GTA Wiki

GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard

Revision as of 21:25, April 19, 2012 by McJeff (Talk | contribs)

11,127pages on
this wiki

Welcome to GTA Wiki's Community noticeboard.


Talk page rules apply here.

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

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

We are currently looking for Patrollers, if you wish to become one then make a request on here. We now have a spot open for an Administrator, if you think you're qualified for the position then make a request here.

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

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

Repromotion of staff who resigned the tools

This is something that Dan (Messi1983) and I discussed when I asked to be repromoted to bureaucrat. In short, we think it's probably dishonest for staff to resign and then ask to be repromoted without going through a vote. As it stands right now, ironically, Dan, The Tom and myself have done that one time each, and Dan suggested it's time to make an official proposal, which will go something like this.

If a member of GTA Staff decides to resign their user rights while in good standing, they are free to reapply for promotion, but they must request repromotion through an official community vote rather than directly to a bureaucrat.

Thoughts? Jeff (talk|stalk) 00:56, April 19, 2012 (UTC)

Agreed totally, not because it was my proposal, but because it is only fair and the only right way of doing this. Messi1983 14:13, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
I agree, if a staff member resigns it makes sense for them to have to request a promotion again rather than just automatically get their rights back. Tom Talk 15:55, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
Agreed, though not "%100". -- Ilan (XDEditsHome ) 17:57, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
I agree. -- ExtremoMania Talk To Me This Way 18:21, April 19, 2012 (UTC)

I've enacted this policy and added a section on demotion and repromotion to the GTA Wiki:Staff page. Jeff (talk|stalk) 21:25, April 19, 2012 (UTC)

Staff 'hierarchy/pyramid' format

Recently, many wikis changed their Staff/Administrators page into the 'pyramid'\'hierachy' look, and I want to ask if you would like to do the same here...

Here are some examples:

So, what do you think? -- Ilan (XDEditsHome ) 10:47, April 6, 2012 (UTC)



  • Okay, can we close it, or should I wait for Jeff's vote? -- Ilan (XDEditsHome ) 04:47, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
  • He would have voted by now. Closed as unanimous. Messi1983 06:21, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
  • Allright, I will start work on that soon. -- Ilan (XDEditsHome ) 06:29, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
  • Done [1] -- Ilan (XDEditsHome ) 14:15, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
  • Nice, but do choose a better picture for me then Packie for goodness sake. I'm Muslim, put Yusuf or Mohammed the cab driver as me haha Messi1983 15:39, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
  • LOL, my picture is a joke right? Can I be Billy Grey with that baseball bat instead?DunewolfzBanner 16:09, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
  • On second thoughts, I'll have Niko instead. Messi1983 16:33, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
  • Sure, I'll replace your avatars soon. Would you like artwork or in-game avatar?-- Ilan (XDEditsHome ) 17:28, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
  • Artwork DunewolfzBanner 17:33, April 8, 2012 (UTC)
  • %100 done. Any compliments can be posted either here, or on my talk page :D -- Ilan (XDEditsHome ) 18:34, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

Related Videos

I received a message about this Wiki trying out a new Wikia feature, here it is:

I wanted to let you know we have a new related video product that’s going to bring even more amazing content to Wikia. We’re hoping that your community will be one of the first to try this new feature and give us feedback. In return, we’ll be spotlighting wikis that are part of our video pilot program.
This unique video showcase is designed to play videos related to the content on your wiki, giving you and your community complete control to add or remove videos by each individual placement of the related videos product.
It’s easy. All you need to do is select videos from a growing library of content provided by Wikia and partners such as Screenplay (Hulu, IGN and more coming soon) or you can add videos from YouTube and other supported video hosting sites. Viewers can scroll through and watch the entire selection, and logged in users can contribute to it.
You can see an example of how the related videos product works on Moviepedia here: The module is in the right rail. You can also browse our selection of Grand Theft Auto videos to choose from here (more to come): link.
Alternately, Wikia can give you a head start by placing a pre-populated video module with relevant staff picks on your wiki. You and your community still have complete control to adjust what is presented in the related video showcase.
We look forward to hearing your suggestions on how to make this product one of our best. Please respond as soon as possible to let us know if you want to be a part of this pilot program.

I like the idea and I'm all for trying this out but before I agree to anything I'd like the communities opinion so leave a vote and a comment below.



  • Well it won't make to much of a difference for me, because in the example he gave us on 'The Artist' over n Moviepedia the videos don't even show up anyway, they're just black boxes. RusselNorthrop(Talk2Me--Contribs) 22:26, April 2, 2012 (UTC)
Are you looking at the right part of the page? There is a section titlef "Related Videos" at the side of the page below the "Recent Wiki Activity" section. Tom Talk 23:02, April 2, 2012 (UTC)
  • Hmm, it looks nice, but I'm not sure yet. I'll try it. -- Ilan (XDEditsHome ) 13:16, April 3, 2012 (UTC)


I'm pretty sure this is where I should post this. I think that we should have an actual section (possibly on this page) where some users can request a Userbox to be made. For example, I've seen many users sporting ps3 and Xbox 360 Userboxes. But what about my PS2? I still play it regularly and I think many people do, yet there's no user box. I don't have the experience to do it and don't really understand the coding. It's fine if it'll be to hard, as it probably takes ages just to make 1 box. This is just a proposition. Russelnorthrop || talk to me 12:40, February 25, 2012 (UTC)



Demotion policy

Because this is a very active wiki, we need plenty of people helping out with staff work. But Wikia doesn't like a wiki to have too many admins - if you remember they pretty much told us "no more administrators" after we promoted Haruhi and GTANiko. So having administrators go inactive hurts this wiki.

I would like to propose that anyone who doesn't edit for 90 days have their staff rights revoked so that we can keep a large core of active staff. It should be made clear that inactivity-demotion is not a "punishment" or a "declaration of wrong-doing", and editors who were inactivity-demoted should feel free to request a repromotion should they decide to start editing again. Jeff (talk|stalk) 23:53, February 21, 2012 (UTC)

I agree to an extent. But I propose that users be messaged first before any demotion action takes place, as it usually clarifies two things.
  1. They usually reply and tell us why they are inactive.
  2. If they do not reply within a week or two, it pretty much clarifies they're not coming back. Messi1983 13:59, February 24, 2012 (UTC)
Gotta disagree there based on prior experience. Administrators don't like having their powers revoked even if they never use them. Remember Crescendospectredragon throwing a fit when we demoted him even after he said he didn't plan to edit here because there was nothing for him to do? Jeff (talk|stalk) 22:27, February 24, 2012 (UTC)
Let me explain in more detail my friend.
When I say message, I do not mean sending a message saying they're going to be demoted due to inactivity. I mean a message asking them why they're inactive and if they have any plans to edit here in the near future as there is always a perfectly good explanation to inactivity.
That way when they reply we get an explanation on their inactivity, and when they don't reply, then you know they're not coming back, despite the fact Wikia tells everyone they have a new message on you talkpage on a certain wiki everywhere.
If they do reply, well we'll watch them for a few weeks as they may think "my tools are safe, so I do not need to edit here for the time being".
If they never replied, then I think that is time to demote them until they come back, and if they never come back, well the tools are lost and someone else can have them.
But I also have another proposal, and this is more to do with people being voted in getting promoted, rather then demotion. I propose, that when this wiki has voted a user in to be a patroller or admin, then rather it being a permanent thing, we give them a trial run first, as some users just do 2 or 3 days of editing with new tools and then seem to go AWOL. Messi1983 02:18, February 25, 2012 (UTC)
I reckon that the inactivity limit should definitely be 90 days. But I also think that any patroller or admin that is going to be demoted should be messaged first on their user talk. They have a right to know before they get back on the computer after 90 days just to find that they have 'randomly' been demoted. If they do not reply after 14 days of the message being posted. Then they should definitely be demoted, as they obviously are just taking up room that newer editors could fill by becoming admin or patroller. Russelnorthrop || talk to me 23:37, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

Message Walls

Anyone think we should activate the new Message Wall feature? The L.A. Noire Wiki, which I am a Bureaucrat on, was one of the test Wiki's so if you want to check it out go to the Wiki and have a look. I personally prefer them to talk pages simply because they're easier.



  • Talk pages are better and this is not facebook, myspace, or any other social networking site, and this message wall crap is daft. Messi1983 20:44, January 28, 2012 (UTC)
  • if I had my way (which I don't), I'd make people learn to respond and format their talk pages properly, like everyone who got their editing start on wikipedia knows. Message Walls were conceived of in the first place because of all the kids using Wikia who don't know how to use talk pages, and are just an example of Wikia Staff not wanting to put actual work into making sure people know how to edit. Jeff (talk|stalk) 21:32, January 28, 2012 (UTC)
  • Sorry bro. You know that I support most of your ideas, but this one is something I can't. -- Ilan (XDEditsHome ) 13:16, April 3, 2012 (UTC)
  • Gotta agree with Dan. RusselNorthrop(Talk2Me--Contribs) 08:59, April 7, 2012 (UTC)
  • You agree with me, yet you voted yes whilst I voted no? Messi1983 09:19, April 7, 2012 (UTC)

Image Policy

I think the Image Policy is a bit ridiculous, specifically I'm referring to the "Image names" section, that seems slightly pointless to me and it is very extreme, deleting an image because the name isn't quite right seems outrageous to me.

I think the community should get a say on this policy so leave your thoughts about the image policy below. Tom Talk 01:09, November 12, 2011 (UTC)


Naming section is something I am not keen on with it. What I do agree with always is the licensing menu. I think that should be kept always. But the naming needs to go as people will not follow it well. Users do not deserve to get warned just for naming an image wrong. What we can do is rename the image ourselves, rather then rouse users for naming it wrong. Dan the Man 1983 01:06, November 12, 2011 (UTC)

The licensing menu should be kept and I've been making sure all the images I add have been properly licensed, though I have been having problems with it but that was just a Wikia glitch. It's just the naming section that I have a problem with. Lots of images are added to this site and very few are named "correctly" according to the image policy, it would take too long ro rename them all and considering most of the images aren't named badly it would seem like a waste of time.Tom Talk 01:08, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
I am not saying rename them all, I am saying rename those uploaded that are named wrong rather then warning the user who uploaded it for naming it wrong. Dan the Man 1983 01:15, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
I wasn't saying that you were saying rename them all, I was just saying that the majority of images uploaded are not named correctly according to the naming section so it would be a lot of rather unnecessary work. I think renaming the really badly named images and leaving the ones which aren't badly named, but are still named incorrectly according to the Image policy, would be a better option. Tom Talk 01:28, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
I think it is time we helped people more on here rather then rouse them for every mistake made. People do not want to edit on a wiki where you get warned and blocked for making mistakes.
If editors come here and do malicious edits such as vandalism, spamming, and harrassing others, then yeah that is a time to act and warn them, or if the occassion arises, block them for policy violation. Dan the Man 1983 01:29, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
I agree with that, I think we're too harsh on users that make a simple mistake, this will just cause us to lose potentially good editors. Tom Talk 01:32, November 12, 2011 (UTC)
I also think we need 2 or 3 more admins. Dan the Man 1983 03:04, November 12, 2011 (UTC)

Discussion on Myths

I'd like to encourage an interested someone to start a wiki for GTA Myths. Called, I dunno, maybe. Some people here like to write about myths and I (and other administrators as well) have been deleting myth-related content here. However there's no rule about it.

So I'd like to get a GTAMyths wiki started by someone who likes myths, and then make it an official affiliate of this wiki and then make it official policy to direct myth-hunter traffic to the GTAMyths wiki instead of writing about myths here. Jeff (talk|stalk) 16:48, October 16, 2011 (UTC)


  • There is already a GTAMyths Wiki. -- Ilan xd 12:46, December 3, 2011 (UTC)
    • Yes but it's abandoned. Anyone who had the interest to start editing that wiki could adopt it and make it good. Jeff (talk|stalk) 21:32, January 28, 2012 (UTC)

Game Infobox Merging and MediaWiki Stuffs

Hello all, My name is Adam, resident geek programmer and stuff here on the GTA Wiki. I've recently begun to edit more frequently here, and even removed my templated userpage to something more personalized, seeing as how I'm going to be making more than a few edits here. One of those edits I'd like to make (which would be more like 20 or so) is merging all the episode/game installment infobox templates, such as Grand Theft Auto 2/infobox, into one template which would be easier to use. It is now available (the coding and usage guidelines) at User:Adam Savage/InfoboxTest, and can be found being tested on User:Adam Savage/pageTest. If implemented, I'd be more than happy to do all the conversion work myself. Now, onto the MediaWiki stuffs. I noticed that we really don't have anything in our .js or .css files. Now, there are some neat (not to mention helpful) toys out there which can be used for any Wiki. Just check out this page on my Wiki, as well as this page. The former has neat tools like adding a clock to the bar at the top of the page, and adding "My Contributions" to the hover menu at your username in the top right of the screen, and the latter allows differentiation between users with rights, such as sysops, crats, staff, helpers, VSTF, etc. and regular users via username hilite. I propose adding both my infobox template, and some of the mediawiki I have on my Wiki to this one, to help make this site better than ever. {{subst:Nosubst|Signatures/Adam Savage}} 01:55, March 5, 2012 (UTC)


Note that there has been an error which might need some time to sort out. Bear with me here! {{subst:Nosubst|Signatures/Adam Savage}} 02:05, March 5, 2012 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki