User talk:Aichon

Aichon:Talk

• Main
• Characters
• Sandbox

• Talk
• Userscripts
• Other

Aichon

ˈīˌkän :Talk

Announcement: I'm no longer active. My talk page is still your best bet to get in touch. —Aichon— 04:39, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Please be aware of the following guidelines before posting here.

• New conversations should be started at the bottom using a level two header (e.g. ==Header==).
• I like to keep conversations wherever they start, but if a conversation ends up here, I will keep it here.
• I will format comments for stylistic reasons, delete comments for whatever reason, and generally do anything else within reason.

Thanks. —Aichon—

Archives: 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | To do

Images

Use the image on its own description or talk page. Counts as used without needing to be arked anywhere. You can even have it display at 1px wide so it's almost like it's not there. 02:25, 11 July 2011 (BST)

Still a bit silly, don't you think? I mean, why is something like that necessary at all? —Aichon— 02:27, 11 July 2011 (BST)

I guess it could do with being a speedy, rather than scheduled, crit. That way there's room in intervene before it's processed. 02:29, 11 July 2011 (BST)

I didn't mean so much in those terms. I'm fine with the policy. What I don't like is the wiki's way of figuring out which ones are unused. :P —Aichon— 02:35, 11 July 2011 (BST)

How else would you expect it to figure them out?--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 02:33, 23 July 2011 (BST)

The software already knows which pages are linked to. I'd like it to simply use that with images before declaring an image unused. Why they don't is beyond me. —Aichon— 02:44, 23 July 2011 (BST)

They don't because an image that is linked to isn't necessarily even in use.

Also: We shouldn't really be keeping all to many images around if they're not used. The whole point of the Unused Image page is to tell us which images are no longer needed.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 02:51, 23 July 2011 (BST)

It's barely even an issue anymore since we can undelete images... Unless Kevan changed it back? -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 02:58, 23 July 2011 (BST)

He didn't, but I think that makes it even sillier. If the images are going to stay regardless, then there's even less reason to be picky about which ones we keep or delete. Might as well consider them used, rather than unused. —Aichon— 03:05, 23 July 2011 (BST)

I think we have a difference in definition here. For me, in addition to placing an image on a page, if it's linked, I consider it to be used. I understand the rationale behind removing unused images, but I simply don't think that linked images should be considered to be unused by the software. I'm not talking about any policy changes, since I think it would be annoying to have a policy that's not in sync with the software, but I just wish the wiki software had an option or setting that could be changed. —Aichon— 03:05, 23 July 2011 (BST)

Well, not sure that I entirely agree with you on that one. The reason for this setup is simple, though: Wikipedia's only use for images is to include them in articles. For them, the only reason to link to an image is really to discuss its deletion. Hence, this setup makes perfect sense for them.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 03:37, 23 July 2011 (BST)

That may be Wikipedia's only use for them, but that's by convention only. There's no good reason why articles couldn't simply contain links to images as a valid, alternative convention. That's why I think that an option would be nice, rather than locking everyone into their way of doing it. —Aichon— 04:23, 23 July 2011 (BST)

Not really: That would mean regularly clogging up A/SD with pointless doubled-handled requests.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 02:33, 23 July 2011 (BST)

Here's what I did.. For images I want to be sure are kept I just made a page in my userspace for them to sit. That way they are always in use even if they technically aren't being used in any useful way.       04:49, 23 July 2011 (BST)

Yep. We call that an image ark. My gripe is that I think it's silly that such things are necessary when the image is actually being used (despite what the software says) in some way. In the end though, it's just a gripe, and there's nothing any of us can do to change things. The way we do things now for them is the correct one while the software is this way, and I wouldn't want it changed. —Aichon— 05:08, 23 July 2011 (BST)

Ah didn't recognize the term when it was mentioned above. I can see your point about links should count as use though.       13:59, 23 July 2011 (BST)

katthew bid

I was just getting at the fact that she was considered qualified enough to make the rules of the wiki, and that means the primary rules not the intiracies of them. She was considered able enough to have qwhat, at the time, amounted to a stake of absolute control of the wiki, they were literal moderators. And that she was considered qualified enough to develop most of the systems we use to this day, including but not limited to suggestions. She has shown interest enough to consistently bring real activity to the wiki and influence enough to get ideas implemented in-game without going through the standard system(that she made). The idea that she's not able to do the job seems kinda unrealistic when you consider that she made the job, although I do understand what you mean. She may not know all the rule spam but she does know the why's of the rules better than all but a handfull and the spirit should always trump the letter. --Karek^{maps 2.0?!} 08:45, 13 July 2011 (BST)

I understand where you're coming from, but all of that basically boils down to whether or not we trust her judgment, which is only one factor among several that need to be considered. And, as you know, being a former sysop is not an automatic entry pass. I have no idea where to even begin looking up the discussions from back then that would tell me whether or not she was competent at her job or actually made the level of contributions that you say she did. I also don't know the circumstances regarding her departure as a sysop (not for lack of looking), which may impact her credibility. But without even having to look at her prior record of service, we can see that she hasn't contributed anything meaningful to the sysop-level discussions since after the 2007 purge, nor has she generally been active on the wiki at all. Not knowing the new rules is just the tip of the iceberg. By all indications, she has no demonstrated interest in bettering the wiki. —Aichon— 17:42, 13 July 2011 (BST)

Also, I realized not too long ago that I've been confrontational with you for no good reason. I know it won't mean much without action to back it up, but I wanted to apologize for it regardless, and to make it clear that even though we argue frequently, I still do respect your opinion greatly. —Aichon— 17:57, 13 July 2011 (BST)

UD Tool Script

Do you know of or could make a version of UDTool that works on the updated FF? There are quite a few people that would be interested in it I'm sure.        02:52, 20 July 2011 (BST)

UDTool is a FF extension, and I have no experience in working with those, nor do I have time at the moment to take on a new project (I might in a few months :/). To be perfectly honest though, I'm not really interested in it since the reason I make userscripts is for myself, and I'm afraid I don't use FF typically. I can't remember who fixed up UDTool last time, but you might talk to Revenant, since I wouldn't be surprised if he knows who it was or whether there's someone working on fixing it this time. —Aichon— 03:03, 20 July 2011 (BST)

Pretty sure that's the general's baby.--Karek^{maps 2.0?!} 03:05, 20 July 2011 (BST)

I wasn't sure who to ask I just figured the guy with the userscript page would be a good person to ask lol. I shall ask the general then.        03:21, 20 July 2011 (BST)

Just saw hes on holiday. Dang.       03:23, 20 July 2011 (BST)

You can still ask; talk messages don't degrade if left unanswered for a while! :P

To answer your question, the latest version available here and should work fine with the latest version of FireFox. If you have any problems then feel free to contact me either on my talk page, through email, or by posting on the thread on Resensitized.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 13:12, 21 July 2011 (BST)

I was just gonna wait :P       14:59, 21 July 2011 (BST)

Perhaps an even better idea would be to make a Greasemonkey script similar to UD Tool, as least in respects to the contacts list. Since there are already other Greasemonkey scripts that handle pretty much all the other features of UD Tool, that seems to really be the deal-breaker for many people. However, with our beloved Aichon not horribly active anymore and bogged down with RL worries, no telling when such a thing might be possible. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 18:41, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

you there

I am viewing your page in Chrome. Unfortunately, the breakage of the custom title code has made it icky. You should amend your notice to "Best viewed on another wiki". 04:07, 20 July 2011 (BST)

I'll just change it to "Best on a Mac" instead. ;) —Aichon— 04:26, 20 July 2011 (BST)

Seriously though, I'm downloading Chrome now to check out the issue, since I had deleted Chrome awhile back. —Aichon— 04:26, 20 July 2011 (BST)

I didn't notice any code breakage but I am on a mac.        04:28, 20 July 2011 (BST)

I'm looking at it on Chrome, and I see no issues. Are you on the latest Chrome release, Mis? I'm currently using version 12. —Aichon— 04:29, 20 July 2011 (BST)

Anything that puts content outside the main page area stopped working for me when the wiki was updated, I didn't think it's a browser thing. Is no one else getting that same breakage? 04:34, 20 July 2011 (BST)

Can't say I'm seeing that. In your wiki preferences, are you using the default theme? —Aichon— 04:38, 20 July 2011 (BST)

You know, I honestly don't know. Hold on til I check. 04:40, 20 July 2011 (BST)

04:40, 20 July 2011 (BST)

That was it? —Aichon— 04:44, 20 July 2011 (BST)

That was it. I can enjoy Link's game again now. 04:46, 20 July 2011 (BST)

Yeah the default urbandead theme is borked. Really need to add something to notify people to change that. ~ _{05:28, 20 July 2011 (UTC)}

The default one is fine. It's the others that are borked. I think... —Aichon— 05:31, 20 July 2011 (BST)

If that's the case then we probably need some more testing. General, Karek and I (and probably some others) tested it and put together Help:Wiki Update. It might be that other browsers or macs have different skin specific issues. ~ _{05:36, 20 July 2011 (UTC)}

The custom title template has had issues with other themes for years (I believe that DDR, Rooster, and I have talked about it in the past), so this isn't related to Macs, PCs, or the wiki software update. It's just a matter of it only being designed with the default theme in mind. It simply works with a few of the others because they were based on the default. —Aichon— 05:47, 20 July 2011 (BST)

I suspect you're right and custom title is somewhat borked as well. The fact that it didn't work for Mis after the wiki update until he updated his skin made me think that urbandead was to blame. But I just changed tested it myself and checked a few different pages and it looked fine. Maybe Mis has been drinking heavily again. ~ _{06:06, 20 July 2011 (UTC)}

Actually, I think the problem was that he wasn't using the default theme previously, and that he switched to it, which fixed the issue for him. I use the default theme all the time (I figure things should always look best in it, after all), so I'd have noticed if it had a major issue. —Aichon— 06:40, 20 July 2011 (BST)

Yeah, I suppose that's very possible. ~ _{07:05, 20 July 2011 (UTC)}

We should all swap to the blue theme, because that's the one that Boxy uses. :D --Yonnua Koponen ^{T G P} ^^^ 08:57, 21 July 2011 (BST)

It's borked for me. Any letters that extend like p or q or y etc. are not covered by the custom title splotch of the title of the page. So there's a little square bit of pixels left to be viewed by me as something unsightly and that desperately should be covered up. Indecent exposure, if you will--  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 07:25, 21 July 2011 (BST)

I think that's more of an issue with the template height than anything. I had the same problem with the decender on my user page until I increased the height of my custom title with a span tag. ~ _{07:36, 21 July 2011 (UTC)}

Yeah, I tried fiddling that, and got it everything covered in Safari, but in Firefox, the line under the page title header was covered (so line disappeared), fiddled to try and make the heights more precise, still didn't work. So I gave up. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 16:23, 21 July 2011 (BST)

Ah the line. Probably have to cheat and just add ---- just below the cutom title code. ~ _{16:33, 21 July 2011 (UTC)}

meh

i created the fucking tool, i can has the right to not edit it if i wants it --hagnat 04:07, 31 July 2011 (BST)

:P —Aichon— 04:28, 31 July 2011 (BST)

That makes absolutely no fucking sense. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 05:54, 31 July 2011 (BST)

Does it really matter if it makes sense? So long as he knows to do it next time, he could tell us he didn't do it because he's the Queen of England and it wouldn't make a lick of difference. :P —Aichon— 06:09, 31 July 2011 (BST)

Yeah but he didn't say he would do it next time. he implied the opposite if you ask me, for an illogical, egotistical and generally retarded reason -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 07:42, 31 July 2011 (BST)

Eh, not like it really bothers anyone much, myself included. Practically everyone forgets to do it. —Aichon— 07:47, 31 July 2011 (BST)

looks like he did it next time when suggestion o/d went up. I think hagz was just joking around. Lighten up ddr (or perhaps sober up). ~ _{08:20, 31 July 2011 (UTC)}

Help!

I made a template for rotation but it doesn't work on chrome or safari,only firefox. I can't seem to get it working. Even just the plain code only seems to work on an image. I'm gonna work on it more later but I figured more a experienced coder might get it fixed faster. Heres teh link http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Template:Rotate and one to my sandbox where I've been playing with the codehere       19:46, 4 August 2011 (BST)

Probably have to use a style sheet to make it so. ~ _{20:17, 4 August 2011 (UTC)}

I believe the issue might be that webkit expects you to only use that on block-level elements, not inline elements. For instance, looking at your sample page, the image is flipped in Safari, while your signature is not. Since images are block-level elements by default, while text (even in spans) are inline elements, that seems like the most reasonable explanation to me. When I changed some of your sample code to use divs instead of spans, they reacted as you'd expect. EDIT: Karek just figured out the same thing as I did while I was typing this up. —Aichon— 20:29, 4 August 2011 (BST)

Yeah right as I walked out the door of my house I realized my image used div instead of span but I wasn't sure if that was the cause or not.       04:17, 5 August 2011 (BST)

UD Map Links

Hey-o! I saw that you updated the UD Map Links script after I did -- that's awesome, thank you! I upgraded to your version tonight but noticed the script's description still says that it links to the CDF's map. No big deal, just thought I'd make you aware.  :) Thanks again for the update and also for the other neat, new scripts! Best regards --Lucy Daniels 05:51, 26 September 2011 (BST)

Updated. Thanks for the notice! —Aichon— 06:06, 26 September 2011 (BST)

Profile Viewer

I know it's not your script, but Spidey doesn't have knowledge of how to fix it (he only updated the RG link), and Vic doesn't seem to be around to fix his own script, so a bit of help would be nice. It doesn't work in the latest versions of Firefox or Chrome. Think you know how to fix it and make it work? --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 02:26, 27 September 2011 (BST)

I've never actually used that script since it never worked in Safari, so I don't even have a clue where to start with identifying any issues (nor am I inclined to study the code, honestly, since I'm not playing the game at the moment and wouldn't get to use the script anyway). You might consider hitting Rev up for help. Even if he can't fix it himself, he probably will know someone who can. —Aichon— 01:12, 28 September 2011 (BST)

I'm being bounced all over this wiki because of you guys. Although it looks like Firefox 7 just came out earlier today...Perhaps I'll hold off on asking Rev until I test it in Firefox 7... --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 01:14, 28 September 2011 (BST)

That's what tends to happen with orphaned scripts, unfortunately. :( —Aichon— 01:27, 28 September 2011 (BST)

Asking for permission to adapt elements of your excellent Big Bash 3 page

Hey there, just a quick request for your permission to adapt sections of your FAQ and possibly 'borrow' the odd bit of code from your excellent Big Bash 3 page for the new Mall Tour '11 page. This new Mall Tour is looking like a relatively simple and spartan affair, but a solid page always helps with recruitment, and your Big Bash 3 page has some great writing and code that could be easily adapted for this new undead venture. Let me know how you'd feel about us using your page as the inspiration/source, thank you! --BOSCH 21:34, 4 October 2011 (BST)

I'm fine with you guys borrowing from it (with a few caveats), but I'd suggest checking in with bisfan and Amber if you can track them down. Bisfan was the real leader behind the scenes, while Amber did a lot of leading and made all of the artwork, so getting their okay would be a good idea (and would be a necessity if you wanted to use Amber's artwork). I mostly just made the pages to their specifications, so I consider the pages to be theirs more than mine, though I suspect they might disagree with my sentiment since they've been generous in letting me take undeserved credit in the past.

As for my caveats, they basically boil down to the idea that you should make the page uniquely yours, rather than being an obvious carbon-copy of BB3. At the very least, I'd change the colors (since that shade of red has been used with past BB events, and doesn't MT usually use a shade of bright green?) and would ask that you not directly use any large blocks of text without rewriting them. In my opinion, you're welcome to use BB3's headings and organization of the pages, and you can use BB3's text as a basis for your own, but I'd prefer that it wasn't directly copy-pasted (the blocks of text, that is; feel free to copy the headings). We went for a unique vibe in the writing of BB3's pages, and I'd like to keep it there. Changing the width of the page might be a good idea too (you don't want to go smaller though, for various technical reasons), just to help separate the two visually. Again, make it uniquely yours and distinctive from BB3. So long as you do, you'll have nothing but support from my end since I'm VERY happy to hear that MT'11 is happening (even if I won't be participating). :)

Also, just to check, you're aware of the BB3 admin page, right? It's linked from the bottom of the Thanks page and has instructions for how pretty much anyone can update everything easily. I tried to make it as full-featured as possible while still being simple enough that a wiki novice-to-intermediate could maintain it by themselves. —Aichon— 00:22, 5 October 2011 (BST)

Thanks for getting back to me so quickly! We have both bisfan and Amber on board, so asking them for permission shouldn't be a problem. I won't be re-using any of the artwork, because it wouldn't fit (different titles and styles), but also because I'd like to make the page original too. I'll definitely re-write whatever I use of your words to give us our own voice, I mainly wanted to use them as a basis as, for example, your FAQ covered everything as well as it could be covered. Finally, thank you for the pointer towards the admin page. Perhaps have a look at our page again soon, and hit me up if you have any queries, concerns or suggestion! Cheers, Aichon! --BOSCH 03:02, 5 October 2011 (BST)

The FAQ is pretty generic stuff, so feel free to crib liberally from it. If you have bis and Amber on board, then you should be fine doing pretty much anything you want. It sounds like your head is in the right place (I figured it would be, since it is you, after all), and I mainly wanted to make sure we were on the same page with the idea that a blatant copy wasn't cool but most anything else is fair game, so I doubt you'll hear any complaints from me. I still respond to stuff on my talk page quickly, so if you run into something odd when copying all of the templates that BB3 uses over to MT'11's space, feel free to hit me up for information on them. It's been over a year since I built the pages for BB3, but hopefully I can remember most of it. —Aichon— 03:30, 5 October 2011 (BST)

Question about the inner working of this Wiki

Hi Aichon. I know you are not around much anymore but I also know you still read your discussion page. You've always been helpful and civil toward me even when our opinions diverged so I feel more comfortable asking you this question than I would begging trolled and spammed by others in other parts of this wiki.

I was looking around in neighbor suburbs of Yagoton lately and noticed that The Dead have their name in the active zombie group in every single one of them. They tried to add their group to Yagoton too but I removed them on sight when they tried for obvious reasons and then I didn't bother to keep up with their ridiculous act further for the rest of Malton. Very recently I stumbled on their group page (or lack of group page, if you know what I mean) and in the discussion page I noticed that they purposely tried to add themselves to every single suburbs of Malton to abuse the so called honor system (I think it was in the suburb massacre section of their discussion page). It seems like not many people care about that listing and thus their name remains listed Malton whole, irrelevantly of the exactitude of that claim or not.

My question thus follow: would you know where I would need to go or post to ask the powers that be in this Wiki to either remove The Dead in every suburbs they are not really active in, or give me the right to do it myself without having to create a drama war? I looked myself but I really have no idea where I should do that. And everybody know that if I were to do it directly then the sky would fall on me... You cannot expect anything better from The Dead (or rather Awful Forums...).

Thank you for your time and answer. -- •Eagle of Fire• 

 •[Talk]•  02:49, 24 October 2011 (BST)

Just wait for the next Great Suburb Group Massacre. Where we get to work cleaning out the group listings on each and every suburb. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 03:08, 24 October 2011 (BST)

Axe's solution is definitely the most straightforward and simple, but which one you want to pursue depends on how willing you are to deal with drama and/or the potential for drama. The options I see are to remove them yourself (which is perfectly fine, but may cause drama with The Dead if they object), encourage others to remove them once The Dead leave their suburb (low drama), take The Dead to arbitration to force them to use the system correctly (that'd be a VERY hard ruling to enforce, assuming it went your way, and would mean some very involved drama), or to wait for the next GSGM, which will clean up all of the issues of this sort when it happens (no drama). The GSGM tends to be an annual thing at this point (maybe even longer now), and the next one probably won't roll around until sometime in the Spring.

Personally, I'd probably clean them out of every suburb where their horde isn't located at the moment, since their influence has waned significantly after their spurt of activity around March or April, and I wouldn't expect much drama at this point. I'm sure some of them will object, but most of them are like any other wiki denizen: unwilling to put forth anything beyond a marginal effort. So long as you leave them alone in the suburbs where they truly are active, they won't have any grounds on which to object, meaning that they'd have to put forth some serious effort to undo your constructive edits. Few of them would likely be willing to try and take you to arbies over it, and even if they did, those listings would get locked in the contested state (i.e. how you left it) for the duration of the proceedings.

Thank you for your answers. Unfortunately I have no idea where The Dead are actually active, if they are really actually active anywhere in the first place. I however thought that the fact that they purposely (tried to?) abuse the system in place might mean there would be a quick and efficient way to get rid of them without drama. Maybe it was only wishful thinking though. -- •Eagle of Fire• 

 •[Talk]•  10:33, 24 October 2011 (BST)

They're active in the NE certainly, and have a small presence in several other places.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 11:37, 24 October 2011 (BST)

Unfortunately not. Just because someone abused things in some cases doesn't mean that every instance is an abuse, and we have a responsibility to set things as they should be, rather than what's simplest. You can probably remove them from about 90% of the suburbs in the end. I'd just look for reports of their activity on the wiki, or else leave their mention in suburbs that are listed as red in the area where they were last known to be active, and wouldn't worry about it beyond that. I honestly wouldn't expect there to be any drama if you remove them from most suburbs, and if there is, then there's nothing saying you can't just walk away from it and try a different tactic later while letting them put their name back for now. I.e. remove their names, and if it sticks, great, but if it doesn't, just leave it alone and try something else. I was just talking about worst cases earlier. I honestly doubt you'll get any drama so long as you're civil about it, and if you do, then you can just walk away. —Aichon— 14:30, 24 October 2011 (BST)

Hummm... It seems to me then that there is only two really cost effective solutions to this problem then: 1) Simply remove them from all suburb listings and ask them nicely on their discussion page to add themselves to those suburbs they are really active in or 2) Ask them on their talk page first where they are really active and only after they reply remove them from those suburbs they didn't mentioned.

Solution 1 would be the one I prefer because it is straightforward, easy to do and I simply don't expect The Dead to be civil even if we are to them. It could however potentially lead to high drama on their part, maybe even to a low wiki war. Solution 2 would be the most civil toward them and might lead to good results if they are in a good mood but as I said I don't expect it to be the case because of past experiences. It might be worth a shot if you think it is the best option though, which I think it is judging by what you said so far.

On a related note, their group page is The Dead 2.0 right? -- •Eagle of Fire• 

 •[Talk]•  20:14, 24 October 2011 (BST)

Yep for the page. As for the options, #2 is basically just GSGM, except you'd be doing it early, would be singling them out for it, and would likely be met with the exact sort of response you're already expecting. #1 is closer to what I'd recommend, but to keep it more civil, I wouldn't remove them from every suburb immediately. Instead, I'd remove them from everything except the ones where they might be, which, based on what Yonn said, would be all of the northeast suburbs that are red or orange. I'd then revisit it in a few weeks and would remove them from any of those that had turned green or yellow, since they clearly weren't there any longer. It's easy, doesn't involve having to contact them, and isn't controversial in the least since you're not removing them from any places where they actually are. It may not be as thorough as quickly, but it's what I see as the path of least resistance which yields the best results for everyone. —Aichon— 01:08, 25 October 2011 (BST)

Interesting way to handle it... However, I don't agree: even if the suburbs turn yellow or green it doesn't mean they are not present or active in the suburb. Take when they visited Yagoton for example, the suburb was red for Gods know how long and we were active and kicking all along. In fact, we purposely stopped updating the map to make them think that we were not and they should not come back. I never took the danger map as any real indication of what is really happening in Malton so I don't agree about using that Wiki tool for this particular problem. -- •Eagle of Fire• 

 •[Talk]•  04:39, 25 October 2011 (BST)

Well, that's your call. Personally, I see it as a case of them being a horde and being interested in making it clear how destructive they are, so I think it's a safe assumption that a green or yellow does not have them present in it. If you don't want to make that assumption as well, that's fine, but that leaves less options available to you. Keep in mind that with your #1 option, if you remove them from every suburb, then you're not even making an attempt to leave them listed in the suburbs in which they might be. The reasoning behind my idea was that it would be making an effort in good faith to leave their listing in the suburbs where they are most likely to be. It doesn't need to be 100% accurate since even they aren't making that information publicly available, but it is a best effort to not act solely in our own interests. —Aichon— 13:53, 25 October 2011 (BST)

I am SO coming back for the next GSGM. :D:D --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 11:37, 24 October 2011 (BST)

Go to A/A. I could always use a chuckle. In fact, take it anywhere anybody says, I'm sure I'd fill my chuckle quota with whatever you try. annoying 10:30, 25 October 2011 (BST)

I offer to arbitrate.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 13:37, 25 October 2011 (BST)

I'd rather see a jury involved. >_> --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 16:42, 25 October 2011 (BST)

I'd prefer that this whole thing with them be done already and that people would stop feeding the trolls. They were fun to have around when they imbalanced the entire game, but now they're just boring. Up until then they spiced things up. Once they stopped that, however, they stopped being interesting. Now they're back to their usual state of "dull" that they were in for the last few years. Call me when they march again. —Aichon— 06:29, 26 October 2011 (BST)

Dude they aren't even around. It's hardly fair calling them dull when they don't do anything anymore. annoying 10:11, 26 October 2011 (BST)

Speaking of which, Gaddafi's been kind of dull this past week.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 11:44, 26 October 2011 (BST)

Zombie Gaddafi keeps making a ruckus though. I wish he'd shut up already since he's no longer relevant. —Aichon— 13:39, 26 October 2011 (BST)

You missed my point. They continue to be a nuisance in the meta-game (else this discussion wouldn't exist), yet they aren't contributing anything to the game because they "aren't even around". The fact that they're not around was exactly the reason I made that comment. If they were still around, I wouldn't have a complaint. —Aichon— 13:39, 26 October 2011 (BST)

Wiki Suggestions

Hey you seem to be somewhat active right now. It might be a lot to ask but do you care to weigh in on some discussion here? I'm trying to develop a system for formal requests to Kevan to make updates to the wiki. I thought this might be somewhat up your alley. ~ _{07:01, 26 October 2011 (UTC)}

I get e-mailed when my talk page gets edited. Otherwise I'm less active than I've ever been. Is that sort of thing really a problem, however? We've typically just used A/PD in the past, and it's worked okay. Kevan seems reluctant to make updates, given the dwindling nature of the game and the added cost that these updates to the wiki brings to him (whether in time, money, or the need for better hardware for the wiki). I guess the question I have is why we need something besides A/PD, since requests of that sort really shouldn't be commonplace (i.e. don't bother the boss-man) and should be the sort of thing that's big enough that the entire wiki community agrees it needs to be updated. —Aichon— 13:45, 26 October 2011 (BST)

A/PD isn't appropriate for these requests in my opinion. They simply are quite different in nature than what should be considered official wiki policy. There are about 5 requests to be submitted to Kevan at the moment. Some are to make minor tweaks to fix some of the problems caused by the wiki update and others are aimed towards stopping spam or making our lives a little bit easier in other ways. Discussion of these issues tends to happen on irrelevant pages and when a decision is reached, there really is no formal way of making them through Kevan.

I'll use Wiki_Questions#Spambits as an example. A few people had an opinion on the subject and it looks like consensus was reached about how to approach Kevan about necessary updates. We could simply ask Kevan on his talk page and direct him to the discussion thread and hope for the best but it seems sloppy to me. Several of us would like to see a more formal method of making these requests.

Coincidentally, none of the updates so far would be difficult to implement nor costly. They just involve making one or two changes to the database. That isn't to say that every requested update will be that straightforward, but I think the majority of them will. Anyhow, I appreciate the input and I completely understand not getting more involved in this project. ~ _{14:26, 26 October 2011 (UTC)}