FANDOM


 
Line 5: Line 5:
 
Yes you can. If you weren't sure what exactly he was referring to because it wasn't made explicitly clear, then asking for clarification is always an option. "Hey, when you say "quotes section", what are you proposing to add specifically? Are you talking about the quotes at the top of the articles?" Communication issue solved.
 
Yes you can. If you weren't sure what exactly he was referring to because it wasn't made explicitly clear, then asking for clarification is always an option. "Hey, when you say "quotes section", what are you proposing to add specifically? Are you talking about the quotes at the top of the articles?" Communication issue solved.
   
And even then, though you had no idea that he was asking about adding separate sections, that should have become abundantly clear when he added the first one to Zodd's article less than two weeks after communicating with you. Those quotes sections were there for 2 months. Did you not know that they had been added over that time? I knew they were there, and SRicher knew they were there, because we made amendments to them. It's not good that it took you over two months to see this and start removing them, because in that time, Ubik had added quotes to several articles. Going to the recent wiki history and checking edits from users you have recently given permission to do/not do something, just to make sure that everything is okay, might work. (I check the recent wiki history every day because I have no life - erm, for vandalism. And to look over specific users' edits, who have a history of bad grammar/buggy image contributions, and change what they've amended.) But I doubt you have time to do that, because unlike me, you have commitments to other wikias, which I completely understand.
+
And even then, though you had no idea that he was asking about adding separate sections, that should have become abundantly clear when he added the first one to Zodd's article less than two weeks after communicating with you. Those quotes sections were there for 2 months. Did you not know that they had been added over that time? I knew they were there, and SRicher knew they were there, because we made amendments to them. It's not good that it took you over two months to see this and start removing them, because in that time, Ubik had added quotes to several articles. Going to the recent wiki history and checking edits from users you have recently given permission to do/not do something, just to make sure that everything is okay, might work. But I doubt you have time to do that, because unlike me, you have commitments to other wikias, which I completely understand.
   
 
My proposal to stop things like this happening in the future: I could message you on your wall and direct your attention to an article when a user has followed through with whatever they have communicated with you about for the first time, to see if what they're doing is alright with you. Would that be okay?
 
My proposal to stop things like this happening in the future: I could message you on your wall and direct your attention to an article when a user has followed through with whatever they have communicated with you about for the first time, to see if what they're doing is alright with you. Would that be okay?

Latest revision as of 13:22, October 22, 2016

Eckilsax wrote:
I did make it perfectly clear to him, based on the way he presented his question.


But I can't help it when something isn't made explicitly clear.


Yes you can. If you weren't sure what exactly he was referring to because it wasn't made explicitly clear, then asking for clarification is always an option. "Hey, when you say "quotes section", what are you proposing to add specifically? Are you talking about the quotes at the top of the articles?" Communication issue solved.

And even then, though you had no idea that he was asking about adding separate sections, that should have become abundantly clear when he added the first one to Zodd's article less than two weeks after communicating with you. Those quotes sections were there for 2 months. Did you not know that they had been added over that time? I knew they were there, and SRicher knew they were there, because we made amendments to them. It's not good that it took you over two months to see this and start removing them, because in that time, Ubik had added quotes to several articles. Going to the recent wiki history and checking edits from users you have recently given permission to do/not do something, just to make sure that everything is okay, might work. But I doubt you have time to do that, because unlike me, you have commitments to other wikias, which I completely understand.

My proposal to stop things like this happening in the future: I could message you on your wall and direct your attention to an article when a user has followed through with whatever they have communicated with you about for the first time, to see if what they're doing is alright with you. Would that be okay?

Eckilsax wrote:
As for Griffith, I can't involve myself if I don't know the discussion is taking place.


Hmm. Then you weren't active on the wikia when that took place? I'll post on your wall when discussions like that happen in the future. Again, though, Rec was reorganising Griffith's and Judeau's pages for at least a month. You didn't involve yourself in that situation until Frac reverted Rec's organisational pages without consulting - probably because he didn't know that Besty had permitted that. Those organisational changes had been there for a long time. Rec was on the recent wikia activity for ages, and at any point during that time you could have contacted him about his changes. Were you not so active in September? (Again, I understand if so.)

Eckilsax wrote:
Edit wars happen from time to time


Right. And in that case it shouldn't have happened, since it was a direct result of lack of communication.  It was completely preventable and you and I were not good enough in that situation. Saying that they just "happen from time to time" and leaving it at that completely waives the admins of all responsibility in trying to prevent them from occuring in the first place.

Eckilsax wrote:
But anyway, I hope you don't think I'm being dismissive of this matter. I take everything into account and for future instances, we all need to be more thorough in how we explain things. His work won't be entirely wasted though, I'll incorporate quotes he made sections for as intro quotes for pages that don't have one. :)


Aside from your comment about the edit wars, I don't think you were dismissive. I've removed all the quotes sections from the pages he got around to doing. It isn't just a case of being more thorough when we explain things, but asking for clarification from users if what they propose isn't immediately clear, and being involved more in discussions, as well. Hopefully something like this won't happen again in the future. I also don't wish to come across as angry - my typing style can be quite blunt.

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.