User talk:Avocado

From Fandom wank wiki

Hey, can't be bothered to actually make a page, but this post would be a great little random fandom page. Her "welcome to FW" put down is great.

Will do. --Avocado 00:06, 30 November 2005 (GMT)

Hmmm, I wonder if it's time to lock down the wiki. Do you know if we can do it, or is it only Hnk that has access?--Snacky 17:51, 18 January 2006 (GMT)

Maybe you should just block Florida whatever state whose citizen is causing the problem. Until HnK gets back, at least.--Young Murdered Faery 18:09, 18 January 2006 (GMT)

I think only Hnky can do those kind of restrictions. At least, I can't seem to access any of that. All I can do is block by username and IP. It's been semi-sucessful so far - each time Zinkshipper tries to create a new account, it's blocking it, since the IP has been banned. But it would be handier just to freeze new account creation for the time being.--Snacky 18:18, 18 January 2006 (GMT)

Is she going to be gone for very long? Oh, and out of curiousity, are only the mods allowed to revert pages to a previous version?--Young Murdered Faery 18:27, 18 January 2006 (GMT)

No, I believe you can revert to a previous version as long as the page isn't locked. (FYI, to revert, what I see is on the history page. When you compare the current version to an older version, a bolded "rollback" appears in the upper right next to the current version.) Is Hnky still gone (or gone again)? I could have sworn she was only leaving for a few days when she originally gave us sysop privileges. -- Avocado 18:32, 18 January 2006 (GMT)

Well, I'm hoping I don't have to find out the hard way, but you never know.--Young Murdered Faery 18:38, 18 January 2006 (GMT)

And I just checked. I don't see that "rollback" option, so I suspect it's a sysop/mod thing. --Young Murdered Faery 18:45, 18 January 2006 (GMT)

Good to know. You can always accomplish the same thing by copying the text out of the old version and replacing the text in the new version if necessary. -- Avocado 18:54, 18 January 2006 (GMT)

Oh I know. I just thought using "rollback" would be easier if the option was available, but wasn't sure who could do it.--Young Murdered Faery 18:57, 18 January 2006 (GMT)

Agree; I can't find a way to restrict new account creations. (That's probably something in the "bureaucrat" category, not the "sysop" category.) I don't think it's something we can do. -- Avocado 18:29, 18 January 2006 (GMT)

Is the "Stormfreak of the night" entry locked, or open for editing? Just thought I'd ask.--Young Murdered Faery 01:06, 27 January 2006 (GMT)

It's currently unprotected. If Hinky or Snacky has objections to me reviving it, they can let me know. I've tried for being relatively sane and hitting the points both sides agreed upon. Its existence may be too inflammatory, though. I guess we'll see. -- Avocado 01:10, 27 January 2006 (GMT)

I swear I'm not a sock, just interested in fandom_wank and in wikis but it does occur that if the policy is not to wank about her and that extends to the wiki, why doesn't it extend to the Stormfreak Of The Night entry? I think the entry's very well written and NPOV but I was under the impression that this wiki isn't aiming for NPOV so I'm confused. I hope you don't mind me asking. The community portal isn't live and I'm very in the dark about the policy of this wiki. --Secretrebel 19:46, 27 January 2006 (GMT)

NPOV = Neutral Point of View?

I might be wrong, but in general I think the fw_wiki is aiming for "neutral with (snarky) humor." Most fw members don't personally know the people involved in the wanks, and many aren't in the fandoms the wankers are in. The level of involvement isn't more than, say, a group of friends walking down a street and seeing two or three people yelling obscenities at each other from the windows of an apartment building, where the group of friends = fw and the yelling folks = wankers.

And I thought the Stormfreak Of The Night entry was fairly neutral, but obviously someone else didn't. Refer to the, uh, "discussions" on the talk page for that entry and the Stormfreak one for more details.--Young Murdered Faery 20:17, 27 January 2006 (GMT)

I'm torn on the Stormfreak Of The Night entry, which is why I tried to go for something very neutral. Generally, we try for relatively neutral with added snark when it comes to wankers and wanks. For guides, terms, etc., things tend more to satire, parody, and a high degree of snark. Essentially, the wiki is a jokey extension of FW. In this case, I expanded on Hnky's original version, but toned down some of the snark-- mostly following the "don't wank SF" policy. It's slightly biased to the FW perspective, as this is the FW wiki.

Basically, Snacky and I tried very hard to work with Zinkshipper to come up with a fair and balanced article on SF. You can read the talk pages. We thought we came to an agreement; I posted and locked the article. Snacky said she'd remind FW not to wank SF. The reminder got posted. That really didn't go well. There was a general flipout by ZS with nasty insults directed at me, Snacky, and FW in general, followed by bans of ZS, two of her socks, and three IPs from the wiki. After that, I consider the agreement void and am disinclined to let ZS control what the wiki says on general principles. (Because, essentially, what that says is: insult us, make things unpleasant, and you'll get your way. Bad policy.)

I don't think the wiki article wanks SF or even snarks at her much (it might wank ZS, but that's really a different question). It describes what happened, which is actually fairly significant in the history of FW and JF. I've done my best with it, since I wasn't around at the time. I also have no connection to comics fandom, and I may be off slightly in the sequence, which I'm perfectly happy to have someone correct. If it's too inflammatory to have anything around at all, so be it. My vote is that something stay in. -- Avocado 22:07, 27 January 2006 (GMT)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining. I said I saw no problem with the entry. And I have read all the talk pages. See me here at the cutting edge of discussion. I think my question is a mixture of two separate points.

1) How far does the wiki plan to emulate the policies of the f_w journalfen community? Using the "thou shalt not wank SF" rule as a case in point. It's an issue because even with mod/admin overlap the wiki could be subject to a sploogefest if it only abides by a subset of f_w's own guidelines. I was under the impression f_w and SF had mutually sent each other to Coventry, apologies if that impression is wrong.

2) On a wiki information doesn't die. In fact both you and Faery have just linked me to those talk pages, which are already a precious little mini-wank of their own. (No aspersions cast, there's nothing like a recording angel for attracting flack.) But if this recent example is a typical response (from wankers and wikieditors both) it means that a lot of the informational content of the wiki could be hidden in talk pages and unobvious namepages such as the SFOTN one. The wiki has the potential to create a hideous splooge of metawikiwank and that'll be difficult to patrol - look at the problems they have on wikipedia or encyclopedia dramatica. I've got no issues with those in charge here, I'm just trying to understand what's being aimed at. --Secretrebel 22:44, 27 January 2006 (GMT)

Whee, more indented paragraphs!

IIRC, the main purpose of the fw_wiki is to be a record. It may not be a 100% accurate or a 100% unbiased record, but everyone who contributes to the wiki is (hopefully) trying to be as factual as possible while adding some funny. Hence all the links and attempts at careful wording ("It is believed..." "Allegedly..." etc.) and whatnot. SF has been wanked on FW, like all the other wankers mentioned, which is why she has an entry. She just has an added note of "please don't wank her in the future if possible."

Also, SF wasn't the first person to come here to try to "set the story straight"--just look at Gigaprincess. (And I still find it hilarious that no one knew who it was at the time.) I think right now the mods are dealing with conflicts on a case-by-case basis.--Young Murdered Faery 23:08, 27 January 2006 (GMT)

The wiki is an extension of FW. It serves neither as an introduction to FW, nor as a pure injoke (though it really is mostly an injoke). Membership isn't restricted, but it's meant for FW members. We're not a dictionary, nor a fandom encyclopedia. The goal is parody-- not NPOV, unbiasedness, etc. If it's funny and it relates to FW, it's a potential wiki article. Wank writeups tend to be a little drier, as the article itself is a stub linking to the Wank Report. I try to avoid working on anything I'm too invested in, because grudge isn't funny. The SFOTN article has been restored to its original position. It links all of the talk pages YMFaery and I have mentioned, most of which are also protected pages. SF is far from the typical wanker-- she's about as far from typical as you can get. -- Avocado 19:16, 28 January 2006 (GMT)

Personally, I'd just as soon see the entry cease to exist as see a nutjob Stormfreak yammer and whine like a 3 year old until she gets her way. If we're gonna leave out the snark and worry excessively about balance, what's the point of the entry in the first place? This is fw_wiki, after all, not "fucking idiot appeasement." Wankprophet

...Oh, I think the bare facts of FW's past interactions with SF says it all already. There aren't many people banned from F_W. She's seven of them, and she's nuts. My original intention was to wikify the hell out of ZS's additions. Probably just should have booted her from the get-go, though. Live and learn. -- Avocado 00:43, 28 January 2006 (GMT)

I expected better from you, Avocado...why, I have no idea. Ah, well. Carry on. Magenta Thompson 17:02, 15 August 2006 (BST)

I have no beef with you, but you're not helping yourself out by showing up here. You're not harming yourself as much as the continuous trolling of Zinkshipper did, true. But either you care about what F_W thinks of you or you don't. Which is it? If you want to talk to me, do it off the wiki, please. -- Avocado 18:03, 15 August 2006 (BST)

That's silly. What are Wiki talk pages for, other than to discuss Wiki articles? As for "caring" what F_W thinks of me, I wasn't aware you all thought with one hive mind. You can twist this however you see fit, and you will. My beef is the fact that the story posted here simply isn't true. My question is why are you so determined to keep a wanky lie? The truth was a riot. Hell, I think it's funny. It's why I still read and post at F_W, despite being out of fandom for over three years. So if "let's set the record straight" is your way of painting me as "wah, the wankas don't like meeee!", then fine. Personally, I find your determination to spread a lie around to be just as wanky as anything you've ever accused me of.

Seeing that I'm not breaking any rules, nor doing any editing, nor trolling any pages, I see no reasons for your repetitive banning. And I'd like to point out that I never came her until after you blanked my user page, another testament to your "we're going to talk about you and control every aspect of it and only we're allowed to find humor in this, not you!" mentality. M Thompson 02:04, 16 August 2006 (BST)

HAI

I really like this wiki (and come to you from another) -- and this is totally unasked for -- but dealing with spambots is a royal pain in the ass. I recommend this as an excellent guide to dealing with them. <3 Tfo 20:54, 13 July 2007 (BST)

Thank you. Yeah, we're not thrilled with them. We've had a couple of different suggestions to get rid of them (though I think yours is more comprehensive). Unfortunately, Mindset and I don't have access to change these files, so there's not a lot we can do. I'll pass it on to Hnky. -- Avocado 22:31, 13 July 2007 (BST)

I think, particularly, you might find the spam blacklist to be helpful. (I noticed you don't seem to have one.) Or Hnky, since he is the one with access. ;) Tfo 02:14, 20 July 2007 (BST)