DESTINY CALLS - - 000 55

From Lostpedia

This page has been locked Changes can be discussed on the talk page, or you can request unprotection.

You're really pushing it reverting the moves your friendly sysop has done. Having the word 'LOST' in the article title helps get google hits, which is the aim. --skks 09:29, 10 April 2006 (PDT)

Feel free to move every page on the Wiki to "xxx on LOST" then. I think you'll find that impractical and very annoying. -- Lostpedian 09:32, 10 April 2006 (PDT)

Look, professor, there's a very simple reason we don't have a manual of style, we haven't had a real need of one. We have done really well without one because we trust people to have common sense. Whenever they see the link is red, they either experiment or leave it for someone else to do it. And quite frankly, you're the only one picky enough to be bothered by the LOST word in the title. So we may or may not have a manual of style, well, there are other parts of the site you can work on, don't obsess with it, Cerebro. Play well with others, remember that, Grumpy Dwarf. †††GodEmperorOfHell††† --07:50, 21 April 2006 (PDT)

It seems to me that it's only you who constantly differentiates the sysops from everyone else. You sound like we're the 'big brother' and you're the only person with free will in this wiki. I'm not talking about what you say in your manual of style. It's the general attitude you present more than any other thing, you take it personally if someone reverts your edits and seem to be unwilling to accept that this might happen. This is the main problem here, you can't seem to be accept that what you're doing is disruptive more than helpful. You can take this like i'm abusing my sysop powers and oppressing your rights as a person - like you have before, or you can skip the paranoia and think about why am I saying what I'm saying. --skks 08:06, 21 April 2006 (PDT)

The real objection is our not wanting to have iron clad regulations, we 've been successful because of that, the way things work and have worked so far is more free and relaxed, this month we have had a plethora of new users who are just interested in hitting the edit tab without any regard for style or whatsnot, of course there are going to be vandals and spammers, but to root them out is a sysop's work, maybe New User's edits are crude and misspelled, but Veteran user will clean it, link it and categorize it, IMHO putting all kinds of regulatory styles will make new users not want to try. New users are the greatest assets we will ever have and with Sawyer as my witness I say; let them come and let them goof it up. Go and work a litle in other parts of the wiki, I beg you, leave this matter rest for a while, It's teh weekend, for JJ Abrams' sake,

You Brainy Smurf.

†††GodEmperorOfHell††† --08:10, 21 April 2006 (PDT)

You say you don't mind that some of your moves or edits get reverted - and still you've made a habit of doing exactly the same moves and edits again and again and again, without any discussion. You try and hammer your opinions through obviously hoping that the person who spotted them the last time won't when you do it the nth time. This was the reason you got banned last week, you just didn't listen and it really seems like you still don't. --skks 10:24, 21 April 2006 (PDT)

"but Veteran user will clean it, link it and categorize it" - that's exactly what I am trying to do. As a Veteran user, I am perfectly willing to help clean up... but the problem comes when multiple Veteran users have a different idea about how pages should be named (with "Lost" or without, Upper or lowercase, etc). I've put together some guidelines, which I am willing to discuss. Unfortunately, your actions in moving/deleting/blocking are completely opposite that - you enforce your idea, which leads to conflict. -- Lostpedian 12:14, 21 April 2006 (PDT)

Nobody here is saying that your guidelines won't be accepted. Many of us have full-time jobs and have not yet had a chance to go through them, add our own opinions, and come to a consensus about what will be in the official guidelines. The main problem here is your approach in this matter. By adding this page to the project namespace and calling it a guideline, it gives the impression that this is already an official policy. Your selection of "Lostpedian" as your username could also give other users the impression that you run this wiki, which is not the case. Continuing to revert the move of this page further hurts your cause. While we appreciate your efforts to make Lostpedia a better wiki, if you continue to revert moves by sysops and unilaterally create policy, your ban could become more permanent. Please settle down and give this issue some time for resolution. That's all we ask.
   Jabberwock    talk    contribs    email   - 13:06, 21 April 2006 (PDT)

I'm confused, didn't you just now call it a guideline? I get the impression that you come from Wikipedia, where distinctions about what is "official" policy/guideline/proposal have been known to cause many fights. I did not call that page anything, all I did was list some ideas down. Your threats to make a permanent ban is precisely the elitism I have warned Admin about... I am working here voluntarily, just like you. I am not damaging anything except your ego. I do not deserve to be blocked or banned, but you may not deserve to be an admin with the disrespectful attitude that you're showing. -- Lostpedian 13:49, 21 April 2006 (PDT)

I'm sorry you feel this way. I have responded to your posts in a respectful manner. I did not make any threats against you, but did warn that if you continued to undo the moves to this page that it could result in a permenant ban. This is not a decision I would make on my own. Respect is something to be earned. I respect my fellow sysops, and most others in this community. Your disparaging remarks towards others in this community do nothing to earn you any respect. In regards to calling this a guideline, I have in fact used this word before. Getting into an argument over the semantics of my comments doesn't win you any points either. Please give people a chance to review this proposed article. After some time, review, and consensus, it could easily be turned into an official guideline or policy and moved to an appropriate article name.
   Jabberwock    talk    contribs    email   - 14:17, 21 April 2006 (PDT)

Try adding some real content...

...instead of complaining. I reverted your edit on the manual of style because netiquette is part of style and is a quality that you seriously lack. Seriously, go and turn on your DVD player and spot some details that we have missed or add entries for background characters. Don't move pages based on your internal logic alone and leave he manual of style as it is, a colaborative effort and certainly not your brainchild. And don't go to Admin crying bias, that's childish. †††GodEmperorOfHell††† --07:21, 24 April 2006 (PDT)