User talk:Kizzycocoa/Archive1

From Minecraft Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
This is a reconstructed archive

Due to various account issues and the GDPR data wipe, this archive has been reconstructed from the following url: (Link)

I'm scared of my permaban.

No, but really, at least you used to be able to keep track of my movements. I was a good little editor and signed everything. I might continue. You're doing a piss-poor job of being an admin, Quat. At least Kiddy was being respectful. Yesterday was giving advice to Kiddy. I guess li'l baby-bear went crying to mama-bear.


no, I did not. I banned you, and left to sleep, hoping you'd learn that it's people like you that make our jobs harder. wanting to keep pages for humour, wanting us to be like gods, overwatching every edit, every grammar check, every little detail. and because of people like you, we do get this treatment. user pages vandalised. reputations built. I'm not whining about this at all. but we moderators are not here to be bad guys. we're here for order. and blatantly calling me "kiddy" is unacceptable, even if I were a standard user. even now, tempting me to ban you by continuing your pathetic "joke" of calling me kiddy. --Kizzycocoa 08:20, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Kekeke. Look at the picture, please. Be sure to follow links before replying. I respect you two for doing your job of keeping this a vandal-free environment. Doesn't mean we should produce an oligarchy. Administrators on wiki's fill the role of protection, not governance. --arlnet
anyone can do that. I can do that. there is nothing possible to do other than block anons, which quatro is against. why? so you lot can keep editing and have a good expirience with his wiki. if you want to discuss proxies, I am not the right person to discuss with. --Kizzycocoa 08:28, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


Yous an administrator now.--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 13:36, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

ah, ok then. I guess, for the friday updates and when you're busy playing SMP, I can stand in. and whenever else as well. anything specific you want me to do? --Kizzycocoa 13:38, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Basic Crafting[edit]

Hey, slight notification, you semifailed in your admin. Please check stuff before deleting pages, the users are seperating the current crafting page into two. Read Talk:Crafting. --Arlnet 17:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Edit: Reading back made me sound like an ass just there, but please don't throw your newly-found admin powers around just yet before reading up on things. Zolyx was merging the two pages. You certainly might want to add Crafting and Talk:Crafting to your watchlist.

I specifically sought a resolution with Quatroking directly. he said delete, so I deleted it. I myself felt it needed deletion, but I went to quatro to see what he thought. --Kizzycocoa 17:52, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
You deleted a Work In Progress, assuming it was a final product. Talk:Crafting has made a decision to split Crafting into two pages, one for basic game mechanics and the other for advanced, more specific craftables. You cannot delete a page on the count of "containing duplicate information" without verifying such. It's just poor administration skills, and on a Wiki-based format, proper administration needs to be finely-tuned. The wiki is not supposed to rely on admins for permission, but for assistance in dealing with those causing trouble. I feel this concept, very important to the well-being of a wiki, is being broken here. --Arlnet 15:39, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
well, you did not use the appropriate template. as such, I deleted it.
next time, use the {{wip}} tag. --Kizzycocoa 15:46, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
That only shows horrible administration skills. You can't just scan for "WORK IN PROGRESS KEKEKE". You can look at the History. You could have thrown up a hug blurb on the front saying "EXPLAIN", or write something in the talk article. Please, in the future, avoid deleting articles that have been either created or significantly changed within the past day. Not everyone has access to a list of templates: I don't, and I doubt Zolyx did. "Assume Good Faith": Unless it is blatantly obvious griefing, articles are not made to confuse or cause harm. --Arlnet 15:59, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Edit: Another idea would have been to have looked at the article's author (User:Zolyx) and consulted him on his talk page. He is a good-natured fellow and did not seek to act upon this on his own will: he instead took the up-front action of contacting the rest of the wiki.
hey, I had no idea. I didn't check, as I assume a good wiki page maker will make the page look good, and not leave it. or at least give me a little note, rather than let me blindly fall into this situation.
I am not a horrible moderator. that page was put together poorly, with no sign of further editing taking place. I don't debate how nice people are. I personally welcome the thought that trolls can stop trolling. that pages can be improved. but I have specific orders to be more strict. to distribute perma bans at a much higher volume than I'd like.
for that page, I went to quatro directly. I was unsure to keep it or not. in all fairness, I checked beforehand. I am trying my best to help quatro keep the wiki clean. so please, don't say I'm a horrible moderator. I am just doing my job. if you want a wiki with no moderators, go back to encyclopedia dramatica.
also, a list of templates can be found here: Special:MostLinkedTemplates, which can be found in the special pages page, located at the bottom left of the page. --Kizzycocoa 16:54, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Arlnet, I have yet to find anything on the talk page of crafting that makes me think you guys were planning to split the article. And even if you guys did have such plans posted, I wouldn't accept them due to the fact that its completely unnecessary (page anchors are there for a reason!) anyways.--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 17:54, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
The plot. it thickens.
anyway, yeah. not allowed at all. end of conversation I guess.
on a side note, you stur up a lot of stuff with admins Arlnet, you know that? :\/ --Kizzycocoa 18:36, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
@Quatro: This + its minisection. It wasn't talked about specifically as "Lets split!" but instead as "How should we make sure we don't ruin/spoil the game for new players?". The splitting decision was decided on. Frequently-changing pages such as Crafting should be on your Watchlist. I'm surprised you don't pay more attention to that, actually. Crafting is one of the most edited pages that exist. For an administrator to not pay attention to pages such as this simply shows a dysfunctional system. Watchlists and the "diff" / "hist" buttons exist to help administrators like you and those who improve the Wiki, such as myself.
@Kiddy: Yes, I'm aware. I hope it causes internal "stuff" among the oligarchy here as well. It is important for an administrator to understand the tools available for wikipedic users. History, especially, but also the watch lists. You should also be watching pages such as the main ones, and their talk pages as well.
Also @Kiddy: Might I ask who were you calling a troll above? If you were referring to me, I must dispute this. I do believe the Aspergite page could've stayed somewhere, hidden, for reference but not actual use. Cars was a funny article, and I don't see how it was trollish at all. I thought it was blatantly obvious -- everything about it was as faulty as could be, and to think such a detailed article doesn't exist for most valid content after a full week of use. Other than that, I try to help the Minecraft wiki become a useful tool to help those who need it. That belief includes disabling the requirement of relying on administrators to make decisions and, instead, letting the wiki be defined and governed by those who use it. I don't believe users should have to ask a single entity to dictate what can and cannot be added to the Wiki.
As for my closing point, to tie back to the reason this started at all, Crafting needs to either have a large and well-visible header/spoiler-warning or a separation at some point, so users know that they're going to have the rest of the game laid out in front of them. Please discuss! --Arlnet 21:45, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Edit: Gah, I hate that I keep missing things. @Kiddy, do please keep in mind that not all wiki editors are "good editors". Of course it's a Wikipedia concept, but all editors, even "Non-Vested Contributers", work to make the site better. Please don't assume everyone who edits these pages is a professional or is fully aware of the tools available and formatting structures.