Hello. As per Topic:Xyoydjifr48gfru2, because you didn't reply in nine days, we've quietly removed your mod hat. This is not punitive and does not bar you from getting the mod hat back later; we're simply cleaning up the control lists.
User talk:Derivative
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.
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.
@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak
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.
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
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.
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?
Already merged.
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.
Thanks!
@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak @Robkelk
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.
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.)
Rob
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.
Hello!
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. 😀