Talk:Main Page

From GamerGate Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search


There's a wiki called that basically plagiarizes everything from this wiki! We have to stop this!

That's not quite true. A lot of our articles were forked from wikia a while back. Unless they're copying our new edits? Either way it doesn't matter. Wikia is shit. It's a wiki dumbed down and cut up into a blog format, without the ability to add any extensions or meaningful style changes. Psycho Robot (talk) 00:04, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Plagiarism is the point of a wiki. It's a resource that anybody can view, toss around, and edit. If you're afraid to equip your opponents/shills with particular information then you had best not make it publicly available. 01:50, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Get rid of flagged revisions

It makes me not want to contribute and effectively elevates the admins to a status higher than users. They can choose to decline their revision even before it went public and is somewhat just disheartening. Please get rid of it. Awesomedove (talk) 21:53, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response, this is to prevent vandalizing, if a troll converts a entry into a scat parade it won't be seen until it is approved. If you want to speed up the approval of your edits, you can easily go to in rizon and ask any of the admins to approve your them, as long as they're relevant to the wiki and backed up with verifiable evidence they should be approved. ratalada (talk) 20:48, 05 January 2015 (UTC)
No seriously, get rid of it. That's how wikis are, they get vandalized. Some people see it, correct it, and that's that. I'd be more than happy to help keep some of the entries clean of vandalism, but my edits; even edits to this freakin' main page talk page, getting caught up in 'latest revision' really makes me not want to contribute to the GamerGate wiki. Also, is this a dictatorship or a democracy? Awesomedove (talk) 02:40, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
I saw the 8chan thread and answered there, but since 8chan is down, I will also address you here.
  • Right now on the thread only a few people agreed with you that the approval system should be changed. The rest were ok with it, lots of the editors here are also ok with it because they have seen that we're not a dictorship, we respect the edits done by the users as long as they follow the rules. As you can see here, an ip user added info to Zoe Quinn, usually this kind of edits would have not been approved since it lacked the proper backing(no archives of articles) but since I heard of it I proceeded to search the links, approve the ip user's edit and added the reference links I found while removing the ones I couldn't find and asked him to find the source before adding it back.
  • I appreciate your good will by offering yourself to revert changes but right now, even if you also help we may be too short, if we get more people helping, that are also active in the irc we could remove the approval, but first we need at least a decent ammount of editors that are willing to engange not only here and 8chan but also on irc where admins are present to solve issues that may be out of your ability (like banning vandals).
  • Regarding you having issues with the talk_page, it is weird, even IP unregistered users can edit talk pages. what I've seen was that some user accidently reverted your edit here, I spoke to him and he was also learning to use the wiki, so please don't be hard on him. I added your comment back. If you have more issues plz write them here or go to the irc channel and tell us.
if you have more questions I will answer them. I would give you more info right now but I have to go. the reply in the 8chan thread has more stuff so lets hope 8chan comes back. Ratalada (talk) 21:50, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
8chan is up, here's the answer I gave you there: link , also an archive in case 8chan goes down again.Ratalada (talk) 02:25, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
I've no more questions, only disappointment now. If you guys seriously want to bring down this Wiki for the petty grapple on flagged revisions, go ahead. Awesomedove (talk) 23:25, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Main Page suggestion

The main page can benefit from having a hyperlink leading to a collection of articles that need to be made and/or expanded upon. This will help attract people to become editors by showing them what needs to be done. I think the Timeline page is a great place to start when factoring people who are familiar with what GamerGate means for anyone who is pro. It is my opinion that this should be used as a focal point for attracting people to help contribute to this wiki.

Here is the list of dead-end hyperlinks from the timeline: Adam Sessler, Alexander "Archon" Macris, Anthony Burch, APGNation, Boogie2988 Chris Grant, Daniel Vavra, David Auerbach, Devin Faraci, EventStatus, Ezra Klein, GamesNosh, Greg Tito, Geoff Keighley,, The Guardian, Independent Games Festival (IGF), Indie Fund, InternetAristocrat, JonTron, Joss Whedon, Kyle Orland, KotakuInAction, Maya Felix Kramer, MundaneMatt, Niche Gamer, Screenshot, Stephen Totilo, and Verge.

Once again, the list above is simply a collection of red links in the timeline pages. I didn't give much thought to their context as it's been established that someone else had already thought they were important enough to be considered for their own wiki page. I did notice some inconsistency in regards to the amount of hyperlinks were given in the last 3 months of the timeline. For example, why does Boogie2988 deserve a page while William Usher does not? The point being that more items can always be added to the list, and combing the timelines can be a great way of finding said items.

I'm sure that it's pretty clear that I'm new to the concept of wiki contribution. I hope it doesn't detract from my suggestion or the point I'm trying to make. I am completely oblivious to wiki lingo and how things work in a wiki, so please let me know if I've misunderstood anything. RandomDigits (talk)

Adding International Articles to Categories Could go under Database HongKongFag (talk)

Accurately reflecting current article revisions

It seems that our featured articles are not actually up to date with their approved revisions.

For example, David Auerbach's article is presently being featured on the main page, however, the paragraph the feature employs is from an older revision.

I'm not sure why this is. Could someone inform me? Berke Stavoy (talk) 03:42, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

This is because the main page has hard coded David Auerbach's article--the state of the text that they took it from an earlier revision. You could probably ask in the IRC for it to be edited. Awesomedove (talk) 03:07, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
The summary on the main page is written manually (or copied and pasted) and so it won't update automatically if the actual article does. We looked into it and there doesn't seem to be any way to link the two in a way that's not a giant hassle and not worth the trouble. For example, the featured article summary on wikipedia is manual as well, see Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 15, 2015. If there were any major change then I'm sure the summary would be updated as well, but it looks like there were only minor changes to the phrasing so its no big deal. Psycho Robot (talk) 03:12, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Actually I went ahead and updated it anyways, cause i'm just a good guy. Psycho Robot (talk) 03:16, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
That's what I feared. Well, thanks for updating it, at any rate.
Also, we have an IRC?
Sweet! Berke Stavoy (talk) 03:43, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, we do. It's at Awesomedove (talk) 05:42, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Dev interviews?

Searched but couldn't find a page containing all developer interviews. Do we have that?

We do not. That's definitely a good page to have. Really, the fact that we don't have one already is Marburg's fault. Be sure to give him hell for it. Psycho Robot (talk) 03:25, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Go ahead and make it if you want. Also, if you want to sign with your name and date, use ~~~~ to do such. Awesomedove (talk) 03:50, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Featured articles

With all due respect, Mr. Auerbach, I think it's about time we featured another article. Berke Stavoy (talk) 03:48, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree with changing the featured article. I thnk a good candidate would be the ggautoblocker--It looks and feels high quality plus would be a refreshing change from Auerbach's magnificient face. One can only appreciate him so much. Awesomedove (talk) 12:32, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
+1 upvote. I'd throw in GamerGate Achievements as a suggestion, although it could use an update (what are you looking at me for? I don't know what to update it with!) --Does Not Computetalk 12:43, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
I'd suggest that we implement some sort of system for automating the featuring of articles, but we're not exactly an expansive enough wiki to be able to do that properly. Also, I know I've been inactive on the wiki lately--sorry, I've just been preoccupied. Berke Stavoy (talk) 16:18, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Hmm, perhaps some sort of stack which cycles through articles, featuring one per week or something. New articles added to the stack of articles worthy of feature are given a priority over older ones which is removed after its first week view? A linked list data structure. Or something. Whatever. --Does Not Computetalk 01:00, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
It can even just be a subsection of the main page. 'Future possible featured articles' or something. Anywho, I can add GGAutoblocker to the featured article if 'yall want. I just don't want to unilaterally make that decision. Awesomedove (talk) 01:25, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I think adding the GG autoblocker entry would be ok once it is finished. If u notice, the criticism and media coverage sections are sort of incomplete and are just links. Once it is finished I agree it would be a great choice as featured article. Ratalada (talk) 10:02, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
>tfw Mr. Auerbach is still front page material. Does Not Computetalk 17:18, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Joke articles?

In light of the Teridax article, any chance of this wiki getting a section for humorous and joke articles to preserve 'works of art' like it, but prevent people from confusing them with genuine articles? Also a notice box to put at the top of those articles would be very nice. I'll try to create a template for it.--HumorlessVandal (talk) 09:01, 26 May 2015 (EDT)

Here you go:
This is a joke article:
It is not intended to be taken seriously
--HumorlessVandal (talk) 09:12, 26 May 2015 (EDT)
I think its a great idea, I can't count on people being able to tell jokes from serious content. I'll add it presently. Psycho Robot (talk) 14:46, 26 May 2015 (EDT)
Yeah, I mean it's fine to have joke articles--others wikis have them too but they're usually tagged. Awesomedove (talk) 17:28, 26 May 2015 (EDT)

powered by ethics

Someone who has access to the file directory of the server should change out poweredby_mediawiki_88x31.png to one that says "Powered by Ethics" with a picture of vivian or something. I can make one if someone with server access is willing to do that. --Zaiger (talk) 14:55, 28 May 2015 (EDT)

Or maybe instead of the MW flower logo it can be the GG controller logo. I will make a couple up when I'm bored just in case. --Zaiger (talk) 14:57, 28 May 2015 (EDT)
Something like this
Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination
, I can make one with Vivian James instead of the controller logo if you think it would be better, or one black and white like the logo for this wiki, you would just have to swap out and rename to poweredby_mediawiki_88x31.png and put in ~/skins/common/images/ --Zaiger (talk) 21:59, 28 May 2015 (EDT)
Sorry this is kinda a late reply, but we can't change the powered by mediawiki logo. It's got to do with the copyright of the mediawiki software. Its possible that we could ADD the image, but I'm not sure, I'd have to look into it. Psycho Robot (talk) 19:52, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

New Guy

Hello, I'm a bit new. So, please teach me the ropes.