User talk:WanYao: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 07:08, 19 December 2008

Nota bene before posting here

Post new comments on top, please. And sign them.

Trolling and drama-whoring will not be tolerated. Any post may be deleted at my sole discretion.

Thanks for your time. ;)

Here is an archive of old discussions. And here is another archive of even older discussions.

Sooper Sekrit Link to Classyfried Pr0jectz

XIII

In a few weeks I'll be changing the Gore Corps wiki, you might want to find an alternate link for the guide that you link from the XIII page or hosting it yourself. Just an FYI.

As an aside, I disapprove of Karek's attempt to influence one of my chosen potential arbitrators after he's made it clear he wishes to be involved in the case. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 02:11, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

You're deleting the guide? Noooooooooes! Seriously, that guide should remain on the wiki, it's both useful and part of our history.

As for karek... hmmmm... I haven't looked at that case since I last commented... And, I haven't offered to Arbitrate... And, I came to some tentative conclusions on my own without karek "explaining" anything to me... --WanYao 02:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

The guide's going as it doesn't belong on the GC page, we shouldn't be giving the breathers advice on how to stop us. Also the page is too long, I'm looking to slim do and modernise the RRF's pages. I might see about recreating it as a guide, under either my or the author's namespace for final editing reasons, I can't imagine there being any outcry if you decided to host it elsewhere if I forget/don't recreate it.

You were selected as arbitrator as I know you'd understand the points I'd bring forward in my case. Karek's attempt to influence you after declaring his support for my opposition is conduct unbecoming of a reasonable user in my opinion, and might well influence my approach to the case. --

.

. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:30, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

The guide could be put on a subpage of the GC's ... that's where it belongs IMO ... In any event, I might as well just cut 'n' paste it right now...

And I may have been asked to Arbitrate, but I didn't accept. --WanYao 02:36, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I copied it to a XIII subpage... Not linked yet... Hope it's okay... If it's not ok. --WanYao 02:47, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Credit is given, and it's in the hands of someone trusted by the Corps, so I see no problem with it. One day we may move the content back to a RRF/GC sub-page but at the moment we're happy.

On the arbies matter, you never offered to arbitrate, nor did you decline, by my estimation that still makes you a potential arbitrator, and attempts to sway your judgement one way or the other do not sit well with me.

I'm told you were looking for me earlier on IRC. --

.

. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:57, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

He already pointed out quite clearly what his view on the matter was, his views on this are actually pretty well known and have been for a long time. He won't be chosen, his own comment made that a foregone conclusion and I couldn't care less if he were in the potential to be chosen. That just makes discussing the case specifics even more pertinent, having it as a taboo just means the arbitrator can't familiarize himself with the case in any real depth and makes their ruling as invalid as it is unhelpful.--Karek^maps?! 04:03, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

This is not the place to be mixing in talk about an arbitration case which I'm not directly involved in. Please stop that. Thanks. --WanYao 07:43, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Arbies

I'm going around clarifying some stuff and decided direct to user will probably be the best way for time being.

So . . . The thing about the DEM groups listing themselves with Branch of the DEM, is stuff like this. Listing yourself as part of something isn't uncommon, it's happened a lot with zombie groups, and survivor groups but only certain survivor groups that have done it for an extremely long amount of time have been viewed as a unified group in and of itself. New Malton Colossus, DEM, and Dulston Alliance all get special treatment and qualification from most users as a unified group themselves, of these three the DEM gets even further special treatment, setting itself apart from the rest of the groups in the game, by having the honor of most people not even viewing their individual parts as autonomous. I understand why that came about, I've argued for it in the past and I've told them what they could do to change that in most people's eyes. However it is extremely in-practical for us(the wiki) to treat them to a different standard than the other two groups, or for that matter any large multi-group alliance or organization that coordinates actions that involve groups temporarily relinquishing some self sovereignty. Basically at current their being held to a higher standard of proof than anyone else simply because there's some question and drama surrounding their organizational structure. It's a dispute we won't solve here, the response shouldn't be to choose a side based on personal belief and who moderates the recruitment page/made the rule in question but rather to choose the answer that does the least harm.--Karek^maps?!

Thanks, Karek. Now, I really don't give a lemur's ballsack about the drama surrounding the DEM or their internal organisation... I was merely pointing out a couple of things which seemed relevant... However, your point is well taken... And I actually think it's fine for them to be all listed seperately... Personally, I think I lean towards scrapping the entire Recruitment page, period -- but that's a different subject... --WanYao 22:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok... that was a bit disingenuous me there, what I said about not giving a shit and "merely" posting "some facts"... But you know, it does mean something, those blurbs. Being a "branch of" means something very different than is implied by "membership" or "alliance"... The term "branch" unfortunately plays right into all the negative perceptions of the DEM... However: meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeh... --WanYao 22:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I never said they were smart. I agree about the recruitment page by the way, it's why it's one of the notable pages not on my 12,000+ page watchlist.--Karek^maps?! 03:57, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

It's there, in the arbies page, it was clarified on Midianian's page because he was misunderstanding what was meant, you made the same misunderstanding.--Karek^maps?! 06:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

The word for this is hypocrisy. My point was that you're saying all of my additions were invalid because I wasn't named in the case, more than that you were saying I was arbitrating the case without anyone's approval based on your own desire to strengthen your argument. Don't accuse people of shit if you don't want them to defend themselves where the accusation is, more than that don't act all high and mighty when you just spent two days doing exactly what you're now trying to make me out as the bad guy for.--Karek^maps?! 07:08, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

feel da powaa

when are you going to join the cool kids and come to the sysop side ? In april you asked for a few days, i guess that by now you got plenty of 'em. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{talk mod} 21:27, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

and your talk page needs a new archive. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{talk mod} 21:28, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

you're right, it does need archiving, doesn't it... and, while i'm playing again after a little break... i'm really not as interested or able to spend anywhere near as much time here as i was before, especially in regards to wiki drama, etc. in a way, that might be a good thing: i'm pretty distant from the drama etc., and plan to stay that way... however, if i was going to do the sysop thing, i'd be a "sporadic" sysop... --WanYao 20:07, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Your's is a voice i could trust with the banhammer and other tools, and one i would like to hear, even if only sporadically. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{talk mod} 22:19, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Wiki questions

Hey, noticed you seem to handle a lot of the editing on the Dunell Hills and surrounding suburb pages, so figured it'd be best to ask you first: Where is the changing of suburb danger levels actually done? Does it show in the history? I've looked in recent history for both the suburb page itself, and the suburb danger map, but can't see where it's changed. I am a relative wiki amateur however so it might be right under my nose. Just curious as to how I'd determine who changed the suburb level if they didn't leave a note in the recent news section. Thanks -- Peter McGrady ^FoD 01:32, 22 October 2008 (BST)

Aha! Knew it'd be somewhere obvious. Thanks for that. -- Peter McGrady ^FoD 04:53, 22 October 2008 (BST)

That can't be good...

I was gonna ask you where you been all my life, then i checked your contribs and noticed you'd only been gone 4 days...how'd you miss out on all the 2 Cool bashing that was going on? It would have been right up your alley too...--x o x o 06:32, 17 October 2008 (BST)

ah j3d, see... see how much you love me? i always said... it was only a matter of time before you saw the light... however, i'm not coming back to this "skene" in any major capacity for a long time. if ever. which means you couldbeat that 3-d repair record we share... which i have to fucking post someday, hmnnnnnnn... --WanYao 06:49, 17 October 2008 (BST)

You? 134? I find that difficult to believe. This skene needs you more than ever, know that we'll always have each other, you can stand under my umbrella, ella, ella. But yeah, why the ditching? --x o x o 11:28, 17 October 2008 (BST)

Great Fire ambiguity

Hey as one of the wikizens around here that has a background with ALiM projects that goes back before the purge, we'd greatly appreciate if you went here and testified. We are asking for witnesses who can confirm the fact that the page, Great Fire of 1912 was indeed created by and largely moderated by myself and User:J3D. The task of claiming our creation over the page is complicated by the fact that no history is available to back up our claim due to the history purge. Thanks for you time.--Nallan (Talk) 08:27, 11 October 2008 (BST)

Mall FAK Rates

Seem to be around 1/5....compile some data on it!--x o x o 12:48, 9 October 2008 (BST)

something like that. shit... i decide to quit UD and all this rawking shit takes place. i should quit UD more often! :) --WanYao 07:08, 10 October 2008 (BST)

Hospital search rates seem about the same, as do gun store search rates. --Jen 03:24, 11 October 2008 (BST)

Building Statuses

I've noticed you've been changing the status of malls to "unknown" if they haven't been updated in two weeks. What's your opinion on buildings in general, that haven't had their status changed in ages? Like, say...this one or this one? Also, there's some buildings that don't even have one of those templates - would it be worthwhile, do you think, to remove "building status" from any non-TRP/non-mobile phone mast buildings, at the very least? As those rarely, if ever get updated, and have no real reason to be updated as things stand? (Well..unless they're the headquarters of group...but those are pretty rare). And in either case...if anyone wants to report the current status of a building, there's also the "current news/current status" subheadings on the page, too. --Jen 03:34, 7 October 2008 (BST)

...is there any reason why pages such as this can't just be deleted from the wiki? Please? They're clutter. Occasionally-updated utterly useless CLUTTER. Maybe that's not a reason for deleting them...but WHY THE HELL were they created in the first place???? The TRP, yeah, I can understand those. But generic buildings, with NO unique history? WHY???? --Jen 07:56, 7 October 2008 (BST)

Some of the wiki's more betterer contributors, including those over at ALiM are trying to lolify some of the stub locations to improve the wiki for everyone. Unfortunately some people are out to stop the wiki from being a better place, see 2 Cool intro paragraph for more info. Anyway they exist for whenever anyone does need to add something to one.--x o x o 11:24, 7 October 2008 (BST)

Please don't use my Talk page for this, J3D. And, Jen, the wiki is pretty piecemeal and inconsistent... And people don't even update malls regularly, NTs and other resource buildings are even worse... But, unless a number of people decide to get rid of Status Reports for non-descripts (which I support in principle, I think), it's probably just goinf to stay the way it is... --WanYao 13:00, 7 October 2008 (BST)

Hmm...how would one go about rallying support for getting rid of Status Reports for non-descripts? --Jen 22:22, 8 October 2008 (BST)

Just delete them off, i doubt anyone would notice. If they did then tell 'em to update it more often, chances are they'll either oblige or let you delete. Leave NT ones though, some of them are updated from time to time.--x o x o 23:36, 8 October 2008 (BST)

Deleting the "status report" thing off the page would only be a superficial fix. Though not one I'm averse to making. Ideally...I'd want to get rid of all the Status Report templates for non-TRP buildings. (Hmm...if I deleted it off the page...would that then make it an unused template, and viable for deletion? *Jen plots evilly*) --Jen 23:45, 8 October 2008 (BST)

Now you're thinking like an evil genius! Just put the subpages all up for deletion, rally the troops (ie me and wan) to vote, then someone else has to do the work of actually going through and deleting them all. Or just do the unused template way, either works :) --x o x o 12:03, 9 October 2008 (BST)

ALiM's Birthday Party

You've been cordially invited to attend ALiM's birthday party at Club Head at 10am GMT on the 18th of October. Festivities will last for a full 24 hours. See here for more details.--Nallan (Talk) 02:16, 7 October 2008 (BST)

What happened???

Has this ever happened to you before? I couldn't use my FAK. And it ate my last FAK, to boot. --Jen 01:06, 6 October 2008 (BST)

Oo thats cool, was it on the 60hp or the 45? Either way unfortunate your FAK got goned :( --x o x o 01:28, 6 October 2008 (BST)

Hmm...actually, it's not cool, as several of the Philosophes have explained to me. *sigh* I've been inordinately careful about avoiding stuff like this, too...it's NOT MY FAULT! *crosses her fingers, runs far, FAR away, and hopes that she's not cursed for life.* --Jen 03:49, 6 October 2008 (BST)

I have no idea why you're coming to me with this stuff!!! :) --WanYao 13:01, 7 October 2008 (BST)

'Cause your awesome and know cool stuff and doesn't afraid of anything. ;) --Jen 22:21, 8 October 2008 (BST)

UDWiki:Image Categorisation

Come on Wan! Me having to tell you where something is on the wiki? You're slipping old man. What what? --Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 21:43, 12 August 2008 (BST)

stressful fucking day. i don't wanna think! ;P

I normally dont even cat the images if they arent being used, and then ask a sysop to delete them after two weeks. Its a scheduled deletion or something--Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 22:21, 12 August 2008 (BST)

Category:Unused Images is actually decently helpful. Even if we also have a Special page that does the same thing. It keeps the image out of the way of the other people categorizing images.--Karek^maps?! 22:41, 12 August 2008 (BST)