User talk:Smirkenbowls

Personal message in commentary
User talk pages exist for a reason, putting personal messages on articles is just as bad as what you were reverting... --Inschato 00:45, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Explain your problem?--Quatroking - Row! Row! Fight the power! 01:17, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I double checked and noticed it was not included in the actual article, nonetheless it would have been seen by the user in question in much faster if it was put on their talk page instead. --Inschato 15:24, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for telling me what article you're talking about >.>--Quatroking - Row! Row! Fight the power! 02:04, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome :P --Inschato 02:11, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, that article. Well I was lazy as always and considering he was the only author (and online at the same time) it was a pretty easy way. Nothing wrong with that.--Quatroking - Row! Row! Fight the power! 06:12, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Fanboyism
Hey... same Quatroking from Phoneburnia? --Hikashi
 * Depends. Who's asking?--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 15:13, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * {AC} Hikashi from Phoneburnia. --Hikashi
 * Oh.--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 12:30, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Edit on chess page
Hey. RE: "We prefer not to have all the "zomg i made this" stuff. This includes who did something first, etc." on Chess, I just thought it would clear dispute over the first to implement each game. Also, the tone was not 'zomg', it was informative and tasteful. I have returned the first date of play, but not the names. SteGriff 11:24, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, with the zomg I just meant the overall use of it, not really the way you put it. Actually we should get a userbox for these kidns of data, it would make it a lot easier.--Quatroking - Row! Row! Fight the power! 13:40, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Your edit to Talk:NewFrontier RP Server
You really did not have to edit the talk page, agreed character bio's are not exactly whats means to be placed in a talk thread but we wanted to save room, its hardly effecting you in anyway if we do, the wiki article is there as a guide for new players and the previous talk page helped new players find people with certain roles. Also I don't see any reason why we can't edit the article as many times as we want, it doesnt hurt anyone and you can always increase the amount of edits shown in the recent changes. --BiGfrend 21:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

And this isn't? Gordenfreechmen 20:40, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Alright, it was only a tease, but still, I find how weird people don't know about their User page. Gordenfreechmen 00:42, 2 September 2009 (UTC) and fyi, its User talk, not User:.

Deletion template
Hey, I made a template that will alert you when there's another page you can send to oblivion! Watch Category:Deleteme. :) --Misterangry 04:26, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

deletion of indev
alright thanks ill do that --Kevin77 18:07, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Question
Because the minepedia doesnt have all the cool things wikipedia has, i was wondering how you got an infobox? i cant figure out how to get one.
 * We use templates for that. Also, sign your replies! Quatroking - Garble Garble! 07:50, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Request
I am trying to devote my time for the Minepedia and I was wondering if there a chance I could be promoted to give more contribution to the site and somewhat earn my trust here. Not that I am more special than anyone else here, but i really want to help in any way possible instead of reporting all the time whats is wrong. I do understand I have to keep a neutral point of view and that I have to do the right choice. So please, if you consider my request or not, let me know and I would love to have a talk on any messenger/chat system possible.--FuzzyWuff 18:48, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Regarding protection of the custom servers list
I understand the need to prevent vandalism, and shameless self-promotion. I deal with it all the time on wikipedia. Anyway, to the point, either it has been enabled, or it will; Flagged revisions.

Quite simply, flagged revisions(an extension) will prevent any edits made to a page, unless the editor has a special right, autoreviewer status. Unfortunately, the downside is that it creates(at least in my opinion) a massive backlog of edits to be reviewed for inclusion(hence why I was against it on WP). However, given the small amount of users here, it may work for this wiki.

I'm certain it would solve your problems with protection. The right of autoreviewer can only be granted by an admin, and only edits by admins/autoreviewers will get through, solving the need for full protection.

Hope I helped.Daedalus969 06:57, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

As an aside, if you need me to confirm I am the same one who uses the Daedalus969 account on wikipedia, simply ask.Daedalus969 06:59, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I would also suggest the Extension for Parser Functions, which, in my opinion, are a must. They enable much more functionality, in lieu of logical functions, page name-based changes, time, and error handling.Daedalus969 07:16, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

As another aside, I would also suggest the category tree extension, which allows a tree of all pages in a category to be transcluded onto a page. Useful for keeping track of pages pending deletion. To this end, along with other small changes in the field I am most familiar with, I have made it easier for you to track pages pending deletion. Here, I have added a category that will only be included on pages the template is transcluded to. After a slight fix(forgot to add the includeonly tags), I'll fix my signature to how it is on wikipedia.Daedalus969 07:24, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Forgot to list off the cat, it's Category:Pages Pending Deletion.Daedalus969 07:26, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

And now my signature is fixed, unfortunately my userpage is still a redlink, :/ .. I'll get to that later.— Dæ dαlus Contribs 07:32, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Of course, I'll self revert any changes you don't like, but I can't tonight. Heading to bed. Night.— Dæ dαlus Contribs 08:35, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * eh, it works fine right now and I'm too lazy to get all tech up in this bitch and apply new addons and stuff.--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 10:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC):
 * I realize how it's pushing you away.. but if not that, you at least need to add in some anti-porn spam regex. You can easily find out how to at the mediawiki website, or I can link you to the specific page here, if you like.  Either way, it would solve a few problems, mainly with that spam.— Dæ dαlus Contribs 20:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Give me one case of porn spam on the wiki. We already have akismet installed and running greatly, so linkspam won't work either.--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 22:47, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Let me see if I can find it, I only mentioned it because I saw someone revert it.— Dæ dαlus Contribs 09:06, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I give up. It's too far gone into my history.— Dæ dαlus Contribs 04:03, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Reverting/Changing Images
Before you change images, please consider the pages they will affect. Also check them afterward to see if they look proper. You'd recently reverted the blocks Template1 image and it made the picture on the blocks page cut heavily into the wording on the left by being too wide. -KinoftheFlames 06:53, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Deleting Pages
I've noticed you delete wiki pages frequently, which is good considering there is a lot of excess pages that are unneeded. I would like to ask that if you delete a wiki page such as Ladder because it is better listed under a category (in this case Crafting), then to please instead of deleting it, redirect it to it's existing location. Also, if the only thing on a page is vandalism look at the history of the page to see the last edit that didn't have vandalism on it and revert the page to that. An example of this is the page Roller coasters which I saw once to have some relevant information. The need for that article is debatable of course, but then I'd think it should be talked about on the talk page and not outright deleted. Thanks! -KinoftheFlames 03:29, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The rollercoaster page only had one history entry, the one I deleted. Also checking if a certain page contains information that is already listed somewhere else on the wiki is just a fuckload of work. People will make redirects, eventually, anyways.--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 08:51, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Please review the page Category:Pages Pending Deletion frequently for articles requiring deletion. The new delete template places articles for deletion in this category. -KinoftheFlames 13:05, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I already told him of that. I was the one that created that category.  I do much template work on wikipedia myself, so I know how they work.— Dæ <font color="Blue">dαlus <font color="Green">Contribs 22:11, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikis are CONSTANTLY EVOLVING. There's no reason to delete a page that doesn't have a lot of content because before long it will change and grow like the rest of the wiki. I understand if it's a page that's been long dead but you just going around and deleting things as you see fit is just plain stupid. PurelyAtomic 16:41, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Instead of yelling bullshit at me, how about letting me know which articles you're talking about? Maybe I can actually take you serious then, don't you think?--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 17:03, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Adminstrator request
I intend to try and fix the Cuprite article that got vandalized to hell and back. King me! CompuHacker 22:37, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

In case you didn't know,
You can prevent a deleted page's recreation by fully protecting the page. Hope that helps.— <font color="Green">Dæ <font color="Blue">dαlus <font color="Green">Contribs 20:54, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Yo why was I banned (Drone)
"no reason given" doesn't seem like a particulary useful ban, especially since you then decided to delete my opinion on a comical page which I believe should be kept. Are you really no better than the so called "trolls" by rigging votes just because your opinion wasn't winning? 00:28, 8 July 2010(UTC)

I concur with Drone. By owning a *wiki, it is your responsibility to ensure equal rights. Admins are not more equal than users. I suggest you consult the page regarding Adminitis, as on the now-deleted page regarding Aspergite you exhibited the following symptoms:


 * 1) Humor Breakdown: "This page is not funny."
 * 2) Believes that he or she is always right
 * 3) Impatience
 * 4) "Everyone is a vandal or a troll, and must be blocked" is a recurrent thought. (in the Diagnosis section)

As stated in Redstone, Aspergite was forced by trolls into use. The page was left as a memorial of the July 6th incident, thereby being a historic page. Wikis are not specific to current events and configurations, but also to past occurrences.

At the very least, there was a majority vote in Talk:Aspergite from different non-sockpuppet/proxied users about the consensus. Users were banned for making arguments in the talk page, even if they did not alter the page themselves. Drone did not, and there were other users banned for this mistake. Users are encouraged to Ignore Rules when they inhibit the improvement of the Wikipedia. Users are not to be banned from the Talk page. This can be constituted as administrative abuse. Before banning a user, at the least check for contributions. There are templates in place, such as the S for Skeleton (and on the Wikipedia, "ha ha but serious", as shown on the Adminitis page) that explain that the page is not to be taken seriously. All users are equal, and a page must reach a consensus before deletion. You, sir, have overstepped your boundary as an administrator, regardless of the ownership of this Wiki. Hosting a Wiki does not grant you superbeing powers. Jimbo Wales does not himself have governing control over other users, exept for volunteer administrative duties. Blocking users entirely for giving opinions in a logical mannerism is abuse. The users had argued that the page stay, however have not attempted any reconstructing of said page.


 * at that time, trolls overran the wiki. there would obviously be a majority. you lot came here, messed everything up, vandalized many pages, and expect it to be immortalized? no. that isn't how it works. irregardless, many of the proper editors disagree, and you have no control. at all. this is not YOUR wiki. while people are allowed to improve it out of wanting to help, the owners and admins overrides any and all decisions. at least, that is my opinion. as it is his wiki, he can modify whatever he wants. and considering the huge amounts of spam, revert wars and trolling, I'm not surprised everything has turned out how it has. and I have no doubt that it is futile to discuss this whole aspergite thing further. Kizzycocoa 12:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

some wikipedia shit and follow-up bitchfights

 * I am going to say one thing, regarding your 'rant' above about the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia:


 * The MediaWiki software is free. Those who install it on their servers are under no obligation to adhere to the rules on wikipedia.  Indeed, Wikipedia's rules are it's own, they were made there through discussions and consensus.  They by no means control the rules of any other servers running MediaWiki software anywhere else.  By acting like anything made on wikipedia matters here, in terms of policy/rules/guidelines, your entire argument is invalid.


 * Quat installed this wiki on his server, and uses his money to maintain it. You don't have a right to do anything.  Editing here is a privilege he gives you.— '''<font color="Green">Dæ [[User talk:Daedalus969|<font

color="Blue">dαlus ]]<font color="Green">Contribs''' 05:05, 10 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Just because he is under no binding legal obligation to not abuse power, there is still the ethical and moral responsibility of being a human being to not abuse power. Abuse of power is always an easy thing to see, except for those who benefit from it. As it is, on this wiki it is easily seen that Quatroking is possibility, mildly, abusing the power he has as an administration and owner of the wiki. It can also be deduced that perhaps he is insecure, in that any who disagree are blasted down quickly, without any consideration of the other side, an important skill that many people learn in college actually. However, his user page says he is only 16, so perhaps it is fair to be expected and understood that he may be a bit insecure and immature. Reading the rules page of this wiki practically disgusts me. Especially the rule about 'obvious' articles. The rule is merely a way to be an elitist and call those who are perhaps extremely knew to the game idiots. As sure, some things might seem obvious, but some need a bit of hand holding to get started. Now...where was I? Oh right. My closing statements. Quatroking is an insecure, immature child who can not stand to possibly hear a contrary opinion. Would you like to know why the 'trolls' (Ok, yeah they were trolls, whatever.) Didn't try something civil like using the discussion page to suggest some other name? Because every other idea was blasted down so quickly without even proper consideration, because they knew that the admins and higher ups of this wikis would ignore them, even with valid complaints and arguments. So yes, there may be no legal reason why he should follow those rules, but the moral and ethical rules are there, important things to remember for life. --99.159.20.67 22:14, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Arrg so many mistakes, screw it, I'm tied.--99.159.20.67 22:15, 10 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Bumped/2nd'ed. Even the Cars article was humorous and deserved to be upkept for at least longer than the five-to-ten minutes it existed.  It truly took work and effort, those who were trolled should have known better than to believe that cars validly existed.  There was even a Joke tag at the bottom, it could have been made more noticeable but it was directly underneath the YouTube Videos section.  An admin deleted it under the "excuse" of vandalism, which was an entirely inappropriate reason (indeed, Cars featured a creation of humor, not an insulting vandalous article).  It was also classified as "under the same category as the aspergite bull****", which was vandalism, as it was being used against the Cuprite section that had been named without a vote (A small disclaimer, I supported the cause, however not the method).  The cars article was built as a humorous joke to coincide with the release of Seecret Friday Update #4.  Any who saw it as a troll were upset from their own reasoning, as it was neither purposefully trollish in nature nor was it disguised in a scandalous fashion.
 * Edit: Your recently-added rule addition (after the fact, no rules were broken during the initial Cars posting) indicates "pages that could mislead other players." If that was the case, the administrative response to Cars should have been to add a "joke" tag at the top of the page.  You delete pages too often, good sir. --Arlnet 03:44, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * this is a WIKIA. as in, ACCURATE AND UP-TO-DATE INFORMATION. if you want to spam joke pages, go back to encyclopedia dramatica. this whole discussion is a JOKE. Kizzycocoa 12:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * What Kizzycocoa said. You can take your "funny" pages somewhere else (try wikipedia, you guys think its the same site as this one anyways) as they are not welcome here. Minepedia's goal is to help users, not to entertain their butts off.--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 17:23, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * And thus, you summarily dismiss everything I said without paying attention to a word of it. It can be helpful to users to understand the basics, if you think that explaining the 'basics' is pointless, well then, I'm sorry. I guess I can skip the basics of civil discussion, because you certainly do.--99.159.20.67 19:58, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, why don't you start a wiki yourself? I'm sure you're much better at running it than I am, especially since you're all okay with inaccurate information! (oh, and I'm in college too, so I don't see why you expect me to be immature just because I'm 16. You might want to stop discriminating based on age)--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 21:44, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * On that note, could you please block the user Psych? They're harassing me on my talk page, they're also the IP above.— <font color="Green">Dæ <font color="Blue">dαlus <font color="Green">Contribs 23:03, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not trolling or harassing you. I'm just saying that you're being cocky on the wiki because you think you will have power. I just want you to stop and reverting edits that ARE important (even if it's like a little information) because every information counts. You also been doing this on Wikipedia. --99.231.201.18 23:08, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * When you several times, revert me on my own talk page, after I have several times removed your edit, that is called harassment. When you act like I want power, when I have never asked for it; when you call me cocky, when I have shown nothing to demonstrate it, and when you fail to back up any accusations with evidence, that is called trolling.— <font color="Green">Dæ <font color="Blue">dαlus <font color="Green">Contribs 23:21, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * How you're being cocky: Right now we're having a "fight" about putting a template on an article that should be left untouched like all the other articles. You're being a dick to everyone even on this Talk Page replying to other people instead of Quatroking (but it's my fault for replying to you in the first place). --Psych 23:25, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You really don't have any idea what you're saying. First of all, the template is not stupid.  It was created for maintenance of this wiki.  It adds the page to a category that Quat checks every now and then.  He then reviews whether or not the article should be deleted or kept, and removes or deletes it in turn.  The only valid reason you would have to remove the template from the article, would be to attempt and hide it from Quat.  There's nothing cocky about requesting the deletion of an article which violates rules Quat made on his own.  Lastly, I'm not replying to him, because I have nothing to say to him at the moment, so I don't see why there is a need for you to bring it up, unless you're trying to change the subject.— <font color="Green">Dæ <font color="Blue">dαlus <font color="Green">Contribs 23:33, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Take this fight to your own talk pages, please.--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 23:51, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to ask the same question as the header of this section: WHY WAS I BANNED? I was never intending on contesting it, as I'm sure you have your reasons, but I would really like to know what I did so I can make sure to not do it again. I looked to email you here, but found no email user link, so I emailed you via the forums, and have yet to receive a response. I have done nothing to vandalize this wiki, and have even reverted much vandalism, and if you don't believe me, check my contributions page. Thank you, Phoenyx :D
 * Merely accidental. I had to block a massive number of users on 8 july because of the whole red ore bullshit trolling, in which I also blocked a few innocent users by accident. If I'm not wrong, you should be unblocked by now (which you are, obviously, you edited my talk page) and have no more problems.--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 17:14, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 18:14, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Lol, hypocrisy
Why would you delete the article on Aspergite when we have an article called Adminium, which is very clearly not the official name? I demand that you either delete the Adminium article or restore the Aspergite article. PurelyAtomic 17:05, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Adminium redirects to Bedrock, because part of the community calls it like this. Aspergite was made up by a bunch of trolls with nothing but vandalism in mind.--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 17:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * WRONG! the Aspergite article was both humorous and well written. it was a fully accurate resource and provided accurate information on the now called Redstone. You're just apparently overlooking all of that because of the name. PurelyAtomic 17:48, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Pretty sure all of the accurate information got merged. Also, if you look at the article's history, you'll see the last few revisions contained a lot of nonsense. ～Quatroking

Yet another case: why is Quatroking an article if you don't allow vanity articles? PurelyAtomic 17:07, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Because you don't seem to read the rules.--Quatroking - Garble Garble! 17:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Please cite the rule that allows vanity articles PurelyAtomic 17:48, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The rules allow pages about community members who are noteworthy and/or have a certain leading position. (in my case, I'm the main wiki administrator) ～Quatroking (I forgot the signature code and I'm browsing from my DSi)

Crafting edit
Sorry about the walking during crafting thing, I thought that was new. PurelyAtomic 17:48, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

You may want to block..
User:90.194.247.121, per this edit.— <font color="Green">Dæ <font color="Blue">dαlus <font color="Green">Contribs 04:52, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Scratch that. I read something wrong.  My bad.— <font color="Green">Dæ <font color="Blue">dαlus <font color="Green">Contribs 04:59, 10 July 2010 (UTC)