Community Central talk:Spotlights/CPFW

Hello. I am HF, an admin on the CPFW. I'm on my alt because my main is blocked here. The wiki I hail from has 3,350 articles, at this moment, and increases every day. I'm sad to say however, some are stubs, not well written, and poor in quality. WE RECENTLY closed admin applications. The wiki has a logo, and it has been the same since November of last year. The main page has links to HQA articles, and has a FAOTW, feaured picture, and quote. It is also unprotected.

The MyHome and WikiSticikies are enabled, and used frequently. Our sidebar is also clean and organized, and the categories are also organized. The sitenotice is changed frequently to inform users of events happening, and bills that need to be voted on.

The welcome template is also signed by latest user.

The wiki has had some bad reviews from other people, but we make them to assure some mentally ill, or mentally scarred users do not get offended. We also began reconnecting to the CPW, and are both advertising each other.

I wish to inform you that even though our block logs and user right logs are messy, its just our admins voicing our opinions. Our admins might not always get together, but in the end, amazing breakthroughs come through, and rules are to be made. The COC is a result of all the users putting their minds together, and making sure nobody gets hurt. Sure, it may be strict, but weren't your 8th Grade Language Arts teachers strict? Of course they were. Probably. =|. But still, you have pretty good grammar right?

The point is, we make our policies strict so our users can become better editors.

Please consider our wiki. -- H a pp y f a c e 00:40, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, we are VERY VERY good, only bad thing, um, there is no bad points IMHO! --I miss pufflezzz....(cry) 21:19, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, this is a very friendly, fun, peacful, community. We have over 3,500 pages 95% of which are well written and not stubs. Please consider us for spotlight. --Anniemoose98 Club Penguin Fanon Wiki Sysop (Talk)

Yes, please spotlight us.--12yz12ab BAWWWWW to me because I dont care Do you REALLY want to see my edits? Or where I made them? 00:26, January 21, 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm yes, I also think it should be in the spotlight. Dancing Penguin  18:55, January 21, 2010 (UTC)

I would love us to be spotlighted. But... there's a few problems. That is to say there are problems with said wiki. First of all, it is not peaceful. I will admit this is sometimes my own fault (I'm a little rowdy), however, often it is not. Second, our admins can be very trigger happy sometimes. I had a friend who was banned because once, on a different wiki, he had an argument with one of our admins. We also just had a huge inter-wiki war with the Club Penguin Wiki. And, this COC (Code of Conduct) we have, is often ignored by admins. I can name individual situatioins on request. Once again, I do want us to be spotlighted, but I also want to warn people. Some users may say I'm a revolutionary crazy who hates the wiki and all who edit it (or words to that effect), but in truth I love the wiki. It's just a little.... crazy sometimes. That's the situation IMHO. I know it is also the view of one user know as NotAnEdiotr. He is currently banned for the reasons I stated above. But it is listed as "site destablisation". Thanks for reading!

--Sheepman (Talk page OF DOOM ) 22:05, January 21, 2010 (UTC)

To be fair, I have had arguments with him on the Club Penguin Fanon as well.--109.78.206.213 14:12, January 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * This is because he did destabilize the sites with many things in which I can bring up apon request, including making one of our users quit (who came back after Not an Editor was banned) Also, Sheepman has destablized the site almost as much as Not an Editor did. He is probably just mad that he spent some time being banned for the same reason. Also, that so called war was settled and we are once more peaceful with the CPW. That was because of the Club PEnguin WIki first making a vote to ban links from us, making THEM start the war. --Anniemoose98 Club Penguin Fanon Wiki Sysop (Talk)

The war was both sides fault. The official causus belli was User:TurtleShroom (an admin on both wikis) posted an appeal to vote against something (I forget what) on the Club Penguin Fanon's Sitenotice. Some other Club Penguin Wiki Admins started a vote to remove all links to the Club Penguin Fanon in order to limit such 'interference'. he CPF started a similar vote in retaliation...

and so on and so forth. However, as Anniemoose stated, the war is over.

I have never attempted to 'destabilize' any wiki, and nor has Sheepman. I would be interested to see this list of my crimes if id din't know that they were all nonsense (altough he is welcome to prove me wrong if he can.) Sheepman is actually less guilty than I, as I have indeed fought arguments that sometimes affect the Wiki's community (although rarely drastically) whereas Sheep has done so only once or twice, and on a much lesser scale.

Incidentally, he was only just unbanned and I am still banned despite haveing obayed the 'Code of Conduct' to the letter.

Yours,

109.78.206.213

14:12, January 24, 2010 (UTC)

There are also too many disagreements with the COC, and the Death Code is going under a reform. Yes, spotlight would be nice, but we need a little, just a little more time. |||DZGuymed||| 03:06, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

Ya. We do need more time. I am nae angry about nothing, Anniemoose. I got banned 'cause I said sometning which other people thought was a swear word, but I didn't think was one. I would never knowingly swear. I told you everyone would try to discount my opinion. NotAnEditor never made anyone quit. --Sheepman (Talk page OF DOOM ) 18:31, January 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think here we can say that they banned you there for saying a swear word ( "damn" ) in a sentence. You are wrong however in the part you say NAE never made anyone quit. TurtleShroom semi-quit and said it was because he couldn't stand NAE. NAE was blocked shortly after by an admin and TurtleShroom returned shortly after, he said "In regardance to my Semiquit template, that was an overreaction". Man, this is confusing. Dancing Penguin  16:49, January 24, 2010 (UTC)

He did not, however, know it was a swear. He's Irish (as am I) and in Ireland it's not a swear. Also, the SemiQuit template can mean 'I might quit', 'I'm not editing much', or 'be warned! I will quit if you don't obey me!'. Draw your own conclusions as to what he meant.--109.76.132.234 07:26, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

Why not? It would be a good Idea. -- Swiss Ninja   - I place the Royal Seal on this page - 04:30, January 24, 2010 (UTC)

Wow how do you get many wiki


 * Please excuse me, as I would like to share my opinion. I think this wiki is not a very good candidate for a spotlight, for these reasons:


 * 1) The wiki needs to be friendly and stable, which it is not.
 * 2) this
 * 3) this
 * 4) this
 * 5) this
 * 6) Most admins abuse, from my view.

Please consider fixing these issues before you apply. -- seahorseruler | Talk  (EditCount) Yoshi! 20:56, January 24, 2010 (UTC)

There is pointing out flaws in a site, and then... there's what Seahorse did. Our MediaWiki messages are not destructive or counteractive to our policies, and complaining just because they say "PWN" and disagree with the politcially correct CPW's messages does not mean we are an unworthy canidate. It may be part of my raising, but I believe that the punishment of villains should be more important than rehabilitating them. I will admit that I can e over-serious and harsh on vandals.

I admit that if someone vandalizes our site and erases an article with obscenities, I will destroy them. Not block, not ban, destroy. I have a total zero-tolerance rule on vandals, but I have been working on being less trigger-happy. In fact, have indeed been less trigger happy.

I will inform you that I, the casus belli of the first "war", voted against removing the CPW from our adverstising sidebar. I even warned them. I can produce that evidence on demand, should you wish. The movement to take the CPW off of the affliate list was not my idea. In fact, because of that vote, it was the CPW who chose to remove us, and we retaliated by removing them (I voted no on both). Again, I can produce evidence for this, if you ask for it.

Seahorse and that IP Address (who has done a lot of things to our site, mainly causing flame wars, which, again, I can produce on demand) are focusing on things that occured in the long apst.

You should recall that I have recieved administrator rights on the Mario Fanon, which I applied for straight to the Staff and people. I had to vow not to cause any "drama", and I have succeeded in not causing "drama".

The wars, Walruses, and "drama" are things of the past. The CPFW is floruishing and has been drama-free for a good while now. We have finally settled into a stable system, accepted the CPW's new regime, and have focused, once again, on our editing. I have come along way both in real life and online since then, and though I will not hesistate to defend my positions, I believe that I can defend them far better these days.

The CPFW deserves its spotlight. We have come a VERY, VERY long way since you last saw us. Don't let the IP Addresses and Seahorse fool you. Seahorse is a major CPW member who participated in the so-called "wars" as much as I or anyone else did. He rarely comes to the CPFW and has made few mainspace contributions. He is not "innocent" or a "bystander", just as I am not innocent either. Everyone who has commented here has an active roll in the drama of the past.

I plea for you to overlook the drama of the past and help us prosper and embrace the future. Please, give the CPFW its spotlight.

Sincerely, -- † This is Serious Business! Jesus Loves You and Died for You!! †    :)  :) TurtleShroom Productions: Patent Pending. † 18:51, January 28, 2010 (UTC)


 * Hmm, NotAnEditor has repeatedly tried to come back. He's blocked but somehow his IP changes and he says he'll not give up. Maybe you should give him a chance because he hasn't vandalized or anything and he just wants to I dunno, talk? Dancing Penguin  23:05, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

I have so many reasons why this wiki is unsuitable for spotlight:
 * 1) A lot of their pages don't have anything to do with Club Penguin at all.
 * 2) No one wants to read stuff that only applies to the users. People want to read stuff about Club Penguin. Why put it on Spotlight if your main audience is existing users?
 * 3) Your CoC is remarkbly unfair. As well as the fact no one uses it.
 * 4) Most notable, I was banned there "for all eternity!!!111, as they would say", for saying crap once on the shoutbox. I admit that was breaking the policy, but their CoC states that I should have got a warning. They ignored it and blocked me indefinetly simply because they hate me. Luckily Explorer767 came to justice and gave me a warning. However...
 * 5) I was blocked once again for "eternity", because I was following the policy on the CPW. Sounds strange? I removed a vote from a user who had voted on one of the CPW's forums. However, she was breaking the policy because only registered CPW users can vote on our forums, according to our policy. Despite that, she blocked me indefinetly on the Fanon wiki, which is a completely different wiki.
 * 6) No freedom of speech. I made a blog there addressing all of the above issues, but they deleted it, because they didn't like it. I tried complaining on Explorer's talk page, but he only permits compliments on his talk page and no hatred/complaints whatsoever.

Most important though is number one, because nobody wants to read this stuff anyway. I suggest just keeping with the huge userbase you already have, instead of risking it by applying for something completely irrelevant. Tigernose (Talk) 19:45, January 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * The second most important problem is that they seem to block everyone who has done something wrong (or in some cases, nothing wrong) for all eternity. What? A simple disobedience of the CoC doesn't always have to end in banishment? It's cruel, they also don't let you talk on your own user talk, thinking you will cause more havoc. And they still think that rollbacks, sysops and bureaucrats are ranks... Tigernose (Talk) 19:47, January 29, 2010 (UTC)

If this was one month ago, I'd be ranting and causing more drama, but I'm done with that. There's a part of me that calls to defend the CPFW's dignity, but I would rather lose Spotlight than gain a flame war.

I don't think we should have spotlight -- YET. I personally think we're close, but we're not at that point of near-perfection.

@Tigernose -- I would like to apologize for Anniemoose's blocking you. That was total power abuse and I had no idea that he was thinking. DP unblocked you, BTW.

Explorer out. --Explorer 767 20:40, January 29, 2010 (UTC)

Tigernose is the CPFW's number one hater, and, as you know all to well, my "successor". He is heavilly over-exaggerating our Code of Conduct and our blocking policies. In fact, half-to-all of what he says is absed on a single grain of truth: me.

Each arguement needs a rebuke, because Tigernose is just bashing the site. He may be jealous because we are out-doing him at the moment.

Each issue he presented requires a rebuttal, some are exaggerated, some are just me, and some are outright lies.
 * A lot of their pages don't have anything to do with Club Penguin at all.
 * Tigernose fails to grasp that, early in its inception, we expanded far beyond Club Penguin and into Antarctica. If you actually read our items (and a LOT of people do), you would notice the constant references to CP, to the game, and to game physics as a whole. Someone wanted to call us "Club Penguin Fan Universe", because we cover CP and beyond. We also keep everything on a similar level and mindset to CP (mine carts, phones, agencies, waddling, history), even when we parody the widest of subjects.


 * Your CoC is remarkbly unfair. As well as the fact no one uses it.
 * Part one is 100% bias, part two is a total lie. Everyone obeys the COC. The strike policy... I don't obey the strike policy, but everyone else does. He thinks that everyone is a clone, even a yes-man/puppet, of me.


 * Most notable, I was banned there "for all eternity!!!111, as they would say", for saying crap once on the shoutbox. I admit that was breaking the policy, but their CoC states that I should have got a warning. They ignored it and blocked me indefinately simply because they hate me. Luckily Explorer767 came to justice and gave me a warning. However...
 * At the time, "crap" (pardon my language) was banned as a "swear". It is harsh, but kid-friendly. However, we eventually legalized "crap" on the box (but not in the main articles, yet) after a fair discussion on an open forum. He was unblocked.


 * I was blocked once again for "eternity", because I was following the policy on the CPW. Sounds strange? I removed a vote from a user who had voted on one of the CPW's forums. However, she was breaking the policy because only registered CPW users can vote on our forums, according to our policy. Despite that, she blocked me indefinetly on the Fanon wiki, which is a completely different wiki.
 * Anniemoose, the blocker in question, was new to being a Sysop, and Tigernose did not have the right to remove someone else's vote. You see, Tigernose's "regime" worships the ballot and democracy, and promises that "everyone is equal", that "no one is different from anyone else", and that "sysops are not ranks, they are buttons". This socialism only extends to where Tigernose wants it. You see, if he truly pulled through with his democratic promises, anyone can vote. Plus, I don't recall it being written at the date of the rigging, about two weeks ago. Anniemoose has the right to vote as much as anyone else did.
 * Anniemoose was vengeful and did so in revenge, yes, but she did give a warning at least once for Tigernose to stop cheating the ballot. Her move does not reflect the opinions of the database. Explorer unblocked him.


 * No freedom of speech. I made a blog there addressing all of the above issues, but they deleted it, because they didn't like it. I tried complaining on Explorer's talk page, but he only permits compliments on his talk page and no hatred/complaints whatsoever.
 * Oh boo hoo! He loves to complain; that is all he does on the CPFW. You see, Tigernose does not edit on the CPFW. He makes little-to-no mainspace contributions. He never benefits the site, he only comes to complain about something on a blog or talk page. I've never heard him say a nice thing to someone, unless it is an idea he agrees with, or it comes from the keyboard of one of his comrades. Besides, there is hypocracy afoot: he removed Anniemoose's vote and opinion from his forum. Is that free speech? No, no it is not. It is no worse than the deletion of a blog that is nothing but whining. Our site, contrary to the myths, does NOT ban criticism. I've criticized before. However, we ban whining. Tigernose goes on and whines. "The COC is unfair!", "Your MediaWiki policies are lame and politically incorrect!", "You hate me!", "I hate this policy!", "You're stupid!". Of course, Tigernose doesn't actually talk like that or call us stupid, but he does nothing but attack and whine. Freedoms can be abused.
 * Explorer is clear on his talk page on what he removes and what he does not. Tigernose was doing nothing but whining. That is not serious criticism. Seriosu criticism would be, say, "Hey Explorer, I don't like how that article is written, or that picture is a bit blurry. May I reccomend...", or "Why did you block him? He's done nothing wrong! You see, where he coems from...". Criticism is not "YOUR COC STINKS AND YOU HATE ME!". That is whining.


 * I am the only one who ignores the Strike System. I also give warnings, but the strike system, to me, is a bureaucratic waste of time. Vandals always come back for revenge. Also, AG is changing his IP Address so he can continue to spam us night and day. We blocked him for endlessly fighting with us, yet making few contributions. He has a history of sockpuppeting (AG Banned, AG Banned 1, AG Banned 2, Agentgenius, AgentGenius, AgentGenius, but the "A" is an alpha symbol, NotAnEditor...) and riots. He once caused a flame war so bad that I nearly quit in frustration. He is determined to un-censor the site and will not leave, no matter how many times I ask him, and no matter how many times I block his sockpuppets and new IP addresses. He uses MS-DOS to renew his IP address every time he gets banned, so I can not properly destroy him.

Every story has more than one viewpoint. Tigernose only gave you his. The drama is of the past, and these haters are trying to re-arouse it on your talk page to prove that we are incompetent to hold Spotlight. We are not in turmoil, we are not laced with drama, and we are not evil. I think it is time for our spotlight! Please consider us in the future! -- † This is Serious Business! Jesus Loves You and Died for You!! †    :)  :) TurtleShroom Productions: Patent Pending. † 03:41, February 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * I strongly suggest everyone take this conversation elsewhere. The spotlights page is not the place for drama. If you feel that this discussion is pertinent to the spotlight process, feel free to leave a link to the location where you continue the conversation. =) - Brandon Rhea (talk) 03:43, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

TS, can you please be just a little more civil? Using harsh words is a vicious cycle.

Other than that, I'd be happy to debunk a few poor arguments... albeit civilly.

I'll just begin by pointing out that Tigernose doesn't edit the site, and that I feel his opinion may be the result of a hasty generalization due to the fact that he's only had a small taste of the database.

We ARE working on improving CP-related content, and I'm currently thinking of proposing a law that requires all new articles to reference Club Penguin as much as possible. Explorer 767 23:36, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

I understand Explorer, I am simply making my own point here, but TurtleShroom obviously can't leave it alone. And with the Anniemoose incident, I do have the right to remove his vote per our policy, and it's right too, most wikis disallow inexperienced users to visit even! But our policy clearly states that we are allowed to remove such votes.

On another note, I personally don't think the CPFW needs spotlight, because it won't benefit at all from it, as I explained in my message: it's audience is simply it's userbase, new users are linked there through the CPW or something, but not from spotlight. I do understand my opinion is partially influenced by generalisation and whatnot, however I do know what I'm talking about and I am not new to the wiki (I refused to join the wiki when I first found it out, back in October 2008 - If I am wrong about the date then pardon me, I can't recall well when I found it out).

Also, my voice doesn't have to influence Wikia Staff, and therefore TurtleShroom shouldn't be offended on someone else's behalf. Tigernose (Talk) 17:52, February 3, 2010 (UTC)