Alternative History talk:TSPTF

Archives: /Archive/ • /Wall of Shame/

Owen
What about getting a vote of the TSPTF members? and try and find one that'll vote to keep Owen on this Wiki?--Smoggy80 18:20, October 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * I vote to block him - For going against canon numerous times, despite repeated warnings!--Smoggy80 18:20, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * I vote to block him - For bizarre behavior, going against canon, and causing unrest throughout the community! I am in favor of a permanent ban in fact! --Arstar 18:36, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * I vote to block him- For all the reasons noted above. --Zack 18:40, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * While his antics can be humorous, all the stuff he does isn't contributing at all. His continuing to do articles that repeatedly he is told can't exist I would categorize a spam and therefore I vote to block him as well.Oerwinde 21:36, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * I vote to leave him to his antics. His articles are frivolous, his grammar is atrocious, but he is neither a troll nor a smammer. It is obvious from his attempts at articles and his comments on talk pages that he is "intellectually challenged." He is managable without blocking him. SouthWriter 16:04, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think South has a point. He does seem a bit, um, challenged when you think about it. But at the same time sometimes I think he is just a troll who takes pleasure in his awful grammar and ruining and distracting us from our work. What to do? Unblock him? Or keep him where he is? Arstar 01:49, October 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * What's done is done. A precedent has been set; if you undo the "permaban", then you not just allow Owen back in, but you also send the message that a permanent ban can be undone. Is that the message you want to send Owen?BrianD 02:07, October 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * I have little say in his ban, as I only have rollback rights and no banning powers so I could not undo his ban even if I wanted to. But if he does have some sort of condition than that changes it. Arstar 03:00, October 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * If we did agree that we had made a mistake, there'd be no shame in undoing it. People make mistakes. But I support the ban. It wasn't his spelling or his frivolousness: it was his constant lying about things. See above, where he tried to convince everyone that he was the original creator of Doomsday. I admit that the lies were obvious enough to hint at some kind of handicap, but let's face it. It's not a hard lesson to learn not to lie. He was banned several times for trying to pull ruses like that, but he didn't take the hint. Benkarnell 03:09, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

I wanted to clarify my earlier comment. Given the seriousness of Owen's actions, a precedent has been set (I don't know of anyone else who's been permanently banned). If you unban him, you basically say that a permanent ban can be undone at any time and make it useless as a tool. I don't know that Owen is "challenged"; if he is, that should be taken into consideration, but it still wouldn't overrule his ban because, as Ben said, it's not a hard lesson to learn not to lie. --BrianD 03:19, October 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Even if Owen is challenged, there is the argument that someone with a mental handicapped should not be treated any differently from someone without one. Certainly we should have patience, but they should not be given special treatment for breaking the rules. The problem is Owen has been given special treatment since he got here because we always thought he did have a mental handicap. I support the ban. Owen's alleged handicap is not serious enough that he cannot learn right from wrong. Whether its lying or stealing others work, there comes a point where we need to use our blocking power. Mitro 13:24, October 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * The fact is that he received several short bans for the same behavior. This was in my opinion the way bans are supposed to work. Benkarnell 13:43, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

So what if Owen is mentally handicapped in some way? he should be treated exactly like anyone who does not have a handicap, why should he get special treatment? plus how do we know that he actually is handicapped and just badly educated, generally messing around or just doing it to be annoying?

Can we just not lay this all to rest, have a simple democratic majority vote of TSPTF members of wether or not Owen stays or goes? after all we are the ones entrusted with some powers (however small) over this Wiki, shouldn't we have some democratic powers?--Smoggy80 16:06, October 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree, Smoggy, I am just one vote. And I didn't say he was "mentally" challenged - only "intellectually" so. According to what I read (I think on Wikipedia, maybe on a news link), there is a large segment of the population in his area that are under-educated. And, consequently, unemployed. Owen has nothing to do, so he's online. I'm not bothered by his antics, but his lying and stealing need to be addressed. Since he's the first to be permanently banned by an administrator on this wiki, if that is to be an option, so be it. A super majority of administrators should be enough. SouthWriter 16:47, October 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually User:Calthrina950 was the first to be banned for 1000 years. Mitro 17:41, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

I thought the only reason there was all this discussion was the fact that banning him for life was a precedence? if its been done before why can't it be done again?--Smoggy80 19:15, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with SouthWriter a 3/4 majority is what should be in place for 1000 year bans. We should, just to confirm and be fair hold a quick vote here amongst us TSPTF members as to whether the permaban should be upheld. Zack 19:59, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

Hamster1983 is Owen's newest account. Guys, should we ban this account to? Arstar 21:14, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

Not yet, but let me know if it does anything untoward. --Zack 21:18, October 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * I like Zack's idea but I just wanted to say a few more things in regards to it. I think its fair to say that all bans less than permanent are at the discretion of the individual admin. They should only be second guessed if there is obvious bad behavior on the part of the admin. That being said any permabans will always immediately be put to a vote which would require a 3/4 vote to approve. Sounds like the start of our Block policy.
 * @Arstar, how do you know its Owen? [EDIT] Never mind it is Owen. I blocked that account as well since he is sockpuppetting. Plus now that I have looked at Wolfworld it is actually plagarized from this site http://www.wolfram.demon.co.uk/ah_wolfworld.html Mitro 21:22, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

I saw this policy on Wookiepedia and I think we should adopt it due to the Owen block. Check out Alternative History:Equality. Mitro 21:52, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you Mitro. I think we should set up the equality rule as a replacement for NCNC and to set permanent guidelines for this wiki. Below I've set up a place for TSPTF members to vote confirming the Owen ban. For all major issues I think the 3/4 super majority vote should be in place. --Zack 22:51, October 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Wait why is the equality policy as substitute for NCNC? They both cover different things. One is how we deal with people with mental and physical handicaps. The other is used to prevent discussions over OTL politics and religion from turning into flame wars. They are both able to coexist. The conventions meanwhile act as a permanent guideline. Mitro 23:01, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

My apologies I thought it was "general" equality. --Zack 23:04, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

Zack 22:51, October 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Supporters

It's regrettable that it's come to this, but I don't see any other choice here. BrianD 23:00, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

He's been warned enough times and just not learned his lesson from his short term bans, it's time for him to go--Smoggy80 15:21, October 14, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with everything said above.--Vladivostok 16:10, October 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * Objectors

Owen's sockpuppets investigation
New user today: User:Hamster2010. Very similar to Hamster1983. Please keep an eye on this one, its likely an Owen sockpuppet. Mitro 20:22, October 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * Also keep a watch on User:Endoftime1983. He wrote an article for 1983: Doomsday that was later obsoleted. He has a similar writing style as Owen and Owen made some heavy edits to that article.
 * There is also a new user called User:Zh'xonRomulus‎. He should be watched as well because of Owen's Star Trek fascination. Mitro 21:16, October 14, 2010 (UTC)

Keep an eye out for Owen sockpuppets. I recently prevented him from being able to leave anymore messages on his talk page, so he is likely to return to using sockpuppets again. Mitro 20:27, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok so Hamster2010 was another Owen clone. Mitro 02:53, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Owen taunted Mitro, and then asked me to reinstate him, failing to "sign" (he put his name in the text to Mitro) from the same anonymous source. SouthWriter 15:09, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Owen taunted Mitro, and then asked me to reinstate him, failing to "sign" (he put his name in the text to Mitro) from the same anonymous source. SouthWriter 15:09, October 16, 2010 (UTC)


 * Just want to point out to everyone that the comment that was left on Owen1983's user page abusing Mitro was NOT me!! by the spelling it was Owen USING my sign in. i dont think anyone with half a brain would have been fooled, but someone with half a brain may have written it--Smoggy80 16:55, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't worry Smoggy, I knew it wasn't you. In fact Owen was not signing as you but actually suggesting you would be someone to replace me on the Brass. So take it as a compliment :-)
 * Also, I think Hamster2009 is an Owen puppet. Any objections? Mitro 18:46, October 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * I object until there is any clear cut evidence such as gibberish posts or bizarre complaints calling for Owen to be unblocked. If/when that happens then by all means block him for a 1000 years. --Zack 19:18, October 18, 2010 (UTC)

As hamster1983 and hamster2010 are both his i would expect it will be--Smoggy80 19:10, October 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well Hamster2009 did start labeling several new articles with the deletion template saying the articles were not AH (despite the fact that they were). Mitro 20:25, October 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * Then block Hamster2009 for being a "troll". --Zack 20:28, October 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * I blocked him for inappropriate username. With that name, if he wasn't a sockpuppet of Owen, he was somebody trolling by using a name that obviously sounded like an Owenclone. Benkarnell 03:04, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

Found another Owen clone. He is calling himself Owen1984 now. You should see the nice message he left on my talk page. Mitro 22:10, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

As weird as this may sound, Mitro, that is not Owen. The language and format is just not him. He would have put a link in their somewhere to a random word and he would have written it in his signature "--" closing marks. That's either someone on this site trying to be funny or a new user who found out about Owen. Arstar 07:29, October 31, 2010 (UTC)

Either that, or Owen has started to learn how the English language works much too late. Fegaxeyl 09:35, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * Interesting point Arstar. However Owen has shown that he knows how to use copy and paste. The first line of his rant sounds like him (he even mispelled dictator) but the rest could have been copied from somewhere else (God knows the internet is full of such things). That being said I won't rule out someone else being a troll, nevertheless he still gets blocked. Mitro 12:49, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not objecting to the ban. But how about the lack of his signature "--" (without a period followed by his username)? But then another sentence gives me another vibe, "In closing, mitro, I used to like you," (notice that the only word misspelled is your name, likely he added that to the sentence)? But on another note, when will he give up? Arstar 04:14, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not objecting to the ban. But how about the lack of his signature "--" (without a period followed by his username)? But then another sentence gives me another vibe, "In closing, mitro, I used to like you," (notice that the only word misspelled is your name, likely he added that to the sentence)? But on another note, when will he give up? Arstar 04:14, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

Owens posting again on blogs (Arstar's blog), just as a anon wiki contributor at the mo, so everyone keep an eye out a new sockpuppet may be in the making--Smoggy80 19:25, November 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you Smoggy, I blocked the ip address. Mitro 19:43, November 8, 2010 (UTC)

So that means that Owen is finally gone? Good. The fellow (I wish to call him something worse, but I don't want to sink to his level) has been acting like a cockroach for far too long. Every time we moved against him he'd scurry away and pop up sometime later. Now his 1000-year long ban can finally take effect.

Yank 20:29, November 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Probably not Yank. Owen appears to have access to several ip addresses. The only thing we can hope for is that he continues to blatantly state who he is, so that we can block him. Eventually we will get all of them. Mitro 20:31, November 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep an eye on 86.179.253.54, it may be another Owen IP. Mitro 14:37, November 16, 2010 (UTC)

Well I might just be jinxing myself and the wiki, but Owen appears to be gone. Whether we got all his ip addresses or else he just grew bored, I don't think we will be seeing him for sometime. Mitro 17:47, December 10, 2010 (UTC)BlackSky

We've got another potential sock-puppet called "CommanderZeta" sounds Star Trekish like the Commander Data one he made. Plus there are some weird edits. Keep an eye on the account for now. --Zack 01:39, December 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm...well his edits do not seem that disruptive and his language is certainly better than Owen's. I will keep an eye him though. On that note, I have a feeling that Owen is going to become a mythical figure in this wiki. We are going to hear the words "Owen-like", "Owenish" and "he's another Owen". I can't wait until we get a newbie who asks us who Owen is? Mitro 21:53, December 13, 2010 (UTC)

I dont know much about this Owen, but I have been here long enough to know who he is: a troll that thinks that by attacking us over and over again he is achieving some thing; solution? We let him create his own Althstory wiki so that he can cuss, ban, and reject anyone who even enters the wiki while also trying to show the world his althistory work, which no one will see because of his shanagins. BlackSkyEmpire

Well I spoke too soon. 86.178.0.235 just left a message on Smoggy's page, signing his name as Owen1983. I gave him a 1000 year block. Mitro 17:01, December 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm going to make an executive decision as part of the Brass (other Brass can disagree with me if they feel I am wrong). I ask that no member of the TSPTF speak to Owen, that time has long passed. If you have the power, block him. Constables should report back if they find evidence of his presence, but they should also not speak to him. Mitro 16:06, December 24, 2010 (UTC)

LG blocked 212.219.142.33‎ for Owen like edits. After looking over his contributions (which go back a few months) I am in agreement that this is likely an Owen IP address. If there are no objections we can extend the ban to be permanent. Mitro 18:27, January 11, 2011 (UTC)


 * No objectionsOerwinde 18:30, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

I am concerned about User:The Republic of freedom. He seems to be very similar to Owen: he is English, bad spelling and grammar and is infatuated with 1983: Doomsday. Maybe I am overreacting, but please keep an eye on him. Mitro 14:27, February 4, 2011 (UTC)


 * Sigh. Benkarnell 14:49, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * Why the sigh? Mitro 15:13, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * You know. It just doesn't end with that guy.  I'd say he can't take a hint, but there's no hinting about it.  Over and over he's been told to leave and never come back. Benkarnell 04:47, February 5, 2011 (UTC)

TSPTF Signature
Just an idea so that its easier to notice us from the normal population. I'm going to make a prototype one here: Arstar 04:08, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

If you're going to make one the signature coding is (NO SPACES) [ [ F i l e:180px-Tsptf.jpg | 25 px ] ] [ [ U s e r:USERNAMEGOESHERE]]

Is there any way to make a wiki code (like maybe 5 tildes) to make the signature easier? Better yet, perhaps a button only available for TSPTF members? SouthWriter 16:12, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

You should consult with Vegas, I think he did the 1983DD Badges for the site. If anyone is a pro on coding signatures on this wiki it should be him. But this signature is much easier than it looks. All you do is you click "more", then click "Preferences", then copy-past the signature coding above into the box that says "Signature". Check off the "Custom Signature" box and then save your preferences.

Better yet, why don't we have badges for each of the ranks, like the Brass holds a real flashy badge, the Leutenients a silver badge, the constables some other badge and the retired Officers Emeritus hold an "Honorary" badge? Just an idea, Arstar 20:33, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

I can add a template to create the sig now. However adding wiki buttons is a lot harder and if its posible i will try. Images arn't rearly my thing though, i'l tell you when its done, I might have to create indivitual templates though--Vegas adict 20:39, October 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * Personally, I prefer looking like just another user. People can look at my user page if they like. But I'd rather not proclaim I OUTRANK YOU every time I want to add some kind of (possibly inane) comment to a talk page.
 * Actually, the more I think about it the more I want to discourage anyone from putting rank into sigs. A signature like that seems like it would stifle debate. It adds a whole new dynamic to situations where rank is irrelevant. It doesn't matter who's an admin when you're just talking about alternate-history issues as opposed to wiki policy. Benkarnell 20:45, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Like I said it was just an idea, so don't get all mad.However I have seen it done on several other wiki's. But your right it is kinda bragging. But I mentioned it because before some troll says something he shouldn't he'll see the insignia and see that there are active admins who can ban him at any moment. Arstar 20:50, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I sit next to a real life internet troll at work. They don't care about admins banning them. For them, getting banned is a sign of honor. My co-worker showed me his 6 different user names on a forum and also the conversation he had on another forum where is banned. Seeing the badge is just going to incite them more. Mitro 20:54, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay...that's kind of...yea. Should we scrap the badge sig then? Arstar 20:57, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay...that's kind of...yea. Should we scrap the badge sig then? Arstar 20:57, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay...that's kind of...yea. Should we scrap the badge sig then? Arstar 20:57, October 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * I didn't mean to come off as mad - probably the capital letters were a bad idea :(. But in cases where rank does matter - trolls, for example - then I think you can say something like "Stop now - I'm an admin here." But the problem with putting the badges in the signature is that they show up everywhere. Maybe it would be appropriate to "flash a badge" when leaving warning messages on user pages? That can be done without a template, certainly. Like this. 180px-Tsptf.jpg Benkarnell 20:59, October 11, 2010 (UTC) [EDIT] On the other hand, Mitro has a point: trolls are only interested in causing trouble, so maybe the badges wouldn't be much of a deterrent. Benkarnell 20:59, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Great idea! So when we go to leave a warning we click the "Custom Signature" box in the preferences section? Arstar 21:01, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm going back to my "Arstarpool" signature then since having the badge sig in the box doesn't allow me to use my Arstar sig. &#91;&#91;File:180px-Tsptf.jpg&#124;25px&#93;&#93; &#91;&#91;User:Arstarpool&#124;Arstar&#93;&#93; 21:03, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm going back to my "Arstarpool" signature then since having the badge sig in the box doesn't allow me to use my Arstar sig. &#91;&#91;File:180px-Tsptf.jpg&#124;25px&#93;&#93; &#91;&#91;User:Arstarpool&#124;Arstar&#93;&#93; 21:03, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm going back to my "Arstarpool" signature then since having the badge sig in the box doesn't allow me to use my Arstar sig. &#91;&#91;File:180px-Tsptf.jpg&#124;25px&#93;&#93; &#91;&#91;User:Arstarpool&#124;Arstar&#93;&#93; 21:03, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

Segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever
I am little concerned about this TL. Though I realize the deletion policy says we don't delete article because they are offensive, I worry that this TL might cause some issues. Considering the creators previous edits, I'm sure that he is writing a white power wankfest. Mitro 14:11, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. It seems to be "Mr.r"'s baby, and he's been banned for adding ethnic stuff to things without permission before that was as close to offensive as this place should get.

Way I figure it, he's seeing how much he can get away with.

Lordganon 14:17, October 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well it still sets bad precedent to start deleting articles because some people find them offensive. Let's adopt a wait and see approach. If it looks like he is just trolling, than we will block him and delete this TL. Mitro 14:31, October 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * It looks like something of a nonsense project: nothing really even written yet. What are the policies regarding outright racist/hateful projects? That is comepletely different from, say, that timeline a lot of people wanted to delete that portrayed Barack Obama as a communist dictator. The TL is much too short to have crossed the line yet, but I think the line certainly exists. Benkarnell 14:59, October 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with Mitro - wait and see, if he crosses the proverbial line then take appropriate action. --BrianD 16:57, October 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * Hey, if a Communist America can pass the muster, a hyper-conservative one could as well. I couldn't find the time line with Obama as as communist dictator (which would be interesting to persue, or at least read). However, there is a time line that presents a Socialist USA (Marx comes to America). I'd say that if Mr R has been banned for adding stuff without permission, it doesn't mean he should be banned for creating his own stuff. Segregation, as such, is the norm in the south in the "Two Americas" time line. And lest we forget, ethnic groups are self-segregated in societies all over the world today. Official segregation is also the law in other places.


 * The "line" that must be drawn in this wiki is any that overtly proclaims superiority of one ethnic group over another. This would be like a Nazi wiki that seeks to justify those views as good and wholesome. A "white power" wankfest, as Mitro puts it, probably should be avoided or even banned. A "separate but equal" treatise, on the other hand, would be fine.SouthWriter 17:30, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

I personally don't care if Obama is portrayed as Communist Dictator or a TL that has segregation in it. I don't think its a stretch to say all of us think segregation is evil & that President Obama is not a Communist dictator.

With that said South raises an interesting point there are a tone of anti-American, anti-conservative timelines floating about where Fox News is shutdown, George Bush is assassinated & so on. Nobody (and rightfully so) is calling for those TL's to be censored and deleted. So why such outrage when a crazy conservative TL comes along? If we agree that it is offensive then we don't have to contribute to it. We can ignore it and not make it a "featured timeline". I may very well be our bias showing seeing as must of us are left of center, but nevertheless we don't have to have an NPR style freak out and start blocking and banning people for their work. My issue with "Mr. R" was that he inserted gibberish & removed content from pages. --Zack 18:26, October 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * A dystopic "always-segregated USA" TL is absolutely acceptable, as are Nazi victory TLs, Communist World Revolution TLs, and, well, nuclear-holocaust TLs. Crossing the hypothetical line would be a TL that talks about how great the US would be if only the pesky black people were out of the way, or something like that.


 * The Obama TL is called "2009: Second American Revolution." A quick glance shows its overblown ludicrousness and lack of research (a 2009 PoD that results in a Soviet state in the USA), and on the side it offended a lot of people. But as I said then, "I do not believe we have a policy of deleting ATLs just for being really stupid." If we did, well, we'd have a mighty big deletion job on our hands. :)


 * Mr.r has made a couple of weird and disruptive edits to other people's projects without asking. But this new mini-project of his is in no way deserving of deletion. Nothing outright racist or hateful at all in its current state. Benkarnell 18:43, October 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * Aye. But it's definitely something that should be watched. Lordganon 02:33, October 24, 2010 (UTC)

Short Wiki break
Just to let everyone know i'm taking a two week (or so) wiki break due to tree felling season, i'll be mainly offline from the end of this week till mid - end Dec. I'll keep popping in from time to time so if you leave me a message i'll get back to you eventually--Smoggy80 16:30, November 15, 2010 (UTC)

Due to heavys snows over here in the UK i'm back early from my wikibreak--Smoggy80 12:38, December 4, 2010 (UTC)

New user
Keep a look out for Garrett Roesler. He is a new user who has been leaving some offensive and inappropriate comments on several talk pages. LG and myself have already had to warn him about his behavior. If he keeps it up, please hit him with a short ban. Mitro 14:16, November 23, 2010 (UTC)

New AH Wiki
This is probably not a big deal, but I thought it would not hurt to bring it to the attention of the rest of the TSPTF.

It all started a few days ago. An anon created a new TL called 9/11/2001 was MUCH worse. Jazon Naparleon took offense to this article and left a message on the talk page. He mentioned how offended he was and he blamed the new wiki format on what he felt was a recent string of bad TLs that have been created. Personally I thought his logic is flawed and his reaction was completely unwarranted and unfair toward the anon. Nevertheless, Jazon called for a rebellion against wikia and its new format. Furthermore, he shared his ideas with several other editors and for a short time left his message in the forum.

Most editors either declined to participate or else left messages calling for restraint. I thought Tbguy1992's response was very good actually and South had a good suggestion of creating a "writing club" to help improve the writing skills of new editors. Sadly both Arstarpool and Red VS Blue agreed to join him in his rebellion. He used his talk page at the Anti-Wiki Alliance to discuss his rebellion. Notice the use of "his Mitroness", it sounds like he does not have a high opinion of me.

However, his rebellion culminated in simply creating a new alternate history wiki here.

So maybe it is my time to overreact, but here it goes: should we be worried about this? Are we going to lose editors over this? Will editors want to transfer there TLs over there, especially the featured TL Superpowers? Or is nothing going to come of it? Thoughts, comments, suggestions? Mitro 16:00, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

I don't think Jazon is mentally with it, I'm sorry to say. I think 9/11/2001 was MUCH worse is a fine TL and I look forward to see how it plays out, its a shame that it caused such an outcry. Perhaps its just as well the disgruntled editors leave so they don't cause a ruckus around these parts. Personally I'm not terribly worried. --Zack 16:52, December 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well I am at least going to suggest that we don't allow him to solicit new members for his wiki by leaving messages on user talk pages. He already did this for a few people, but I let it slide because he confined it to his friends. If he or others expand their recruitment, I will warn them that they should keep their solicitations to the forum, blog or just leaving a link on the online AH list. The first warning will be friendly, the second not so much and if there is a third time I will block them from editing. I feel it is only fair since I have followed the same route for other editors who tried to drum up support for their off-wiki sites. Mitro 17:12, December 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I side with Mitro on this. If these other editors feel that strongly, then while I'd hate to see them leave, I believe they should leave this wiki and start their own, with our blessing and no hard feelings on our part. They get to do alternate history according to their vision, on a wiki that works for them, and those who remain here get to do the same.BrianD 18:10, December 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * I am not disloyal to althistory.wikia, but I did sign up at Jazon's site just to see what's going on there. So far, I have not figured out how to add articles to the new wiki. The "main page" is the only one up to be edited, and there does not seem to be any way to rename a page. The format there, though, is a lot less crowded. The sidebars are smaller, as are the ads. There are tabs rather than buttons. It is attractive, and I signed in as SouthWriter so they know who I am. But again, don't worry -- I'm not leaving "our wiki" just yet. SouthWriter 18:56, December 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think anyone is accusing you of disloyalty South. No one is required to edit only one wiki, even if they are an admin. There is also no guarantee that Jazon's project will succeed either. That being said, it is still possible that Jazon's wiki and this place could exist side by side. From Jazon's rhetoric, I get the idea that he wants to limit the wiki only to experienced editors who are solid writers. Thus this place can remain open and attract new users, while experienced editors can always take a trip to the "other wiki" when they want to get away from it all. There are down sides to that setup. We might suffer a "brain drain" as our best editors leave for the more exclusive wiki. Also it might cause some resent between the editors who are not and the editors who are part of the "secret society".
 * Nevertheless if it does turn out that we will be directly competing with this other wiki than we will have to decide what are our options. At the moment I see nothing wrong with adopting a "wait and see" approach. Mitro 19:14, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

i for one will not be leaving this wiki--Smoggy80 19:46, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

Heh. You know, funny as it may sound, I like the new layout here, lol. Dont think his shoutwiki looks that great, either.

Lordganon 20:47, December 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed. It reminds me of monobook, which I used for a short time after they finally did away with monaco. In the end I found the new format to be closer to monaco than monobook was. Mitro 21:58, December 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I ain't leaving Wikia anytime soon, but I am still a tad pissed that they removed Monaco which was much better for this kind of Wiki. But a "Secret Wiki Society" does exist, and it's off anything related to Wikia (including ShoutWiki) and on an actual website.
 * I'm not moving over to this new Wiki at ShoutWiki, either. So consider me one of the more "lax" members of this rebellion. I might make an account over at S-Wiki but I've ultimately decided to keep my "HQ" if you will on the Wikia system.
 * And Jarzon calling you "his Mitroness", I've seen other people say that before. Personally I think it's a tad rude but I can see why some people call you that, because many see you as that you are the de facto caretaker of the Wiki.
 * Arstar 01:07, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sigh, I try not to be. In terms of seniority, both Louis and Ben are superior to me. Mitro 02:08, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * You're a heck of a lot more active than they are, Mitro. Lordganon 02:41, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nevertheless, the wiki consensus is the true caretaker of the wiki and the TSPTF carries it out. Anyone can do what I do with no problem. Mitro 02:47, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * As far as I'm concerned, you're one of the seniors at this point, Mitro. You're one of the "Illuminatus" of this wiki, just as I'm one here and with Ill Bethisad. You're someone who understands the underpinings of the whole and seeks to maintain the spirit of things. Louisiannan 03:41, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks everyone for your kind comments, but let us get back on topic. Mitro 14:52, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm curious, how has the "rebellion" gone towards creating a new wiki? I was under the impression that we were going straight to Wikia to reinstate the old skin. In any case, a sister site could be to people's benefit, particularly if it acts as a kind of "Club" for more dedicated writers. However, I am interested to know what Jazon had meant by "the tech support people are transporting all the articles from here to there"; that needs some clarification. Red VS Blue 04:10, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes I am also curious about that. What does he mean by articles? Does he mean a few select ones, or does he mean all of the articles on the wiki? All 12,000 of them? That is a big issue. I don't think people want there transported to another wiki without their permission. [EDIT] Never mind, I just saw the message he left on RVB's talk page. He does intend to transfer all 12000 articles. Mitro 14:52, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that in violation of the copyright laws in place on this wiki? Or do we have none of those? Red VS Blue 23:30, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks everyone for your kind comments, but let us get back on topic. Mitro 14:52, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm curious, how has the "rebellion" gone towards creating a new wiki? I was under the impression that we were going straight to Wikia to reinstate the old skin. In any case, a sister site could be to people's benefit, particularly if it acts as a kind of "Club" for more dedicated writers. However, I am interested to know what Jazon had meant by "the tech support people are transporting all the articles from here to there"; that needs some clarification. Red VS Blue 04:10, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes I am also curious about that. What does he mean by articles? Does he mean a few select ones, or does he mean all of the articles on the wiki? All 12,000 of them? That is a big issue. I don't think people want there transported to another wiki without their permission. [EDIT] Never mind, I just saw the message he left on RVB's talk page. He does intend to transfer all 12000 articles. Mitro 14:52, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that in violation of the copyright laws in place on this wiki? Or do we have none of those? Red VS Blue 23:30, December 2, 2010 (UTC)

Man alive, we best put this down soon. --Zack 21:06, December 2, 2010 (UTC) I have no problem with Jazon starting his own alt-history wiki, but to take our work - the work that he had little or nothing to do with, and create a situation where it can be altered without regard for those who worked on it previously? That isn't right at all. It's as if one man (boy?) owns the wiki and can unilaterally move it without consent of anyone else who works on this TL. I wasn't even asked to join in this "rebellion" and I know other editors weren't, and yet our work is affected by this. I don't want to leave Wikia. I have no problem with Wikia. I have a big problem with what Jazon plans to do. This is a precedent that we can't let slide. --BrianD 22:10, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * I left a message on his talk page asking him to reconsider transferring all of the articles and instead just transfer those articles/TLs he controls. He has not yet replied, does anyone know of any other ways to contact him? I was considering contacting Shout Wiki and ask if they can stop until we sort this out, but I am not confident they would listen. Mitro 21:11, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * The only thing I can suggest at the time being is that everyone who opposes this massive transfer should message both Jazon and ShoutWiki and tell them what you think. I do plan to email the ShoutWiki staff as soon as I can. We might also want to see if Wikia itself can do anything to stop this. Mitro 22:24, December 2, 2010 (UTC)

We ought block Jazon that will slow him down a bit from copying the format directly. --Zack 22:30, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Probably not. Even as an anon he can still view the wiki and access the code. However, judging from his most recent message to RVB, he is not the one doing it but the ShoutWiki staff are. Mitro 22:34, December 2, 2010 (UTC)

Is there anyway to prevent anons from editing articles? That would filter out the run of the mill spammers and Jazon types. --Zack 22:44, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, we go through every single article and change the protection status to prevent anon and new users from editing the article. If we do that I predict this place would be dead in 6 months and it won't stop what Jazon is intending to do. Right now we need to reason with him and appeal to ShoutWiki to intervene by not going through with the transfer. Mitro 22:48, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, after reading everything about this, I'm really starting to worry. I mean, how can ShoutWiki actually transfer anything by simply getting a request from a user? I mean, he's not even an admin for Christ's sake! I find it hard to believe they would listen to one person. This would mean that any potential troublemaker could create an account, contact ShoutWiki and transfer data and we wouldn't know about it until it's too late! Scary thought.--Vladivostok 07:40, December 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree Vlad. But at least Jazon appears to be apologetic (see my talk page). I think he plans to contact Shout and get them to stop. At least we can prevent it from happening this time. Mitro 14:19, December 3, 2010 (UTC)

Bigdee4198
I blocked Bigdee4198 for one year for vandalism, check his contributions for the reason why. I know that a year ban is kind of harsh for someone with only four edits, but when you see his contributions you will understand why. Mitro 14:49, December 2, 2010 (UTC)

Upcoming wikibreak
I am going to be married in about 2 weeks, thus as the day gets closer I am going to be spending less and less time here. So please make sure you are taking care of the responsibilties you signed up for. I hope to return to a more active status soon. Mitro 17:31, December 3, 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations, Mitro! Arstar 03:58, December 4, 2010 (UTC)

The Stirling Awards
Nominations for the 1st Annual Stirling Awards of Alternate History have begun! Mitro 23:19, December 5, 2010 (UTC)

To clear things up
First of all I am not racist and I will NEVER slurs on my TLs. Second of all I very sorry about my bad edits it will never happen again. --mr.r 13:38, Decamber,16, 2010

Owens back
he messaged me on my talk page his new IP is 86.178.0.235--Smoggy80 12:31, December 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * I already blocked the ip address (see the Owen sockpuppet investigation section). Mitro 16:04, December 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Who is owen? mr.r 21:29, December 24, 2010
 * He's a guy who has been bugging people and not following rules for some time, and we banned him back in October, but he's come on through different IPs and usernames. Arstar 03:09, December 25, 2010 (UTC)



74.118.195.117
It's not Owen, but this user IP edited a page and made it into some sort of advertisement. I rolled back the edit, but could someone ban it?

Lordganon 03:14, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

On it. BrianD 18:23, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

I found owen
Hey TSPTF look at this http:// aliens.wikia.com/wiki/user:1983 mr.r 11:24,january,6,2010
 * Um...Owen is only blocked on this wiki, he can still access the other wikis operating under Wikia. In fact I believe Owen1983 is an admin on the Alien Species Wiki. So thanks for finding him, I guess, but what do you want us to do? Mitro 16:36, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * I think it means he will stop buging this wiki (maybe for good). mr.r 11:42,January,6,2011
 * He was an admin there long before his block, it didn't stop him then. Mitro 16:52, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Good point. mr.r 16:57 January 6, 2011
 * Listen I appreciate you trying to help, but don't worry about Owen. He was before your time here.  Mitro 17:03, January 6, 2011 (UTC)

TSPTF Call Out
If you are a TSPTF member, please respond to this message. I am looking to see who is still active. Mitro 15:26, January 21, 2011 (UTC)

Still here and kicking. Lordganon 17:07, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Да, я! --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 17:16, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm here, though I've been a bit busy outside the wiki for quite a while. I do want to get back to 1983:DD and help out elsewhere where needed. BrianD 17:18, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Still around.Oerwinde 18:19, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * New member, reporting for duty. Red VS Blue 22:32, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Still here--Smoggy80 12:11, January 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * Still here, Exams and Website work have been ocupying me recently thoughVegas adict 19:35, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm still alive. Not receiving emails from the Wiki as usual however. --Zack 17:24, January 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah I have that problem too. Mitro 17:47, January 27, 2011 (UTC)

Alright, anymore actives out there who still need to sign in. Mitro 15:20, January 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry Mitro, I missed the memo. I'm still around, currently freer than I have been in a while. Working on Nuke's "Two Americas" presently, though I really want to get back to 1983DD soon. SouthWriter 21:22, January 27, 2011 (UTC)

Louis, Ben, Mr X, Vlad and Yank have not responded to the Call Out and thus are now on inactive status. If they respond soon I will reinstate them as active admins, but until then we need some new members.

If we follow the 1 admin for every 1000 articles rule, we need four new Lts. I will be making the announcement to the entire community soon, but if there is anyone you think is good for the job, nominate them soon.

Also we need a new member for the Brass. For those who don't know, the Brass are just like Lts, except they grant user rights and make the final decision in any issues that the community is divided on. So far such issues have never come up (Arstar's impeachment trial being the closest), but in case they do I think it would be better to have at least an odd number of Brass. So if any current Lts meet the qualifications and want the job, I would highly reccomend finding someone to nominate you. I might be willing to do the nomination if someone contacts me. Mitro 16:17, January 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeah, IIRC I said a while ago that for the forseeable future I'd be Inactive. That may not be true forever, but it's certainly true now. Long live the New Guard! Benkarnell 14:51, January 30, 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks Ben and when you do return I will return you to active status. Anyway, are their no opinions or suggestions for new TSPTF members? I asked Jorge if he was interested? Thoughts, comments or suggestions? Mitro 15:24, January 31, 2011 (UTC)


 * I've asked King and Smoggy about it. Was going to a couple days back, but forgot, lol. Thanks for reminding me. As for others.... how about someone else with the map games (Maybe BoredMatt or Fedelede?), and maybe Tbguy1992, Mister Sheen, Mumby, Katholico, or Red? Not interested in Brass myself, but surely someone is worthy and would do it. Lordganon 16:02, January 31, 2011 (UTC)


 * I actually messaged Oer to see if he had anyone to suggest from the gamers (we need more of them active in the administration of the wiki considering how large of a community they are). I asked Jorge if he was interested. The other people you suggested are good recommendations as well, Katholico in particular since he is already admin on the Spanish wiki. Mitro 16:14, January 31, 2011 (UTC)


 * Smoggy declined for the moment (avenue for the future, then), and Jorge said he didn't have time.... I've asked Katholico now as well. Lordganon 23:15, January 31, 2011 (UTC)


 * Fedelede would be a good choice I think, he was pretty active on multiple areas of the wiki. BoredMatt is pretty prolific on the map games if you want to pull from there. Seems more level headed than most of the Map Game crew as well.Oerwinde 10:03, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

I AM ALIVE! So the Call Out was on email, huh? I don't get emails from the wiki. --Yank 02:07, February 1, 2011 (UTC)


 * No actually, the call out was just a message I left on this talk page to see who was still watching. I later contacted those members who did not respond on their personal talk pages. Anyway, I will return you Yank to active duty. Mitro 14:26, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Tbguy1992 is interested in being a part of the TSPTF. I am going to post his nomination soon. If you guys have any as well, please post them as well. Mitro 20:02, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Katholico is interested as well, and I'll nominate him sometime soon too. King's on the fence, but I think he'd like to be a constable if nothing else. Will keep informed. Lordganon 06:14, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

King has agreed to be nominated as well. Lordganon 08:04, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

Kath has now been nominated on the page. Lordganon 08:46, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

I just nominated Tb. We only have one more position (assuming all three guys get in). Mitro 14:07, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

I'd say on of the map guys, then. Oer, which would be the best choice, in your mind? King has been nominated now too. Lordganon 22:51, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

I nominated BoredMatt, for being an extremely active map gamer and one of the more level headed of the bunch.Oerwinde 04:30, February 5, 2011 (UTC)

I'm actually quite happy with being moved into the retired-folks category and retaining my rights for none other than reasons of pride, if no one else minds. Mr.Xeight 04:52, February 6, 2011 (UTC)


 * I've been sort-of active lately, but I am about to go completely inactive again for at least the next month and a half. This website is one of several that I am giving up as a way to help with my Lenten contemplation.  Benkarnell 05:09, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

user
Hey, some guy just made a page call butts you should block him.Mr.r 02:24, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
 * Done and thank you. Mitro 02:55, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

Map Games
Michael Douglas made a blog post that made me curious. Apparently he was insulted on AH.com for being from this wiki. Here is an example he used:

"I'm mad right now cause you think your the shit. You come from fucking althistory wiki which is a bunch of shit and all you do is play fucking map games."

Now I have not seen the actual post (but I assume that I could get the link from Mike) or the context for which it was made, however, I can't help but take away from the statement the use of the Map Games in the insult. They really have become popular on this wiki. Nevertheless they have caused some issues. I would like to ask: what are your opinions on the Map Games as they are now? Mitro 01:51, February 17, 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorta new to this site, but from what I've seen:

I have tried to creat e more complex map games that are plausble and have an enourmous array of options, but everyone has said it either was overly complex (although it really wasn't), or I should buy some game that you can do stuff like it. It really annoyed me that when I tried to push the boundries of map games a bit, everyone shot it down. Its like the people dont want a new gweneration f complex map games, but to stick with the implausible, boring old map games. Also, I am fairly offended by the post, even though It wasn't directed at me. It seems like everyones ignoring the dozens of good TLs that this wikia has turned out. We dont only play map games. Roguejedi 16:30, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) They usually last from 2-5 turns, with a small minority making it past 10. We need to focus energies to make them better, rather than continuously moving on.
 * 2) There is little creative value. It is usually focused on expansion, and once there's no more expansion, people get bored. If we could add more creative value, they would not be a such a low form of entertainment.
 * 3) People do not want to create articles to accompany the map games. I was thinking a cross between community timelines like DD, and map games. We could have a main timeline page while people should develop their own articles. Like how there's pages like Hanthawaddy (Principia Moderni) on the game Principia Moderni.
 * 4) Imo we should try to model them more on what Conworlds is doing. Like Future World or Pangam-Pangat. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 02:44, February 17, 2011 (UTC)

I actually really like the idea of what Principia Moderni is doing. If people were more into it and updated the articles for their nations it could really grow, creating history sections that describe events in the map game with more detail. It could be a model for future map games.

I think map games also get a bad rep because the majority of players don't care about how plausible their posts are as long as their favorite nation becomes a superpower. Just like every other althist you need to do a little homework before you post.Oerwinde 18:48, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * Gamers certainly are in need of an intervention. They are getting a bad reputation both on and off the wiki. Nevertheless, any real change needs to come from within the community. Rogue and Kenny, you both have some good points, I just wish there were more of you. If the TSPTF tries to impose changes it will either kill the games or drive them to their own wiki. Still if we hear more negative things about the wiki because of the map games we may have to intervene.
 * That being said I do plan to begin a campaign to cull the large defunct game list. Most of those games barely got past turn 1 and have not been updated in months. They are cluttering the wiki and I am going to delete them. Mitro 19:24, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * I have an interesting idea. How about, you start a map game like thing in a certain year, and every week or so you do ten years. People then create articles on what happened in those years, like a normal alt history, but people decide what happens and over time it evovles. If I could get some support on this I think we could get it off the ground. I think you should delete the defunct map games, but not the ones that have done well and have been creative. It will help give map games a better reputation. Roguejedi 20:09, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * O I don't plan to remove games that were played for a while, like Europe 1430. But the ones that barely got past turn 10? Yeah they are gone. Mitro 20:23, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's what I meant, but how do you like my idea of a creation of a game where every week is ten years and you create articles about those ten years. Roguejedi 20:34, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't actually play the map games, so I am not the person to ask. But hey I support anything that makes the games more plausible. Mitro 20:55, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * I really don't agree with that as that would simply clog up the wiki with useless Map Game pages.I mean, most map games don't get past turn 10. They'll just be sitting there, useless. PitaKang 21:37, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * I tried that on Conworlds but the problem is people will tend to procrastinate until the last day of the week, and the six days in between make it moribund. Didn't make it past the first week, even though everyone had good articles. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 22:20, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe if we could get some of the better editors (not only the ones doing the map games), then we could do it. Also, if a week is fairly empty, then we could go back to it. I was thinking of only inviting the really good and plausible editors that dont give up on map games. Roguejedi 22:49, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * I still dont think it's a good idea. I mean, creating a new page for every year would kind of clog this wiki up. I mean, Europe 1100 was due to end in 911 days. 911 more pages? And that's one map game. There's 3 active games here, and if they keep on doing this, most of the pages here will be map game pages. Also, another problem is that it's extremely annoying to have to switch back and forth to look at years before, and all in all, I think it's a waste of space. I mean, a map game page will have like what, 10 posts? Then it's done. It's just too little to make a page for. That's just my opinion. PitaKang 22:58, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * What we could do is have a legit timeline with lots of information articles with the map game as the skeleton. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 23:37, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * That could work.... PitaKang 23:39, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm game to try it Roguejedi 00:13, February 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Another thing I've noticed in the last week or so is duplicate games. The duplicate Explorers or Europe 1430 are different as the original games went for quite a while, and trying to recreate them after they die is fine, but for instance the Massive Impact games, the first one went like 3 turns, so someone rather than trying to get people to actually use the old one created a new one. If a map game was stillborn, instead of creating a new identical one in order to try again, just try to revive the original.Oerwinde 08:34, February 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm game to try it Roguejedi 00:13, February 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Another thing I've noticed in the last week or so is duplicate games. The duplicate Explorers or Europe 1430 are different as the original games went for quite a while, and trying to recreate them after they die is fine, but for instance the Massive Impact games, the first one went like 3 turns, so someone rather than trying to get people to actually use the old one created a new one. If a map game was stillborn, instead of creating a new identical one in order to try again, just try to revive the original.Oerwinde 08:34, February 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Another thing I've noticed in the last week or so is duplicate games. The duplicate Explorers or Europe 1430 are different as the original games went for quite a while, and trying to recreate them after they die is fine, but for instance the Massive Impact games, the first one went like 3 turns, so someone rather than trying to get people to actually use the old one created a new one. If a map game was stillborn, instead of creating a new identical one in order to try again, just try to revive the original.Oerwinde 08:34, February 18, 2011 (UTC)


 * It's best, as you say, if changes come from the community. And in this case, from the map-playing subculture.  So I'm glad to see some mappers here part of the discussion.
 * One simple step could be adding a guideline: "If you do not wish to continue work on your map game, please add a template to the page so an admin knows it can be deleted."  Or something like that.
 * The problem of duplicate games can also be first addressed with a guideline and community standards. "Before you create a page for a new game, look through the archives to see if it's been done before."
 * But I don't think we should worry too much if someone at AH.com is saying insulting things about our wiki. There are a lot of very large egos at that site, and generally speaking, if something exists, you can be fairly sure somebody at AH.com has said something rude about it.  Benkarnell 16:47, February 18, 2011 (UTC)

Calthrina950
It appears Catherine has been active on another wiki called Novelas. Her reputation is so good there she actually has supporters asking to reverse the ban here. You can see the message I received here. Mitro 14:43, February 19, 2011 (UTC)

She been banned for over a year now, she's due an appeal to her sentence, she may have calmed down and matured in that year, we could cut her ban from 1000 year to 1 year (provisionally) and relese her on probation immediatly.

However if she acts up again, she gets three warnings, then she's gone again and the 1000 year ban kicks in again and this time, no appeal.--Smoggy80 18:39, February 19, 2011 (UTC)

That not only sets a bad precedent, but also would be bad judgment.

I agree with Mitro's opinion, as expressed on his talk page and that of the person who asked, that this is simply an attempt by the head admin of the novellas wiki to get Catherine's work moved off of there. I've skimmed through her "althists" on there, and the only one that would be allowed on this wiki at all - the rest are future histories, impossible, or racist and religious extremism - is the Russian one that has been heavily criticized on here anyways as being heavily biased in favor of Russia, with virtually no other content to it other than the Russian Empire.

The one story in particular, the "American Empire," shows she has not changed, but is rather laying low.

Catherine insulted most of the active users on this wiki at one point or another, and quite offensively. Refused to follow the rules, and kept violating them, as well.

A year, or even two, is not enough time. 1000 years might sound like too much, but it is just what they deseve for their actions. I do not care how "good" they seem to be elsewhere.

And, looking at their talkpage last night, I saw a reference to Catherine being banned on the nationswiki as well, though when I looked there I could not find any record of them there. Take that as you will, but if the allegation/note was true, we were not the first to dispose of it.

Lordganon 21:59, February 19, 2011 (UTC)

To add, the same user that asked about Catherine used "Beside that, Novelas is trying to tone down conworldish projects" as a note when he removed a dead link from the conventions page earlier. Lordganon 22:04, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that info about the Nations Wiki LG. I did some investigating and found out she was blocked...as a sock puppet account.  Her primary account on that wiki is User:Youngla0450, which is an account on this wiki as well.  I went and permanently blocked that account as well in case she tried to use it again.  Mitro 23:34, February 19, 2011 (UTC)

possible trouble causer
the IP address 68.38.233.201 has been causing some trouble by doing edits on various pages (lordgannon's and southwriter's in particular), and not making a user name, despite repeated requests, could the TSPTF do a 'official' post on the user page? or possibly a week ban for not following procedure despite warnings?--Smoggy80 17:39, February 21, 2011 (UTC)

It's not really any pages in particular or created by any one user that they seem to edit, though they do seem to be attached to Delmarva for some reason. As I told them in the latest warning, a block on them - minus the usual thing preventing account creation - will follow the next time that they do it. Since the last one - done by Zack - was a week, this next one will be whatever is the next longest. Couple weeks, I figure. Lordganon 04:33, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

And before anyone says something about them being Owen or the like, their IP traces back to New Jersey. Not a shocker, that one. Lordganon 04:34, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

I rolled back the last edit he/she did on Delmarva. For anyone who's not familiar with this situation, he/she is making numerous minor edits that contradict what Fxgentleman has put in, and despite Fxgentleman's requests to not make any such edits. The anon editor has also ignored requests to give him/herself a username and is ignoring any attempts by editors to interact with him. BrianD 05:39, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

troll master
Hey some guy blanked uk zombie page and put a message saying he is the troll master. This guy sounds like owen.Mr.r 19:17, February 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * I already reversed the edit and blocked the anon for a year. And no he is not Owen, it is not his style and the ip address does not match ones he has used. It makes no sense to accuse every anonymous troll/vandal to be Owen since he never actually vandalized pages on this wiki. Also Mr. r you came after Owen, so why the hell do you keep mentioning him? Mitro 19:20, February 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * I ment that he is like Owen and I did not know you blocked him until after I made this message.71.174.89.240 20:58, February 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * Look, your obsession with Owen just makes it seem like you're one of his sock-puppets. Just stop and let the admin take care of him. We need to get past Owen. PitaKang 21:02, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

SayNoToTheism32
This guy, whose very offensive "timeline" I added a deletion template to - which he removed without changing a thing in the rest of it - spent about 20 minutes, logging in and out, extensively vandalizing my user page, making it even more offensive than his "article." I undid all the edits - had to do that individually to the blasted things - and have now blocked him. Feel free to edit the time its for.

Also, you guys need to pay more attention to things going on - Brian at the very least was online during this >.>;

Lordganon 10:43, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well at least we have a new member for the Wall of Shame. Mitro 14:18, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

A anon, IP 202.14.33.189, just posted on the banned user's article trying to defend it. IP traces to the New Zealand, like the other anon IP the guy used, so it's more than likely the same person. I've added a block there as well. Lordganon 22:01, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Alternative History:Adoption Policy
See the link above. I wrote down the unofficial policy we have been using for adopting timeline. Please read and comment. Mitro 21:38, March 10, 2011 (UTC)