January 25, 2020

🐔 Knight Challenge #2 🐔

The next set of Challenges takes flight!
From writing, to research, to images, find your preferred way to contribute with our second theme: Birds!

Latest Announcements

Zelda Wiki talk:Staff/Archive 1

From Zelda Wiki, the Zelda encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Have you ever wanted to ban someone so badly that you gave them an advance notice, just to terrorize them? :P It's really hard to resist, but I know that I am supposed to be a responsible MOD. So responsible I shall be.


Your Loyal Zelda Fan,

Wielder of the Sword

Spelling error

Since the page is protected, I can't fix it myself. So would a sysop please change "privilaged" to "privileged"? Thanks. Heimstern Läufer 23:40, 17 September 2007 (EDT)

Question

Why is EA listed as an active sysop? I'm not sure being his being on the chatroom a lot counts. He has made a grand total of 16 edits, with one being automatically patrolled. He has deleted only 12 pages. He made only one user block. I'm not trying to be mean to him or anything. It just is not fair to the rest of the Wiki to list him as active.User:Matt/sig 05:07, July 8, 2008 (UTC)

EA is here, he just doesn't edit. In act, he is more of a handyman for blocking and stuff, cbut you have to consider he's doing coding on AZ right now, so he really doesn't have time. Seablue 01:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I know EA is here. But he is not actually active on the Wiki. From his contributions, patrol logs, delete logs, and block logs, he has never been active on the wiki for any significant length of time. Of course, he is on call in the chatroom a lot. But that still does not count as active. Perhaps we should put him under another heading. A heading more appropriate for what he actually does. It seems strange to have a single subheading under a heading anyway.User:Matt/sig 01:49, July 14, 2008 (UTC)
Uh
Quote1.png coding on AZ right now Quote2.png
— Me

He doesn't have the time to do it. Seablue 11:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Whoa!

We just lost 2 sysops? well, I better fax my resume (just kidding ;)) Seablue 01:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

They were no longer part of the wiki. So their accounts were reverted back to being normal.User:Matt/sig 01:49, July 14, 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I know. Like I said, you and I better fax our resumes. (Just kidding again ;)) Seablue 11:32, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Nathan No-min

If anyone would look at the logs, you would see that Jason changed Nathan to a Norm. Therefore, I think a change in the page is needed. User:Austin/sig 19:00, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Noted and updated. --Fury Three 20:26, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Colors

Matt was thinking about adding colors to the page so it can be easy to indentify who's who, correct? If so, then I suppose: Admins are red, Patrolers and purple, and Autopatrols are green. (The colors can be changed.)User:Austin/sig 04:43, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

The Space

I am sure Matt is aware that there is a huge space between the first header, and the userbox. This is because the box is too big, and cannot fit inbetween the Help Template/box. But, if you simply change the font from 95% to somewhere to 75%, the box will shrink. The text is still clearly legible at the area around 75%. This will kill the space which makes the page look ugly. User:Austin/sig 13:17, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually no. The page looks fine. I have no idea what you are referring to.User:Matt/sig 18:53, April 8, 2009 (UTC)
I see the space. But it isn't anything to worry about. It is very small actually.User:Mandi/sig 18:57, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

It must be me then.User:Austin/sig 19:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Nope. None of us are seeing that. It is most likely because you are using Internet Explorer. Switch to Firefox. It is better. You won't have that huge space.User:Mandi/sig 19:21, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
I just tested it (in Chrome) and found that it is only there when you "restore" the browser window because it doesn't have enough space to fit everything. Just maximize your window and it should be fine. Triforce (T C) 19:48, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

That is a browser side problem. There is nothing that can be done on the wiki about it.User:Matt/sig 20:00, April 8, 2009 (UTC)

Admin Webmasters

I removed the references to Matt and Steve being Webmasters of "The Triforce" because the link leads to a dead forum, and thus seems quite irrelevant and unnecessary. (Xizor 06:10, 24 September 2009 (UTC) Edit: Also, it is set up that only Bureaucrats are listed as Webmasters of another website. If The Triforce were to become a Mastermind, then this would not be an issue.) --Xizor 06:02, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I am supportive of your actions. User:Melchizedek/sig 08:40, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I am not. It's supposed to be factual information. Not biased and twisted to suit the desires of the crats. It's not a dead forum, it's unreleased to the public. just been working on the skin for ages. And there's nothing saying that only bureaucrats can be webmasters of another site. It is that bureaucrats must be a webmaster of another site.User:Matt/sig 17:22, September 24, 2009 (UTC)
Yumil gets his information about being a former webmaster of Zelda Relic, a true dead site. And since there's that and nothing saying admins can't be webmasters, there is no valid reason to remove the information. Edit reverted. Personal whims are not good enough to enact non-existent rules. I learned that the hard way last year here.User:Matt/sig 17:37, September 24, 2009 (UTC)

Firs and foremost, two on one with this issue means that as soon as I'm done writing this, I'm doing a rollback. Secondly, the fact that your website is unreleased makes me ask why you are advertising it. It is, right now, dead, and furthermore, NO OTHER ADMIN IS LISTED AS A WEBMASTER OF ANYTHING, and if some of them are, then they aren't parading it around; nobody said you couldn't be a Webmaster, but your site is neither noteworthy nor active. Thirdly, Zelda Relic, while inactive/dead, is noteworthy because it is a former Mastermind of this Wiki. It was not a personal whim. I think that you including it is a biased, personal decision, and the fact that you're reacting as hotly as you are suggests you are not looking at this objectively, but rather as an unfair attack on you/your website. If Mandi did the SAME EXACT THING, I'd remove it too. If any other admin said they were a webmaster of an unreleased/inactive/not noteworthy site, I'd remove it too. I mean, no offense, but just a forum on a free host does not qualify as much of a "Website" and you're really not much of a "Webmaster" as you are a menial administrator. I advise that rather than engage with me in an edit war, you respect my decision and talk with me on Skype or some other neutral location/forum, and we discuss this with the group at large. Thanks. --Xizor 19:56, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

This is not about what defines what a website is. It has it's own url on a subdomain of larger service. Just like Zeldapedia is on a subdomain of Wikia. It's our site and it's notable enough to be here, though not enough to have it's own page here yet. I ask you to please keep your personal dislike of freely hosted forums/sites away from the wiki. User:Matt/sig 20:14, September 24, 2009 (UTC)
I removed the link and just made it plain text. I think that should be an acceptable compromise. Shows that it isn't and never was advertising. If it was intended as advertising we would have got some members from it. :PUser:Matt/sig 20:36, September 24, 2009 (UTC)
Actually, a few things: First, it never had to do with my dislike of freely hosted sites, it has to do with the irrelevancy of linking to a dead site. The subdomain is not so much the issue that it's a FORUM and it's INACTIVE. Stop making everything so damn personal, because it's not. Secondly, I fail to see the need to have posted this when on Skype I dropped the issue and told you to do whatever you want, and instead of just changing it (as you did) you had to also edit this page. And for the record, if an ad fails, it's still an ad. ;) I'm dropping this issue unless someone else thinks it's not acceptable. --Xizor 01:46, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Because skype is not publicly available for all to see, and it would have looked bad if I changed it without talking about it. No need to be so rude about it.User:Matt/sig 03:06, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
It doesn't link anymore, so stop complaining about stuff that is not worth starting arguments about. It's not worth it. Next time, please ask before doing something drastic like that.User:Matt/sig 03:08, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

Then next time just say, "I'm changing it back cause we decided that on Skype." and leave it at that. Don't include all the lecturing/condescending crap. In fact, leave it out entirely in the future with anything you write, cause it just annoys me. Like: "so stop complaining about stuff that is not worth starting arguments about" is about the most unhelpful, rude, condescending thing to say. You make these things drastic in the first place by being over the top upset and hostile about it, and you make it personal. I think you'd find that people would not want to argue with you if you as much if you weren't so confrontational and hostile about things you don't like. In fact, it just might even improve your general likability. But what do I know, right? ;) I'm not replying to you if you reply to this so save yourself some effort (your hand must need rest) and save everybody else a headache and just don't even reply to this. --Xizor 04:03, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Being rather hypocritical there. Nothing insulting or condescending was implied. It was a simple matter that was best resolved by talking it out first. Yet you chose to just do it despite what others might have thought of it. That's not how things work here. There's a process that has to be followed in order to have things resolved in timely manner without anything messy going down.User:Matt/sig 04:41, September 25, 2009 (UTC)