Wikia

GTA Wiki

Changes: GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard

Edit

Back to page

(Comments)
(Votes)
 
(1,557 intermediate revisions by 56 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Welcome to '''GTA Wiki's Community noticeboard'''.
+
Welcome to '''GTA Wiki's Community Noticeboard'''.
   
 
'''Archives'''
 
'''Archives'''
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 1|Archive 1]]
+
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 1|Archive 1]] ''(June 2011 - July 2011)''
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 2|Archive 2]]
+
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 2|Archive 2]] ''(July 2011 - April 2012)''
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 3|Archive 3]]
+
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 3|Archive 3]] ''(November 2012 - June 2013)''
  +
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 4|Archive 4]] ''(June 2013 - August 2013)''
  +
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 5|Archive 5]] ''(August 2013 - January 2014)''
  +
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 6|Archive 6]] ''(January 2014 - January 2015)''
  +
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 7|Archive 7]] ''(January 2015 - April 2015)''
  +
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 8|Archive 8]] ''(May 2015 - October 2015)''
  +
*[[GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 9|Archive 9]] ''(October 2015 - March 2016)''
 
Talk page rules apply here.
 
Talk page rules apply here.
   
 
This noticeboard is for discussion and voting on changes to the wiki, reporting vandalism and wiki rule breaking, and reporting bad or unfair behaviour from GTA Wiki staff.
 
This noticeboard is for discussion and voting on changes to the wiki, reporting vandalism and wiki rule breaking, and reporting bad or unfair behaviour from GTA Wiki staff.
  +
Votes for the expiration of a Patroller's probation will also be held here.
   
 
For requests for promotion, please go to '''[[GTA Wiki:Requests for Promotion]]'''.
 
For requests for promotion, please go to '''[[GTA Wiki:Requests for Promotion]]'''.
 
We currently have a lot of staff so there will be no more Patroller requests for a while. Current Patrollers may request to be promoted to Admin status by voting on the Requests for Promotion Page.
 
   
 
'''Voting Rules'''<br />
 
'''Voting Rules'''<br />
 
Since voting about a change can cause arguments, here are the rules.
 
Since voting about a change can cause arguments, here are the rules.
 
*Anyone can start a topic for a community vote.
 
*Anyone can start a topic for a community vote.
*Please be civil when voting, and never condemn another users vote.
+
*Please be civil when voting, and never condemn another user's vote.
 
*Voting usually lasts 3 to 5 days.
 
*Voting usually lasts 3 to 5 days.
   
== Anonymous Users Should be Allowed==
+
'''Please input your new requests above the old ones. That way, we can easily spot it rather than looking for it.'''
+
==[[Grand Theft Auto V/Title Update Notes]] Page Improvement==
::<font color=red>'''RESOLVED: Anonymous editing will ''not'' be allowed'''</font> - <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 04:28, June 21, 2013 (UTC)
+
No big explanation needed about the problems with the page because... well, [[Talk:Grand Theft Auto V/Title Update Notes|it's been discussed a bunch of times, always leading with Smurfynz being "right"]]. I lay forth three ideas on how we can improve the page:
+
#We make seperate pages of the title update notes in the year they were released in. For example: [[Grand Theft Auto V/Title Update Notes - 2013]].
I have noticed on many active wikis that anonymous users are allowed. And when you check some of these wiki's recent wiki activity you'll see that a large amount of edits are done by anonymous users. So what I'm trying to say is that GTA Wiki should allow unregistered users to edit freely. This would make the wiki much more active and encourage some of these anonymous users to sign up and become registered users. Sure there may be a vandal here and there, but with the large staff this could easily be stopped. And if possible, an admin or Bureaucrat could block the Anonymous User account for a week. Please consider this as I believe this could do great for the wiki.  [[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 04:37, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
+
#Or we dedicate each update list with their own page.
+
#Or we use tabbers for each of the update list section... which I suggested, but y'know, Smurfy would rather go offroading in a [http://dailynewsdig.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/phantom-donk-575x303.png Rolls-Royce Phantom donk] than to have that.
  +
Lemme know which idea you want by voting '''Idea''' '''1, 2, '''or''' 3''' (or by '''one, two, '''or''' three'''). --'''[[User:Tony 1998|Tony42898]]''' <small>('''[[User talk:Tony 1998|Talker]]'''</small> - <small>'''[[User blog:Tony 1998|Blogger]]'''</small> - <small>'''[[Special:Contributions/Tony 1998|Stalker]]''')</small>-- 02:23, May 1, 2016 (UTC)
 
===Votes===
 
===Votes===
*'''Yes '''- [[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 04:37, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
+
*'''Idea 1''' - <span style="background-color:white; border:4px ridge black; color:#FFFFFF; font-family:System;">[[File:Body Armor Android.png|20px]] [[User:Camilo Flores|'''SWAT Cam F''']] [[File:Torpedo Android.png|20px]]</span> <span>[[File:Detonator Android.png|20px|link=User talk:Camilo Flores|Dispatch]]</span> <span style="background-color:#000000;">[[File:Crate Android.png|20px|link=Special:Contributions/Camilo Flores|Data Files]]</span> 02:55, May 1, 2016 (UTC)
*'''Yes - [[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 04:42, June 8, 2013 (UTC)'''
+
*'''Idea 1''' - <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 06:11, May 1, 2016 (UTC)
*'''No '''- [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 11:16, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
+
*'''1''' - <font size="5" face="Old English Text MT"><b>[[User:SJWalker|Sam]]</b></font> [[User talk:SJWalker|<font face="Old English Text MT"><sup>Talk</sup></font>]] 09:41, May 1, 2016 (UTC)
*'''NO''' - '''[[User:Ilan xd|ILan]] (<small>[[User talk:Ilan xd|XD]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Ilan xd|Edits]] &bull; [[w:c:rockstargames|Home]] </small>)''' 11:07, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
+
*'''Idea 1''' --<span style="background-color:transparent; border:4px ridge limegreen;">[[File:MH007Signature.png|0x20px]] [[User:MythHunter 007|<span style="color:;">'''MythHunter 007'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:MythHunter 007|<span style="color:;">'''Talk'''</span>]]</sup> [[File:MH007Signature.png|0x20px]]</span> 11:07, May 1, 2016 (UTC)
*'''No''' - [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 12:29, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
+
*'''Idea 1''' - [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 11:11, May 1, 2016 (UTC)
*'''No''' - <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]])
 
*'''Oh Hell No - [[User:Cloudkit01|Cloudkit01]] ([[User talk:Cloudkit01|talk]]) 13:26, June 9, 2013 (UTC)'''
 
*'''No''' - <span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> <sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>[[User talk:Dodo8|Talk]]</span>''</sup> 14:12, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No''' -[[User:Tony 1998|Mr. T., That&#39;s Me!]] ([[User talk:Tony 1998|talk]]) 03:49, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*No [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 06:53, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No''' - <font size="+1.5" face="Trajan Pro"><b>[[User:The Tom|Tom]]</b></font> [[User talk:The Tom|<sup><u>Talk</u></sup>]] 10:00, June 11, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No''' - --'''[[User:Thomas0802|Thomas0802]] ([[User talk:Thomas0802|talk]]-[[Special:Contributions/Thomas0802|Edits]])''' 17:41, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
   
 
===Comments===
 
===Comments===
*The GTA Myths Wiki as well as others I see allow anonymous users and I don't think it would be a big deal. We should try it out; but if there is lots of vandals then reverse it. [[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 04:42, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
+
*The first option seems to have a lot of potential. Users would be more interested in the latest updates and this would be easy for navigation. However, the third one is still a good option. Either case, it is better than cluttering the current page, to the point it will be stuck forever. <span style="background-color:white; border:4px ridge black; color:#FFFFFF; font-family:System;">[[File:Body Armor Android.png|20px]] [[User:Camilo Flores|'''SWAT Cam F''']] [[File:Torpedo Android.png|20px]]</span> <span>[[File:Detonator Android.png|20px|link=User talk:Camilo Flores|Dispatch]]</span> <span style="background-color:#000000;">[[File:Crate Android.png|20px|link=Special:Contributions/Camilo Flores|Data Files]]</span> 02:55, May 1, 2016 (UTC)
*Yeah, but what if some of them are anon vandals? [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 11:16, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
+
*Idea 1 is both the most logical and efficient for organisation and layout. Sure it'll work. <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 06:11, May 1, 2016 (UTC)
*Same as Mikey. It is not a secret that any second anon is a vandal: it is impossible to trust anons, at least in my eyes. Sure, Wikia is all about making a community, but anons are a different story. -- '''[[User:Ilan xd|ILan]] (<small>[[User talk:Ilan xd|XD]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Ilan xd|Edits]] &bull; [[w:c:rockstargames|Home]] </small>)''' 11:07, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
+
==Bot Jobs==
*There will not be "a vandal here and there". There will be dozens of vandals per day. Just think about it this way - Wikia and Wikipedia tout their everyone-can-edit rule like it's a religion. For them to turn off anonymous editing completely on this wiki just proves the magnitude of the anonymous vandalism problem this wiki once had. In fact, I'd bet that even if this resolution passes, Wikia Staff would veto it. <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 12:33, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
+
:'''''Closed as <font color=limegreen>Please refer to my talk page for specifying jobs</font> by''''' <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 21:06, April 12, 2016 (UTC)
*We already have problems with registered users, unregistered users would bring even more problems. But I agree we should have more Admins. For example, there's some guy who is adding Fanon content and me and Jeansowaty are the only one who spotted him? I'm voting '''No'''. <span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
+
Please specify here what you would like the Wiki bot to do. I ain't very good at programming, so I'm taking it one step at a time, running a few trials soon. <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 12:58, April 12, 2016 (UTC)
*'''We already have problems with registered users, unregistered users would bring even more problems''' - Sums it up perfectly. [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 22:56, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
 
*As per Dan's last comment. [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 06:53, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*Well, that ended up quickly. -- '''[[User:Ilan xd|ILan]] (<small>[[User talk:Ilan xd|XD]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Ilan xd|Edits]] &bull; [[w:c:rockstargames|Home]] </small>)''' 13:02, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*thumbs up the last comment* - [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 22:34, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*I agree with Jeff and Dodo. While I do allow anonymous users to edit on the other Wiki's I run, this Wiki is just too big for that, there are already a lot of users, adding unregistered users to that would make this place almost unmanageable. I think I was the only one around when this Wiki was abandoned, pretty much every unregistered user was a vandal, and it took an incredible amount of time and work to get this Wiki to what it is now, allowing unregistered users will be a step backwards. <font size="+1.5" face="Trajan Pro"><b>[[User:The Tom|Tom]]</b></font> [[User talk:The Tom|<sup><u>Talk</u></sup>]] 10:00, June 11, 2013 (UTC)
 
*In my opinion, I disagree but not at all. The bad part is, that each day we need to check if these new users are doing good edits, reasonable work, and don't messing up with the pages, we had a lot of problem with it. --'''[[User:Thomas0802|Thomas0802]] ([[User talk:Thomas0802|talk]]-[[Special:Contributions/Thomas0802|Edits]])''' 17:44, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
   
==WE NEED MORE STAFF- Raise the Admin limit to 8==
+
:Could you contact staff so they can give your bot a bot tag? It's pretty hard to keep up with the wiki activity since the bot edits clog up both WikiActivity and RecentChanges. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 16:30, April 12, 2016 (UTC)
   
::<font color=red>'''RESOLVED:''' Proposal to raise admin limit to 8 failed. </font><b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 04:29, June 21, 2013 (UTC)
+
::Um, they already flagged the bot. Is that what you mean by Bot Tag? <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 16:32, April 12, 2016 (UTC)
   
Currently the GTA Wiki has '''3 Bureaucrat''', '''5 Admins''', & '''8 Patrollers. '''Once GTA V is fully released there will be a flood of new users. Some users will be good editors, some will unintentionally make mistakes and others will be vandals. My proposal would be to have one of 8 patrollers assigned to one of 8 admins. This would make it easy for one admin not to get overwhelmed with his duties. Of course patrollers could still contact another admin and fellow patrollers but this new reporting system would improve the responce time as in the past, vandals were not stoped for a while. It would almost be like individual teams that would make up the whole GTA staff.  I hope you all consider this great plan to assure a promt responce in any situation that could damage the GTA Wiki. [[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 02:52, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
+
:::Bot tag is a user right tag which means the bot edits don't show up in WikiActivty and only show up in RecentChanges if the "Show Bots" option is tagged. So far I can see bot edits everywhere and according to [http://gta.wikia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3AMonkeyBot188&year=&month=-1&tagfilter= this page] it isn't flagged. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 16:34, April 12, 2016 (UTC)
===Proposal===
 
*3 Bureaucrats
 
*8 Admins (assigned one patroller)
 
*8 Patrollers (assigned one admin)
 
*Staff total: 19 (18.75% increase)
 
===Votes===
 
*'''Yes - [[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 02:52, June 10, 2013 (UTC)'''
 
*'''Yes and No''' - [[User:Tony 1998|Mr. T., That&#39;s Me!]] ([[User talk:Tony 1998|talk]]) 04:12, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''Yes '''- [[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 04:29, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No''' [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 06:59, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No -''' <span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]] 07:20, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''Yes''' - [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|VaultBoy Tom]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk to me this way]]) 11:38, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No''' - '''[[User:Ilan xd|ILan]] (<small>[[User talk:Ilan xd|XD]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Ilan xd|Edits]] &bull; [[w:c:rockstargames|Home]] </small>)''' 13:10, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No''' - <font size="+1.5" face="Trajan Pro"><b>[[User:The Tom|Tom]]</b></font> [[User talk:The Tom|<sup><u>Talk</u></sup>]] 13:50, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No''' - [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 19:15, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No '''- [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 22:50, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''Probably''' - [[User:Cloudkit01|Cloudkit01]] ([[User talk:Cloudkit01|talk]]) 03:57, June 11, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No''' - <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 13:45, June 11, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No - '''[[User:Istalo|istalo]] ([[User talk:Istalo|Leave me a message]]) 14:33 ,June 12, 2013
 
   
===Comments===
+
:::That's odd, I received an email saying it had been flagged. I've paused the bot in the mean time, and asked Sannse to tag it. Thanks Rain. <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 16:38, April 12, 2016 (UTC)
*As I stated above this proposal is about further limiting the potential damage vandals and confussed users can do on the wiki. This "team" system will also allow for a faster responce time and more organized effort to secure the GTA Wiki agginst potential threats.
 
*I partially agree with this. I do agree that we need three more admins and patrollers to keep the Wiki smooth running. However, the staff can't be on the Wiki all day. We have lives outside the Interweb and the Wiki. That's a problem (and I contribute to that) that will never be resolved. [[User:Tony 1998|Mr. T., That&#39;s Me!]] ([[User talk:Tony 1998|talk]]) 04:09, June 11, 2013 (UTC)
 
*I don't really see any logic in assigning patrollers to certain admins to report an issue. I don't think any admins are getting "overwhelmed". And about raising the amount of admins to eight seems a little high, but the release of GTA V may call for this. I'm not sure. I'll think about it. [[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 04:29, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*We already have enough admins and bureacrats to cover the different times zones, except the far east. The only new additions to the Bureacrat and Admin team should be from the far west or far east, so that we have strong coverage for each time zone. [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 06:59, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*I agree we should have more admins, yesterday we were 3 active patrollers who spotted that vandal, but we couldn't stop him until an Admin logged in. Since I'm one of the patrollers who wants to be promoted in the future, my vote won't count anyway. Also, 8 Admins seems a little too much, in my opinion 7 would be enough.<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> <sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>[[User talk:Dodo8|Talk]]</span>''</sup>
 
*Yeah, I think it would be a good idea to have more admins, but as Dodo said, it would be a bit too much with 8. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|VaultBoy Tom]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk to me this way]]) 11:38, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*We don't need more admins, but we do need more patrollers: 6 admins is enough (for now) and our cuurent limit for patrollers is 8 anyway (so your proposal doesn't increases this limit). I personally think that limit for patrollers should be increased to 12.-- '''[[User:Ilan xd|ILan]] (<small>[[User talk:Ilan xd|XD]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Ilan xd|Edits]] &bull; [[w:c:rockstargames|Home]] </small>)''' 13:10, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*I agree with Ilan. That's why we're currently allowing requests to become a patroller. But I think we have enough admins at the moment. It's exam time for some admins, hence the current inactivity of me among others, so that may explain why nobody was available at the time. We can revisit this idea in a couple of months, if it's still an issue then we may implement some changes. <font size="+1.5" face="Trajan Pro"><b>[[User:The Tom|Tom]]</b></font> [[User talk:The Tom|<sup><u>Talk</u></sup>]] 13:50, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
**We will check this issue during the summer holiday. If there will be periods of time when no staff will be present I consider we should agree to make the staff bigger.<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
 
*Okay, a couple of points.
 
**First of all, Dodo, your vote does count.
 
**Secondly, I believe we should discuss whether to take on a new admin when GTA V is released, or a little beforehand, so we can deal with the inevitable bad edits, vandalism, arguments over content, and new members.
 
**Thirdly, this idea of assigning a patroller to a certain admin is not logical, and is ridiculous in my opinion. [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 19:26, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*I hadn't read the part about patrollers assigned to admins. I agree with Dan on that, and on everything else he said. <font size="+1.5" face="Trajan Pro"><b>[[User:The Tom|Tom]]</b></font> [[User talk:The Tom|<sup><u>Talk</u></sup>]] 09:48, June 11, 2013 (UTC)
 
*Not sure if this is the place to put this, but admins and bureacrats do have those boxes urging people to message us. If any one of our editors actually left me a message I would have been able to come and sort out the issue. When I was patrolling I would send messages to every last admin; if other editors did so as well, there would be a greater chance of a quick solution. I still believe that if we do we need an admin, they should be at least GMT +5. [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 20:40, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
**Good point. <font size="+1.5" face="Trajan Pro"><b>[[User:The Tom|Tom]]</b></font> [[User talk:The Tom|<sup><u>Talk</u></sup>]] 09:48, June 11, 2013 (UTC)
 
*If we're having more admins, make it one more, not three. - [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 22:50, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 
*My whole logic is that patrollers really don't have any power to stop an aggressive vandal which is why we need more editors with blocking power. The number 8 for admins makes sense since there will be 8 patrollers. The problem isn't that there is not enough patrollers, but rather there isn't enough admins. Adding three admins would fill the gaps that are missing at the moment. As it is there are vandals; once V is out, bet that number to double. Everyone has there own time they are active, so more admins would further protect the wiki. The time is now to be prepared for the near future. [[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 03:39, June 11, 2013 (UTC)
 
* The thing about admins is that being an administrator is a much bigger deal than being a patroller. Administrators have to be patient, reliable, responsible, and knowledgeable about GTA Wiki's policies - even the unpopular ones like the [[GTA Wiki:Image Policy|Image policy]]. We've promoted one admin who would plead with vandals to pleasepleaseplease be nice instead of blocking them while they laughed in his face and kept vandalizing, and we've promoted one admin who wasn't even remotely qualified and ended up getting demoted for saying there was ''nothing for him to do''. That's why I'm very hesitant when it comes to promoting people to admin, and to opening promotion back up again. Opening up a position for one more administrator is something I'd probably vote in favor of if someone made that proposal, but another thing I want to make clear - an empty spot doesn't guarantee that any particular person's going to get the position, and an empty spot doesn't mean that there's any great urgency to fill that spot. Admins need to be qualified and reliable. <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 13:44, June 11, 2013 (UTC)
 
**I agree with you. Being an admin doesn't make you god of that wiki. Most wikis I visit just to read have a crap load of admins, yet, they don't do a damn thing. Promoting someone an admin, they will go AWOL then causes disturbances and disputes. If we ever do promote a Patroller to Admin, we can't take their word for it; we need to check if the user has good, quality edits and check if the user is on good terms. As for the Patrollers, we are only given the Rollback tool Chat blocking tool. What you said about how they (we) can't stop aggressive vandals, that could be a problem. Even worse if there are no admins active. This request on this noticeboard is a yes and no to others and I and when it closes, this is something I could look back on after the release of GTA V. [[User:Tony 1998|Mr. T., That&#39;s Me!]] ([[User talk:Tony 1998|talk]]) 18:02, June 11, 2013 (UTC)
 
* I'm voting '''Yes''' because of what Sasquatch just said. Once GTA V is out there will be more confused new users and vandals. It would be smarter to get new admins now and prepare, rather than later.  [[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 16:58, June 11, 2013 (UTC)
 
* What about the proposal to assign on admin to one patroller? My first point was that this would improve the responce time to a vandal. What I was also thinking was that it would make sure admins and patrollers are very involved, and performing their job. Of course taking a couple days off is normal, but this new system would weed out the editors that have lost interest and would freeup positions for enthusiastic editors. We could also have a reward system where the team with the most edits that month get a badge or some recognition in the wiki community. The team system would not only be a fun reward system, but a functional tool to make sure everyone is performing in their position. [[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 02:39, June 12, 2013 (UTC)
 
::As both I and other people have said, if anyone catches a rampaging vandal (by which I mean someone vandalizing as many pages as he can manage, not just a drive-by vandal) they shouldn't edit war with the vandal - they should inform ''all'' of the admins and b'crats and then completely ignore the vandal. Even if the vandal gets fresh and tries to remove the message, the admins will still get the "you have new messages waiting" and have the sense to check their talk page history to see what's going on if they don't see any new messages. There's no reason to assign patrollers to individual admins. <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 02:59, June 12, 2013 (UTC)
 
*Ok ok, what about we raising at least to 1 more bureaucrat, and 2 admins? That wouldn't be a bad idea...
 
PS.: Arrrrrghhhh I don't have much time to see the new updates, beacause the school is killing me (not really, but you know right...). Bloody hell, I'll try to check posts, this friday ok? [[User:Istalo|istalo]] ([[User talk:Istalo|Leave me a message]]) 14:33, June 12, 2013
 
**There'll always have to be an odd number of bureaucrats, since there are occasional bureaucrat-only votes. And what I said about promoting people to admin goes double for promoting them to b'crat. <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 14:55, June 12, 2013 (UTC)
 
*I thought better and I changed my vote to '''No'''. I believe we should have 1 or 2 more admins, and maybe a few more patroller, but is fine for now.<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
 
   
<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
+
===Jobs===
  +
* <s>Remove images from these categories: [[:Category:4-Door Sedans and Coupes]], [[:Category:2-Door Sedans and Coupes]] and [[:Category:Exclusive Enhanced Version Content in GTA Online]]</s>. [[User:Thegtaseeker96|<font size="4" face="Trebuchet MS">'''TGS96'''</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Thegtaseeker96|<font face="Century Gothic" color="Gold">'''talk'''</font>]]</sup> <sup>[[Special:Contributions/Thegtaseeker96|<font face="Century Gothic" color="Gold">'''stalk'''</font>]]</sup> 13:10, April 12, 2016 (UTC)
  +
*It'me again: <s>Replace [http://gta.wikia.com/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Image_policy this template] with the new [[Template:ImageLicense|image license]] template</s>. BTW, the bot is awesome. [[User:Thegtaseeker96|<font size="4" face="Trebuchet MS">'''TGS96'''</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Thegtaseeker96|<font face="Century Gothic" color="Gold">'''talk'''</font>]]</sup> <sup>[[Special:Contributions/Thegtaseeker96|<font face="Century Gothic" color="Gold">'''stalk'''</font>]]</sup> 14:08, April 12, 2016 (UTC)
  +
*Italicate "<nowiki>==Grand Theft Auto</nowiki>==" <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 15:05, April 12, 2016 (UTC)
  +
*Various common spelling mistakes to be found and fixed. <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 15:05, April 12, 2016 (UTC)
  +
*Replace <nowiki><gallery></nowiki> with <nowiki><gallery position="center"></nowiki> <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 15:06, April 12, 2016 (UTC)
   
==Affiliation with Watch Dogs Wiki==
+
==GTA Wiki Bot==
+
Hey guys, so I've decided to go ahead after a discussion off-site with VaultBoy, and consider creating a bot. I believe McJeff once had one and it turned out well, and Tom also was gonna create one a while back, but forgot. What do you guys think? No votes, just comments - for now. <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 11:12, April 8, 2016 (UTC)
::<font color=orange>'''RESOLVED''': The margin of support falls short of the 70% required to enact the affiliation</font> - <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 01:20, June 26, 2013 (UTC)
 
I know since the beginning of time this wiki has been running completely on its own. The [http://watch-dogs.wikia.com/wiki/Watch_Dogs_Wiki Watch Dogs Wiki] has many similarities with GTA wikia; it uses similar framework as I quite like the GTA wiki setup and similar category networks. I think it would be nice if we could get some more editors interested in editing there. I don't want to put too much emphasis on the affiliation so just a picture link on the main page somewhere would be all. Also linking the two titles together could be beneficial to readers, as the two games share a lot in common as well. [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 08:04, June 12, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
:Since (as of this post) the proposal has not quite enough votes to pass but does have majority support, as well as sporadic voter participation, it shall remain open for a few extra days. Proposals need 70% support to succeed, this one currently has 62.5%. Patrollers and admins who have not voted because they don't care are allowed to vote "no preference", "no opinion", "indifferent" or something similar. <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 04:34, June 21, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
::5 days and one additional 'no' vote later, I'm closing this as a failed proposal. <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 01:20, June 26, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
===Votes===
 
*'''Yes''' - '''[[User:Ilan xd|ILan]] (<small>[[User talk:Ilan xd|XD]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Ilan xd|Edits]] &bull; [[w:c:rockstargames|Home]] </small>)''' 16:07, June 12, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No - [[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 02:58, June 13, 2013 (UTC)'''
 
*'''Yes - '''[[User:Istalo|istalo]] ([[User talk:Istalo|Message]]) 15:52, June 13, 2013
 
*'''Yes -''' <span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
 
*'''Yes''' - [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 17:50, June 13, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No''' --'''[[User:Thomas0802|Thomas0802]] ([[User talk:Thomas0802|talk]]-[[Special:Contributions/Thomas0802|Edits]])''' 17:49, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No''' - <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]])
 
*'''Yes '''- [[User:Instulent|Instulent]] ([[User talk:Instulent|talk]]) 14:13, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No''' - [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 14:02, June 21, 2013 (UTC)
 
   
 
===Comments===
 
===Comments===
*It doesn't really important if the two titles share similar features, as even the wikis with the most different subjects can become affiliated. I do think, however, this is a very good idea and may open a door us to affiliate with more Wikis. -- '''[[User:Ilan xd|ILan]] (<small>[[User talk:Ilan xd|XD]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Ilan xd|Edits]] &bull; [[w:c:rockstargames|Home]] </small>)''' 16:07, June 12, 2013 (UTC)
+
*I thought about using a bot a while ago when I decided to get rid of these non-existent categories: [[:Category:4-Door Sedans and Coupes]], [[:Category:2-Door Sedans and Coupes]] and [[:Category:Exclusive Enhanced Version Content in GTA Online]]. It is a pain to manually remove them from all the images they are listed in (over 1400 images, which is why I gave up), so we can use a bot to get this job done quicker than any normal user. Yep, a bot can be useful. [[User:Thegtaseeker96|<font size="4" face="Trebuchet MS">'''TGS96'''</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Thegtaseeker96|<font face="Century Gothic" color="Gold">'''talk'''</font>]]</sup> <sup>[[Special:Contributions/Thegtaseeker96|<font face="Century Gothic" color="Gold">'''stalk'''</font>]]</sup> 14:14, April 8, 2016 (UTC)
*To say Watch Dogs Wiki should be an affiliate to the GTA Wiki really makes no sense. It is not related to GTA in any way; that alone should be the deal killer. Saints row is a GTA clone, and has very similar attributes, but it is not GTA and therefore should not be able to tap into the GTA network. Grand Theft Answers and Rockstar Games Wiki should really be the ones considered affiliates at the moment. [[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 02:58, June 13, 2013 (UTC)
+
**I second that. <font size="5" face="Old English Text MT"><b>[[User:SJWalker|Sam]]</b></font> [[User talk:SJWalker|<font face="Old English Text MT"><sup>Talk</sup></font>]] 15:11, April 8, 2016 (UTC)
*#You don't seem to understand the affiliation concept; (as ILan pointed out) the topics don't have to be similar in order for an affiiliation to be made; do some research - look at other wikis that belong to affiliate groups. One thing that I love about Wikia is the community that exists and the various wikis with interesting information, social integration is something tha we could do with, for our own editors and maybe to attract new talent.
+
*A bot will be good for doing tedious and boring tasks (like adding categories), so yeah, why not? [[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 15:19, April 8, 2016 (UTC)
*#Plus it would be good for readers to have quicker access to other wikis that we affiliate with. Limiting our affiliation just to GTA-related wikis, kind of defeats the object of community integration and linking.
+
*With comments like this, I'll start at the weekend some time. It'll be named MonkeyBot188. Wild, how can I get it to do tasks like that, btw? <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 15:21, April 8, 2016 (UTC)
*#<span style="line-height:21px;">"</span>''It is not related to GTA in any way''<span style="line-height:21px;">" - a view that indicates little research done before speaking. I suggest people do some research before voting if they wish to agree with this statemnt. [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 09:39, June 13, 2013 (UTC)</span>
+
**Honestly? I don't know. :p I'm not that great at programming. [[File:v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User:WildBrick142|My User page...]]<span class="helpcursor">[[File:V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=User talk:WildBrick142|Whats up?]]</span>[[File:V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg|30px|link=Special:Contributions/WildBrick142|I did NOTHING!]] 15:36, April 8, 2016 (UTC)
*Well I see no problem to affiliate with other wiki, and plus as Ilan said, it's a good idea... [[User:Istalo|istalo]] ([[User talk:Istalo|Message]]) 15:52, June 13, 2013
+
***No trouble mate. See, I'm gonna talk to Staff about making one, and I was thinking of just creating the account, getting the basics sorted, then from there, slowly improvise with it to get the most of its functions, with the programming and such. It requires a .net extension download which I think does most of the word for you. I'll look into it more over the coming days. <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 15:44, April 8, 2016 (UTC)
*It's a good idea! Also, we should list the Rockstar Games Wiki too.<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
+
****[[w:c:c:Help:Bots|This covers most of the basics]]. {{Signatures/RainingPain17}} 18:00, April 8, 2016 (UTC)
*Go ahead. And like Dodo said, you should add the [http://rockstargames.wikia.com/Main_Page Rockstar Games Wiki] too. - [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 17:50, June 13, 2013 (UTC)
 
**Credit to Sasquatch, it was his idea :) <span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
 
**In that case, good idea Sasquatch. - [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 20:52, June 13, 2013 (UTC)
 
**Thanks. [[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 02:18, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
 
**@Jbanton, You have a real pissy tone in your responce to the comment I made which is a sign that you are a very insecure person. Now thats out of the way, you should look at the wikis that are GTA wiki affiliates and note it's only GTA related.  I very much understand the affiliates concept as I was the one who lobbied for an affiliates section on this wiki. I know you have been fighting to get your foot in the door over at "watch dogs wiki" as an admin, but that is no reason to use the GTA Wiki name as a way to boost activity on an ill qualified wiki. YOU who should be looking out for this wiki, not others you are trying to boot activity on for your own reputation. [[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 02:18, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
 
**#We don't have affiliates, hence why I have this proposal here.
 
**#You really should research; I've been an admin there for a little while actually, your misconceptions and naivety ''("use the GTA Wiki name as a way to boost activity on an ill qualified wiki")'' are uncalled for and poorly founded.
 
**#GTA Wiki belongs to Wikia, editors don't have to pledge full allegiance to one topic. Also this is not the place for (poorly researched) personal atacks. [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 07:04, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
 
***Stop it, guys. You're part of the GTA Staff, you shouldn't fight eachother.<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
 
***Enough! No more personal attacks. Both of you need to calm down.  - [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 20:34, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
 
*I'm not sure if we are allowed to add amendments or that sort of thing to proposals, but could we also affiliate with other Rockstar title wikis, such as [[w:c:reddead|Read Dead Wiki]] and Midnight Club wiki? [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 17:19, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
*Nah, I think we should be affiliated or "allied" to Wikis only with the Rockstar Games as the developer/publisher, Watch Dogs could be a nice game but it has nothing to share with GTA. --'''[[User:Thomas0802|Thomas0802]] ([[User talk:Thomas0802|talk]]-[[Special:Contributions/Thomas0802|Edits]])''' 17:49, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
*It's nothing against Watch Dogs Wiki, but in my experience "affiliated wikis" never leads to anything good and usually leads to a fight between the wikis when malcontents from one jump over to the other and start causing problems. <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 03:12, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
*I think so, because then we can build a bridge in a way for larger communitys joining the Watch Dogs wiki and to here as well. [[User:Instulent|Instulent]] ([[User talk:Instulent|talk]]) 14:15, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
*This has now run for a little over a week. Five votes in favour versus three against. I'm guessing this can be closed as the motion having passed. I have taken on board Jeff's comment and will do my best to ensure that nonsene and trolls are not shared, mainly by stamping them out in the first place at the affiliated wiki. [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 07:54, June 19, 2013 (UTC)
 
   
==Edit Requirement==
+
==New policy(ies) + Demotion system overhaul==
::<font color=red>'''FAILED'''</font> - <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 04:30, June 21, 2013 (UTC)
+
:'''''Closed as <font color=limegreen>Successful</font> by''''' <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 11:12, April 8, 2016 (UTC)
I've noticed that some staff members (I won't name names) are inactive sometimes. So to ensure that the GTA Wiki staff is active and doing their job properly, we should have a "three strike rule". What I'm saying is that  if a staff member didn't produce 30 edits at the end of the month, that person would recieve "a strike". And if that peticular staff member recieved three stikes in one year, he or she would be demoted. This sytem would make sure every staff member is quallified for their job and flush out the ones who are not. This would also possibly open up staff positions for people who are quallified for the job, rather than the ones who are not. For an active and quallified staff member 30 edits a month should not be a problem; if it is, then you are not cut out for the job and are just holding up precious staff positions. One edit a day is not too much to ask for. And to make sure every staff member is producing 30 edits a month, three trusted editors at the end f each month whould check every one of the staffs contributions.
 
====Proposition:====
 
*30 edits are required each month by a staff member.
 
*If 30 edits are not executed, that staff member will recieve a strike.
 
*If a staff member recieves three strikes in a year, he or she is demoted.
 
*Edit counters - Three trusted staff members who check the staff's contributions each month.
 
Please vote and leave a comment. Thankyou.  [[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 03:44, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
===Votes===
 
*'''Yes '''- [[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 03:47, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No''' - <span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
 
*'''No''' - <font size="+1.5" face="Trajan Pro"><b>[[User:The Tom|Tom]]</b></font> [[User talk:The Tom|<sup><u>Talk</u></sup>]] 11:58, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No''' - [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 12:50, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No''' - <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 14:59, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''Absolutely Not''' - [[User:Tony 1998|Mr. T., That&#39;s Me!]] ([[User talk:Tony 1998|talk]]) 15:25, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''Yes, great idea!''' --'''[[User:Thomas0802|Thomas0802]] ([[User talk:Thomas0802|talk]]-[[Special:Contributions/Thomas0802|Edits]])''' 17:59, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''No '''- [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 19:23, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''Yes - [[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 04:53, June 18, 2013 (UTC)'''
 
   
===Comments===
+
Yo guys. So, I've decided to create a new policy (two really, in the same page since they're relatively similar). Firstly, '''oddjob-ing'''. Don't be fooled by the rather humorous name. Oddjob-ing is the act of staff members carrying out minor edits on only a monthly basis to secure their staff position. Minor edits are usually coding fixes, unnoticeable spacing errors, or general single-instance grammar fixes on articles. Users caught doing this over a few month's time should be treated as inactive and a demotion should be filed against them. I have several staff in mind that act in such a way.
*I think this is a great idea, and is an easy edit requirement for a staff member. [[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 03:47, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
*This would be useless if the staff member knows the rule. It ain't that hard to produce 30 edits a month.<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
 
*Thirty edits are quite easy to produce, and the staff are required to have administration skills, not just editing. Also the introduction of the system would penalise users who produce edits that add a lot to articles, but come in lower amounts. Finally, we have the sixty day rule, so I don't think the addition of a new system is really necessary. [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 12:57, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
*Unnecessarily bureaucratic. <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 14:59, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
*So let me get this straight, you want to demote Staff members that are inactive for a month? What about users who have a reason for being inactive? Is Messi going to be demoted because of his medical reasons? Is Jeff going to be demoted because he in in West Virginia? Am I going to be demoted because I can't edit all the time because I'm on vacation? Seems to me that you didn't quite think this out wholly. There is a rule on the [[GTA Wiki:Staff]] page for users who are inactive for no given reasons. [[User:Tony 1998|Mr. T., That&#39;s Me!]] ([[User talk:Tony 1998|talk]]) 15:25, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
**Tony is right. Next year I will be in the eighth grade. In my country, we have to learn very, very, very much for the Romanian and Maths exams, which are very difficult. I won't be active all day during this period, but I'll try to check the wiki at least once a day. Being a staff member doesn't means you have to produce many edits, but to keep the wiki off vandals and check issues.<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
 
**Tony said all of what I wanted to say. - [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 19:27, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
**I really agree with this idea, it was one of the most brilliant ideas I ever saw, so, there's a lot of "newbies" who been keeping a hard work in the edits and they have not the chance to become a standard (so sorry). And if one of the staff member did not his part in a month, he should be "expelled". In my part I think things have been done good, the 1000 edits in March and I really excuse my absence in the months of April and May in cause of someones death in my family. Today no one of the staff's member is going inactive so that's good. So sorry about the newbies but I agree with your idea and I think your idea needs to be applied. Like Dodo I'm too in the eight grade and I need to learn a lot but, I always try to help the Wikia meanwhile these days.. --'''[[User:Thomas0802|Thomas0802]] ([[User talk:Thomas0802|talk]]-[[Special:Contributions/Thomas0802|Edits]])''' 17:59, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
::I believe those who are extremely inactive (not editing for more than a few months; not responding to messages) should be considered for demotion, but "strike" thingy would be too difficult to accomplish.<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
 
:::Users such as Bob.cutlass2, Haruhi, and GTANiKo are prime examples of long inactive users. The "strikes" effect is problematic and unprofessional, it's like playing baseball. Each users' contributions should be checked, should the users go inactive without any reasons. [[User:Tony 1998|Mr. T., That&#39;s Me!]] ([[User talk:Tony 1998|talk]]) 18:34, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
::::We have a policy that says anyone who goes inactive for 3 months is automatically demoted to patroller. As far as people who are barely active but who edit just often enough to keep from getting demoted, I suppose the way to handle that would be for someone to file a request for demotion against them. But what kind of work they do should also be taken into consideration, as should whether they intend to become active again when GTAV comes out. It can be assumed that editors who get promoted are among the best of editors, and punishing them for not being active should be done reluctantly. <b>[[User:McJeff|Jeff]]</b> ([[User_talk:McJeff|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/McJeff|stalk]]) 23:00, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
   
::::This sounds like a great idea to keep the wiki running strongly. I think the 30 edit requirement is fine, and if someone can't even tack up 30 edits a month then they have probably lost interest altogether. Waiting for V shouldn't be an excuse for long periods of not contributing, or very little as we are all waiting for V and there are still plenty of things to improve apon. It's a yes for me it really shouldn't scare anyone that is activley involved. [[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 04:53, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
+
Similarly, my second part of the policy, '''Jobsworth-ing''' is the act of staff (only those who follow the first policy above) making edits which otherwise ''break'' articles, be it link errors (no, not incorrect links. Link errors where coding is exposed), template errors, or file breaking, and then the failure of fixing the article before becoming inactive once again. This policy demonstrates the lack of care and attention inactive staff have, outlining their poor use of revision check, and lastly, their lack of inactivity to fix such edits.
*This concept is massively flawed. Firstly, an editor could write 20 complete articles in a month, and be given a strike for inactivity, that's ludicrous. It isn't about the edit count, it's about the significance of each edit. Secondly, we have a policy in place, and we demote inactive users, the current system is much more professional. The three strike idea is such a primary school concept. I could think of more flaws in this idea, but that's redundant now, I think I've got my point across. <font size="+1.5" face="Trajan Pro"><b>[[User:The Tom|Tom]]</b></font> [[User talk:The Tom|<sup><u>Talk</u></sup>]] 11:07, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
*I know this wiki doen't like change, but I suggested this idea in the first place because I believe the current one (which is that you'll be demoted if you're inactive for three months) isn't working. I hate to say, but Winter Moon abuses the current rule by doing one or two edits a month just to keep his admin position. If this new rule was put into place he would be gone quickly, opening up an admin position for a patroller who deserves it. This rule would keep this from happening again. Sure the rule can bend a bit if your on vacation or something, or you have many large edits. But five large edits a month I believe aren't enough to be part of the staff. Being part of the staff is a priveledge, not a right.  [[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 05:40, June 19, 2013 (UTC)
 
:It also seems unfair that if you can't contribute 30 edits, you are demoted. What about Winter Moon? He is out, yet he can still edit here snd there to maintain his position and stay active. If you see my rant similar to this, you'll see what I'm talking about. [[User:Tony 1998|Mr. T., That&#39;s Me!]] ([[User talk:Tony 1998|talk]]) 11:18, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
:::To exemplify what Tom, was saying; If a user makes only twenty-five edits like [http://gta.wikia.com/Unnamed_Truck?diff=prev&oldid=430921 this], [http://gta.wikia.com/Dewbauchee_GT?diff=prev&oldid=383188 this] or [http://gta.wikia.com/Maibatsu_Sports_Coup%C3%A9?oldid=422600 this], they would still be punsihed although they had gone to the effort of adding over half a gigabyte's worth of information. The system is fine as it is. [[User:JBanton|JBanton]] ([[User talk:JBanton|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/JBanton|Contribs]]) 08:48, June 19, 2013 (UTC)
 
*This vote has ended, but I feel I need to add my two cents on this. So here it goes. Winter Moon has not abused any rule. He has every right to edit as little as possible, as he might be busy with his life outside this wiki. That is what some people can never fathom on here, people have lives outside this wiki. I hope a stupid proposal like this never pops up again. If it does, I shall delete it immediately, as in my opinion, it is nothing but trolling. [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 06:41, June 26, 2013 (UTC)
 
**I agree. Not only it is trolling, but it is ''greed''. This purposal is actually wanting inactive staff to go demoted so current patrollers or normal good editors can apply for promotion. In a way, you, Messi, were inactive due to medical reasons. That's excuseable. Most staff go inactive without any reasons (sans Winter Moon). Hypotheticly speaking, if this purposal came to fruitition, inactive admins would go inactive and it would have made room for patrollers, wanting to become admin so badly. Same thing for patrollers; I'm inactive, but I have a reason for that. If I get demoted, Instulent and/or Kingrrhem would get my position. That's is just greed and it is awfully unfair and wrong. [[User:Tony 1998|Mr. T., That&#39;s Me!]] ([[User talk:Tony 1998|talk]]) 23:45, June 26, 2013 (UTC)
 
   
==Edit guide for new users who don't know how to edit and use the Wikia==
+
On that note, it brings me onto my last proposal: demotion overhaul. Currently, Admins are demoted after 3 month's inactivity - this doesn't need to be changed (well, see the bottom of this proposal). What '''does''' need to be changed is the exception made for patrollers under such circumstances. Patrollers are currently given a 3 month basis before they're declared inactive. But they aren't demoted. So, under that rule, forgive me if I'm wrong, but that effectively means a patroller can become inactive for 1 million years and still hold their staff position. Clearly hasn't been a policy taken into mind for JBanton and several former patrollers who were demoted for lack of activity, therefore this proves we need to stop making exceptions and nail down a firm policy to correctly handle inactive staff - patrollers. I propose the same rule as Administrator demotion applies to Patrollers - 3 month's inactivity results in demotion. As for Admins, I'd say demotion to powerusers, not Patrollers - inactive staff don't deserve to keep some form of staff position, even if it's lower in hierarchy.
: '''<font color = blue>Idea extended below this purposal</font> --'''[[User:Tony 1998|Mr. T., That&#39;s Me!]] ([[User talk:Tony 1998|talk]]) 00:12, June 26, 2013 (UTC) 
 
So, let put the cards on the table, I have an idea and I think it should be applied. The point is, new users ( a lot of people with less then 10 edits who started their accounts few days ago ) and they simply start editing the pages, without to have the knowledge and sense, how it works and how to use the Wikia ( edits formation, use of the talk page ). That's why I started to "keep an eye" in these users, normally I check the Wiki Activity everyday and I see edits from newbies, 50% from these edits are completely wrong, ( having nothing to share with gta, catastrophic grammar, messing up the pages ) and unfortunately I need to revert it, after this I always post in their talk pages a little advice and help how to edit and they don't even answer it. So my idea is, when someone creates an account, he/she should receive a edit guide and read it all before start editing in the Wikia, that should help them. I appreciate your positive acknowledgment.
 
--'''[[User:Thomas0802|Thomas0802]] ([[User talk:Thomas0802|talk]]-[[Special:Contributions/Thomas0802|Edits]])''' 20:31, June 21, 2013 (UTC)
 
   
===Votes===
+
That's me done. Cast your votes and comments on the change. <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 05:47, April 6, 2016 (UTC)
*'''Yes''' - [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 20:36, June 21, 2013 (UTC)
 
*''Yes'' - [[User:Tony 1998|Mr. T., That&#39;s Me!]] ([[User talk:Tony 1998|talk]]) 00:27, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''Yes '''- [[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 03:49, June 23, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''Yes '''- [[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 04:24, June 23, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''Yes''' - [[User:Messi1983|Messi1983]] ([[User talk:Messi1983|talk]]) 06:08, June 26, 2013 (UTC)
 
*'''Yes''' - <span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
 
   
  +
====Votes====
  +
*'''Yes''' - <font size="5" face="Old English Text MT"><b>[[User:SJWalker|Sam]]</b></font> [[User talk:SJWalker|<font face="Old English Text MT"><sup>Talk</sup></font>]] 09:01, April 6, 2016 (UTC)
  +
*'''Yes''' --<span style="background-color:transparent; border:4px ridge limegreen;">[[File:MH007Signature.png|0x20px]] [[User:MythHunter 007|<span style="color:;">'''MythHunter 007'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:MythHunter 007|<span style="color:;">'''Talk'''</span>]]</sup> [[File:MH007Signature.png|0x20px]]</span> 09:52, April 6, 2016 (UTC)
  +
*'''Yes''' - [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 10:43, April 6, 2016 (UTC)
  +
*'''Yes''' - [[User:Thegtaseeker96|<font size="4" face="Trebuchet MS">'''TGS96'''</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Thegtaseeker96|<font face="Century Gothic" color="Gold">'''talk'''</font>]]</sup> <sup>[[Special:Contributions/Thegtaseeker96|<font face="Century Gothic" color="Gold">'''stalk'''</font>]]</sup> 14:18, April 6, 2016 (UTC)
  +
*'''Yes''' - [[User: That Ferrari Guy|<font face="Comic Sans MS"><b>Mr. Ferrari</b></font>]] <sup>([[User talk: That Ferrari Guy|<font face="Comic Sans MS">talk</font>]])</sup> 17:36, April 6, 2016 (UTC)
  +
====Comments====
  +
*Just to be clear on the maintenance of this, users who go against the 2 new policies will be alerted that they are nearing the boundaries of the issue, then eventually be demoted if they continue to do so for a month more. <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 05:57, April 6, 2016 (UTC)
  +
*I agree and I propose something more: a special warning template only applied to Staff Members when they break these policies. This could be useful to notify the inactive staffer and also for other users (not only Staff) to keep track of the situation should he decides to reapply or request a promotion. [[User:Thegtaseeker96|<font size="4" face="Trebuchet MS">'''TGS96'''</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Thegtaseeker96|<font face="Century Gothic" color="Gold">'''talk'''</font>]]</sup> <sup>[[Special:Contributions/Thegtaseeker96|<font face="Century Gothic" color="Gold">'''stalk'''</font>]]</sup> 14:18, April 6, 2016 (UTC)
  +
**Nope, not necessary at all. It's not a policy you can "break", it's a strict guideline rather than a policy. No need for an optimised warning template. A simple reminder will do just fine. <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 14:28, April 6, 2016 (UTC)
   
  +
==Map Overhaul==
  +
Not many of you may have used the [[Special:Maps|Maps]] feature here, but after noticing how bland and out-of date the maps are (mostly), I've decided to have a massive revamp of them. I recently started by deleting some of the current maps so I could get fresh new copies. It will take a while, but I'm thinking of getting all games' maps into the maps feature. There's currently a map glitch which prevents me from uploading NEW maps (only using the supplied templates is possible ATM), which Wikia staff are aware of and have told me they'll fix it ASAP. The project will be put off a little because of this, but I don't even think this needs a vote - it's self explanatory - I'm doing it anyway xD <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 11:05, March 28, 2016 (UTC)
   
 
===Comments===
 
===Comments===
*Then, as well as the "Welcome" automated message, there should be an automated "Edit guide" too. Not sure every newbie'd read it anyways, but it's worth giving a try. - [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 20:38, June 21, 2013 (UTC)
+
*
*Actually, I thought of something even better that that flimsy automated message and the Edit Guide....... '''A Welcome/Greet New Users Template. '''I will create it. It will say the usual good faith of new users and ones new to Wikia, the Wikia Editing Guide link, Contents of GTA Wiki (i.e. Vehicles, Weapons, Characters etc. organized in links to take them into category pages about the such. If they need any help, I will provide the links to the Staff rank category page. How's that? Best Idea so far? [[User:Tony 1998|Mr. T., That&#39;s Me!]] ([[User talk:Tony 1998|talk]]) 00:27, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
+
==Badges==
:*Good idea, T. [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 10:17, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
+
''Closed as '''unsuccessful''' by'' [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 11:55, March 27, 2016 (UTC)
:*Nice one T, that would be even more better. - --'''[[User:Thomas0802|Thomas0802]] ([[User talk:Thomas0802|talk]]-[[Special:Contributions/Thomas0802|Edits]])''' 17:10, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
 
:*Sounds good. [[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 03:49, June 23, 2013 (UTC)
 
:*This sounds like a good idea.  [[User:Boomer8|Boomer8]] ([[User talk:Boomer8|talk]]) 04:24, June 23, 2013 (UTC)
 
:
 
   
==The "Welcome New Users" Template Layout==
+
Why don't this wiki have any badges. I think it should have badges. Badges will increase the users here. [[User:Myth hunting master|Fear The Thunder]]
In continuation of [[User:Thomas0802|Tom's]] purposal above, I had concocted an idea on how to make new users of GTA Wiki or Wikia, in general. The '''Welcome New Users '''Template. This new template will replace the currently used (and bland) "Welcome" automated message and will make the user understand what is done around here or around in Wikia.
 
   
I am still writing the template's coding, but I am not going to reveil it because if I do and this purposal gets all "''No's''", it will just be a waste of time, vice versa, if "''Yes's''" are a majority of the "''No's''", then I will reveil it.
 
 
Here is the template's layout will be:
 
*'''"Welcome to GTA Wiki!" '''
 
**'''Introduction about the wiki and what's on here'''
 
**
 
*'''"Contents" --What we have on the wiki; category (or other) links to them.'''
 
**'''GTA Games'''
 
**'''Characters'''
 
**'''Weapons'''
 
**'''Vehicles (With the Manual of Style/Vehicles description/link alongside it.)'''
 
*'''"Policies" --Brief introduction about the policies. If they want to see it all, there will be a link to it. Also, an Edit Guide (if we have one).'''
 
**'''~~Number of the common policies'''
 
**'''~~'''
 
**'''~~'''
 
*'''Contacting the Staff'''
 
**'''Patrollers'''
 
**'''Admins'''
 
**'''Bureaucrats'''
 
*'''"Outroduction" --good faith/luck to the new editors'''
 
 
 
I think it is possible to replace the current automated message with this template in mediawiki.css, but we have to find out first. This will familiarize new users, who are new to editing, to understand how things work around here, where to contact staff members if vandal bombardment is going on, etc.
 
 
Also if this template is succesful, I will be applying it on my upcoming wiki and our afilliates.
 
 
Staff Members are welcome to add, alter, or change the WNU layout in the '''Comments'''.
 
 
[[User:Tony 1998|Mr. T., That&#39;s Me!]] ([[User talk:Tony 1998|talk]]) 00:12, June 26, 2013 (UTC) 
 
 
===Votes===
 
===Votes===
*'''Yes - [[User:Sasquatch101|Sasquatch101]] ([[User talk:Sasquatch101|talk]]) 05:40, June 27, 2013 (UTC)'''
+
*'''NO''' - [[User: That Ferrari Guy|<font face="Comic Sans MS"><b>Mr. Ferrari</b></font>]] <sup>([[User talk: That Ferrari Guy|<font face="Comic Sans MS">talk</font>]])</sup> 19:35, March 26, 2016 (UTC)
*'''Yes '''- [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 19:49, June 27, 2013 (UTC)
+
*'''No''' - <font size="5" face="Old English Text MT"><b>[[User:SJWalker|Sam]]</b></font> [[User talk:SJWalker|<font face="Old English Text MT"><sup>Talk</sup></font>]] 19:59, March 26, 2016 (UTC)
*'''Yes ''' - <span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
+
*'''Neutral''' - <span style="background-color:white; border:4px ridge black; color:#FFFFFF; font-family:System;">[[File:Body Armor Android.png|20px]] [[User:Camilo Flores|'''SWAT Cam F''']] [[File:Torpedo Android.png|20px]]</span> <span>[[File:Detonator Android.png|20px|link=User talk:Camilo Flores|Dispatch]]</span> <span style="background-color:#000000;">[[File:Crate Android.png|20px|link=Special:Contributions/Camilo Flores|Data Files]]</span> 20:57, March 26, 2016 (UTC)
+
*'''Yes (conditional)''' - [[User:TAlim 1994|<span title="Click this link to visit my User page.">TAlim 1994<font face="Segoe Script" color="Ghostwhite"> - Konan T-A Lim</font></span>]] ([[User talk:TAlim 1994|<span title="Click this link to visit my Talk page.">talk</span>]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/TAlim 1994|<span title="Click this link to see the contributions that I have made.">contributions</span>]]) 09:19, March 27, 2016 (UTC)
+
*'''No (Never)''' - <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 09:32, March 27, 2016 (UTC)
+
*'''No''' - [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 11:53, March 27, 2016 (UTC)
 
===Comments===
 
===Comments===
*I think it needs a bit more planning, but it is a good idea. [[User:Mikey Klebbitz|Mikey Klebbitz]] ([[User talk:Mikey Klebbitz|talk]]) 19:57, June 27, 2013 (UTC)
+
*What? You mean leader-board achievements? So what, people can points-game? Absolutely '''NO''' way. No. Just no. [[User: That Ferrari Guy|<font face="Comic Sans MS"><b>Mr. Ferrari</b></font>]] <sup>([[User talk: That Ferrari Guy|<font face="Comic Sans MS">talk</font>]])</sup> 19:35, March 26, 2016 (UTC)
*'''Extra, Non-Related Idea:''' I think we could add flags near our name on the Staff page so if the user is Portuguese for example, he might contact Mickey.<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
+
*I don't know what do you mean with "badges" on the wiki. - <span style="background-color:white; border:4px ridge black; color:#FFFFFF; font-family:System;">[[File:Body Armor Android.png|20px]] [[User:Camilo Flores|'''SWAT Cam F''']] [[File:Torpedo Android.png|20px]]</span> <span>[[File:Detonator Android.png|20px|link=User talk:Camilo Flores|Dispatch]]</span> <span style="background-color:#000000;">[[File:Crate Android.png|20px|link=Special:Contributions/Camilo Flores|Data Files]]</span> 20:57, March 26, 2016 (UTC)
*I wrote the coding in exactly 25 minutes:
+
**I believe that "[[User:Myth hunting master|Myth hunting master]]" is referring to achievement badges, such as the ones on our sister wiki, [[w:c:gta-myths|GTA Myths Wiki]]. [[User:TAlim 1994|<span title="Click this link to visit my User page.">TAlim 1994<font face="Segoe Script" color="Ghostwhite"> - Konan T-A Lim</font></span>]] ([[User talk:TAlim 1994|<span title="Click this link to visit my Talk page.">talk</span>]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/TAlim 1994|<span title="Click this link to see the contributions that I have made.">contributions</span>]]) 09:31, March 27, 2016 (UTC)
+
*I am willing to have badges on this wiki, but only for a very restricted scope of achievements: namely the number of edits and perhaps edits to specific page categories. We already have edit badges as Userboxes, so I do not see why we cannot have a very small number (perhaps no more than 10-20, or perhaps even as little as four (one for each edit milestone - 500, 1,000, 5,000 and 10,000)) for a bit of material for bragging rights, but no more. This should prevent any "points-gaming", but also allow for a little something for editors on this wiki to work for. [[User:TAlim 1994|<span title="Click this link to visit my User page.">TAlim 1994<font face="Segoe Script" color="Ghostwhite"> - Konan T-A Lim</font></span>]] ([[User talk:TAlim 1994|<span title="Click this link to visit my Talk page.">talk</span>]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/TAlim 1994|<span title="Click this link to see the contributions that I have made.">contributions</span>]]) 09:19, March 27, 2016 (UTC)
[[Template:Welcome]]
+
*We've been asked this millions of times before, and I can't emphasise enough how much bullshit it causes.
+
:# Pointgaming, as Ferrari already pointed out, is too much to cope with, especially on a wiki that is (usually) very hectic and active. A wiki with hundreds of users, and hundreds of active users, means this is bound to be misused.
What do you think?<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black">[[User:Dodo8|Dodo8]]</span> [[User talk:Dodo8|<sup>''<span style="color:#FF6600; font-family:Cooper Black>Talk</span>''</sup>]]
+
:# Competition - There's literally no point, some of these badges are just out of pure LUCK, so really it's hardly even fair.
  +
:# Users will have to "start again" - What about me? ZS? GTAInc? Wild? Tom? Why introduce this ''now'', after we've all gained thousands of edits? It's ridiculous. Userbox "badges" are enough. <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 09:32, March 27, 2016 (UTC)
  +
*As far as I know, Konan, the limitation of badges is pretty hard, as you'd have to individually delete badges (they automatically add to the wiki when activated - loads of them). Also, there are no milestone badges AFAIK - only "you made the 1000th/2000th/3000th edit" kind of thing (out of pure luck). <font size="4" face="Tahoma"><b>[[User:Monkeypolice188|Monk]]</b></font> <font face="Tahoma"><sup>[[User talk:Monkeypolice188|Talk]]</sup></font> 09:32, March 27, 2016 (UTC)
  +
**I see. Admittedly, I know very little of how the badges system works "under the hood", but I still feel that a very limited amount of badges will do this wiki some good. I do not know exactly how difficult it is to actually remove unwanted badges, but surely there should be a way to delete them en masse? If not, and if it is too difficult to implement the feature as desired, perhaps you are right, and the badges should not be enabled. Also, do not badges automatically get awarded to users who already meet the prerequisites for earning them once the feature is turned on? I would assume that they would. Finally, with regards to your point about this wiki being very active, I wish to note that one of the other wikis that I occasionally edit on ([[w:c:halo|Halo Nation]]) does have badges, and like this wiki, is also very active, yet still ordered. [[User:TAlim 1994|<span title="Click this link to visit my User page.">TAlim 1994<font face="Segoe Script" color="Ghostwhite"> - Konan T-A Lim</font></span>]] ([[User talk:TAlim 1994|<span title="Click this link to visit my Talk page.">talk</span>]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/TAlim 1994|<span title="Click this link to see the contributions that I have made.">contributions</span>]]) 10:35, March 27, 2016 (UTC)
  +
*Over the last few years, this has come up again and again. The reason that everyone agreed on a few years ago was that we would never have badges because it would seriously mess up the wiki; users would be coming to pointsgame and won't be editing just to increase the quality. For example, Wildbrick added over 1,000 (maybe 2,000) images to the wiki last month, not for edits but for quality, whereas if we had badges he may have done that just to fly up the leaderboard and the images may have been of terrible quality. The only reason Myths Wiki has them is because it is a relatively small wiki compared to the GTA Wiki so bad edits are easier to track compared to on here. Also, as the Myths Wiki has seen countless times, pointsgaming and just general leaderboard position can lead to a lot of fights and people leaving. For a wiki the size of this one, badges are just a bad idea. [[User:LS11sVaultBoy|LS11sVaultBoy]] ([[User talk:LS11sVaultBoy|Talk]]) 11:53, March 27, 2016 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 11:11, May 1, 2016

Welcome to GTA Wiki's Community Noticeboard.

Archives

Talk page rules apply here.

This noticeboard is for discussion and voting on changes to the wiki, reporting vandalism and wiki rule breaking, and reporting bad or unfair behaviour from GTA Wiki staff. Votes for the expiration of a Patroller's probation will also be held here.

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

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

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

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

Grand Theft Auto V/Title Update Notes Page ImprovementEdit

No big explanation needed about the problems with the page because... well, it's been discussed a bunch of times, always leading with Smurfynz being "right". I lay forth three ideas on how we can improve the page:

  1. We make seperate pages of the title update notes in the year they were released in. For example: Grand Theft Auto V/Title Update Notes - 2013.
  2. Or we dedicate each update list with their own page.
  3. Or we use tabbers for each of the update list section... which I suggested, but y'know, Smurfy would rather go offroading in a Rolls-Royce Phantom donk than to have that.

Lemme know which idea you want by voting Idea 1, 2, or 3 (or by one, two, or three). --Tony42898 (Talker - Blogger - Stalker)-- 02:23, May 1, 2016 (UTC)

VotesEdit

CommentsEdit

  • The first option seems to have a lot of potential. Users would be more interested in the latest updates and this would be easy for navigation. However, the third one is still a good option. Either case, it is better than cluttering the current page, to the point it will be stuck forever. Body Armor Android SWAT Cam F Torpedo Android Detonator Android Crate Android 02:55, May 1, 2016 (UTC)
  • Idea 1 is both the most logical and efficient for organisation and layout. Sure it'll work. Monk Talk 06:11, May 1, 2016 (UTC)

Bot JobsEdit

Closed as Please refer to my talk page for specifying jobs by Monk Talk 21:06, April 12, 2016 (UTC)

Please specify here what you would like the Wiki bot to do. I ain't very good at programming, so I'm taking it one step at a time, running a few trials soon. Monk Talk 12:58, April 12, 2016 (UTC)

Could you contact staff so they can give your bot a bot tag? It's pretty hard to keep up with the wiki activity since the bot edits clog up both WikiActivity and RecentChanges. Monolith Patch Rain - Talk SCS Freedom 16:30, April 12, 2016 (UTC)
Um, they already flagged the bot. Is that what you mean by Bot Tag? Monk Talk 16:32, April 12, 2016 (UTC)
Bot tag is a user right tag which means the bot edits don't show up in WikiActivty and only show up in RecentChanges if the "Show Bots" option is tagged. So far I can see bot edits everywhere and according to this page it isn't flagged. Monolith Patch Rain - Talk SCS Freedom 16:34, April 12, 2016 (UTC)
That's odd, I received an email saying it had been flagged. I've paused the bot in the mean time, and asked Sannse to tag it. Thanks Rain. Monk Talk 16:38, April 12, 2016 (UTC)

JobsEdit

GTA Wiki BotEdit

Hey guys, so I've decided to go ahead after a discussion off-site with VaultBoy, and consider creating a bot. I believe McJeff once had one and it turned out well, and Tom also was gonna create one a while back, but forgot. What do you guys think? No votes, just comments - for now. Monk Talk 11:12, April 8, 2016 (UTC)

CommentsEdit

  • I thought about using a bot a while ago when I decided to get rid of these non-existent categories: Category:4-Door Sedans and Coupes, Category:2-Door Sedans and Coupes and Category:Exclusive Enhanced Version Content in GTA Online. It is a pain to manually remove them from all the images they are listed in (over 1400 images, which is why I gave up), so we can use a bot to get this job done quicker than any normal user. Yep, a bot can be useful. TGS96 talk stalk 14:14, April 8, 2016 (UTC)
    • I second that. Sam Talk 15:11, April 8, 2016 (UTC)
  • A bot will be good for doing tedious and boring tasks (like adding categories), so yeah, why not? V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 15:19, April 8, 2016 (UTC)
  • With comments like this, I'll start at the weekend some time. It'll be named MonkeyBot188. Wild, how can I get it to do tasks like that, btw? Monk Talk 15:21, April 8, 2016 (UTC)
    • Honestly? I don't know. :p I'm not that great at programming. V-michael-trunk-miniV-franklin-trunk-miniV-trevor-trunk-mini 15:36, April 8, 2016 (UTC)
      • No trouble mate. See, I'm gonna talk to Staff about making one, and I was thinking of just creating the account, getting the basics sorted, then from there, slowly improvise with it to get the most of its functions, with the programming and such. It requires a .net extension download which I think does most of the word for you. I'll look into it more over the coming days. Monk Talk 15:44, April 8, 2016 (UTC)

New policy(ies) + Demotion system overhaulEdit

Closed as Successful by Monk Talk 11:12, April 8, 2016 (UTC)

Yo guys. So, I've decided to create a new policy (two really, in the same page since they're relatively similar). Firstly, oddjob-ing. Don't be fooled by the rather humorous name. Oddjob-ing is the act of staff members carrying out minor edits on only a monthly basis to secure their staff position. Minor edits are usually coding fixes, unnoticeable spacing errors, or general single-instance grammar fixes on articles. Users caught doing this over a few month's time should be treated as inactive and a demotion should be filed against them. I have several staff in mind that act in such a way.

Similarly, my second part of the policy, Jobsworth-ing is the act of staff (only those who follow the first policy above) making edits which otherwise break articles, be it link errors (no, not incorrect links. Link errors where coding is exposed), template errors, or file breaking, and then the failure of fixing the article before becoming inactive once again. This policy demonstrates the lack of care and attention inactive staff have, outlining their poor use of revision check, and lastly, their lack of inactivity to fix such edits.

On that note, it brings me onto my last proposal: demotion overhaul. Currently, Admins are demoted after 3 month's inactivity - this doesn't need to be changed (well, see the bottom of this proposal). What does need to be changed is the exception made for patrollers under such circumstances. Patrollers are currently given a 3 month basis before they're declared inactive. But they aren't demoted. So, under that rule, forgive me if I'm wrong, but that effectively means a patroller can become inactive for 1 million years and still hold their staff position. Clearly hasn't been a policy taken into mind for JBanton and several former patrollers who were demoted for lack of activity, therefore this proves we need to stop making exceptions and nail down a firm policy to correctly handle inactive staff - patrollers. I propose the same rule as Administrator demotion applies to Patrollers - 3 month's inactivity results in demotion. As for Admins, I'd say demotion to powerusers, not Patrollers - inactive staff don't deserve to keep some form of staff position, even if it's lower in hierarchy.

That's me done. Cast your votes and comments on the change. Monk Talk 05:47, April 6, 2016 (UTC)

VotesEdit

CommentsEdit

  • Just to be clear on the maintenance of this, users who go against the 2 new policies will be alerted that they are nearing the boundaries of the issue, then eventually be demoted if they continue to do so for a month more. Monk Talk 05:57, April 6, 2016 (UTC)
  • I agree and I propose something more: a special warning template only applied to Staff Members when they break these policies. This could be useful to notify the inactive staffer and also for other users (not only Staff) to keep track of the situation should he decides to reapply or request a promotion. TGS96 talk stalk 14:18, April 6, 2016 (UTC)
    • Nope, not necessary at all. It's not a policy you can "break", it's a strict guideline rather than a policy. No need for an optimised warning template. A simple reminder will do just fine. Monk Talk 14:28, April 6, 2016 (UTC)

Map OverhaulEdit

Not many of you may have used the Maps feature here, but after noticing how bland and out-of date the maps are (mostly), I've decided to have a massive revamp of them. I recently started by deleting some of the current maps so I could get fresh new copies. It will take a while, but I'm thinking of getting all games' maps into the maps feature. There's currently a map glitch which prevents me from uploading NEW maps (only using the supplied templates is possible ATM), which Wikia staff are aware of and have told me they'll fix it ASAP. The project will be put off a little because of this, but I don't even think this needs a vote - it's self explanatory - I'm doing it anyway xD Monk Talk 11:05, March 28, 2016 (UTC)

CommentsEdit

BadgesEdit

Closed as unsuccessful by LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 11:55, March 27, 2016 (UTC)

Why don't this wiki have any badges. I think it should have badges. Badges will increase the users here. Fear The Thunder

VotesEdit

CommentsEdit

  • What? You mean leader-board achievements? So what, people can points-game? Absolutely NO way. No. Just no. Mr. Ferrari (talk) 19:35, March 26, 2016 (UTC)
  • I don't know what do you mean with "badges" on the wiki. - Body Armor Android SWAT Cam F Torpedo Android Detonator Android Crate Android 20:57, March 26, 2016 (UTC)
  • I am willing to have badges on this wiki, but only for a very restricted scope of achievements: namely the number of edits and perhaps edits to specific page categories. We already have edit badges as Userboxes, so I do not see why we cannot have a very small number (perhaps no more than 10-20, or perhaps even as little as four (one for each edit milestone - 500, 1,000, 5,000 and 10,000)) for a bit of material for bragging rights, but no more. This should prevent any "points-gaming", but also allow for a little something for editors on this wiki to work for. TAlim 1994 - Konan T-A Lim (talk | contributions) 09:19, March 27, 2016 (UTC)
  • We've been asked this millions of times before, and I can't emphasise enough how much bullshit it causes.
  1. Pointgaming, as Ferrari already pointed out, is too much to cope with, especially on a wiki that is (usually) very hectic and active. A wiki with hundreds of users, and hundreds of active users, means this is bound to be misused.
  2. Competition - There's literally no point, some of these badges are just out of pure LUCK, so really it's hardly even fair.
  3. Users will have to "start again" - What about me? ZS? GTAInc? Wild? Tom? Why introduce this now, after we've all gained thousands of edits? It's ridiculous. Userbox "badges" are enough. Monk Talk 09:32, March 27, 2016 (UTC)
  • As far as I know, Konan, the limitation of badges is pretty hard, as you'd have to individually delete badges (they automatically add to the wiki when activated - loads of them). Also, there are no milestone badges AFAIK - only "you made the 1000th/2000th/3000th edit" kind of thing (out of pure luck). Monk Talk 09:32, March 27, 2016 (UTC)
    • I see. Admittedly, I know very little of how the badges system works "under the hood", but I still feel that a very limited amount of badges will do this wiki some good. I do not know exactly how difficult it is to actually remove unwanted badges, but surely there should be a way to delete them en masse? If not, and if it is too difficult to implement the feature as desired, perhaps you are right, and the badges should not be enabled. Also, do not badges automatically get awarded to users who already meet the prerequisites for earning them once the feature is turned on? I would assume that they would. Finally, with regards to your point about this wiki being very active, I wish to note that one of the other wikis that I occasionally edit on (Halo Nation) does have badges, and like this wiki, is also very active, yet still ordered. TAlim 1994 - Konan T-A Lim (talk | contributions) 10:35, March 27, 2016 (UTC)
  • Over the last few years, this has come up again and again. The reason that everyone agreed on a few years ago was that we would never have badges because it would seriously mess up the wiki; users would be coming to pointsgame and won't be editing just to increase the quality. For example, Wildbrick added over 1,000 (maybe 2,000) images to the wiki last month, not for edits but for quality, whereas if we had badges he may have done that just to fly up the leaderboard and the images may have been of terrible quality. The only reason Myths Wiki has them is because it is a relatively small wiki compared to the GTA Wiki so bad edits are easier to track compared to on here. Also, as the Myths Wiki has seen countless times, pointsgaming and just general leaderboard position can lead to a lot of fights and people leaving. For a wiki the size of this one, badges are just a bad idea. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 11:53, March 27, 2016 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki