User talk:FawkesGamer360

From Grand Theft Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search


Hi, welcome to Grand Theft Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Talk:Luis Fernando Lopez page.

Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- ZS (Talk) 23:03, February 17, 2010

Deleting Work

Hey. I can see you have an issue with User:A-Dust (who is an admin) "deleting people's hard work". Could you clarify what you mean, or provide an example? You can see all of the articles he has deleted here. The only relevant one I can see is where he deleted Talk:Knife, because that is where you talk about the article (not discuss how good the weapon is). Discussions about gameplay should go in the Forum. If there's something else you have a problem with, please let me know so that we can either correct it, explain why we do it that way, or change our policies to be more reasonable. That's what you can do here that you can't do at Wikipedia. Gboyers talk 00:48, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

Well, that page you just linked me to is a mild example, but the only examples I remember are the deletion of Yusuf Amir's talk page. Judging by his opinion on GTA IV, I think he only deletes these pages because he hates the game a lot, but that's a pretty silly thing to assume. Still, it is pretty annoying reading ur email to find out that this guy has deleted things you do.--FawkesGamer360 00:53, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

I can understand how that's annoying (it happens to me on other sites, especially wikipedia); but if you really disagree about something, talk to us and we can figure out what the best thing to do is. I can't promise we'll always restore the work, but at least we can make sure it's fair and that everyone is treated the same. I know A-Dust wants to keep the "fluff" out of this wiki, and keep it to relevant, factual information; and I know some people disagree (like I'm more of an inclusionist than him) - but we arrive at a good balance usually. I don't think it's because he hates the game, but perhaps he doesn't agree on the significance of some things. I can see that Talk:Yusuf Amir was deleted, but "I want his fucking house" isn't really discussing the article, and I'm not sure that counts as deleting your "hard work" ;) Let me know if you have any questions. Gboyers talk 01:06, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

I delete articles and images and revert edits when it is necessary and have done so on this site for the past few years now. I generally take a no-nonsense approach to things and, if the article or contribution is of no value, it will be deleted/reverted. I do dislike GTA IV but that doesn't mean that I will revert edits about the game. In fact, I've frequently edited character articles for the GTA IV Era games and improved them. I've done it for every other game in the series and will do so with the GTA IV Era ones, without using any prejudice against them. As for it being annoying, it is annoying when I'm patrolling edits to find a new talk page contribution like "I want his fucking house", which contributes nothing. As for including things, I seem to recall wanting to include articles on many more things than what users, including yourself, have in the past wanted to include, whilst there is no real need to keep images that are not currently being used as the majority of the unused ones are unused for a reason. A-Dust 01:22, February 23, 2010 (UTC)
Hey, I'm glad that you're coming clean and all, but please don't delete my comment on my talk page and replace it with your own comment. Anyway, my little comments on various talk pages are simply me copying what other wikis do. They write something cheeky, which is then followed by a reply or two, and then it becomes a whole humorous conversation. If they were of no value, they'd be deleted, but they don't because its funny. As I attempted to mention before, my unnecesary contributions were not what I meant by "hard work". There are various comments on your talk page regarding other users complaining about you deleting THEIR hard work, which I'm sure were more important than mine. I notice that you seem to delete entire atricles rather than take the time to edit them. Why is that?--FawkesGamer360 01:43, February 23, 2010 (UTC)
Firstly, I did not delete the comment you made but opened an edit window before the comment was added and saved after it. As for what other wikis do, that is irrelevant on this wiki. Discussions can be taken to the forum, the articles and talk pages are reserved simply for dicussion on the article and how to improve it. As the whole 'humourous conversation', this is a wiki designed to be an encyclopedia, and not a discussion forum and 'discussions' such as the one you added to Yusuf Amir's page have no place being on the site in my opinion, but the compromise is the forum. As for deleting 'their hard work', if it was relevant, necessary, within policy, consistant with templates already used or worth keeping it wouldn't have been deleted or reverted in the first place. As for people complaining, that doesn't bother me and never will. The wiki needs someone prepared to eliminate the things that aren't required and on this site, in all honesty, that is me. I have a no-nonsense approach. If something shouldn't be there, I'll remove it. As for your question, as mentioned above, if they were worth keeping or relevant they would be left with an expand or cleanup template.
    1. Noodle Run: article already existed at its proper location and name
    2. Sea Dragon: beta vehicle that never even appeared in a game, should be covered on the Beta Releases article
    3. Falling: As trivial about having an article about walking.
    4. Ethnic neighbourhoods: trivial and information can and should be displayed in the relevant articles
    5. Radio Stations Heard in GTA IV: Radio Stations in GTA IV? Plus information can and should be displayed on the relevant articles
    6. Uzi Submachine Gun: article exists at the proper article name
    7. Blista complat: article exists
    8. Drussillas: article exists and articles content was a random grouping of letters
    9. M16/M4: article already exists
    10. Glock 22: article already exists
    11. Victor vance: article already exists at proper name
    12. 18th St: article about the real life gang, no relevance to the GTA series that can't be mentioned as a trivia point in an article/articles
    13. Thompson Machine Gun: not even in a GTA game so no relevance
    14. Marcus: redirect article deleted so another page could be moved to that name
    15. S. Fiona Scott: article already exists at proper name, user request to delete
    16. Kill Phil: Part 1: mission name does not exist
    17. Kill Phil: deleted to make room for the above article to be located at its correct name
    18. Grand Theft Auto: Great Britain: modification that, to my knowledge, was never even released. Should be mentioned on Modifications article if at all.
    19. Suction Testicle Man: man who creates modifications, not relevant.
    20. GTA London: same as GTA Great Britain article
    21. Predator film series: about modification and television program, no relevance
    22. The Terminator: same as above
    23. Call of Duty Modern Warfare: same as Predator article
    24. Online Maps for Games: YouTube user, not relevant
    25. GTA 4: San Andreas or GTA5: fanboy discussion, not relevant
    26. Night of the Living Dreads: article at proper name
    27. Category:Animals: unnecessary category that contained only one character, who appears only briefly anyway
    28. Talk:Huntley: 'this car is awesome' is irrelevant
    29. Eccentric Hobo: information was largely fanboy speculation and irrelevant
    30. User:A-Dust/Sandbox: sandbox no longer required
    31. Uzi Submachine Gun: article already exists at proper name
    32. What happens next: wishlist, which already exists
    33. User:A-Dust/Sandbox 5: sandbox no longer requirede
    34. Category:Suicides: unnecessary and limited to a few characters, already covered with Category:Deaths
    35. Category:Serial killers: irrelevant due to the nature of GTA games.
    36. Tallest Building in GTA 4: irrelevant, information can be put on to relevant pages
    37. Poinclickshipabitch: idiotic complaint from user
    38. Talk:Girlfriends in GTA San Andreas: asking a question about this in GTA IV
    39. Characters by Surname (C-E): article replaced, no longer required
    40. Category:Miscellaneous templates: unused and unnecessary
    41. Category:Books: irrelevant
    42. Mr. Bellic: no real information known, little known already in other articles
    43. M-90: not even in a GTA game
    44. Piggsy: fanboy speculation, irrelevant
    45. Gangs in GTA Vice City: limited only to images and links, which is covered under Gangs and the category
    46. Secret Valley: fanboy creation, irrelevant
    47. Christmas: article would never have had information, irrelevant and unnecessary
    48. Glenwood: article exists at proper location and name
    49. The Choolon: article about GTW user, irrelevant
    50. 'Programed' Car Chase Scenes: irrelevant
    51. Weapon Tier Three in GTA San Andreas: already covered at Weapons in GTA San Andreas
    52. Weapon Tier Two in GTA San Andreas: same as above
    53. Weapon Tier One in GTA San Andreas: same as above
    54. The ost brotherhood: spam and article already exists at proper name
    55. Kent paul: spam and article already exists at proper name
    56. The angels of death: spam and article already exists at proper name
    57. The Shopping Mall: irrelevant
    58. A home in the hills: spam and article already exists at proper name

The above is a list of the articles I have deleted since December 23 and the reasons for the deletion, all of which are a good reason for deletion. Hope that helps. A-Dust 02:25, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

That looks good. A couple of things I would have done differently is to create redirects rather than deleting duplicates. If someone has gone to the effort of creating the article, you can bet dozens of other people have failed to find it (and not bothered to create it), which is a good enough reason for a redirect for me. If something on should be moved to the forum, then you should probably say this, either in a reply or directly to the user (chances are they will never see the edit summary). Maybe some of them should be {{prod}} instead of completely deleted straightaway? Or perhaps tag them with {{merge}} where you say "should be merged into XYZ" instead of deleting them. Remember that normal users can't see the content of deleted articles, so that would require staff to go in, extract the content, and put merge it into the other page. If you tag it, anyone can help out. Gboyers talk 02:50, February 23, 2010 (UTC)