User talk:Jenburton

Vandalisation?
I have two questions considering all of this.

1: How can it be vandalisation if a guy removes what he has made, it is his creation and he is free to do as he please?

2: How come you wikia admins all of a sudden pop up around here after having done nothing for YEARS?

The Emperor Zelos 05:15, May 31, 2012 (UTC)

Manners, Zelos, and watch the tone. kyām dēkәr 06:47, May 31, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, considering it's his page and he no longer wants the content on here why should he not be free to delete it? pá mamūnám ontā́ bán 07:46, May 31, 2012 (UTC)

Well if this is about the message on my Gastish page, I never deleted, or at least intended to delete anything. Now I am very tempted to remove it =) OlykoekSlayer 23:15, May 31, 2012 (UTC)


 * All contributions made to Wikia are done so under the terms of the CC-BY-SA license the terms of which state, in part, "...all users contributing to Wikia projects agree to grant broad permissions to the general public to re-distribute and re-use their contributions freely for any purpose including commercial use. Such use is allowed where attribution is given and the same freedom to re-use and re-distribute applies to any derivative works. By editing Wikia, you agree to license any text you add under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike License 3.0 (Unported)." Because you've contributed to Wikia and have, in doing so, granted us the permission to display the content you've created here removing content because you're moving to another host it is considered vandalism. Jen Burton (help forum | blog) 18:34, June 1, 2012 (UTC)
 * The code for the page is available in its history so if anyone should want it they can go there. Deleting the content doesn't wipe it from existence. Flag of Kihāmát (1957-).png pá mamūnám ontā́ bán 19:33, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

Are you fucking kidding me? If the pages remain here but are inactive then it's only fair to allow a link to an active and more current article. You're being ridiculous. pá mamūnám ontā́ bán 19:29, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I understand if other users are allowed to redistribute and reuse any submitted information, but is that really good when the work is fallacious and/or out of date? Also, I am impressed how you manage to find wikis like this with relatively quick speed. OlykoekSlayer 01:11, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

That is not vandalism under any sense of the word.

Noun
vandalism (countable and uncountable; plural vandalisms)

Willful damage or destruction of any property with no other purpose than damage or destruction of said property.

Considering NOTHING here is done to WILLFULLY damage ANYTHING but rather show where BETTER things are, aka a SOURCE, it is NOT vandalism.

But I must say Jen, thank you for showing the true nature of wikia. You have done splendid and this is all recorded. The Emperor Zelos 14:37, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

Hear, hear! pá mamūnám ontā́ bán 15:51, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

For how long will it remain recorded Zelos, for how long...? kyām dēkәr 16:05, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

Unless Wikia deletes it all, forever The Emperor Zelos 16:58, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

New admin
I've been made an admin, I'll be taking control of this wiki from now on. I do not intend for this wiki to grind to a halt but I also do not want to completely deny the existence of the new wiki. Please respect the fact that some people have grown displeased with Wikia as a wiki and now even more so with the staff. Now, is there anything on the wiki that you'd like to complain about? Also, in future if you want to change any such things, please inform me beforehand. pá mamūnám ontā́ bán 17:56, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

He doesn't need to inform you since he outranks you Wattman 21:28, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

She doesn't need to but considering that she is not actually involved in the wiki it would only be curtious.  Pá mamūnám ontā́ bán  21:36, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate that this probably isn't top of your list of priorities but I would also appreciate at least a little recognition of what I said, Jen.  Pá mamūnám ontā́ bán  22:04, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

Rebellion against the move
I'm part of the rebellion against the move - the leader of it is Rostov-na-don, unrightfully banned and had his blog deleted when he had suggested the election of new admins.

Please, visit his blog on a different wiki where we have started voting (http://rostov-na-don.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:Rostov-na-don/Usurpation_and_Adminship_Votes)

Sincerely, Wattman21:23, June 4, 2012 (UTC) Also, if I get banned due to posting this, avenge me :-D

I'm not going to ban you (unless you start vandalising, which this plainly isn't).  Pá mamūnám ontā́ bán  21:34, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

Zel banned Ros for a month for doing the exact same thing - talk 'bout justice and equality.

Wattman 21:37, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

But I'm not Zelos.  Pá mamūnám ontā́ bán  21:43, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

But it was him who appointed you, and I'm loyal to my own kindred Wattman 21:44, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

It was, but then again only admins can appoint other admins. I haven't done anything disruptive here.  Pá mamūnám ontā́ bán  21:47, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but he himself appointed you, without prior consensus from the userbase - had it been Timemaster, I wouldn't've been as predjudiced as I am now :) Wattman 21:50, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

TimeMaster is no longer active on this wiki though, as far as I can tell. Please don't transfer your grudge towards Zelos onto me unduly.  Pá mamūnám ontā́ bán  21:53, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

That's not a grudge - this is! And, let's not spam Jen's page here, Jen's such a nice fellow Rostov-na-don ist dein herr Oberst! 21:56, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

Compliments and Thanks
Jen, you're an awesome guy/gal. Thanks for propagating democracy - Rostov-na-don ist dein herr Oberst! 22:22, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

If you look at the picture, you'll find her a girl. Heuchler. kyām dēkәr 22:29, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

I have obstructed eyesight, so I can't really tell. Rostov-na-don ist dein herr Oberst! 12:21, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

Adoption of the Wiki
Is it possible under special circumstances? I mean, the current admins are propagating a brain-drain of the wiki, which I believe is fundamentally wrong.

If I can gather a large enough tally count, we could push for the appointment of (a) new administrator(s) which would be appointed by the community, and will hopefully sanate the damage already done.

Best regards - Rostov-na-don ist dein herr Oberst! 12:21, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

The current administrator, MOB, is not propagating a brain-drain of this wiki, but offering an alternative. The most active senior member with nothing else in his mind than the best for the wiki, MOB, was indeed appointed by the former administrator, but has the support of several users.

As far as I can tell, no damage what so ever has been done to the wiki, but it has rather been left alone, kept from vandalism. I did however begin a reform in the uttermost sincerity, with no apparent "damage". Thus, any overtaking from Wikia, with due respect, would be unethical, biased and foremost against the Wikia policy.

The best regards, despite circumstances, kyām dēkәr 12:52, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

How is moving not a braindrain? It is leeching users off into somewhere else, advertised as better and less opressive, which is the exact definition of brain drainage.

Damage has been done - activity ground to a halt (even though it wasn't brilliant before), people being redirected to a less active and less stabile server, that has a warning for files over 32kb...

I could not really say much more, as it is obvious from the activity logs. Rostov-na-don ist dein herr Oberst! 13:52, June 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * Rostov-na-don - I appreciate your passion for this wiki, but as mentioned previously, we won't be adding new admins to this community at this time. MOB has been given admin rights and there is no indication at this time that they are incapable of fulfilling the duties required of an admin on a wiki. If there comes a time when there is staff intervention needed regarding this wiki's leadership, I'll post a blog post asking the community to both nominate and vote for perspective admins. Jen Burton (help forum | blog) 17:34, June 5, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not suggesting adding a new administrator, I'm suggesting removing Emperor Zelos' administratorship due to his numerous ToU violations (for which I have contacted Wikia staff before, but with no responce), and appointing someone else in his stead. Rostov-na-don ist dein herr Oberst! 18:09, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

I have started a new vote, as you have said. 16:18, August 21, 2012 (UTC) ~)  The Elector, Darkness Immaculate 

Voting is Closed
As per title, voting is closed. If I need contact you by way of Special:ContactWikia, say. 11:32, September 15, 2012 (UTC) ~)  The Elector, Darkness Immaculate 

Thank you! One more thing - as I might not be able to run the wiki all by myself, could you also grant bureaucrat rights? 20:46, September 17, 2012 (UTC) ~)  The Elector, Darkness Immaculate 

Waahlis
Do you mind telling me why Waahlis is blocked? And I think that you have made an error in judgement giving Elector Dark aka Rostov-na-Don admin rights.  Pá mamūnám ontā́ bán  19:52, September 18, 2012 (UTC)

The official reason for blocking User:Waahlis was his repetitive linking to the fork even after warning, and my promotion is due to a popular vote. 19:58, September 18, 2012 (UTC) ~)  The Elector, Darkness Immaculate 

But it wasn't repetitive, he didn't even get a warning. You got a net total of +1 (since you didn't count Waahlis' con vote) and for what it's worth I would have voted against you too giving you a grand total of 0. In any case I want to hear from Jenburton.  Pá mamūnám ontā́ bán  20:31, September 18, 2012 (UTC)

User:Waahlis himself withdrew the con-vote, as you would've seen if you had read the blog more closely. He instead opted for nominating himself. As for repetitive, it's as memory serves. He did get a warning a month ago, and the actual reason can be found in the logs. 20:35, September 18, 2012 (UTC) ~)  The Elector, Darkness Immaculate