User talk:Primal Rage

Eire and Detour's reasoning is sound. The stub template encourages people to contribute to the article which lacks information. By providing a, let's face it, rather short and cursory passage that basically says "The good guys arrive somewhere. Stuff happens and they fight the bad guys. They win, and leave", people are less likely to take the time to complete the article, because people are less inclined to completely rewrite somebody else's work, no matter how little information it conveys. --FFN 05:51, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

No long description exists that I can find, nor even a translation into english. If you have some english translation I will provide a longer description. 68.61.240.172 15:10, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

In that case you *PROBABLY* pad out the synopsis with more detailed descriptions of things happening so you can get at least a few paragraphs, but leave the stub tags around, and perhaps even a ((cleanup|date|insert description here}} saying this synopsis was done without the benefit of translated text. Or doing this may offend our staff and regular users, heh. --FFN 16:55, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

I never removed the stub notice in the first place, I just added a couple sentences of overview, and it got delted. Yet somehow the people deleting it failed to offer anything better. 68.61.240.172 22:17, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

(re: claims on FFN's talk page) You did remove the stub notice, mignash. Check your edit history. --Detour 23:31, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

(You're supposed to keep all talk page replies on the one page so the conversation can be followed on a single page, as opposed to multiple pages on multiple windows/tabs.) --FFN 03:17, 25 October 2009 (EDT)

Thanks! I hadn't seen that left it in this time. 68.61.240.172 12:28, 25 October 2009 (EDT)

Please, stop your edit war on Rook (SG).--Rosicrucian^Talk 17:44, 22 November 2009 (EST)

I agree. Please remove political commentaries. 68.61.240.172 17:46, 22 November 2009 (EST)

Okay, since you seem to be missing the point let me say that if you remove that one more time without getting some other users to support you, I am giving you a time-out. Right now, the majority seem to be in favor of the caption.--Rosicrucian^Talk 17:50, 22 November 2009 (EST)

It seems' It's Walky blocked me ANYWAYS, even if I didn't change it again. His reason for blocking seems to be because I'm me. What's up with that? 68.61.240.172 10:26, 23 November 2009 (EST)

You know, I searched for a Transformers wiki years ago, ultimately leading to the creation of this place, because some dude named "mignash" was such a pain on Wikipedia. Such a pain. He was so big of a pain that he was even banned from there for a time! So no, you're not allowed. Neither you nor your fun political insanities. --ItsWalky 10:28, 23 November 2009 (EST)

THANK YOU. I do not want edit-wars all over Shattered Glass.

(Believe it or not, now I feel embarrassed about supporting his bid to include a mention of the Seekers on the Wikipedia article on the F-15 Eagle.) ---Blackout- 10:36, 23 November 2009 (EST)

What political insanities? Because I added a comment on Obama, which isn't even that bad? Rosicrucian asked me not to revert the page any more and I did as asked. so it seems you are into banning people you don't like? --68.61.240.172 10:41, 23 November 2009 (EST)

No, that's just how I knew it was you, rather than some other harmless anom merely obsessed with Shattered Glass. So you're going, exactly because you're you, because you're not allowed here. TFwiki.net exists to avoid Matthew Ignash. That's specifically why the original Wikia site was sought by me, so we could have a Transformers Wiki safe from your edit wars. --ItsWalky 10:47, 23 November 2009 (EST)

I wasn't aware you created and owned the site. Sorry to intrude on your private property. 68.61.240.172 10:49, 23 November 2009 (EST)

While Walky could have perhaps put it more tactfully, he's certainly hit upon something that is a critical difference between the Wikipedia dynamic and the atmosphere here. At Wikipedia, there is continual dynamic tension between the policy wonks and those that are passionate about the subject matter. In fact at Wikipedia it's not uncommon to have someone who is entirely uninterested in the subject matter of an article, and just enforcing policy. Sometimes the policy wonks win, and an article gets locked down in the "correct" form. Sometimes they give up, allowing an editor to set up what amounts to a little fiefdom in a collection of articles. Here, though? Well, for one the default assumption is that we're all passionate about the subject matter, even if we take it with varying degrees of seriousness. We're here, right? Second, we're much looser policy-wise. Most of our policy documents have evolved within the past year or two, and are mainly just setting down in text things that we've agreed on in the past. It's much more "D&D house rules" than "Did you remember to use the new cover sheet on your TPS reports?" As a result we'll almost never sanitize an article to fit one user's complaints, unless they can justify that it's getting in the way of the information the article is supposed to present.

I tend to think the two approaches are night and day, and you're not the first user to run afoul of the general community atmosphere by trying to edit here the same way he does at Wikipedia. I don't know if I agree with Walky blocking you permanently, but he is the guy who helped facilitate the move off of Wikia, onto his own hosting no less, and even though we've moved hosting since then he's still been instrumental in keeping things running, including picking up the slack when the advertising doesn't cover our hosting bills. He has done some of the "heavy lifting," so to speak and for the most part he's a reasonable guy. In this case, he's exactly right that you're exhibiting some behaviors that don't really work with how this wiki has operated. Maybe he didn't explain that in a way that's satisfying to you, but I can honestly say that if you had continued your pattern of edits I would have blocked you myself, if not for Rook then for something else. If you're ever to be unblocked, these are behaviors that would need to be fixed. Some people get the benefit of the doubt because of how much time and sweat they've invested in the place. You haven't earned that yet.--Rosicrucian^Talk 11:56, 23 November 2009 (EST)

Agreed, I have not earned it yet. That's why I made my proposal. I cann't earn the respect if I cannot post, so I am offering my "pledge" and ask for the ability to earn the respect. As I proposed, i will not edit voluntarely for ONE WEEK. I will then attempt to only make edits within my pledge, and with (hopefully) the blessing of the majority of the users here in an appropriate fashion that will help the wiki. I want you to give me feedback on this, so I don't ruffle ANY feathers. Primal Rage 12:03, 23 November 2009 (EST)

... You also can't earn respect by signing up under an alt ID after being banned. That is also against the rules. --ItsWalky 16:03, 23 November 2009 (EST)

You can't show anything if you can't even type. So I made this page to make a proposal, and I'm NOT editing the wiki until things are good, hoping to get some feedback and direction. Would it be a such a horrible thing if I posted in the proper manner to articles that needed the work? Primal Rage 16:31, 23 November 2009 (EST)

I do think that's a good way to start. Doing meat and potatoes editing and filling out articles is a good thing, and your interest in Shattered Glass could be a good thing as you could collaborate with Jeysie in getting the character articles filled out with the missing fiction. Try not to stress the captions so much, as like everything they're secondary to the content itself.--Rosicrucian^Talk 14:20, 23 November 2009 (EST)

I'd appreciate Primal Rage's help. The list of Shattered Glass stubs is way too long, and there needs to be more editors working on it. ---Blackout- 14:47, 23 November 2009 (EST)

It's one of the things that caught the wiki by surprise, I think. For the longest time, the fiction output by the club was negligible, and now they're consistently putting out a fair bit of it, and it's reasonably detailed. I personally plan on getting a club membership next month to start to help out on that, but this month my money's fairly well tied up.--Rosicrucian^Talk 14:51, 23 November 2009 (EST)

If only I could do that. Unfortunately, club membership is rather hard to get where I am. ---Blackout- 15:07, 23 November 2009 (EST)