All The Tropes Wiki Project, Part XIX

[Bob Schroeck]

Previous thread is here, and I closed it out on some drama involving rabid Trump fanboy NormAtreides' brief success in playing one admin against a couple others.

I will just note again that I am not inclined to trust him nor give him much slack, given his shenanigans on the Trump page in the past.

[robkelk]

Replying to this post, which I can't select for quoting because the thread is closed.

He's apologized for the way he did it, but not for what he did.

I've asked him about what he appears to have forgotten to comment on. I continue to do nothing else on the wiki while I await his reply.

(Note to self: I want to add the final line of this web comic strip to Self-Deprecation/Quotes.)

[Bob Schroeck]

Honestly, is Norm really worth one of our admins -- the one, I might note, who has done the most and until now continued to do the most to ensure our legal status vis-a-vis copyrights -- exiling himself?

[robkelk]

Give him a chance to answer, then the rest of you can decide who if anybody you need to censure. (My opinion: somebody needs to read ATT:1WAY - who, I'm not completely sure.)

I'm actually getting things done elsewhere while I'm not working on ATT - it's lowering my stress level slightly.

[robkelk]

I couldn't resist looking.

Nobody other than me has any examples for this YKTTW? I have another five in my working notes, which I should have added before starting my recusion. (Anime: "Squid Girl", "Taishō Baseball Girls", and "Variable Geo"; Film: "Fall On Your Knees" (1929); Western Animation: "Onward".)

[GethN7]

Give him a chance to answer, then the rest of you can decide who if anybody you need to censure. (My opinion: somebody needs to read ATT:1WAY - who, I'm not completely sure.)

I'm actually getting things done elsewhere while I'm not working on ATT - it's lowering my stress level slightly.

Concur. Besides, while tempers flared in Bob's case (which he graciously admitted and took blame for), the worst I'd advocate is a censure, and that has already been passed down and accepted where warranted.

Past that, I consider this matter a closed book in that regard at least. As for Norm, we'll see how he responds.

[Bob Schroeck]

Well, he's answered.

EDIT: Assuming that meets with your approval, Rob, I would like to add the following post after you accept his apology. I'm putting it here first so you and Geth can suggest changes in phrasing if you see the need:

Now that that is done with, {{FlowMention|@NormAtredies}}, I would suggest that if you're upset that far too many trope entries show true and well-documented but unfavorable aspects of Donald Trump, it is incumbent upon ''you'' to find equally true and well-documented examples of positive aspects of his life and personality. We are not TV Tropes with its enforced hugbox "no negativity" rules, and we the staff are not required to bend over backwards to find nice things to say about the most evil bastards in the interest of "balance". You want "balance" on this page? ''You'' find the good things to say to balance it. But they're going to have to be solid, true and documented -- no Clintonesque quibbling about the meaning of tiny words so you can exculpate Trump of something everyone knows is true. If you can present entry candidates for the page that meet the minimum requirements of true and documented, then we will add them. But I honestly think you're going to have a hard time finding any more positive things about a man that members of his own political party have called "an asshole" and a criminal than there arlready are on the page.

[robkelk]

As one can probably tell from my 114 edits in the last fifteen minutes, I have accepted his apology.

As for your proposed reply... one of those edits was here. Don't know whether you want to mention a Trope Workshop page, but it is germane.

[Bob Schroeck]

...for a moment there I thought you meant you'd made 114 edits to your reply...

And yeah, that's a good addition, actually.

Here's my revised version:

Now that that is done with, {{FlowMention|@NormAtredies}}, I would suggest that if you're upset that far too many trope entries show true and well-documented but unfavorable aspects of Donald Trump, it is incumbent upon ''you'' to find equally true and well-documented examples of positive aspects of his life and personality.

We are not TV Tropes with its enforced hugbox "no negativity" rules, and we are ''not'' required to bend over backwards to find nice things to say about the most evil bastards in the interest of "balance". [[Trope Workshop:Wants the Work Done for Them|Nor do we take orders to add content from users]] [[You Could Always Edit It Yourself|who are perfectly capable of making the requisite edits themselves]]. Nor we will remove truth from the page because it conflicts with your bias.

You want "balance" on this page? ''You'' find the good things to say to balance it that aren't already on the page -- and show that they're ''fact'' and not just propaganda or wishful thinking. And no "whatabouts" or Clintonesque quibbling about the meaning of tiny words so you can exculpate Trump of something everyone knows is true. If you can present entry candidates for the page that meet these minimum requirements, then we will add them. But I honestly think you're going to have a hard time finding anything like that about a man whom members of his own political party have called an asshole and a criminal.

[robkelk]

[[Trope Workshop:Wants the Work Done for Them|Nor do we take orders to add content from users]] [[You Could Always Edit It Yourself|who are perfectly capable of making the requisite edits themselves]].

Be prepared for somebody to come back and say "the page is locked so I can't make the edits myself." (To which I would answer "The lock isn't permanent - have patience.")

[Bob Schroeck]

I'll change it to "create the content themselves". And I'm already saying if it meets the requirements we'll add it.

[Bob Schroeck]

And added.

[robkelk]

I'll change it to "create the content themselves". And I'm already saying if it meets the requirements we'll add it.

In that case, no objections here.

[robkelk]

Could somebody who's been with ATT since Day 1 answer this one, please?

[Bob Schroeck]

That wouldn't quite be me but I can answer that, kind of, if no one else does.

[robkelk]

Just noticed that Bob spotted an apparent contradiction on the part of two of NormAtreides's statements in one thread. I hadn't noticed that one.

I don't appreciate being lied to.

I think they've had enough chances. Next infraction I spot from this user, no matter how minor, gets an "On Notice" warning post to the user's Talk page... unless another mod beats me to it.

[Bob Schroeck]

I hadn't noticed it right away myself, hence the second message about it.

[robkelk]

So... Fate Nuovo Guerra/Characters. All the blatant copyright violations in the page images.

I said eight months ago on the page that this needed to be fixed.

Anybody mind if I just nuke all the images from the page?

[Bob Schroeck]

<holds out the Big Red Button>

[Labster]

I only recognize like 18 of those characters, which is not many. I’m ambivalent but I guess I’d rather not host so many extra images. It is an example of reuse and inspiration from art.

[Bob Schroeck]

You know, I kind of wish we'd been cataloging things like this all along and confirming if they still exist on TVT. We could use it in a good faith move to help them with their dodgy copyright status, or on the other hand if our current detente should decay it would be a handy tool.

[Bob Schroeck]

Meanwhile, I notice that NormAtredies seems to be lying low (again) in the wake of my question to him a few days ago. If he wasn't lying about his work shifts and his oh so active social life that might explain it, but... <shrug>

[GethN7]

Since I manage the Wikia/FANDOM branch, I'm just dropping some news on a new policy they are doing:

https://community.fandom.com/wiki/User_b...ing_Policy

Due a lot of amateur power vendors using the block button out of sheer spite, Wikia/FANDOM is now going to investigate wikis where that is an issue and will punish admins who ban for something as asinine as not constantly licking the boots of the admin in question (like rewarding a reasoned and civil disagreement with an admin with a ban simply because the admin demanded absolute obedience and nothing less). This is especially to curb admins just blocking with no given reason, since Wikia staff are FED UP with people raging at them after getting doors slammed in their faces for reasons not made clear.

The reason I bring this up is because I am, by default, the only active admin on our Wikia branch, and I can assure you all I take pains to give clear ban reasons and am unlikely to fall afoul of this new policy, but if anyone else wishes to assist me (and that would be deeply appreciated), I urge you that, when exercising any blocks, to please leave clear reasons for doing so if you wish to be another admin alongside me due to this new policy.

[robkelk]

Meanwhile, I notice that NormAtredies seems to be lying low (again) in the wake of my question to him a few days ago.  If he wasn't lying about his work shifts and his oh so active social life that might explain it, but... <shrug>

He's back. Been busy, apparently.

[Bob Schroeck]

And not bad work, either, from the quick look I took.