65,003
edits
Halopedia:Requests for adminship/CommanderTony: Difference between revisions
Halopedia:Requests for adminship/CommanderTony (view source)
Revision as of 11:26, May 6, 2024
, 1 month agoText replacement - "<br ?\/>" to "<br>"
m (Text replacement - "== ([^=])" to "== $1") |
m (Text replacement - "<br ?\/>" to "<br>") |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| colspan="2" style="background: white; padding: 0px 5px; text-align: center;" | | | colspan="2" style="background: white; padding: 0px 5px; text-align: center;" | | ||
'''Request for adminship: [[User:CommanderTony|CommanderTony]]<br | '''Request for adminship: [[User:CommanderTony|CommanderTony]]<br>Submitted: September 10, 2007, by [[User:Phil.e.|Phil.e.]]<br>Closed: January 5, 2008, by [[User:Manticore|Manticore]]<br>Result: Passed''' | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
<!--Nominator, please nominate this user for administratorship here.--> | <!--Nominator, please nominate this user for administratorship here.--> | ||
I, [[User:Phil.e.|Phil.e.]], nominate [[User:CommanderTony|CommanderTony]] for adminship of Halopedia. | I, [[User:Phil.e.|Phil.e.]], nominate [[User:CommanderTony|CommanderTony]] for adminship of Halopedia. | ||
<br | <br>''Nominee, please accept or defer the above nomination below this line.'' | ||
'''I, [[User:CommanderTony|CommanderTony]], gladly accept this nomination for administratorship.''' | '''I, [[User:CommanderTony|CommanderTony]], gladly accept this nomination for administratorship.''' | ||
| Line 117: | Line 117: | ||
**'''Jolly W. Roberts''' | **'''Jolly W. Roberts''' | ||
<br | <br>{{quote|Because I've asked them what they do with their adminship. Not one of the things Tony plans to do if elected came up.|Rawr}} | ||
<br | <br>Well how should I know what they do. And if I am elected, i'll gladly do as i'm told and needed to do by the "Senior" admins.File:UNSCoH_Dingo_without_letters.PNG|30px]]UoH/D Company|<font color="silver"><b>Colonel]]</b></font> [[User:CommanderTony|<b><font color="crimson">Tony</font>]]</b><sup>[[User Talk:CommanderTony|<b><font color="black">Talk]]</font></b></sup> 9/14/2007 | ||
That's doesn't means I hated you, CT, I just think you might want to improve Halopedia by other means, like setting up policies. [[User:Master Chief Petty Officer|'''ΜΆŜΤΈŖČΗέÏΣΡΈΤΤΥОΓΓïČëŗ''']] 13:18, 15 September 2007 (UTC) | That's doesn't means I hated you, CT, I just think you might want to improve Halopedia by other means, like setting up policies. [[User:Master Chief Petty Officer|'''ΜΆŜΤΈŖČΗέÏΣΡΈΤΤΥОΓΓïČëŗ''']] 13:18, 15 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
| Line 129: | Line 129: | ||
::Another important thing to consider is that Administrators are not the editors, owners, or god-kings of Halopedia. Content on articles is intended to be added and edited by users, and it is not possible for the admins to view and edit every single contribution, particularly when we have a much smaller community to maintain the wiki. It is just as much your job as a contributor as it is mine to see that speculation, poor grammar, and unverified nonsense (which I agree is annoying and demeaning to the wiki) are kept out. --<b>[[User:ED|<font color="black">E</font>]][[User talk:ED|<font color="black">D</font>]]File:ArmyROTC.gif|15px]]</b> 18:48, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | ::Another important thing to consider is that Administrators are not the editors, owners, or god-kings of Halopedia. Content on articles is intended to be added and edited by users, and it is not possible for the admins to view and edit every single contribution, particularly when we have a much smaller community to maintain the wiki. It is just as much your job as a contributor as it is mine to see that speculation, poor grammar, and unverified nonsense (which I agree is annoying and demeaning to the wiki) are kept out. --<b>[[User:ED|<font color="black">E</font>]][[User talk:ED|<font color="black">D</font>]]File:ArmyROTC.gif|15px]]</b> 18:48, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
:::AncientAnubis has a point. That elephant type article seems totally irrelevant to me. But if you want articles that have ANYTHING TO DO WITH HALO, I might as well make a Plasma bolt article right now. And I should also make a new article for every color of plasma bolts. I should also make an article for the wheel on a Warthog, and perhaps an article about Fire, noting the way that carbon particles light up and make fire appear the way that it does. After all, fire is in Halo, is it not? Maybe while I'm at it I'll add lightning bolts, water, air, water particles in the air, clouds, and everything else that you can see in Halo. I'm probably annoying you by now, listing all of these stupid things that I can make an article out of. Which is my point. Why make a rule that "each thing should have its own article". Why not just make seperate sections for subjects that have to do with the same main subject in an article? Like that plasma bolts thing. Why not have it as a section in Plasma Weapons? Or whatever. And the colors of plasma bolts could be described in that ''same section'', don't you think? And fire, water, and air, those could be left to Wikipedia, yes? Why not just use common sense and merge articles where necessary, making subjects that include that one sentence, instead of making an '''''entirely new article''''' for that one sentence? Things will get hectic if you keep that absurd rule. Most things should have their own article, yes, but not little bits of information that could be easily included in articles that not only relate to the information, but are about the '''SAME THING'''. <br | :::AncientAnubis has a point. That elephant type article seems totally irrelevant to me. But if you want articles that have ANYTHING TO DO WITH HALO, I might as well make a Plasma bolt article right now. And I should also make a new article for every color of plasma bolts. I should also make an article for the wheel on a Warthog, and perhaps an article about Fire, noting the way that carbon particles light up and make fire appear the way that it does. After all, fire is in Halo, is it not? Maybe while I'm at it I'll add lightning bolts, water, air, water particles in the air, clouds, and everything else that you can see in Halo. I'm probably annoying you by now, listing all of these stupid things that I can make an article out of. Which is my point. Why make a rule that "each thing should have its own article". Why not just make seperate sections for subjects that have to do with the same main subject in an article? Like that plasma bolts thing. Why not have it as a section in Plasma Weapons? Or whatever. And the colors of plasma bolts could be described in that ''same section'', don't you think? And fire, water, and air, those could be left to Wikipedia, yes? Why not just use common sense and merge articles where necessary, making subjects that include that one sentence, instead of making an '''''entirely new article''''' for that one sentence? Things will get hectic if you keep that absurd rule. Most things should have their own article, yes, but not little bits of information that could be easily included in articles that not only relate to the information, but are about the '''SAME THING'''. <br> Consider that, eh? —[[User:Jaeryd|Jaeryd]] 18:43, 19 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
::::You seem to be agreeing with us and then disagreeing at the same time, so let me make the policy a little more clear (before I do write a policy about it, finally). Halopedia keeps articles of the same '''subject matter''' in the same article. Everything within the article should pretain to its title. Why isn't ''[[UNSC Euphrates]]'' included in the [[Frigate]] article, even though it is a small article? because though the ''Euphrates'' is a frigate, the fact that it is does not mean it should be included in the Frigate article. That article is about frigates in general, whereas the ''Euphrates'' articles covers the information known about the history of ''one individual frigate''. It is the same way with the Elephant articles. "Elephant" details the specifications of the Elephant in general, whereas the other article details the information on ''one single elephant''. Just beacause we know little about it does not mean it isn't important. | ::::You seem to be agreeing with us and then disagreeing at the same time, so let me make the policy a little more clear (before I do write a policy about it, finally). Halopedia keeps articles of the same '''subject matter''' in the same article. Everything within the article should pretain to its title. Why isn't ''[[UNSC Euphrates]]'' included in the [[Frigate]] article, even though it is a small article? because though the ''Euphrates'' is a frigate, the fact that it is does not mean it should be included in the Frigate article. That article is about frigates in general, whereas the ''Euphrates'' articles covers the information known about the history of ''one individual frigate''. It is the same way with the Elephant articles. "Elephant" details the specifications of the Elephant in general, whereas the other article details the information on ''one single elephant''. Just beacause we know little about it does not mean it isn't important. | ||