UDWiki:Administration/Move Requests
This page is for the requesting of page moves by normal users. The average user's ability to move pages has been rescinded due to frequent abuse by vandals; as such, users will need to submit requests (similar in nature to those on Speedy Deletions and Protections) for pages to be moved by a sysop.
Guidelines for requesting a Page Move
Copy the template below (Or just type it), replace the text in red with the relevant details, and paste the template under the Move Request Queue heading. A day after a sysop has taken action on the request, move requests should be moved to the Archive.
===[[PAGENAME]]===
*[[MOVE TO HERE]]
*~~~~
|
Move Request Queue
There are no pages in the move request queue
Characters_of_Note
- Move to User:Amazing/Characters_of_Note
Personal page in the main namespace. Any attempts at discussion about the rules of the page or consensus building get shut down by Amazing ranting about page ownership, bias, and his not understanding the history of a separate user sub-page. He's imitating a user's page but trying to do so with more authority by putting it in NS:0 while ignoring previous consensus on this specific article not being in NS:0. Clearly he wants something he has editorial control over, he has that as a subpage of his personal page. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 05:28, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- I flatly refuse this action, "discussion of the rules" amounted to nothing more than jabs with no solutions, I did not rant about ownership, and I completely understand user sub-pages as I have a few of them. I am not imitating a user's page, and instead created an "open" alternative to one. I do not want editorial control, as laid out specifically when I created the page. Karek is simply quitting the discussion and moving to this page for a petty "screw you" move, basing his arguement on false or at least 'stretched' information. If this page is moved, I will delete it and create a different public resource that is similar but different enough that it will not circumvent this move. In other words, "Famous Characters" with entirely differnet guidelines and no existing "copied" list, etc. This is my only option since folks like Karek only complain and offer no actual suggestions/discussion on changes that could be made to the system. I can't psychically impliment his personal vision of the democratic voting system open to all users I set out to offer. Frankly, I could start making a ton of changes to the current list to make it "not a copy", but I made the rules pretty specific and - I don't want control over the process, so I theoretically can't arbitrarily insert or remove characters. It's clearly a good-faith attempt at creating a wiki resource, and I just want it to be used in a fair way. -- ™ & © Amazing, INC. All rights reserved. Replying constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service. 05:39, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- You literally copied and pasted word for word from Ross' page because you had a feeling of bias that no one else, not even people rejected, have brought up. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 06:07, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- Actually, I created a page that listed the same users in order and removed Ross' formatting, so it's actually not "literally copied and pasted", and if you count code, it's not "word for word". If you count the alphabetization, it's even less "literally copied". Plus I can't very well be biased and remove who I don't want and add who I do want. That's up for the voting to decide if people so choose. I don't understand why you're bringing the arguement here under the guise of a fake move request. "This is a userpage"? Really? Nobody believes that, not even you. No, if you want to talk in "literal" terms, you "literally" nominated a page for moving because you got mad, you've "literally" brought an arguement to a Moderation page for no real reason, and you "literally" threatened me with Vandal Banning for creating a page you don't like and defending it on the corresponding talk page. Maybe chill out for a bit? I seriously didn't mean to get you this worked up, I was just debating the issue with you. -- ™ & © Amazing, INC. All rights reserved. Replying constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service. 06:14, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- You literally copied and pasted word for word from Ross' page because you had a feeling of bias that no one else, not even people rejected, have brought up. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 06:07, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- In the edit reason, you put: "You literally copied the content word for word and are now saying you'll recopy it into the main namespace because yours being there is what's important to you not neutrality" - I didn't say that. Either I'm not being clear or you're not seeing straight due to anger. I said I'd create an entirely different page that isn't done in bad faith, that wouldn't undercut the move. Something new with a different ruleset I'll guess at due to the zero input I've gotten from you and others on how it could be better. -- ™ & © Amazing, INC. All rights reserved. Replying constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service. 06:18, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- Also, why did you put this in "Recent Actions"? O_o -- ™ & © Amazing, INC. All rights reserved. Replying constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service. 06:01, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- Habit, I'm not required to make the request I'm doing it out of common courtesy and so a third party can rule on it. You know, taking other's input for the sake of neutrality. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 06:08, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- Indeed, maybe if you'd taken my input as valid instead of just rolling from your first impression... Well, c'est la vie. If I even spelled that correctly. -- ™ & © Amazing, INC. All rights reserved. Replying constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service. 06:14, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- Habit, I'm not required to make the request I'm doing it out of common courtesy and so a third party can rule on it. You know, taking other's input for the sake of neutrality. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 06:08, 17 September 2012 (BST)
While I agree with Karek's stance, I'd first like to hear Ross' 2 cents. It's taken straight from his page, so it's essentially up to him if he wants to have that stuff in the mainspace (yet). -- Spiderzed█ 06:20, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- Just a quick question since I've been out of the loop for a few years and rarely visit the site. Is it an established rule that nobody can copy content? Especially with the intent of editing it later based on the input of others? This is a legit question. -- ™ & © Amazing, INC. All rights reserved. Replying constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service. 06:26, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- It's been crit 1 for Speedy deletion since before your ban. Not liking an articles current home isn't generally considered a valid purpose. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 06:41, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- None of the factors in Crit 1 apply. It's not a strict duplication because I added to and edited it, and it's not for "no purpose" as I clearly stated the purpose. Just because you disagree with the purpose doesn't mean there isn't one. I can't stress enough this problem of working backward from what you want. Funny you'd point out "not liking an article's home" when that's the entire stated basis for you wanting to move a non-userpage with original content. -- ™ & © Amazing, INC. All rights reserved. Replying constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service. 06:56, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- You should leave the wikilawyer stuff to Akule, at least he's good at it. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 09:03, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- None of the factors in Crit 1 apply. It's not a strict duplication because I added to and edited it, and it's not for "no purpose" as I clearly stated the purpose. Just because you disagree with the purpose doesn't mean there isn't one. I can't stress enough this problem of working backward from what you want. Funny you'd point out "not liking an article's home" when that's the entire stated basis for you wanting to move a non-userpage with original content. -- ™ & © Amazing, INC. All rights reserved. Replying constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service. 06:56, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- It's been crit 1 for Speedy deletion since before your ban. Not liking an articles current home isn't generally considered a valid purpose. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 06:41, 17 September 2012 (BST)
If Ross is willing to move his version out of his user space, I think the pages should be merged into one main namespace page -- boxy 09:22, 17 September 2012 (BST)
Whoa, whoa. It's been what, half a day? Amazing's trying. It has potential (though personally I think it's lucky not to be A/SD'd even). There is no harm in giving this one a try for a few days. A ZOMBIE ANT 10:56, 17 September 2012 (BST)
- Umm, why? What's the point in redoing the same concept twice, just with different facilitators? -- boxy 11:29, 17 September 2012 (BST)
Yo. What am I supposed to be asking/answering? The initial idea came from a discussion that was had on historical groups voting, about whether a group should be historic, because of a single individual. In addition to that, I always enjoyed User:Iscariot/No More Heroes and agreed that the days of such special characters were over. So I thought it would be fun to post up a paragraph linking characters to events and groups they were involved with. It's be bloody interesting, learning about group 0, the way the zombie hordes are so interlinked and listening to al the radio survivor broadcasts.
However, the whole idea of the namespace was the usual wiki problem. People disagreeing, putting up comedy nominations, nominating wiki personalities, rather than ingame ones, all that Jazz. As someone not around during the golden age, I felt it would be sensible if I acted as a moderator, as I've never been in any of the groups associated, find PKing boring and don't care who makes the final list. You'll see how in the discussion, I've tried not to force or nominate anyone myself, merely cycling those who others have questioned or dismissed. (Imagine the riot if I slipped Dermot O'leary onto the list.) My initial plan was always to put it in the namespace once completed. (Which in fairness, it probably almost is already), where you wonderful people can do whatever you like with it.
So, yeah. I'm already opening it up. I've asked Karek to do some tweaks, if Goribus comes back with the objections about forum attacks zerging allegation I can add that, and not doubt MHS staff has lots of juicy stuff I can include. Talking of which, I still have no idea how the DEM were formed.
What am I supposed to be answering? --I'm not the Ross UDWiki needs, I'm the Ross it deserves. 12:15, 17 September 2012 (BST)
Recent Actions
Zombie Hunter skills
Lets forget the original is miscapitalised, there is only one skill, there will always be only one skill. Can we swap the redirect. Please? RossWHO????ness 14:00, 24 August 2012 (BST)
- done.--Shortround }.{ My Contributions 14:02, 24 August 2012 (BST)
Merondi
Pretty sure this should be at User:Merondi. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 04:20, 21 August 2012 (BST)
UDWiki:Featured Articles/Voting
Since it's not a vote. -- AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 00:17, 21 August 2012 (BST)
U-can-add-a-link-here
- Move to: Somewhere.
Seems to be some sort of mistake from user User:Scageo. not sure where it should be going as I haven't had a good enough look yet or contacted the user DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 13:52, 17 August 2012 (BST)
- Weird. Moved it to his userspace.--Shortround }.{ My Contributions 17:12, 19 August 2012 (BST)
Zombie Skills
- Move to Zombie skills
- Reason: Consistency with the rest of the "skills" pages, like Civilian skills etc.
Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 15:49, 23 July 2012 (BST)
- done.--Shortround }.{ My Contributions 11:18, 25 July 2012 (BST)
Articles prefixed "Guide:"
Specifically Guide:Siege PKer Guide, Guide:Dealing with People and Guide:Group Culture.
- Move to equivalent pages with prefix "Guides:"
- Reason: Consistency with the rest of the items in Category:Guides.
Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 17:15, 22 July 2012 (BST)
- done by karek, I've fixed incoming links and deleted the pointless redirects.--Shortround }.{ My Contributions 11:18, 25 July 2012 (BST)
AZDC
- Move to AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
- Reason: Group consensus to rename ourselves. --RadicalWhig 00:45, 18 July 2012 (BST)
- done. I've kept the old name as a redirect for people who still want to find the group but don't know the new name.--Shortround }.{ My Contributions 10:45, 19 July 2012 (BST)
AZ/DC Subpages
Including:
- AZDC/recruit moved to AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA/recruit
- AZDC/rules moved to AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA/rules
- AZDC/badges moved to AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA/badges
- AZDC/pantheon moved to AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA/pantheon
- AZDC/groupbox moved to AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA/groupbox
- AZDC/nav moved to AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA/nav
Subpages of the above request. --RadicalWhig 00:45, 18 July 2012 (BST)
- They'll probably need to physically be subpages of the above request meaning AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA/(pagename) DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 02:27, 18 July 2012 (BST)
- Changed--RadicalWhig 10:18, 19 July 2012 (BST)
- This is done.--Shortround }.{ My Contributions 10:52, 19 July 2012 (BST)
- Changed--RadicalWhig 10:18, 19 July 2012 (BST)
DEM
- Move to DEM (Disambiguation)
- Reason: this really should be a redirect to Department of Emergency Management. I checked the incoming links and while I didn't check every single link, it doen't look as if any lead to Deus Ex Machina. I suggest simply linking to the disambig page from Department of Emergency Management. See Talk:Deus Ex Machina#DEM disambiguation for more info. ~
16:47, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- The reason I brought this here was to get some consensus but if none is forthcoming, I'll probably just do it manually in another couple of days. ~ 02:58, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
- Karek did this.--Shortround }.{ My Contributions 10:52, 19 July 2012 (BST)
Archives
| Move Requests Archive | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
