Everything she's posted in the last day, except for the main text of Miss Fisher's Murder Mysteries and two tropes on that page, has been word-for-word copies from the Miss Fisher page at TV Tropes. I've given her a 3-day temp ban and left a note on her talk page, but we can prevent further potential legal problems if we doublecheck anything she puts into the moderation queue.
Please don't rubberstamp Hepzibah's contributions
Noted. I approved because the article wasn't and I made assumptions, the high activity should have warned me.
You deleted Mind Game/YMMV, claiming that it had zero content. It did not have zero content, so I restored it. You deleted it again.
Just because we don't collect examples of Fetish Fuel or Complete Monster on those trope pages does not mean we do not collect examples of those tropes at all.
DO NOT ACT UNILATERALLY. Discuss issues with the other moderators before taking action in cases where there is a difference of opinion.
Edit-warring counts as being disruptive. I acknowledge that "Being disruptive on a one-off basis" is not grounds for a ban, according to All The Tropes:How We Do Bans Around Here.
I am restoring the page again. Do not delete it again without consensus.
I responded to you on the forums. I was on the understanding with Geth that I was allowed to delete all examples of Fetish Fuel, for the reasons why Fetish Fuel was banned in the first place. I'm not understanding the difference between banning examples on FF but then allowing FF examples on work pages, that still allows people to violate All The Tropes:No Lewdness, No Prudishness.
Complete Monster I was on the understanding that we banned examples and told people to go to Doc's fork in order to collect examples of those tropes. However I understand I didn't pass that through Geth, so I'm more understanding of a disagreement arising there.
@Gethn7 does not unilaterally set policy on All The Tropes.
He has in the past temporarily stepped down from moderation because of poor judgment.
Get consensus from all of the moderators, not just one.
While he has indeed had period on not being in moderation, he is still a bureaucrat (which means the current other bureaucrats are of the opinion he is of sound judgement, otherwise you would have removed him so he isn't currently one), and I as a normal administrator, can contact a Bureaucrat and double check that being doing something is not out of line and that I can proceed. Now, getting the opinion of multiple bureaucrats is even better, but I think there is an assumption of bad faith on mine and/or Geth's part; when I was just acting in good faith as a administrator in doing cleanup tasks, if there was a change in policy in FF in my absence, that's fine; but me checking with Geth was to make sure that that hadn't happened.
As far as I was aware, Fetish Fuel was a kill on sight or at least rewrite it not to be depraved if at all possible since we decided not to host examples for it. On those grounds, I believed I was giving sound advice. Unless someone changed our rule on hosting that, then I stand corrected.
I had understood that the same rule that applied to Complete Monster also applied to Fetish Fuel.
If it does not, please explain the inconsistency.
I have to support Rob here. While we removed all the examples from Complete Monster, to my recollection there was never any requirement that we hunt examples on individual work pages down and purge them. Similarly, we have references to individual Troper Tales still scattered about even though we have no Troper Tales section. There is, to the best of my knowledge, no mandate that we hunt down and kill examples from these, Fetish Fuel or any other topic for which we no longer allow examples on its page or in its section.
Fair, but consider those topics were purged because they were a breeding ground for all sorts of messed up depravity, hence the purging, and I would say, if we cannot rewrite it not come off like one-handed editing, then purging all examples is preferred.
I rather fall on the side of consistency: If we removed all examples of something a long time ago for being problem magnets, any remnants should be cleaned or at least rewritten to not come off depraved if the material can be saved.
Preferred by whom?
I remind you of the wiki policy All The Tropes:No Lewdness, No Prudishness, and submit that you are ignoring the "No Prudishness" part of that policy:
Don't gut pages or nominate them for deletion just because they're about sexual topics. Sex exists. It's used in media a lot. You'll just need to cope with that fact. Relationships, fanservice, and sexual activity all fall into their own tropes as a result.
Plus these relics are exactly that -- relics left over from pre-fork content. We have no one trying to revive or recreate these sections, encouraged by the existence of these examples or not. Purging them now because someone in the future might add new examples of the same kind -- examples which we can intercept and prevent the actual inclusion of with the moderation system, I might add -- is exactly the kind of wholesale destruction of centent we left TVT over.
Now that is an argument that makes sense. Fair point, I see the logic.
I should clarify the few I did edit of FF, I did try to rewrite, or re-link to the alts linked in the FF trope page. I only removed those I thought couldn't be edited better.
Back to The Future/Fanfic Recs
You deleted this as a duplicate page. Please restore the page, and them re-delete it with the name of the page it duplicates in the "Other Reason" field so that other people can find the page.
Done. Back to the Future (film)/Fanfic Recs
All of your recent "Duplicate Content" deletions
Please restore the pages, and them re-delete them with the name of the pages they duplicate in the "Other Reason" field so that other people can find the pages.
You've done this repeatedly - it's a waste of your time and mine to point out every example.
A Certain Scientific Railgun/Characters/Railgun Sub Series Protagonists
You deleted this page as duplicate content. The page had a cleanup tag asking that it be merged with A Certain Magical Index/Characters/A Certain Scientific Railgun Sub-Series Protagonists. Did you do that before you deleted the page, or do we need to restore the page so that the merge can take place?
File:Carl Sagan Planetary Society 270.jpg
You deleted this as a duplicate file, but you didn't say what it was a duplicate of. Please restore the file, and them re-delete it with the name of the file it duplicates in the "Other Reason" field so that other people can find the file.
It is a duplicate of the Commons file that I replaced it with on the Carl Sagan page.
File:Carl Sagan Planetary Society cropped.png
@Derivative, can you please not delete pages outright when you recreate them? We want the pre-existing edit histories -- in some cases we may be legally required to maintain them. Instead of wiping out a page and its history, just replace its contents with your new stuff.
I delete and recreate in order to get the boilerplates showing. Disregarding the original one-line Skarsgard article, the other ones I did today were just redirects IIRC, so there isn't much legal requirement to worry about.
It's easy to open a temp page using the Page Creator, and pick the desired boilerplate in it, then copy and paste. Or you can also do what I do, which is keep copies of all the common templates handy in a local directory to copy when I need them.
I should also point out my creation of the new Skarsgard article was based on Wikipedia and contained of the single line TVT article only the same phrase "is a Swedish actor", which also matches exactly with the Wikipedia article. There was zero plagiarism.
Wouldn't keeping them local be a much slower and painstaking process which also doesn't update when the boilerplates are updated?
If there's ever a case of me needing to restoring revisions when I delete and recreate, fine; but I don't think it was needed in this instance.
I have to agree with @Looney Toons here. I have been able to add boilerplate text to existing pages in the past - it isn't such a difficult task that the existing pages need to be deleted.
The only reason I deleted the page to do the boilerplate was that it was literally a one line and was the simplest and fastest method for me to solve the issue of making a bad creator page ATT-quality. The original revision of the page has already been restored by me, in case TVT decides "is a Swedish actor" is somehow worthy of a copyright suit. This was a very case-specific situation.
"can't figure out how to customise outdated perameter"
That template doesn't take arguments - either a page is outdated or it isn't.
(No, I didn't code that template. Blame somebody else for that choice.)
Yeah I was trying to add the reason why it's outdated.
I usually add a Mod note immediately after the template, if it matters.
Post moderation - anti-spam measure
You probably already notice the site message at the top of the page. As a result of the Great Miraheze Spam Flood that affected multiple wikis in December 2020, we have instituted moderation of posts. Most people's edits and image uploads will not appear immediately, the way that they would on Wikipedia... but yours will. This is a privilege (given for consistently good edits and being a Troper in good standing), not a right.
This privilege comes with a responsibility: You also have Moderation rights. Whenever somebody makes an edit that requires moderation, it will appear at Special:Moderation until somebody with Moderation rights either approves or rejects it. Please pitch in when there are posts waiting for moderation. I trust that only spam will be rejected. 😀
Save Complete Monster on Allthetropes.org
Topic left open but deprecated for sake of continuing CM situation.
You've shown here that you were uncertain that the proposal being made by Robkelk was the right call since there were other options we could visit in order to help amend the troubles with this trope. You also said "it's sad that we aren't able to get the users who care about CM so much, to also contribute elsewhere to ATT." I do care about CM a lot, and I have zero intention of seeing it's contents nuked.
So if you could, please give a firm "Nay" vote to the proposal? There are ways we can work things out for the trope without opting to take the most extreme solution (Or as Geth put it "burning down an entire wheat field just because of a few recurrent tares in the wheat.")
When I mentioned the users who care about CM, I'm talking about all of your CM "friends" who seem to be equally as passionate as you, and who seem to be in a constant state of conflict with you on various wikis over the years. Both these IPs and registered users unfortunately don't seem to want to contribute elsewhere, which is saddening personally. Single-issue editors are a thing as rob did correctly point out, but I would have preferred that they contribute more than just edit wars with you. I also have stated before that the CM issue for reasons both in and out of your control, took up nearly all of your ATT time, which didn't help you establish and maintain relations with other users, particular certain admins, which you know who they are.
I think my responses on Example Sectionary state clearly I want my original subpage proposal implemented preferably (especially since it somehow was not after consensus was reached to do it) at least on a trial basis to see if that helps clean up some of the issues, but if consensus decides/changes to that the deletion of CM is the only cause forward; I've got bigger battles to fight.
TL;DR: Subpage or bust. I think that's your last hope, especially since Rob stated that the problems would "go away" if it was implemented, at least to my interpretation.
Also fuck 503's.
I don't really have any such "friends" on this site, though. I went it alone for a long while and now suddenly there's this idea being put fourth that the trope as it is now and has been maintained as for a while now isn't good enough, which, I won't lie, does hurt me quite a bit. I do hope I can make things right with Rob and get him to understand my position. I really want us to be united in maintaining the trope as it is now, with perfectly good and "not overly strict and objective but just strict and objective enough" criteria in place for what characters can and cannot qualify as examples, as opposed to being divided over whether or not all edits should be irrevocable and near lawlessness with a trope like this ought to be encouraged by the precedents set by the users who aren't me.
Rob held off on implementing that because he felt it would be kicking me whilst I was down and had no power to add any input on it. And personally, I still don't agree with it. There is literally nothing wrong with the set-up of the trope, it's examples, and it's subpages as it is right now - the problem is that some users are having trouble grasping that this isn't a purely subjective opinion-based trope, but a subjective trope that's nonetheless ruled by objectively defined criteria that must be adhered to when making new entries (if a character too notably fails to align with the criteria, they have no business being put down as examples.)
And no, the problems would not "go away" if that was implemented. People like that ban evader will always be trying to apply messy edits in order to have things their preferred way.
Friends was my sarcastic way of saying that CM and your previous stewardship has attracted a lot of users who engage in heavy drama with you over it, it wasn't a serious suggestion that they were genuinely your friends.
The status quo doesn't work because it got us to this point, hence why the entire moderation staff are repeating the same shit that we debated last month, only this time some want the entire problem removed like a tumour, I'm merely arguing chemotherapy.
He held off also because he had other wiki priorities to attend to first. Not just to let the dust settle, which seems to have been re-surfaced now.
The problem going away is also the current problem that you have of CM being deleted, if my subpage idea goes through CM stays, if it doesn't; it seems like it is bound to be deleted.
I don't care about how the result goes stay/delete wise, currently CM is a mess that never ends, if the subpage idea doesn't work, i'm happy for it to go; i'm only arguing that we give it one last shot in a different format, like YMMV.
I'm not a hard CM deletion advocate, but I'm not someone who cares about it staying either; I'm giving you a chance at saving it in a way that doesn't get it removed; because it's obvious that Rob and LT are not going to keep CM in the status quo. That's your choice how you deal with it.
Ah, okay. XD
No, what got us to this point was someone's flimsy grasp on how the "rules" for this trope worked and how, despite being subjective, examples are determined only if they objectively fit with the given criteria for being an example of the trope ('cause otherwise people could throw in any old villain, including ones with clear redeeming qualities or sympathetic factors), and that same person unknowingly taking the side of a serial ban evader when said ban evader made wild, personally motivated edits (which included adding and DELETING existing examples as she saw fit) and it was rightfully deemed vandalism by Mark and Geth, which got the ban evader blocked on all three of her sock accounts.
Which is why I will accept your subpage idea over flat out deletion if it does come to that, even if I don't agree with the idea either. It's the lesser of two evils in my book.
You have to understand that your creation of Examples NOT to go here etc etc and almost immediate reverting of examples you deemed wrong has been lasting years on this wiki, and I don't think it made the right impression on other admins; especially when those admins don't know who is right or wrong. Your problem with the Tales of Berseria situation and the need to use the term veto, was what set this all off initially, they don't like the concept of one admin have control over an entire trope/subpage.
I'd be willing to work that out with the other admins were they only to approach me about it. I only did those things to keep the trope from backsliding into the mess of chaos it was when it was first ported, where examples like Peter Griffin, Mr. Krabs, Eric Cartman, you name it were still seen listed as examples even when they do not match up with the criteria. Believe me, I don't WANT to have control over the entire trope. I want us to all start managing it better and recognizing that what controls which characters do and do not get listed as examples is THE CRITERIA. I cannot stress enough how it important it is to weigh things by that rather than by personal taste and opinion like your average subjective trope.
I am opposed to nuking the page and deleting all examples as well. It would only anger people who come here expecting something different from TvTropes. I just think we should have a set of rules determining how a character does (or does not) qualify as a Complete Monster, so that we know how to proceed.
Who said anything about nuking the page?
Either somebody is confused, or somebody is spreading misinformation.
The discussion is being held here where everybody can see it, not on a random mod's Talk page out of sight of other users.
The "nuke" talk has been going around based on your proposal. Looney Toons and Mark D. Gordon seemed to be confused on that too.
I'm not at all confused. You and other other obsessed Complete Monster wonks have turned it into something so toxic that I'd rather see the whole thing burnt to the ground than have it poison the rest of the wiki, and good riddance to it.
That's a little extreme and overly harsh, don't you think?
Not at all. It's approaching Fetish Fuel levels of toxic, in fact, and I would rather amputate the limb than have the wiki die from the gangrene.
The wiki is not going to die because one trope attracted one ban evader. Otherwise, the trope will only be toxic if we choose to make it toxic rather than compromise on how to manage it best. Which I thought we did before that ban evader's accounts getting blocked and her edits getting reversed triggered Robkelk into wanting to raze the whole garden just to get rid of some weeds.
Rob isn't wanting to raze the garden -- he wants to apply carefully distributed herbicide. Me? After getting my attention pulled unwillingly into this whole clusterfsck, I want to raze the garden -- pull Complete Monster out of the wiki stem and root, lock away anything that looks like it, and evict the autistic wonks who use it as a dick-measuring-by-proxy contest ("My villain's biggest!" "No! Mine is!"). I've not formally suggested this, but the longer this goes on, the closer I get to doing so.
And given my history with TV Tropes and All The Tropes, consider what it has to have taken to bring me to that point.
OK, you need to take some time off from this site. You are clearly very emotionally distraught, hyperbolic, and confrontational about what has gone down in regards to this trope. And talking about evicting people and using autism as an insult is absolutely out of line. Please, for your sake and all of ours, back away from this site and calm down.
Responding to LT in that way isn't going to calm him down, if anything the opposite.
If you're going to have a spat, please do it off my talk page so I don't get an email notif every time.
Sorry, LK, I lost track of the fact that this thread was on your talk page.
There's god knows how many different threads about this at this point, a decent few were started by Doc.
Also you might want to note he's talking about you on Geth's talk page.
This thread is pretty much dead now, if that helps.
I'm done attempting to reason with LT. I can only hope he takes my advice.
I'm sure some people could say the same in your direction. Swings and roundabouts.
Also if using autism as an insult was banned here, we're all fucked.
Some people want the problem to go away permanently. I guess we will have to wait until the vote either way.
You can consider this talk resolved now. We've no further use to keep it around or keep.it going.
I appreciate the gesture, but I would prefer the flow extension resolving of topics on my talk page to be left to me on principle. Just a personal space thing, nothing deeper.
The thing is...we DO have that set of rules. Right here: https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Complete_Monster/Criteria
The problem we're facing now is that some users have confused how other users dealt with three user accounts that turned out to be sock accounts for a single serial ban evader who was legitimately messing up subpages by adding and removing examples to their heart's content without regard to the criteria for being unfairness in regards to edits that can or cannot be made by regular tropers.
Lily might want to introduce herself, being a very new visitor here.
I recall her from TV Tropes and other websites. Thankfully she's not that ban evader, and her input can be welcomed and trusted.
I would really prefer if she introduced herself and to the rest of the ATT staff. How do we know she is not that ban evader and she is to be trusted?
Again, I've seen her activity and even interacted with her on other websites. And yeah, we'll have to wait for her to introduce herself properly.
That's all well and good if she is even that user she is claiming to be, and not impersonating Lily.
I think an IP check would have to be done to confirm that.