User talk:A morris

Suggestions
I'm going to give you some suggestions about this wiki as we can make several improvements. So here they are: I hope you listen to me for this time. --Walker guy94 (talk) 08:20, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * We should close the thread of "The Burn Wall". Even though those opinions are made anonymously, the negative ones are still considered as personal attacks. This is a collaborative site not a community site, so we shouldn't make opinions about any other contributors.
 * I've been checking through the admin request page, and I've concluded that this wiki will be flooding in adminisrators. I suggest that you should reconsider they requests more complicated than before as some admins who were absent in the past few weeks have returned to this wiki. More importantly, you should close the admin request page when no more admins are required.
 * Thanks for your suggestions. I will consider taking action in the next few days. When I was first given the ability to give other admin rights I was told by Wikia's helper "the more admins, the better!", but you are not the first to suggest that there may be a limit or ratio between admins and regular editors. I will do some research on it and also check on which admins are still active. I was looking at a wikia a couple of days ago (Avatar wiki I think) and they have strict policies regarding how long an admin can be inactive before their adminship is revoked. That might be something we would want to consider. --a_morris (talk) 13:31, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for responding! I'm sure we can make this wiki even better in the future. --Walker guy94 (talk) 11:00, April 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * I personally believe that administratorship should only be revoked if the admin has gotten banned for something major (vandalism, etc. minor would be if they didn't vandalize or be rude to another user, but got banned for something else) or if the admin is absent for 1 year & months +, and show no signs of returning to the wiki (i.e. by telling a fellow user on Facebook or something they'll never return to this wiki/Wikia in general). Once they do become active (not just editing 5 pages or something) their administratorship should be given back, because they (probably) worked hard for it! ^_^. Bleeh (talk) 22:38, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * This is my opinion of who you should take away their adminship. TheDataMonster, Bella Goth, Bob Newbie is KL, Walker guy94, and JAL. Archie 02:19, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Admins become admins for a reason. Whether that reason is that they are good editors, are kind to users, or both, there's is always a reason (or there should always be). Anyways, only staff could remove Bob Newbie is kl's administratorship because he's a bureaucrat, not just a sysop. I do agree with JAL's administratorship being removed, though, it hasn't been 1 year and 3 months since his latest edit. If he doesn't edit before one year and three months is over, I think his administratorship should be removed until he comes back and becomes active once again. If he comes back and becomes active again. Bleeh (talk) 02:38, April 29, 2010 (UTC)

Bob and Betty Newbie of console
Bob and Betty actually are not the same people. Secondly they appear in the console version of the sims 2, not The Sims 2 Pets (Console).
 * I fixed that in Betty Newbie (console)'s page after completely reading Bob's. They seem the same to me they are even married to the same people. --a_morris (talk) 21:09, April 14, 2010 (UTC)

Hi A Morris
Its myuntoldfunstory i have a question do you mind if i make a page on this wiki advertising the sims 2 pets wiki if you dont want me to i completely understand and i DO NOT want to be known as compition im just making that wiki to expand the part aboute it on your wiki and if you want to pleeese tell your freinds about it and if you can pleeeeeeeeese edit if you can possibly do it
 * I will link to your wiki, where we have other related sites, at The Sims Wiki:About and in the sidebar. --a_morris (talk) 00:29, April 15, 2010 (UTC)

Transparent logo
I asked Dharden if he/she (?) wanted a transparent logo, or that it has to be a white logo, because of the background. Dharden said that the logo was a non-issue for him/her (?), and that I should ask you. So, here goes:

Would you like to have a transparent logo or has it to be a white logo, because of the background (can be made more beautiful with #background_strip in Monaco.css)?

I can make the logo transparent, and I can upload it as File:Wiki-transparent, for example.

Dennyboy1997 06:08, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

P.S. Sorry for my awful English, I'm not very good at grammar...

Hiya
Can you take a look at what I wrote on File talk:Wiki.png? I was annoyed at your logo being inside that ugly white box, so I removed it as best as I could. Oset&bull;c 14:39, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

request for Bureaucrat
A_morris look at requests for adminship.--Monster2821 21:13, July 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Monster, I see that you want bureacrat rights, if I was the bureacrat, I would turn you down. You don't have much expirence with wikis but I'm just a regular user here. --Auror. plus the great Andrachome 23:54, July 9, 2010 (UTC)

Two template suggestions
Hello, It's me pestering you again. I got some inspiration for two templates while browsing other wikias. They are basically simple message templates, but I wanted your opinion on their usefulness first. The first is basically just adding a warning to the top of the template page, stating that the template is still under development or undergoing testing and people should not use it. The other template is somewhat similar, but urges users to help out and provide feedback through the talk page. Appropriate categories would be added to the templates of course. This would also make it easier for users to see if someone needs a hand on a template or just wants a second opinion. What are your thoughts? Duskey ( talk )( blog ) 06:39, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. --a_morris (talk) 14:18, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * What about a third asking for feedback/suggestions on developed templates? --a_morris (talk) 14:20, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * That was actually my intention for the 2nd template I mentioned. I guess that was unclear. The purpose of the 1st one would be to stop people seeing it and thinking it's ok to use on pages. The 2nd is to let template-savvy people know that you wouldn't mind some feedback on it and also to make it easy to find said templates (through a category). Duskey ( talk )( blog ) 22:28, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Admin vs Sysop
Hi, I have noticed that there are two similar templates, here and here. Why are there two so similar templates?   Jeve  '  Talk  16:33, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * idk. Does it matter? --a_morris (talk) 16:38, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * An admin and a sys-op is not the same thing and using the same image for both is a good idea since it shows people that this user is part of The Sims Wiki staff. Sorry to butt in on a discussion. Duskey ( talk )( blog ) 22:32, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * A sysop is an admin but an admin is not always a sysop. However, I don't think it is vitally that a userbox make the distinction. --a_morris (talk) 20:39, July 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Which reminds me, I've been meaning to ask you something, a morris. Do you mind if people respond to the more trivial matters on your talk page? This page seems quite busy and I easily understand if it gets overwhelming seeing as how you get messages on everything from how to edit an article to vandalism to expansion pack rumors and everything in between. It also appears you're the most active bureaucrat, so I personally see no harm in other users adding answers or clarifications to questions asked, even though it is YOUR talk page. How do you feel about this? Duskey ( talk )( blog ) 22:35, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * By all means feel free to join in. --a_morris (talk) 20:39, July 12, 2010 (UTC)

66.189.32.187
I gave this IP a 3-day block for continuing to vandalize after having been warned twice. Given their track record, I'm not sure they don't deserve a week, but I know policy is not to block anon users for too long. Dharden 18:47, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Re: Affiliates
Yes, I had a similar idea. My idea what simply to put websites who link to us in an 'Affiliate' category in addition to 'Websites' and then have that displayed under The Sims Wiki:Affiliates, is that possible using transclusion? It would keep us from updating the list manually and only require us to re-post their microbanner when we add a new one. A banner AND a text list seem redundant if it can be handled by a category.

I'm not sure it'd work, but couldn't we use the 'includeonly' and 'noinclude' tags for the category? Something like this on Category:Affiliates so the normal category text would only show if you were actually on the category page and not on the affiliates page.

A list of websites who have linked back to us.

--CATEGORY LISTING--

The Sims Wiki:Affiliates would look like this:

--TABLE WITH AFFILIATES BANNERS-- (Added manually once we've exchanged pleasantries)

How does that sound? Duskey ( talk )( blog ) 20:00, July 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * Aha, I see. I just thought it'd be unneccesary to link to affiliates in banner and then text form. Whether we do that or not, I still think the category listing should be included at the bottom. Duskey ( talk )( blog ) 20:42, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Tookute4m3
I gave this user a 1-week block for profanity and harassment after they'd already been blocked once for that. Given their attitude and track record, I doubt that they have any intention of becoming a constructive contributor, and am not sure that a week is long enough. Personally, I think they've earned a month, maybe even two, but I'm not sure about going directly from 3 days to one or two months. Dharden 21:42, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Troll?
I've been getting ... strange ... edits on my talk page from User:Iesha Parsons. They appear to be attempts to sow discord. Would it be out-of-bounds for me to remove them? Also, any suggestions about what to do in cases like this, aside from following the principle of Do Not Feed the Trolls? Dharden 04:49, July 13, 2010 (UTC)

Votes on redirects
I've noticed that redirect pages, retain their old votes. Doesn't this prevent new votes on the intended article to be seperate of the old votes on the redirect page? Ideally we would need to move the votes on the redirect page to the new page or at least reset the old votes. Also, I think redirect pages should be made ineligible for voting. Are you aware of a way to fix this issue and what are your thoughts? Duskey ( talk )( blog ) 04:38, July 14, 2010 (UTC)