User talk:The doctor

Archives

 * Archive 1
 * Archive 2
 * Archive 3

Spoilers
Hey doc! I left you a long note as a reply to your comment on my page, but here's another topic. One thing I think we need to look at in reference to continued good administration of the wiki is spoilers. I don't really think it's OK to put spoilers into an edit summary at all -- at one point, somebody added a body count from a big climactic novel and then as their edit summary put all the information so anyone on recentchanges then knew the end of that novel.

Also, all spoilers from current novels and comics in articles and on talk pages should be marked, and perhaps our existing spoiler templates could be streamlined some to show what kind of spoilers are involved -- perhaps a date so we know when to remove it. Just a thought on that, although I definitely want to enforce the ban of edit summary spoilers and require spoiler warnings on talk pages.

After all, do you really want to know the ending of the comic I just read? I got the one with the limited edition photo cover after all and would love to share ;) -- Captain MKB 21:48, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Mike
I have thuroughly review his actions, and some of them are opposite of the rules. His conduct toward others at times also is highly questionable as the least. The reason for such warnings is shown in your own comment. When one ignores a problem, no matter how minor, it usually only becomes worse. And yet that is what yourself and 8of5 are doing. Sadly, such a thing appears to be all too common on wiki sites, which is why I did not simply leave the matter with other administrators.

AdmiralYamakawa 12:16, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Memory_Beta:Protection_policy#Protecting_pages

Protecting pages In general, administrators should not protect pages which they have edited in the past (this includes discussing the article on the talk page). Administrator powers are not editor privileges — administrators are simply representatives of the community of contributors as a whole. If an administrator is involved with a page and wants that page protected, he should contact another administrator to do it for them.

Because wiki pages are supposed to be open to everyone, it's best to leave pages protected for as short at time as possible. Talk pages should never be protected.

Special:Contributions/Captainmike

02:45, 20 January 2009 (hist) (diff) N Memory Beta talk:Log in before making drastic changes‎ (New page: Could I have a consensus of registered users here -- would this policy apply to an anonymous user who wished to create a new detailed index of starship classes in a new format we would not...)

02:46, 20 January 2009 (hist) (diff) m Memory Beta talk:Log in before making drastic changes‎ (Protected "Memory Beta talk:Log in before making drastic changes": vandal protection [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed] (expires 02:46, 3 February 2009 (UTC)))

02:48, 20 January 2009 (hist) (diff) N Memory Beta talk:No personal attacks‎ (New page: Should this policy have a more detailed description of what constitutes a personal attack? Name calling, for example -- how much is too far? -- AdmiralYamakawa 06:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC))

02:48, 20 January 2009 (hist) (diff) m Memory Beta talk:No personal attacks‎ (Protected "Memory Beta talk:No personal attacks": vandal protection [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed] (expires 02:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC)))

00:17, 21 January 2009 (hist) (diff) Memory Beta talk:Deletion policy‎ (note on turnng meaningless/futureless definition/list articles into redirects to like categories (re: starship classes)

00:18, 21 January 2009 (hist) (diff) m Memory Beta talk:Deletion policy‎ (Protected "Memory Beta talk:Deletion policy": vandal protection [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed] (expires 00:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC))) (top)

Memory_Beta:Protection_policy#List_of_protected_pages

List of protected pages If you protect a page, or find a protected page not listed on Project:Protected page, please add it to the list. Please also add a short description of ten words or less indicating why you protected it.

Memory Beta:Sign your posts on talk pages

Because everyone is allowed to edit the talk pages, the discussions can sometimes get a little chaotic. It's important that everyone sign their posts on talk pages so that individual statements can be attributed to specific users.

Signing your posts is easy: use three tildes (AdmiralYamakawa) to sign just your name, or four tildes (AdmiralYamakawa 06:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC)) to sign your name PLUS the current date and time.

Memory Beta:Be considerate to new members

AdmiralYamakawa 17:10, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Anon IP users
See doc -- no explanation why, but this user has a serious hate on for me -- thinks i've violated all these policies, but no fact to back up the flames. Completely ridiculous.

Coincidentally -- that IP address I accidentally banned for three days instead of permanently -- just in case that user was causing any sort of problem in the future. All three are now on permanent blocks. -- Captain MKB 14:11, 25 January 2009 (UTC)


 * On this latest "policy annoyance", I have a rebuttal:

Protected pages
I stand by my position protecting "Memory Beta project" pages -- these are administrative articles and do not relate to the rules about protecting articles in our regular namespace. Since only registered users are allowed to influence policy, only registered users should be allowed to debate policy. These pages aren't protected from edits, they're protected onlybfrom non-voting anons and vandals. -- Captain MKB 17:46, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Signing posts
Again, welcome messages are administrative templates and are not considered "posts" that need to be "signed" -- Captain MKB 17:46, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Being considerate
I've been very considerate to new members, even to the point of delaying banning them after they commit serious breaches of policy. I even unblocked a banned IP address to give the user a second chance. One banned IP i gave a shorter span to see if they wanted to return and contribute. Although, since the policy says to block these users, I should not be so lenient. If anything I've been TOO considerate. -- Captain MKB 22:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Breaches of policy
there are breaches of policy and then there are serious breaches of policy -- for example, no one is ever going to be banned for failing to sign a talk comment.

For banning -- A "serious" breach of policy would be a threat, like promising to destroy someone or to hack their personal information data. Another serious breach would be an insult, like calling someone a Nazi or spitting the f-word at them repeatedly. -- Captain MKB 17:46, 25 January 2009 (UTC)