Code Geass Wiki
Code Geass Wiki
(Created page with "{|border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" style="background:#19277C; text-align:center" width="100%" !bgcolor=#19277C colspan="10"|<font color="#FFFFFF">'''Welcome to Administ...")
 
 
(17 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
  +
 
{|border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" style="background:#19277C; text-align:center" width="100%"
 
{|border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" style="background:#19277C; text-align:center" width="100%"
 
!bgcolor=#19277C colspan="10"|<font color="#FFFFFF">'''Welcome to Administrative Request Page'''</font>
 
!bgcolor=#19277C colspan="10"|<font color="#FFFFFF">'''Welcome to Administrative Request Page'''</font>
Line 19: Line 20:
   
 
==Deletion Requests==
 
==Deletion Requests==
<!-- Please place your comment under this line. Be sure to sign your post with four tildes as seen here. ~~~~ -->
 
   
 
==Move Requests==
 
==Move Requests==
 
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ -->
 
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ -->
  +
It has come to my attention that someone renamed the Nunnally vi Britannia page Adolf Hilter which seems inappropriate, could someone please put a stop to it.--[[User:Hulk10|Hulk10]] ([[User talk:Hulk10|talk]]) 00:31, November 16, 2017 (UTC)
  +
  +
  +
*The page [//codegeass.wikia.com/wiki/Collection_of_official_statements https://codegeass.wikia.com/wiki/Collection_of_official_statements] which summarizes the official statements by the show staff needs to be added to the site navigation under "Media". it also needs links from the "Lelouch" page, the "Geass" page, the "Zero Requiem" page and the "Re;" page
  +
[[User:CodeGeassFan83|CodeGeassFan83]] ([[User talk:CodeGeassFan83|talk]]) 12:59, August 10, 2018 (UTC)
  +
   
 
==Protection Requests==
 
==Protection Requests==
  +
{{Forumheader|Edit war on "Collection of official statements" page}}User [https://codegeass.fandom.com/wiki/User:CodeGeassFan83 CodeGeassFan83] reverted my recent change to the [https://codegeass.fandom.com/wiki/Collection_of_official_statements Collection of official statements] page, marking it as vandalism. I disagree and have reverted it back to my proposed edit. As stated in my comment, my edit added new information that readers may find useful, removed formatting (i.e., bolding) that was not present in original quotations, removed biased wording, and removed opinions which do not belong in a "list of official statements." If the user continues this behavior, this may lead to an [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_warring edit war], so perhaps this page should be protected per [https://community.fandom.com/wiki/Help:Page_protection the page protection policy] until a neutral third party can rule on which edit is more appropriate.[[User:Dc880610|Dc880610]] ([[User talk:Dc880610|talk]]) 14:00, July 28, 2019 (UTC)
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ -->
 
   
  +
It should be added to that that the edits consisted of nothing but irrelevant information such as the fake video of the "japanese ending". While it did state it to be fake, that info is completely irrelevant and thus not suited there. As such your attempts to fill pages with unsuited content are nothing more than vandalism.
==General Discussion==
 
  +
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ -->
 
  +
It must also be pointed out that this page has never caused such problems before and all these edits are being done by a brand new account which is suspicious to say the least. It's clear the root of the problem is this new person and not a page which has existed peacefully for a year.
I think it is time we removed statuses from all pages. They are too much of a hassle and lead to edit wars and conflicts. If someone wants to know the status of a character, they can read the article.--{{User:Godisme/Sig2|01:29,12/28/2011}}
 
  +
  +
[[User:CodeGeassFan83|CodeGeassFan83]] ([[User talk:CodeGeassFan83|talk]]) 14:05, July 28, 2019 (UTC)
  +
  +
I will concede that the fake video could perhaps be segretated into a separate section of its own: "False Information" or such. This could further clarify that it is not official. I stand by the remaining edits. The MyAnimeList interview is anything but irrelevant. The formatting changes such as removing bolding were accurate: the bolding was not present in the original source, as Twitter only supports plain text. The information in the "Code Geass Memories" section was expanded by copying directly from the already-sourced translation. Finally, I removed various statements of opinion or bias that supports one particular viewpoints. Per the [https://community.fandom.com/wiki/Help:Vandalism vandalism policy]: "Useful community content presents the widest range of relevant and accurate information on a topic. In the case of a wiki, if someone edits a page so it reflects only a single viewpoint, that can be considered vandalism." My changes all work towards this goal. [[User:Dc880610|Dc880610]] ([[User talk:Dc880610|talk]]) 14:26, July 28, 2019 (UTC)
  +
  +
I do agree about the additional interview, and it has been included on the page now, in my recent edit.
  +
  +
(also, this is why Talk pages exist. Instead of spamming edits and coming here, we could have come to an agreement on there)
  +
  +
[[User:CodeGeassFan83|CodeGeassFan83]] ([[User talk:CodeGeassFan83|talk]]) 14:29, July 28, 2019 (UTC)
  +
  +
I stand by my most recent edit for the reasons stated above. User [[User:CodeGeassFan83|CodeGeassFan83]]'s edits reintroduce opinions and bias that do not belong in a neutral "Collection of official statements." I will not revert back to my latest, since I am certain [[User:CodeGeassFan83|CodeGeassFan83]] will simply revert it back. I will leave this to the admin's discretion. [[User:Dc880610|Dc880610]] ([[User talk:Dc880610|talk]]) 14:42, July 28, 2019 (UTC)
  +
  +
  +
  +
: Not saying this is necessarily what I'm going to do yet, but I'm far more inclined to actually just delete the page if its going to keep being a problem. [[User:BahamutX978|BahamutX978]] ([[User talk:BahamutX978|talk]]) 19:12, July 28, 2019 (UTC)
  +
  +
Are these based on accurate translations (by reliable translating groups or translators)? {{User:Lelouch Di Britannia/Sig2}} 13:04, July 29, 2019 (UTC)
  +
  +
Yes, they are. Some of them, for example the subs for the epilogue from 2009, are even the official translations.
   
  +
If you doubt any of those, feel free to ask any person who speaks Japanese.
:I've never found statuses to be worthwhile and would not object to them being removed if that is what is decided. They are a source of unneeded controversy that distracts from the real work that needs to be done around here. At best the rows (and there will always be disagreements over it due to many "deaths" ambiguous and people being immature) do not encourage editing and at worst put people off, which is obviously bad for the wiki. {{User:Yyp/sig}} 14:30, January 1, 2012 (UTC)
 
   
  +
[[User:CodeGeassFan83|CodeGeassFan83]] ([[User talk:CodeGeassFan83|talk]]) 13:09, July 29, 2019 (UTC)
::I personally don't mind them, it's quick and easy for a person to find out if the character is alive or dead!! I know that's what I search for on a lot of Wiki so I can see why Salubri likes them!! [[User:SunXia|<span style="font-family: Kristen ITC; color: Goldenrod;">'''SunXia'''</span>]] [[User talk:SunXia|<span style="font-size:95%; font-family: Kristen ITC; color: Goldenrod">(Chat)</span>]] 14:37, January 17, 2012 (UTC)
 
[[Category:Forums]]
 
   
  +
To be clear, I mostly don't object to the page's existence, provided the translations are accurate. (The only one I've personally verified are the tweets, which I ran through Google Translate, and they seem to match up.) My objection is that the page purports to be a simple list of statements, yet is filled with biased language that pushes the author's particular viewpoint, including by advertising the author's Reddit post at the end. My proposed edit makes the page more neutral. [[User:Dc880610|Dc880610]] ([[User talk:Dc880610|talk]]) 13:43, July 29, 2019 (UTC)
:Ive already removed them from the specific character boxes a while back. But if a character is dead they are dead regardless of whatever fanboy or girl wants to believe and im getting kind of tired of having to feel as though we need to justify that for every person on bleach asylum or random user that has a problem with it. The point being where they currently are at is fine. They are on pages that dont see much in the way of editing and therefore if disturbed can be locked with no real issue because they are not popularly worked on pages. This is the same issue as people complaining about the background color or that we have too many policies to allow them to put opinions out of universe wording and whatever else they want onto article pages. Every other wiki with characters have similar deceased posting on characters dead and gone and dont have such issue. My general take is if the character is dead, we state that and deal with whoever we have to when they decide to be ignorant about it just as we handle anyone else who vandalizes the site. Why should we be limited because we dont do what a small group of people who dont even care about the site thinks. Plain and simple they wanna edit war they get blocked, they want conflict they get blocked. Also on the note it seems we have become so scared at stating death of character that we give the most vague explanation of death. Look at Gin's page and youll see it or anyone else who has recently died. Also to state they arent worthwhile wouldnt be accurate by that notion we shouldnt have infoboxes talking about weight and height, affiliations and whatnot. The characters status is just as much apart of the article as anything else we put in it. Immature people always are gonna have a problem, from the constant issue with trivia, hair color, eye color, and whatever else. DBZ wiki seems to be engaging in a one sided war with us cause the admin over there doesnt like Godisme, do we get rid of him to make it easier on us. Do we get rid of are policies to make it easier on us. If real editors wanna edit they arent discouraged from editing by any of this, realistically not anytime that i can remember have we had anyone with original issue with any of this ever want to be an active and productive member of this site. --[[User:Salubri|<font color="00BFFF" size="2px">'''Salubri'''</font>]] [[User talk:Salubri|<font color="1E90FF" size="2px">('''Talk''')</font>]] 16:53, January 17, 2012 (UTC)
 

Latest revision as of 13:43, 29 July 2019

Welcome to Administrative Request Page
Block Request Archive Deletion Request Archive Protection Request Archive General Discussion Archive

This forum exists for the purpose of requesting assistance from an administrator. Leave a message here if you:

  • Need a user/IP to be blocked due to vandalism or severe disruption.
  • Need a spam page to be speedy deleted.
  • Need a page to be protected.

All administrators should have this page in their watchlists.

Blocking Requests

When reporting users, please use Template:Block-request. The fields to be filled are {{block-request|user=|reason=|reporter=|reply=}}. It is recommended you read the template documentation first.

Deletion Requests

Move Requests

It has come to my attention that someone renamed the Nunnally vi Britannia page Adolf Hilter which seems inappropriate, could someone please put a stop to it.--Hulk10 (talk) 00:31, November 16, 2017 (UTC)


CodeGeassFan83 (talk) 12:59, August 10, 2018 (UTC)


Protection Requests

Forums: Index Edit war on "Collection of official statements" page Administrative Requests


User CodeGeassFan83 reverted my recent change to the Collection of official statements page, marking it as vandalism. I disagree and have reverted it back to my proposed edit. As stated in my comment, my edit added new information that readers may find useful, removed formatting (i.e., bolding) that was not present in original quotations, removed biased wording, and removed opinions which do not belong in a "list of official statements." If the user continues this behavior, this may lead to an edit war, so perhaps this page should be protected per the page protection policy until a neutral third party can rule on which edit is more appropriate.Dc880610 (talk) 14:00, July 28, 2019 (UTC)

It should be added to that that the edits consisted of nothing but irrelevant information such as the fake video of the "japanese ending". While it did state it to be fake, that info is completely irrelevant and thus not suited there. As such your attempts to fill pages with unsuited content are nothing more than vandalism.

It must also be pointed out that this page has never caused such problems before and all these edits are being done by a brand new account which is suspicious to say the least. It's clear the root of the problem is this new person and not a page which has existed peacefully for a year.

CodeGeassFan83 (talk) 14:05, July 28, 2019 (UTC)

I will concede that the fake video could perhaps be segretated into a separate section of its own: "False Information" or such. This could further clarify that it is not official. I stand by the remaining edits. The MyAnimeList interview is anything but irrelevant. The formatting changes such as removing bolding were accurate: the bolding was not present in the original source, as Twitter only supports plain text. The information in the "Code Geass Memories" section was expanded by copying directly from the already-sourced translation. Finally, I removed various statements of opinion or bias that supports one particular viewpoints. Per the vandalism policy: "Useful community content presents the widest range of relevant and accurate information on a topic. In the case of a wiki, if someone edits a page so it reflects only a single viewpoint, that can be considered vandalism." My changes all work towards this goal. Dc880610 (talk) 14:26, July 28, 2019 (UTC)

I do agree about the additional interview, and it has been included on the page now, in my recent edit.

(also, this is why Talk pages exist. Instead of spamming edits and coming here, we could have come to an agreement on there)

CodeGeassFan83 (talk) 14:29, July 28, 2019 (UTC)

I stand by my most recent edit for the reasons stated above. User CodeGeassFan83's edits reintroduce opinions and bias that do not belong in a neutral "Collection of official statements." I will not revert back to my latest, since I am certain CodeGeassFan83 will simply revert it back. I will leave this to the admin's discretion. Dc880610 (talk) 14:42, July 28, 2019 (UTC)


Not saying this is necessarily what I'm going to do yet, but I'm far more inclined to actually just delete the page if its going to keep being a problem. BahamutX978 (talk) 19:12, July 28, 2019 (UTC)

Are these based on accurate translations (by reliable translating groups or translators)? Lelouch Di Britannia Talk Page  13:04, July 29, 2019 (UTC)

Yes, they are. Some of them, for example the subs for the epilogue from 2009, are even the official translations.

If you doubt any of those, feel free to ask any person who speaks Japanese.

CodeGeassFan83 (talk) 13:09, July 29, 2019 (UTC)

To be clear, I mostly don't object to the page's existence, provided the translations are accurate. (The only one I've personally verified are the tweets, which I ran through Google Translate, and they seem to match up.) My objection is that the page purports to be a simple list of statements, yet is filled with biased language that pushes the author's particular viewpoint, including by advertising the author's Reddit post at the end. My proposed edit makes the page more neutral. Dc880610 (talk) 13:43, July 29, 2019 (UTC)