in red too I suppose, since some maps have an inherent green to them. Still love the idea, just a few suggestions though! --Mortsnarg (talk) 17:37, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
    • Still thinking about this. A cross looks good in small structures, but not in large structures. Outlines, on the other hand, looks good on large structures, but not very good, and may even be unreadable, on small structures. MC (MyComputer) 17:45, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
      • Not really, Sean posted some pics with outlines on small building in these two pages and they looked fine. DLVIII Talk 17:51, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
        • Good point, it does look neat. MC (MyComputer) 17:56, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
        • Alright, finally have the time to update the map... I see it looks something like the map above? MC (MyComputer) 10:47, August 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • Sounds pretty neat. DLVIII Talk 17:39, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
  • Sounds good to me. Sam Talk 18:14, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
  • Nice idea. Myth(Leave your threats here/Want to Stalk?) 19:33, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
  • Yeah, sounds like a great idea. As per VaultBoy stated. :) --Tony42898 (Talker - Blogger - Stalker)-- 11:01, August 12, 2015 (UTC)

DJ Quotes to Radio Transcripts

Closed as successful - LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 12:50, August 11, 2015 (UTC)

So I've noticed that there are DJ Quotes pages. I've been thinking of changing it around and making Transcripts for Radio Stations similar to mission pages. Randomized radios would be split into sections (morning quotes, before song quotes, commercials, etc.) while full looped stations would have the entiriety of it.

DJ quotes can stay and work alongside radio transcripts though. Radio Transcripts are the main point here, not DJ quotes. So, yes or no? (Vote for either replacing DJ quotes with transcripts OR keeping the both of them)


­ 18:36, July 29, 2015 (UTC)



  • Sounds a good idea. Not too sure how the random stations would be laid out. Sam Talk 18:41, July 29, 2015 (UTC)
    • They would be split similarly to IV Mission Transcripts. A section for morning dialogue, general dialogue, evening dialogue, comments on songs and commercials (and more sections if there's more dialogue).[174][175][176]­ 18:46, July 29, 2015 (UTC)
      • Thanks for that WildBrick. Sam Talk 18:49, July 29, 2015 (UTC)
      • I see, but will this be integrated into the radio station's article, or will a special article contain ALL radio stations' quotes? Not sure about where to document it. - [177] • [178] • [179] 18:52, July 29, 2015 (UTC)
        • It'll be just like Mission pages. For example "The Lab/Transcript". They can still be added in respective pages without creating a new "[station name]/Transcript" if a separate transcript page is deemed unnecessary.[180][181][182]­ 18:56, July 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • Agreed. Not certainly sure about exactly how this will work, but it sounds about right, I don't think a separate article was ever necessary, but never even thought of bringing it up at a vote on the Noticeboard. -[183][184][185] 18:44, July 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • I think it is a good idea. Myth(Leave your threats here/Want to Stalk?) 19:00, July 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • I support the idea, I don't see why not. [186] AndreEagle17 [187] [188] [189] 19:13, July 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • I support the idea, but still can't figure out how it works. I mean, almost anything is randomized, but I was thinking of something like "all quotes in a commercial", "all quotes when a song is about to start/finish", among others. But yeah, still a good idea for talk radios, like VCPR, PLR and WCTR. [190] SWAT Cam F [191] Dispatch [192] Data Files [193] 19:46, July 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • Excellent idea! Why not? [194] ([195]) 20:08, July 29, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8

Existing Modification Pages

Closed as successful by LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 20:39, July 24, 2015 (UTC)

Recently it was decided (and I 100% agree) that the GTA wiki should not add new Mod content, however there is still quite a bit of content on the wiki from times when this was allowed and in fact, encouraged. Rather than simply go around deleting it all, I would like to see it treated similarly to other unofficial content like Crews. i.e. all pages be moved to sub-pages of the main Modifications page. e.g. Your Own Mission would become Your Own Mission.

(Forgot to sign) Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 22:10, July 23, 2015 (UTC)



  • Sounds like a great idea. --Tony42898 (Talker - Blogger - Stalker)-- 06:10, July 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • Honestly the mods policy should've gotten rid of the Modifications page as well. We have a GTA Mods wiki for that reason.  Rain - Talk 08:17, July 24, 2015 (UTC)
    • There is? I don't even heard about GTA Mods Wiki before... Can you show me the link? MC (MyComputer) 08:23, July 24, 2015 (UTC)
      • That would be because it doesn't exist any more. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 08:44, July 24, 2015 (UTC)
        • I've read a "GTA Mods wiki" somewhere but looks like either it was false or closed. Either way, shouldn't we leave the mods stuff to the GTA Fanon wiki? Rain - Talk 09:06, July 24, 2015 (UTC)
          • There was a but I think it was deleted. It used to be linked on the Policy page and I remember visiting it once to check the link was valid, a few months ago. Bottom line for me, after the community split, THIS wiki (rightly or wrongly) was more or less dedicated to mod content, and I don't think it is right that all that work should be thrown away just because the majority of us NOW don't like it. It deserves to be kept but "sub-paging" it sort of demotes it. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 09:25, July 24, 2015 (UTC)
            • It was actually an intention of mine to create a GTA Mods Wiki last year, but time constraints in the real world and internet problems prevented me from foregoing it. --Tony42898 (Talker - Blogger - Stalker)-- 17:52, July 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • I liked this Idea. Myth(Leave your threats here/Want to Stalk?) 09:21, July 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • Can I just add, are you willing to delete the "gamefile mod" articles, such as JUMP and Paths? I would like to see them gone, they pay no use here. Not sure about things like Handling.cfg however. [208] [209] [210] 09:26, July 24, 2015 (UTC)
    • It depends on what's there. If it's literally a modified file then it can go. If it's documentation of the original file, it should stay. [211][212][213] 09:46, July 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • I think this is a great compromise between those who want mod pages to stay here and those who want them gone. [214][215][216] 09:46, July 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree with this idea. Approved. [217] ([218]) 18:02, July 24, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8

Probation Expiry: Myth hunter

Closed as unsuccessful by Leo68 (talk) 17:18, July 23, 2015 (UTC)

Leave votes below for the probation expiry of Myth hunter. (Admins and Bureaucrats only, Patrollers and non-staff can leave comments.)



  • I've been so busy these past months I haven't had a chance to notice what he's been doing so I'm going to vote neutral to keep it fair. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 10:30, July 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Myth had kept his promise by keeping the wiki free from vandalism, which is the responsibility of a patroller. Yes, he may be inactive at times, but he is already a great patroller. MC (MyComputer) 11:48, July 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • I can't vote but if I could, my vote would be Neutral since Hunter was the only one other than me to ban vandals from chat, he wasn't as bad as many other users think. [221] AndreEagle17 [222] [223] [224] 13:45, July 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • I'd also vote Neutral. He's a good editor, but his contributions are slack, and from time to time he can be rather pestering. --[225] [226] [227] 14:13, July 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • As above, I'd vote neutral. I've spotted a couple of behaviour problems prior to promotion, and while he has improved, semi-activity, poor grammar and sometimes behaviour are problematic. Rain - Talk 14:24, July 20, 2015 (UTC)
    • Sorry to ask, but what was the problem with my behaviour? If you tell me I will try my best to improve. Myth(Leave your threats here/Want to Stalk?) 02:46, July 21, 2015 (UTC)
      • I was speaking about the time where vandals raided the GTA Myths wiki, if you see what I mean. Rain - Talk 09:29, July 23, 2015 (UTC)
        • I was really frustrated with those vandals. Cleaning attacks continuously for 3 months is not an easy task. Anyway, can you tell me exactly where was the problem? Like, what i should improve?. Myth(Leave your threats here/Want to Stalk?) 09:35, July 23, 2015 (UTC)
          • Not insulting vandals would be a first step. I haven't you seen here doing this though. Rain - Talk 09:39, July 23, 2015 (UTC)
          • It was only one time that i did that. But that was pretty obvious, A vandal posting stupid stuff on my wall, vandalizing more than 350 pages and turning the wiki into hell for 3 months. I always avoid insulting others, but in that case I was really mad.Myth(Leave your threats here/Want to Stalk?) 10:12, July 23, 2015 (UTC)
  • Myth started off quite inactive, which isn't good, but he's improved in editing and is simply trying to understand how things work here. He's learning how to use his tools correctly and has dealt with troublesome users. I feel he could handle the job. I believe how things work on the Myths Wiki are much easier on there than here, so I really appreciate the effort he is putting in to learning how the GTA Wiki works. [228] ([229]) 00:07, July 21, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • Sorry MH, but your main activity occured at the end of your probation, and it would be a concern you wouldn't be active enough as a Patroller. Leo68 (talk) 00:55, July 21, 2015 (UTC)
    • Just after my probation were my exams and then I had to go away from my home. When I returned my internet was not working properly for 10 days. After that I became active. But I understand your vote. Just wanted to tell the reason. Myth(Leave your threats here/Want to Stalk?) 02:46, July 21, 2015 (UTC)
  • Into day 3, and we have no real outcome. Four neutrals and a negative could come down to no but there are three other voters. Three options; mark as failed, extend probation by two months or a veto. If it's at veto and I'm unavailable, refer to my original vote. Leo68 (talk) 06:22, July 23, 2015 (UTC)
  • The biggest problem I have is that prior to being appointed as patroller, myth hunter clearly lied about his age for nearly a year when he should not have been allowed to edit on wikia, let alone be staff. While he is now over 13, I don't think we should be endorsing this behaviour by finalising the promotion. Smurfynz (talk) 06:34, July 23, 2015 (UTC)
    • But now that i am 13, I am allowed to edit wikia. The only reason I lied was that I wanted to edit but couldn't reveal my age.Myth(Leave your threats here/Want to Stalk?) 09:11, July 23, 2015 (UTC)
      • That's not an excuse. Wikia's ToU clearly state that users must be at least 13 to have an account here. By lying, you've broken the rules. You're lucky to be still here, as if Wikia found out, your account would've been disabled across Wikia. Rain - Talk 09:29, July 23, 2015 (UTC)
        • NO. Once a user is 13, his account is unblocked. Users are blocked till they are 13. Myth(Leave your threats here/Want to Stalk?) 09:37, July 23, 2015 (UTC)
          • False. When Wikia disables an account, it's for good. If you were blocked before, you would've had to wait to be 13 to create a new account. Rain - Talk 09:39, July 23, 2015 (UTC)
            • My point was, the months of activity you had used to build up a history to justify appointment were actually all done under false pretences.  If I had known you were only 12 in February, I would have blocked you for 12 months from the date I found out you were 12. By the time you exposed your lie, it was too late to "punish" you, but that doesn't mean we should sit back and "reward" you for it either. Smurfynz (talk) 09:47, July 23, 2015 (UTC) 
          • OK I am sorry for that. But you can't hate me forvever for just one lie, that didn't even harm anyone. Myth(Leave your threats here/Want to Stalk?) 10:12, July 23, 2015 (UTC)
    • Not this time, vote closed as unsuccessful. Leo68 (talk) 17:25, July 23, 2015 (UTC)

Merging Oracle/Oracle XS & Buffalo/Buffalo S

Closed as unsuccessful by LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 09:34, July 19, 2015 (UTC)

In chat, Sam, Andre & myself, were the vote to merge Buffalo & Buffalo S. The original vote proposed by WildBrick, who created the second Buffalo S claimed that because design, naming, and performance was different that it warranted it's own page. However, the Buffalo and Buffalo S followed design changes between the 2006 and 2011 Dodge Charger, in that performance was improved and the car was given a facelift, which is what the S is compared to the Buffalo, and until 1.14 it was dubbed Buffalo. Likewise, the Oracle Sport is just the upgraded XS, and in IV the XS is labelled as Oracle. This is different to Sentinel XS/Sentinel, Sultan/Sultan RS, Rancher/Rancher XL, as they have notable differences. If this is the case why is Rat-Truck merged with Rat-Loader, Kuruma merged with Kuruma (Armoured) or the stock cars with the original. So, once more, will Oracle XS & Oracle, and Buffalo & Buffalo S be merged? Leo68 (talk) 21:36, July 18, 2015 (UTC)



  • I've added my reasons above, and will add further comments when others do. Leo68 (talk) 21:36, July 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • I'll limit myself to voting, my comments were already said in the talk page. [239] AndreEagle17 [240] [241] [242] 21:40, July 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes, make them a bit similar to the Insurgent page. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 23:08, July 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • Are we back to this again? Of all things?

    Yes, it did and still does warrant it's own page. While it is evident that the Dodge Charger SRT8, car of which the Buffalo is based on, had a facelift with a performance change, it does not mean that this is the same for Buffalos. You all have to remember that GTA =/= Real life. Many things are obviously inspired by real world but the are not and will not be exactly the same in most cases. Buffalo changed to Buffalo S. Charger SRT8 remained as Charger SRT8. What sort of problems does the separate page create anyway? Give me a valid explanation because I don't see what's wrong with it at all.

    Not sure who or why split Oracle/Oracle XS - didn't even know R* renamed both until I saw them being split - but I can agree with why that was done. I don't really see problems with that either except that it may be confusing for IV players since the XS one was just "Oracle" in IV - then again, we have a Disambiglink for a reason, after all.

    Rat-Truck/Rat-Loader were not allowed to be split for whatever reason (I honestly don't rememeber why or who). Kuruma/Kuruma (Armored) were made after the alternative option for vehicle variants was made. I would like this to be split as well. Stock cars were not made at the time, Go Go Monkey Blista was separate but was merged with Blista Compact - then stock cars were added in pages, already merged. If it depended on me, all of these vehicles would have all been split long ago.

    Take a look at this table which shows every single existing vehicle in GTA V. May or may not help in identifying what could be split and what could be merged.

    Anyway, if these get merged then Police Cruisers, Luxor/Luxor Deluxe and Swift/Swift Deluxe will have to get merged too, period. [243][244][245] 23:15, July 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree that the Luxor and Swift should be merged, that's pointless. Police Cruisers I'd be inclined to agree but only just, but the Buffalo S is clearly a facelift Buffalo, with better performance than it's predecessor. Likewise, the Oracle XS was only changed to avoid confusion, and it is still called Oracle in IV, therefore that page would be displayed as; The Ubermacht Oracle is a vehicle in Grand Theft Auto IV, its episodes and Grand Theft Auto V. The Oracle from GTA IV is dubbed Oracle XS in GTA V.
The pages should be divided like Insurgent, Kuruma, or even the way Sprunk Buffalo is displayed on the S page, in variants, with an infobox and introduction. Leo68 (talk) 23:27, July 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes! Thank you Wild. I'm getting tired of this hole debate about merging or spliting vehicles pages too. I remember very clearly that we all agreed to only merge pages of vehicles with the same performe and names. That's why the stock vehicles and the Rat-Loader are all merged, and the Technical is separeted from the Rebel and the Space Docker from the Dune Buggy. Now, out of nowhere, you guys just decided to merge pages with vehicles with diferente performances and names again? What in the actual fuck? And like Wild said, if this vote passes, we have to deal with a lotof other pages for the sake of consistence.
May I sugest that we reach a consensus of what we should take in consideration when it comes to merging or spliting vehicle pages before settling this vote? Performance? Name? Design? Generation? - DLVIII Talk 23:31, July 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • Not this shit again? My standard statement on this issue now:
We cannot be consistent with this because the game developer has not been consistent.
We are obliged to match Rockstar's inconsistency. When Rockstar split them with a patch, we should too. There are a couple of merged pages I strongly disagree with, but I live with it, it's called compromise. e.g. Kuruma & Armoured should be treated no different to Dukes and  Duke o' Death. Both of these 2 specific suggested examples have separate names, prices, performance lines, and yes, their design IS different. Far more so thatn the Sentinel XS/Sentinel for example which is purely a converible version of the same damn car but IS still split seemingly with no objections. smurfy (coms) 23:57, July 18, 2015 (UTC)
  • Rockstar named the Buffalo "S" to distinguish it from the original but it is a FACELIFT not a different car. It is named the same as the Buffalo so that it identifies it as a variant, which is why the Dukes is not part of the Buffalo page and vice versa. If they renamed the Buffalo S without having Buffalo in the name, it would warrant it's own page. Same with the Oracle. The XS is a variant, which is why it is still a Oracle, because it says it on the name. Both cars have the stock name on the back. If there was Schafter S or Cavalcade S, they wouldn't need to make new pages because they would still be labelled Schafter or Cavalcade. The Sentinel XS (hardtop and previously modified variant), the Rancher XL (a larger version), the Sultan RS (a rally version); they are all variants, which is why they still have the stock name. We're adding clutter pages that are smaller, rather than a larger one with all the information in the same place, for no apparent reason. Their design may be different, but that is the idea with variants and facelifts. Leo68 (talk) 00:28, July 19, 2015 (UTC)
  • What 558 said. [246] ([247]) 00:47, July 19, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • This is completely fucking pointless, whatever we agree here is just going to be brought up again in a couple of months and debated again and changed again. CYA. smurfy (coms) 01:06, July 19, 2015 (UTC)
    • Damn, I can't believe you did that Sean... I didn't expect you to do that, honestly! I'm shocked at your action. [248] AndreEagle17 [249] [250] [251] 01:18, July 19, 2015 (UTC)
    • Woah! Seems I have missed a lot while I was in dream land. Okay, so Sean, I'm not one to rage quit games, and never have I left the wiki like that, but this isn't the first time you've left the wiki, and sorry to say this, but it's childish. How can you let a small thing such as an internet argument leave? That's funny. Anyway, I can't force you to come back, nor do I have rights to tell you to never come back, it's your choice. I hope you have a nice time outta here. [252] [253] [254] 11:48, July 19, 2015 (UTC)
  • It's pretty funny how as a GTA Wiki we're supposed to reflect how Rockstar designed their game but sometime everyone want to change that. Rain - Talk 08:56, July 19, 2015 (UTC)
  • In my opinion vehicles with different performance should be kept seperated. Shouldn't we decide to make a rule according to which pages will be seperated and merged? Otherwise their will be many unneeded discussions Myth(Leave your threats here/Want to Stalk?) 09:24, July 19, 2015 (UTC)
  • So... who wants Kuruma/Kuruma (Armored) to be split? [255][256][257] 11:06, July 19, 2015 (UTC)
    • If both Dukes stay separated, then both Kurumas should be as well. Rain - Talk 11:08, July 19, 2015 (UTC)
    • I agree with Rain. Myth(Leave your threats here/Want to Stalk?) 11:13, July 19, 2015 (UTC)
    • Quite frankly, if this vote goes unsuccessfull, I'd like to say that the Kurumas should be split up, they're different enough to each other, more so than the Buffalo and Buffalo S. [258] AndreEagle17 [259] [260] [261] 13:53, July 19, 2015 (UTC)

Allow more user groups to rename pages

Closed as unsuccessful by LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 20:49, July 13, 2015 (UTC)

I propose a change to the current user rights, which is to allow users (or at least patrollers) to move pages. I think this would be more fair, and much more useful than having to wait for sysops/b'crats when they are absent or in case they don't notice talk pages mentioning a necessity of renaming. Although the renaming ability was probably removed for a good reason a long time ago, was it removed at the same time as the ability of unregistered users to edit here? Ultimate94ninja talk · contribs 22:06, July 12, 2015 (UTC)



  • Honestly, I think the ability to rename pages should remain restricted to admins and bureaucrats, since some patrollers here have different opinions. In addition, that would create discussions, which is better to whether remane a page or not. The ability to allow normal users to rename pages would certainly make vandals happy... [271] AndreEagle17 [272] [273] [274] 22:24, July 12, 2015 (UTC)
  • I fully agree. This is a topic I wanted to bring up a while ago but I forgot to. This would make things much more practical and would allow us to manage page titles instead of having to request an admin to rename the page. And Andre, it sure will make some vandals happy, but restricting page renaming to admins won't prevent vandalism itself. We could request to have renaming restricted to "autoconfirmed" users so brand new accounts (including vandals) won't have access to it. Rain - Talk 22:27, July 12, 2015 (UTC)
  • Hmmm, mixed feelings on this one. 6-8 months ago, when we didn't have an active admin layer, sure, it was a problem and I would have wanted it. Now, with all 8 admins and bureaucrats being active, there isn't really as much of a need. In many cases, a page rename request isn't black and white and requires a community discussion and agreement. Media files on the other hand, I have always thought that anyone should be able to rename an image. Unfortunately I don't believe the user rights allows media renaming without allowing page renaming too, so one has to come with the other. This is probably a discussion that needs to take place on the Community Noticeboard though, so I'm going to copy it there. smurfy (coms) 02:11, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • Nope the role has to be done by admin or else people would rename pages that didn't need to be all the time. It's a role that staff members have to perform. We usually have admins or bureaucrats available all the time so it's not an issue. Leo68 (talk) 02:39, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • I don't think it's necessary anymore. We all have active admins and bureaucrats (unlike last year before Vault Boy got promoted) who are one message away to rename pages and images for users. Allowing all users to rename pages is too risky, as vandals will cause trouble. It happened a lot on the Watch Dogs Wiki. [275] ([276]) 02:55, July 13, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • Well, now that I became an admin and don't have problens with this kind of stuff anymore, I guess my opinion on the subject is kind of biased. But I have to admite, when I was a patroller, it was really annoying when I had to keep asking the admins to change the name of the articles. Allowing patrollers to change the names would make things more pratical and faster. I don't have anything against the idea. DLVIII Talk 03:20, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • Nothing much to say, but if every user can rename pages, users can just give any name to the page, which is quite bad. So, I feel that only admins and b'crats can rename pages, as they can consider if the renaming is necessary before renaming it. MC (MyComputer) 04:57, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • This was also something that I wanted to discuss and propose on the noticeboard, but I never really got around to it. It was around the time when admin and bureaucrat activity were low.  --Tony42898 (Talker - Blogger - Stalker)-- 05:10, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • If normal users can rename page on a wiki this big then some users may mess up and "vandalize" page names. I don't think their is a way to allow patrollers to rename without letting other users edit pages. And since the admins on the wiki are active, one can simply contact them. Myth(Leave your threats here/Want to Stalk?) 08:50, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • Probably everyone will disagree with me, but I see that everyone voted "no" with the argument that "it causes people to vandalize". So why do we allow non-admin users to edit pages? This might sound idiotic, but I fail to see why shouldn't we allow renaming to non-admin users because of vandalism but we allow editing even though it provokes vandalism. Also, something everyone seem to forgot is that vandalism occurs quite uncommonly, and if someone renames a page to an idiotic title, this can be spotted and reverted quickly (e.g. move log). Frankly I'm not sure why everyone sees vandalism everywhere even though by checking the block log it is uncommon (mostly because anons cannot edit here). So yes, autoconfirmed users should be able to move pages. Rain - Talk 09:04, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • I voted no because you simply can't. Wikia rules are the things that have made it so that non-admins can't rename pages. There is nothing we can do about it (as far as I'm aware). LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 10:32, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
    • Huh? By default on a wiki any user (including anons) can rename pages. This wiki has requested to restrict page renaming to sysops only, likely at the same time when the community voted to block IP editing here. Also, you could contact Wikia to change that. Rain - Talk 10:39, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
      • ^ Exactly. If the Wikia rules were to restrict renaming to sysops by default then I wouldn't have proposed the change. Ultimate94ninja talk · contribs 11:08, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
        • Users should currently be able to move pages within their own userspace and possibly sub-pages within the main space. But not main pages. See: here. Something I noticed quite some time ago and was meant to question but forgot about, GTA Wiki uses the Chatmoderator user group for the Patroller role instead of the moderator group. The Moderator group does allow move pages. But assigning that group probably removes the "chat ban" rights, so the role can't have both? Might be worth testing that out if a Bureaucrat wants to try adding it to a current patroller? Still won't help with the Non-staff rights issue of course, but that will only need to be investigated if there is a successful request for change, which looks increasingly unlikely to be honest.. smurfy (coms) 12:25, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • Unnecessary. There are enough active admins/bureaucrats that can quickly rename pages, you only need to add a "Move" template in the page or directly ask us. DocVinewood (talk) 12:30, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • A year ago I would possibly have voted yes due to the inactive admins. However, with the staff shake-up over the last few months the staff are now a lot more active, and with the various timezones covered by the staff there is usually at least one admin online at any one time. Sam Talk 17:22, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • Rain, vandalism is not uncommon. Inactivity on wikis and poorly maintained wikis are targets for vandals. Allowing users to rename pages would attract more vandals. You must not pay attention to how many vandals used to and still do attack the Far Cry and Watch Dogs Wikis. [277] ([278]) 18:34, July 13, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
    • I don't pay attention? I'm like the only active sysop of the WD Wiki. Also, you're comparing the GTA Wiki which is among the most active wikis on Wikia to two ghost towns. I'm repeating what I wrote above. Vandals will sure try to have fun by renaming pages to bullshit, but they're easy to spot. Vandalism here is uncommon. Simple as. Just check the block log, it's not like we have to revert and block vandalism every day. Rain - Talk 18:39, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • I have changed the user group on Andre's profile to also be a moderator. All I need is for him to test to see if he can rename a page. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 19:20, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
    • I think testing it should wait until the vote is closed. If this was suggested when we had a staff gap it would be understandable, but we don't need to do it now. There are administrators or bureaucrats active almost all of the time, usually more than one. Leo68 (talk) 19:37, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
      • Leo, I think this was my fault for side-tracking the debate slightly - the standard Wikia rights management would suggest that our patrollers should have always been able to move pages but due to not being given the "moderator" group they haven't been able to. smurfy (coms) 21:10, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • Honestly, I don't care about vandalism. It can be quickly and easily reverted and the user can be blocked twice as fast. My main problem are redirects. Only admins and all the higher ranks, who can delete pages, will get the "Leave a redirect behind" checkbox. Normal users, rollbacks, patrollers, whatever will NOT get that checkbox. I don't like useless nor pointless redirects and having to later mark them for deletion and then waiting for them to be deleted is tedious. Far better leaving no redirect behind which non-admin users simply cannot do. It's not like we have a high amount of pages needing renames so that wouldn't be any different from messaging an admin asking to rename. Saves more trouble in the long run as well. [279][280][281] 19:49, July 13, 2015 (UTC)
    • Good point but I would rather that than the opposite, moved pages with no redirects when they are needed, leaving red links all over. I don't know about the other admins, but when I do a move, I look at the "what links here" and decide whether to manually update the links or leave a redirect based on the number of pages that link. smurfy (coms) 21:10, July 13, 2015 (UTC)

My resignation

I have simply been to busy to even edit here let alone be a bureaucrat here so I am resigning the position I hardly edit on Wikia anymore and I feel it is fair that a more active user can take my place on this wiki as a bureaucrat. Messi1983 (talk) 15:59, July 7, 2015 (UTC)

Probation Expiry: Camilo Flores

Closed as successful by Leo68 (talk) 19:50, June 28, 2015 (UTC)

Leave votes below for the probation expiry of Camilo Flores (Admins and bureaucrats only. Patrollers and non-staff can still leave comments).



  • A brilliant editor, corrections are almost faultless. He deserves his spot, as he his kind, friendly and non-argumentative. Nothing much else to say! [284][285][286] 18:42, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
    • Monk, patrollers can't vote, so you'll have to remove your vote. Rain - Talk 17:44, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
      • Yeh, I just realized. I removed the vote, but I'll keep my comment. [287] [288] [289] 17:48, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • Cam's handled the step up well. No real problems to report. Sam Talk 17:51, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • Cam surprised me, I didn't expect him to be such an awesome patroller during his probation. [290] AndreEagle17 [291] [292] [293] 17:53, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • It's too early but two days will not change my opinion, Camilo has improved on probation and is up to the job. Yes from me. Leo68 (talk) 18:42, June 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • Camilo definitely deserves the spot to me. He has improved tremendously on his probation. [294] ([295]) 17:07, June 25, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • Cam is always improving himself every day, so why not retaining as a patroller? He will definitely make good use of his tools. MC (MyComputer) 09:47, June 26, 2015 (UTC)
  • As far as general patrolling duties, he's doing fine. As a contributor, the language barrier is still a problem. I started keeping track of the poor grammar edits but gave up when the list became too long. The grammar is still "Google Translate" level and is the sort of thing a patroller should be fixing, not causing. smurfy (coms) 00:01, June 27, 2015 (UTC)
  • He needs to improve his grammar, but I'm sure he will work to overcome this issue. Except that, I agree with most of you and think he's proven he's ready to be a patroller. DocVinewood (talk) 23:06, June 27, 2015 (UTC)

Probation Expiry: Monkeypolice188

Closed as Probation Successful by LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 16:41, June 14, 2015 (UTC)

Leave votes below for our latest probation expiry, for Monkeypolice188.



  • Monk had a few issues when he joined, which were ironed out before his promotion, a reason why he is on probation. If you ask me they are an issue of the past now and he has gotten over them. He is a much better user and has been working well in his role as Patroller. A yes from me. Leo68 (talk) 21:22, June 12, 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree with Leo, he had some problems at first but he has gotten better and I feel that he deserves to keep the position. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 21:49, June 12, 2015 (UTC)
  • Monk deserves the position, he knows and enforces the policies and is one of the most active editors here. DocVinewood (talk) 22:03, June 12, 2015 (UTC)
  • Had a minor indiscretion with WildBrick and Rain last week (which he apologised to both users for) but in the grand scheme of things a relatively isolated incident which shouldn't overshadow the whole three months, as he's ironed out the early teething troubles. Probation worked for Andre and it's worked for Monk. Sam Talk 22:29, June 12, 2015 (UTC)
  • Monk had some relapses here and there during his probation, but who doesn't get carried away sometimes? He apologized and learned from his mistakes, he will make a good patroller. - DLVIII Talk 01:37, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • A good chatter, editor and rollbacker, of course he deserves to be a patroller. Since votes are limited to admins and b'crats, I shall not vote. However, it will definitely be a yes from me. :) MC (MyComputer) 06:02, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • Not a fan of his attitude at times, mine isn't any better either, but he usually does a great job (finding all top speeds, acceleration times, etc. is an example) so I wouldn't say no if I were allowed to vote. I believe he can improve a lot as a full patroller. The only problem I really have with him is that he, sometimes, is disputing facts but other than that I don't see much reasons for him not to become a patroller.
    Off topic: 558050, patrollers are not allowed to vote on users on probation so you'll have to remove your vote. [298][299][300] 10:33, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • Patroller vote removed (thanks for pointing that out Wildbrick). smurfy (coms) 10:46, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • Been giving this a bit of though all day. I'm wary of throwing stones from a particularly fragile glasshouse here, but have to point out that this has been far from a blemish-free period of probation and another case is ongoing right now with the Osiris. I'm not sure he is learning from his mistakes as much as has been suggested. However, with that said, I don't think the battles he's been involved in over the last few months should prevent the transition from probationary to patroller just because he's been on the wrong side of a few and has taken a while to back down. smurfy (coms) 10:46, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • I'd just like to say, thanks guys for being there for me and giving me the chance to show my real self. I may not of been the best of probational patrollers on record (probably the worst, come to think of it), but I really will try to improve my decisions (that's my real fault, I make the wrong choices here, and make everything seem bad), and if that means me having to get told off or avoid making choices all together, well so be it. I really can be a good patroller, and I'll do my best to prove it, after all I am one of the most active users on this wiki, so I really can get a lot done in a short space of time, whether that's article edits, minor correction, talk pages and user talk pages, I will do whatever I can to improve this wiki. Thank you guys! [301][302][303] 11:14, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • Sorry to be late but you definitely deserve to keep your spot Monk. You've had trouble on this wiki when you first started but like 558 said, almost everybody did, including me. What matters most is that you improved from your warnings and kept doing what you are doing. Now, you are one of the most active patrollers here and use your tools very well. You have greatly improved and I am proud of you. Keep it up. A "Yes" from me. [304] ([305]) 16:15, June 13, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • I've seen his contributions and his handling of his patroller spot and I'm impressed, but as all first time staff members (including myself), we have our hiccups every now and then and he seems to learn from his mistakes. Monkeypolice earns the right to be regarded as an official patroller here on GTA Wiki. -Tony42898

Notification - Infobox Beta redesign for mobile compatibility

See the project page. Anyone wanting to learn the new markup for infobox design is welcome to observe and possibly participate, the project is not limited to staff only. smurfy (coms) 13:16, May 22, 2015 (UTC)

Sliders on infoboxes

I was talking to WildBrick about the Marshall infobox, as we can see, there's a slider which changes the main picture every second, so I asked him about adding sliders to vehicles with multiple generations, he disagreed because it's too simple to add sliders, instead it's better to keep two images separete, however, he agreed that vehicles with multiple liveries should have sliders, such as the many Burritos, the many Boxvilles and the Hotring Racers. It would make much more simple than a text on the description and the many gallery pictures, so I had to post this on the noticeboard, what do you think about adding sliders to vehicles with multiple liveries?



  • Wildbrick's right. Unless there's tonnes of different liveries (like the Marshall), I really don't think a slider is needed. I think it's best to either put the unique variants in the infobox (eg, Post Op Livery), or put the different regular liveries in a gallery "variant" section (eg, the Mule's different liveries). [316] [317] [318] 16:21, May 9, 2015 (UTC)
    • But that's my point, if the vehicle has dozens of liveries, we add sliders, like I said, for the Burritos, Boxvilles and Hotring Racers. [319] AndreEagle17 [320] [321] [322] 16:25, May 9, 2015 (UTC)
      • As I said, I don't think there's enough of those liveries to put in the infobox as a slider. Look, there's 25 different liveries for the Marshall, and only 3 (in two games) liveries for the Hotring Racer. I still think it would only be usefull for things that have more than 10 liveries. Putting sponsors or company liveries (found on trucks) in the infobox as a slider might work however, it depends how many there are to me. [323] [324] [325] 16:29, May 9, 2015 (UTC)
        • Just understood what Andre and Wild meant, I always get so confused as they right so much in such large pieces of text. [326] [327] [328] 19:46, May 9, 2015 (UTC)
  • To clear some things up; The slider is only for liveries. Vans or trucks that have different company on them. Vehicles and their generations are split as normal if it's a different model name and share the same in-game name. Boxvilles would stay the same with the exception of LSDWP and LSDS Boxvilles as they are the same model but different liveries.
    Template:Infobox Tester has the Burrito page with how the infobox would look like (ofc. changes will be made because even though the snowy one is a different model name, it appears only once ever which means it's better suited for Variants section - for same reason Humane Boxville is not included in the infobox). The slider still needs fixing though because it displays unused ones (as you can see on the page). [329][330][331] 17:25, May 9, 2015 (UTC)
  • The slider for multiple liveries will keep the galleries cleaner but as for multiple generations, no, we have the second image for that. Leo68 (talk) 17:49, May 9, 2015 (UTC)
  • I think we could use the slider for multiple liveries and also for vehicles with different Universe designs (Perennial, Intruder, etc), although I'm probably in the minority here. DocVinewood (talk) 17:57, May 9, 2015 (UTC)
  • I wouldn't say you stand alone, if it's a car like the Perennial, the Manana or something that vastly changed between 3D and HD Universe I'd be inclined to agree with you. Leo68 (talk) 18:01, May 9, 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes please, the Boxville page definetely need one of those. - DLVIII Talk 18:09, May 9, 2015 (UTC)
  • The page may very messy without this, due to the number of pictures in the gallery. The slider will also make the infobox more informative. MC (MyComputer) 03:56, May 10, 2015 (UTC)
  • This is an excellent idea especially when it comes to vehicles with a lot of variants or liveries. [332] ([333]) 04:19, May 10, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
  • This needs to happen. I really hate to scroll all the way to the bottom from a single page, just to look at its variants. Its a massive chore. [334] 22:28, May 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • As documented on the Marshall talk page, the slideshow does not currently render in MonoBook wiki layout. This might be something we can fix under the hood but until then, we should not be rolling this out to any other page. smurfy (coms) 23:05, May 13, 2015 (UTC)
  • I think sliders for liveries is a good idea. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 07:43, May 14, 2015 (UTC)


Resolved = Obvious sockpuppet blocked. Closed by smurfy (coms) 01:11, May 27, 2015 (UTC)

Ok, so, we had a user vandalize many staff member user pages, and vandalize articles a while back. It appears we have a sockpuppet: Domwoodygaming.

It is almost certainly them, given the name is exactly the same, bearing only the "gaming" attachment. This was made shortly before they started vandalizing other pages on their original account, suggesting they were planning on vandalizing pages and trying to get banned, and had another account ready for when they got banned.

[335] [336] [337] 20:55, May 26, 2015 (UTC)


  • The "sockpupet" account created and edited his own user page, just before the original accout started to vandalize. All edits were made on one single day! However, just to be sure, it's best to keep an eye on the sockpuppet account first, as he had not made any edits since the original account had been blocked, as of yet, and this may need more evidence to proof that both accounts were sockpuppets. MC (MyComputer) 22:44, May 26, 2015 (UTC)
  • Reports of this nature need to be made to Admin/Bureaucrat staff, not made on the community noticeboard. This is an obvious sockpuppet account and has been blocked. smurfy (coms) 01:11, May 27, 2015 (UTC)

Use of the "Deceased" symbol

Symbol use in infoboxes approved, DECEASED- Skull, INCARCERATED- Handcuffs DETERMINANT- Question Grave. Vote closed by Leo68 (talk) 07:04, May 9, 2015 (UTC)

Four users (myself, Sean, Marcus and RainingPain) have been discussing how to list characters as deceased in various sections (members, relatives etc.) of infoboxes. One case is character templates, where deceased characters have been identified with a crucifix (†) symbol. As Sean points out, they make the page look cleaner, but they can also impose religious connotations on others, which may not be appropriate on some pages. Since we all have varying opinions on how this should be identified, Sean suggesting setting up a community vote, so here we go:

In infobox sections (such as relatives, members etc), should deceased characters be identified in Written form, or through the use of a Symbol?



  • I think the crucifix means more of religion than death, but I think it should be added to a character's relative who is dead, like Packie McReary, in the relatives section of his infobox, there should be; Derrick McReary†, but in the status section, it's better if we write Deceased. [350] AndreEagle17 [351] [352] [353] 19:18, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
    • The relatives etc. section was the section we were discussing Andre. If you look on the Lost MC page, the members section in the infobox uses the crucifix. I'll re-word the statement to make it clearer. SJWalker (talk) 14:43, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
  • If the crucifix is such a problem, I may come up with a skull icon. That one wouldn't have any religious connotation whatsoever. Rain - Talk 14:52, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
  • We are living in an era where everyone can look at a symbol, a opinion or a idea and immediately feel ofended by it. If anyone look at that crucifix and say that we are imposing religious believe on him, I would say to him shut up and grow a pair, the crucifix is a universal symbol of death, on the context of the page it has nothing to do with religion, get over with. If anyone see religious symbolist on the crucifix is because they want to. The last thing I want right now, is to see this site bend over this ridiculous politically correct bullshit that have been plaguing the media for the past years.
  • Besides, writing deceased on everything is ugly, and as Sean said, the crucifix makes it seem more clean. - DLVIII Talk 15:02, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
  • What if deceased was identified as the word deceased but written in the color red.along with the crucifix TevanoRCMP (talk)
    • Won't solve the issue. Just make the infobox look even worse than right now. Rain - Talk 15:48, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
  • The symbol works in the character templates and it will work in the infoboxes. Leo68 (talk) 15:46, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
  • Seeing how the odds of my suggestion wont look good I am voting as symbol. I would hate to see the cruucifix to go away TevanoRCMP (talk) 16:13, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
  • Since I am a Christian, I can say that the symbol we use is based on the "Cross", which Jesus was hung on, along with what we wear on jewelry for "protection". However, adding the cross symbol to mean deceased is not a good idea, since most editors here are atheists and therefore do not believe in any religion. Still, I'd go for the symbol since it makes the pages look cleaner. As Rain said, a skull symbol is more understanding and less argumentive of a topic than the use of the cross symbol. [362] ([363]) 16:36, May 5, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
    • So what if most editors are atheists? The cross is there to symbolize that the character is dead, not that he was christian or anything like that. If most editors here are atheists, thats their problem. Hell, DocVinewood is atheist and he doesn't care about this. The way that we edit the wikia shouldn't be a reflex of the staff religious beliefs.- DLVIII Talk 17:33, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
      • Well, I believe that the cross isn't a good symbol to use. As WildBrick said, it can offend some users. Plus a Cross isn't used in reality to define a dead character at all. Also, you misread what I was saying. I didn't say that the Cross meant characters were Christians, but that the Cross isn't a good symbol to use for everyone. We have religious and non-religious editors here. A better symbol to use is a skull, which makes more sense and is a less argumentative topic. [364] ([365]) 17:47, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
        • This is EXACTLY the kind of mentality I was arguing against in my first comment, this whole "some people might get offended by it!", fuck this people! No seryously, fuck then. If these people can't see pass their religious beliefs, then they might as well stay away from the internet as a whole. Changing the way we operate things just because some small amound of people are too simple minded to accept that others can have different opinions of the world as they is bullshit, plain and simple. And I say this as a catholic myself. And the cross can have tons of different meanings depending of with person you ask for, the most common meaning is the christian one: death and ressurection, DEATH and ressurection.- DLVIII Talk 18:08, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree with 558. The crucifix is an universal symbol and everybody knows what it means, there is no need to change it. I'm an atheist and I don't have any problem with it, nor I'm offended in the slightest. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. DocVinewood (talk) 16:51, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
  • True as i don't see how the crucifix could offend anyone and well said Doc if it ain't broke don't fix it. Leo68 (talk) 21:36, October 23, 2015 (UTC)
  • Probably gonna be alone on this one but, yeah, written.

    First, the crucifix is mostly used as a symbol of christianity. Many people have different opinions of it whether it's good or bad. Not everyone might understand this though which can cause confusions. Remember, we live in a world filled with different opinions and religions which means some people will get offended by it and some won't. Some mightn't even know what that logo/symbol means (there are people like that) which will cause confusion and distrubance.

    Second. Cleaner yeah, effortful nah. The reason why I'm against this is because there isn't a point to these. "(deceased)" does the job just fine. It does not make the infobox ugly and it does give some bit of information. Unless you're using a 800x600 CRT (probably there are no issues even with that), there is absolutely no problems with it. Why try to fix something that isn't broken? Also how hard is it to type out "(deceased)"? It's no different than looking for and copy-pasting logos. It actually shows some effort put into the page instead of "here, have a random logo - I hope you understand 'cause you gotta find out things by yourself". If we're gonna use a logo to "explain" things, we might as well change all templates into pictures and put everything into abbreviations example being: "TA is a 2-door sc feat. in GTAV & GTAO." (imaginary cookies for whoever actually knows what page's description I shortened like that) I mean it makes the intro for the page cleaner and does give somewhat understandable information. It also doesn't need as much effort as writing the whole thing out so why not?

    Third, as said, the "(deceased)" does the job just fine. Are we really gonna waste so much of our times to swap everything with a logo? Nobody ever complained about the use of "(deceased)" then someone (don't remember who, I just remember seeing it on wiki activity) pointed out "it makes it cleaner" and suddenly everyone started losing their mind. Hundreds of pictures are uncategorized, hunderds of pages are stubs or are broken due to changes with whatever, hundreds of useless redirects are on the wiki, hundreds of old templates incompatible with the new design are not fixed... yet noone cares. Nodoby mentiones a thing about these and then suddenly we get a full-blown discussion about whether actual text should be replaced with some logo. Has logic taken a 180 degree turn or something? Even if this idea comes to pass, do we need to make such a silly issue our top priority?... especially when there actual issues around the wiki? [366][367][368] 17:00, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
    • Disagree, and i'll use your words: The crucifix does a fine job either, you can see that it works well on other wikis. [369] AndreEagle17 [370] [371] [372] 19:18, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
      • "Disagree" Explain why?
        "you can see that it works well on other wikis" Examples on wikis that noone (who supports the symbol) from GTA Wiki edited on? [373][374][375] 17:18, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
    • I think the cross looks nice, look at this page for example, can you imagine how that infobox would look if they put deceased after every single character? It would look polluted as hell, the cross occupies less space and does the job just fine. - DLVIII Talk 17:44, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
      • That's a lot of family members. Anyway, that list and descriptions after it wouldn't look as polluted if bullet points wouldn't be used and the description text would have "" tags.

        Valid link and point though, it seems like the symbols were used on that page all the way back in 2010. [383][384][385] 17:54, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
  • I've thought about it and decided to stick with it in written form. As an athiest I have no opinion on the meaning of the crucifix as it does not offend me in any way, I just think that writing "Deceased" is much clearer and in my opinion makes little/no difference to the layout of the infobox. SJWalker (talk) 17:41, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
  • Not everyone can understand symbols, that's all I have to say. I agree with Wild and Sam. Just saw Rain's skull idea. Changed my vote, symbols are always identifiable when it comes to death :P. [386][387][388] 20:33, May 5, 2015 (UTC)18:34, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
  • It does seem neater when using the symbol, as the written one may occupy some space in the infobox. MC (MyComputer) 22:51, May 5, 2015 (UTC)

GANG==[389] The Lost== [390]


Grand Theft Auto IV The Lost and Damned The Ballad of Gay Tony Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars Grand Theft Auto V Grand Theft Auto Online


Acter, Normandy, Tudor Alderney Broker, Liberty City East Vinewood, Los Santos Stab City Grand Senora Desert Hookies, North Chumash Grapeseed, Blaine County


Liberty chapter: Billy Grey [391] (formerly) Johnny Klebitz [392] (formerly) Los Santos/Blaine County chapter: Johnny Klebitz [393] (formerly) Al Carter


Outlaw Motorcycle Club


Angels of Death MC Pegorino Family Algonquin Triads The Commission Hillside Posse Russian Mafia Albanians Trevor Philips [394] Trevor Philips Enterprises Jeremy Biker Gang Aztecas The Families (GTA Online) Madrazo Cartel Los Santos Vagos


Uptown Riders Elizabeta Torres [395] Gunthugs MC Niko Bellic Petrovic Bratva Northwood Dominican Drug Dealers Los Santos Vagos (formerly) Trevor Philips Enterprises (formerly)The Professionals Ballas




Hexer Lycan Revenant Diabolus Innovation (TLAD) Deamon Hellfury Zombie Bagger (only in The Underbelly Of Paradise) Slamvan (TLAD & GTAO) Duneloader Gang Burrito Maverick Lectro


Bat Knife Pistol Combat Pistol Automatic 9mm Pump-Action Shotgun Sawn-off Shotgun Assault Shotgun Micro-Uzi Assault Rifle Carbine Rifle MG Minigun


Drug trafficking Hijacking Illegal racing Armed robbery Arms trafficking Prostitution Methamphetamine production Contract Killing Heists


Acter clubhouse The Range East Los Santos clubhouse Hookies Grapeseed ranch The Motor Hotel


Billy Grey [396] (Formerly) Johnny Klebitz [397] Jim Fitzgerald [398] Brian Jeremy [399] (Formerly) Terry Thorpe [400] Clay Simons [401] Angus Martin Jason Michaels [402] Lil' Joe [403] Lost MC Lady [404] Earl Horse [405] Dave Grossman Ashley Butler[406] Leila Sharpe [407] Murphey [408] Henry [409] Jose Moose [410] Wyatt Dirty Sue [411] Al Carter*Wow, the feeling was stronger than I had anticipated. Always risky touching on a personal space like religion in a forum such as this. As you may have read, I do have a problem with the symbolism of any one religious denomination being accepted as a "default" for something as universal as death. Much like Wildbrick, I don't think this needs to be a high priority. I do like the idea of using a symbol in list fields (not to be used by itself in the individual's status field as has already been pointed out), but I don't think it should be a cross. That could just as easily be interpreted as indicating a character's faith, rather than their live or dead status. Do a Google Image search for Death Symbol, the first results are all skull and crossbones style images. So is ☠ any better? smurfy (coms) 23:32, May 5, 2015 (UTC)

    • Good point, I feel like this skull you wrote is more like a pirate skull, so yeah, the crucifix suits more the deceased, as most graves are given a crucifix on top of them. [412] AndreEagle17 [413] [414] [415] 00:32, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
      • I think you've missed  most of the point.  "most graves are given a crucifix". No, many Christian headstones use a cross which symbolises the religious denomination of the deceased party. Less than 1/3rd of the worlds population is Christian. It is the most geographically widespread (we won't go into the reasons for that) but Christians are still far-outnumbered by non-Christians. Just beacause the majority of the active editors on this particular wiki are from Western nations that are predominantly Christian, doesn't mean we have to impose the Christian view of the world on everyone else. 60% of the world population does NOT identify a Crucifix as being a recognisable symbol of death, they recognise it through western media forcing it down their throats that it is a Christian symbol (and some of them are intolerant enough to be offended by it, but that is irrelevant to this argument). I'm not saying we have to be strictly secular, but where we can avoid it, we should do so. smurfy (coms) 01:05, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
        • I don't think you got that right, what I meant is that most of the graves uses a crucifix, and that this skull you wrote is more like a pirate skull, last but not least, what else would mean death on the infobox? I have seen many symbols and none of them fit better in this case than a crucifix, but sure, I understand that some users will understand that as a religious image, overall, I actually agree with you. [416] AndreEagle17 [417] [418] [419] 01:12, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
  • Should characters in "determinant" be represented as italics in the infobox sections, or represented as another symbol? MC (MyComputer) 08:57, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
  • After looking at this hot debate going on about what symbol to use, I'll just stay out of it. But a symbol in general is good. Carl Johnson Jr. (talk) 14:24, May 9, 2015 (UTC)

  • Maybe instead of using using crucifixes and all that, how about something GTA-themed for GTA Wiki? Epsilon logo/HUD icon, GTA V rampage logo/HUD icon, 3D Era rampage, etc. There is a nice amount of things to choose from that we could use. [424][425][426] 15:10, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
    • I like this idea. But how would that work? The rampage skull for deceased characters and this interrogation symbol ([427]) for determinant characters? - DLVIII Talk 17:05, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
      • I found this: [428]. It's the deathmatch marker from GTA Online. Rain - Talk 17:22, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
        • 558 and Rain showed the best icons, now we don't need the crucifix anymore, who else agrees? [429] AndreEagle17 [430] [431] [432] 17:57, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
          • I agree too. Also image icons are good since you can make it show the text when you hover over them (unlike acronym which does the same but adds the underline) so that's a nice compromise.

            For determinant characters, I could make IV's/V's red/blue flashing blip (the one that appears on characters where you have to make a decision) as an icon. [433][434][435] 20:52, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
            • Now that we have the icons, here's what I suggest on how to use them. We would make a template called "Status" and it would work as the following:
              produces [436]
              would produce [437]
              Just my idea. Rain - Talk 21:08, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
              • I gotta say, that's a genial idea, if the voting is closed as symbol then we should use it, it looks much better than the cross and the skull, the images may also display a caption saying "deceased" or "determinant" for users who have no idea of what it means. [438] AndreEagle17 [439] [440] [441] 22:21, May 6, 2015 (UTC)

(reset indent) - Tested with The Lost MC infobox >>>

I don't like the Interrogation mark, to me that indicates uncertainty whether the listing should be there, not determinant character, although the mouse-over tip helps. I think the "flashing decision" icon as proposed by WildBrick would be better. smurfy (coms) 22:33, May 6, 2015 (UTC)

    • The interrogation mark could be used on characters whose status is currently unknown, such as Donald Love, by the way, some characters status is incarcerated, (Hsin Jaoming and Gerald McReary for example) what symbol should we use on those kind of status? How about a badge symbol? Like this one ([442])? - DLVIII Talk 03:37, May 7, 2015 (UTC)
  • Maybe the symbol of the Bolingbroke Penitentiary or other known prison, the LCPD logo is more likely to say that the character is a cop. [443] AndreEagle17 [444] [445] [446] 14:34, May 7, 2015 (UTC)
    • Deteminant blip: [447] (if someone could remove the white outline, it'd be great. Photoshop is absolute shit when it comes to gifs, I'm not even sure why Adobe added that "feature"). Also V has an unused handcuff blip ([448]) that could be used for arrested characters. [449][450][451] 15:28, May 7, 2015 (UTC)
      • I know how to do a gif using photoshop, the problem is my PC, anyway, look at the infobox now. [452] AndreEagle17 [453] [454] [455] 15:36, May 7, 2015 (UTC)
        • The flashing red and blue blip doesn't really show a character is determinant at all.I agree that 558's question mark blip should be used for unknown status characters and that the handcuff blip could be used for incarcerated characters, but the flashing red and blue blip doesn't speak for itself. It appears to me as if also the character is either a cop, or is incarcerated. Not to be difficult, but I'd suggest using a different icon for a determinant character. Maybe a cross between life and death (not the cross symbol)? [456] ([457]) 16:34, May 7, 2015 (UTC)Smashbro8
        • Added the "incarcerated" symbol for Elizabeta. MC (MyComputer) 02:24, May 8, 2015 (UTC)
  • The skull icon should be used for deceased, handcuffs for incarcerated but as for determinant, that still needs to be determined. Leo68 (talk) 07:04, May 9, 2015 (UTC)
  • For those who are interested, I've made the template. It's called Template:Status. Rain - Talk 08:34, May 9, 2015 (UTC)
  • Made [458] quickly in GIMP for Determinant. Original image is taken from one of those stock image sites where everything is fair use, I just made it transparent. ToJ (talk) 08:49, May 9, 2015 (UTC)
    • Looks like a pretty good symbol, I don't think that theres any type of symbol that users can look at it and immediatly think: "this character's fate is determinent", so this one should do the job. - DLVIII Talk 18:09, May 9, 2015 (UTC)
  • Update, all three symbols are now able to be used in infoboxes, the skull for deceased, the handcuffs for incarcerated and the questioned grave for determinant. Leo68 (talk) 18:27, May 9, 2015 (UTC)

Lifeinvader Profiles

Closed as Tabbed (9) Flat (0) Leo68 (talk) 15:46, May 5, 2015 (UTC)

Update: As per the vote, I will continue development using the tabbed version and won't be trying too hard to get it looking perfect on mobile at the expense of visual or functional quality on a fully rendered browser. smurfy (coms) 23:58, May 5, 2015 (UTC)

I've been doing a bit of work this weekend building a template to replicate the GTA V in-game Lifeinvader profiles. The intent is to include this template on any character that has a Lifeinvader page in-game. This will also automatically include them in the new category I have also added.

[459]Sample of actual in-game Lifeinvader page

The template, as it stands at the moment, fairly closely replicates the look of the in-game page, with the Friends list page open displaying up to 20 friends with working links to each of their pages.



Franklin Clinton

Occupation: Entrepeneur
Relationship Status: Keeping my options open
[462] [463] [464]
Back to My Profile Photos Friends Stalking
Friends List
Family 5
[465] Denise Clinton
Friends 17
[466] Lamar Davis
Stalking 5
[467] LS Customs
[468] Lamar Davis
[469] Simeon Yeterian
[470] Tonya Wiggins
[471] Denise Clinton
[472] Harold 'Stretch' Joseph
[473] Tanisha Jackson
[474] Tavell Clinton
[475] Dom Beasley
[476] Beverly Felton
[477] Devin Weston
[478] Demarcus Bradley
[479] Andre Barnes
[480] Nicolson Bell
[481] Jamal Reynolds
[482] JB Bradshaw
[483] Darryl Knox
[484] Dana Ellis
[485] 0 friends with private profiles.

I have also done a bit of work seeing if I can more closely replicate the functionality of the in-game page by using 4 tabbers for profile/photos/friends/stalking but there appears to be limited formatting options available to the editor when using the tabber function, so some of the aesthetics of the template would be lost in favour of the additional functionality. 



Franklin Clinton

Occupation: Entrepeneur
Relationship Status: Keeping my options open
[488] [489] [490]
Family 5
[491] Denise Clinton
Friends 17
[492] Lamar Davis
Stalking 5
[493] LS Customs

Family 5
[494] Denise Clinton
Friends 17
[495] Lamar Davis
Stalking 5
[496] LS Customs

Friends List
Family 5
[497] Denise Clinton
Friends 17
[498] Lamar Davis
Stalking 5
[499] LS Customs
[500] Lamar Davis
[501] Simeon Yeterian
[502] Tonya Wiggins
[503] Denise Clinton
[504] Harold 'Stretch' Joseph
[505] Tanisha Jackson
[506] Tavell Clinton

Family 5
[507] Denise Clinton
Friends 17
[508] Lamar Davis
Stalking 5
[509] LS Customs
[510] LS Feud

I'd like to know your opinions on which version would be more useful.

Flat Version:

  • Closely replicates look of in-game site
  • Functional for friends list only, no stalking list visible

Tabbed version:

  • Loses visual similarity for the tabs with background and text formatting lost
  • Fully-functional for both Friends and Stalking tabs, Photos tab is non-functional in-game so would have no content anyway, Profile (messages) tab content would not need to be replicated in the template (at this stage).

The current (flat) version has been trialed on Franklin Clinton's page. I am still undecided on whether to align the template on the right as an infobox or whether to align it in the center of the wiki page to more closely mimic the internet appearance or to align it on the left as a normal article table.

Niko Bellic test:



Niko Bellic

Driver at Bellic Cab Services
Lives in Broker
[513] [514] [515]
On Family (1)
[516] Roman Bellic
On Friends (7)
[517] Mallorie Bordas
[518] Jacob Hughes
[519] Brucie Kibbutz
On Obsessions 5
[520] Burger Shot
[521] Niko Posted a status update xx minutes ago.
Happy Birthday Roman.
+1 Fanboy. Comment. Share.
Mallorie Bordas,Jacob Hughes and 18 others are obsessed with this.
[522] Write a comment...
[523] Niko Posted a photo in Obsessions 12 days ago.
I was hungry after an hour Jacob Hughes

On Family (1)
[525] Roman Bellic
On Friends (7)
[526] Mallorie Bordas
[527] Jacob Hughes
[528] Brucie Kibbutz
On Obsessions 5
[529] Burger Shot

On Family (1)
[530] Roman Bellic
On Friends (7)
[531] Mallorie Bordas
[532] Jacob Hughes
[533] Brucie Kibbutz
On Obsessions 5
[534] Burger Shot

On Family (1)
[535] Roman Bellic
On Friends (7)
[536] Mallorie Bordas
[537] Jacob Hughes
[538] Brucie Kibbutz
On Obsessions 5
[539] Burger Shot
[540] Burger Shot

Thanks for reading. smurfy (coms) 11:18, May 3, 2015 (UTC)


Please indicate your preference for Flat version or Tabbed version below:


Please add any comments or suggestions for improvements to either version:

  • The Tabbed version looks less confusing. However, both versions of the infobox looks very confusing in the mobile version. MC (MyComputer) 12:08, May 3, 2015 (UTC)
    • Good point. I keep forgetting that both my Android and Windows mobiles are set to browse the full version, not the mobile version of wikia. As far as I can tell, the mobile version doesn't render tabbers at all, it just flattens them out, and both versions of the infobox use nested tables which don't ever render well in the mobile version. smurfy (coms) 12:29, May 3, 2015 (UTC)
      • Checked using Wikia's preview tool. It definitely looks terrible on mobile. The table is extremely narrow and barely readable. Rain - Talk 12:31, May 3, 2015 (UTC)
      • Yes, I checked with my Android device (I think it is a better test than the Wikia previwer - although that works pretty well). The set widths of the left columns definitely mess with the mobile rendering, probably more so than the nested tables. I thought there would be side-scrolling issues but it just squeezed it vertically, even when you are viewing the mobile version in "landscape" mode. Yuck. smurfy (coms) 12:38, May 3, 2015 (UTC)
        • The mobile version of the wikia sucks anyway, I wouldn't bother with this if I was you. - DLVIII Talk 02:20, May 4, 2015 (UTC)
          • That's something I agree with - but we can't do much if a lot of people use Wikia through their phone. Rain - Talk 07:25, May 4, 2015 (UTC)
          • Noticed another thing - the infobox is readable in the GTA Fan App. Although a few words are not visible, it is far more better than the mobile version of this wikia. MC (MyComputer) 10:21, May 4, 2015 (UTC)
  • Are you going to be adding this template to Niko Bellic's page? Just out of curiosity. I like the idea and in my opinion, the templates look really good on the pages! Mortsnarg (talk)
    • We don't have access to his profile in-game, so that would be an incomplete template based on the blurry image we can see on Jimmy's PC. Rain - Talk 16:54, May 3, 2015 (UTC)
    • But the people that Niko's friends with and the business's he follows are still partially visible and legible. We could just link it to the people he's friends with (on the main page) it would be incomplete, but there's still info on his page and I think it would be fair to at least consider it. Whatever, maybe I'm missing the point, just think over the idea. Mortsnarg (talk) 17:01, May 3, 2015 (UTC)
      • No, I hadn't intended to put Niko's profile on his page, since the player cannot see it on the in-game LI site nor get the full content of his friends/stalk lists. The mock-up on Jimmy's laptop is unique. I may replicate the 3rd version - the real world internet version which doesn't match the in-game internet version as a 2nd template. Niko's one might warrant a one-off attempted replica on his page not using either template. smurfy (coms) 01:47, May 4, 2015 (UTC)
        • Test of Niko Bellic version added above (as best as I can make out some of the text from my screenshots of Jimmy's open laptop. smurfy (coms) 05:10, May 4, 2015 (UTC)
  • Even I'm not a big fan of things like this, the tabbed version looks nice and easy to handle, like the in-game version. Still can't give an accurate opinion about the mobile version, but all that I can see is that it looks messy in both forms due to their limitations. So yeah, the tabbed one. [550] SWAT Cam F [551] Dispatch [552] Data Files [553] 04:02, May 4, 2015 (UTC)
  •  The tabber makes it look cleaner and more organized. Closing the vote as tabber. Leo68 (talk) 15:46, May 5, 2015 (UTC)