GTA Wiki:Community Noticeboard

Welcome to GTA Wiki's Community noticeboard.

Archives
 * Archive 1
 * Archive 2

Talk page rules apply here.

This noticeboard is for discussion and voting on changes to the wiki, reporting vandalism and wiki rule breaking, and reporting bad or unfair behaviour from GTA Wiki staff.

For requests for promotion, please go to GTA Wiki:Requests for Promotion.

We currently have a lot of staff so there will be no more Patroller requests for a while. Current Patrollers may request to be promoted to Admin status by voting on the Requests for Promotion Page.

Voting Rules

Since voting about a change can cause arguments, here are the rules.
 * Anyone can start a topic for a community vote.
 * Please be civil when voting, and never condemn another users vote.
 * Voting usually lasts 3 to 5 days.

Toning Down Obvious Trivial Points
I been noticing some pages recently; when pages have Trivia, the trival points they have are so obvious that you can figure it out yourself rather than reading it. Most of the Trivias have points that are like "The sky is blue." I been thinking: We get all the obvious trivial points and put them on their articles' sections. There is a policy on Wikipedia (and Wikia in general) where Trivia is not allowed, but it's rare to find one on a page because they have points possibly not known to others. I think the Trivia should be reserved for glitches, tips and unnoticed features in a GTA game, not for, "This is the first appearance of Mikhail Faustin." or "The car is unique to the mission".

Mr. T., That&#39;s Me! (talk) 01:32, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with using the Trivia section to point out interesting facts such as puns in names (p.e. R.C. Hole), continuity errors, hidden stuff...

However, cleaning up ALL of the Trivia sections in articles of this wiki would be hard, time-taking and, therefore non-effective.

What do you suggest we do, T?

Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 20:06, April 24, 2013 (UTC)


 * I thought about something: We don't have to do it immediately. If we find a page with obvious trivia "facts", just remove them. Let's not start and GTA Wiki-wide clean-up. Just remove some points if we get time.


 * Mr. T., That&#39;s Me! (talk) 01:41, April 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * Maybe. What if we separed the articles into "Characters", "Vehicles", "Missions" and "Games" and distribute them by the GTA Wiki Staff?
 * I think it could work...
 * Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 09:29, April 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * Guys, read our policy on Trivia, which states that you should try and intergrate good trivia points into the article itself first. If there is no room for a trivia point in the article, then it goes on the trivia list. "The sky is blue" trivia points, where you state the obvious, such as "Mikhail is Russian" is discouraged and deleted. Messi1983 (talk) 11:29, April 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * Go ahead and start a wiki wide clean up deleting all the "sky is blue" trivia points if you so wish. Be bold when editing :) Messi1983 (talk) 11:31, April 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok, let's do this!
 * Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 11:33, April 25, 2013 (UTC)

Dealing with Vandals (For Staff and Current/New Users)
When vandalism is going on, isn't it less necessary to confront the such users and tell them off, especially users with no staff ranks and that are patrollers? During the Joshualeverburg Incidents, staffs and non-staff confronted him and in result/retaliation, got their userspages vandalised, such as M.K., Hi-Hi Puffy Bosco, and myself. The average contributors and patrollers should report to an admin/b'crat first rather than acting like an admin or if the admins are active during these incidents, block them immediately. To my sense, if you write to the vandals, telling them to stop, you're more than likely making them say, "What are you going to do about it?", "Ha, Ha" or "I'm going to piss the guy off". I just don't want those vandals coming back attacking the users who told them to stop.

Mr. T. (talk) 01:07, April 1, 2013 (UTC)



I agree. I also think that most admins and bureaucrats should be online as often as possible because if we remember back to the 22 case, there were no admins online and his vandalism went on for hours until Ilan finally came on. VaultBoy Tom (Talk to me this way) 21:01, April 2, 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't active during the Zombie22 Incidents, so I have little knowledge of that. Now that we have five admins, at least one of you guys should check the wiki a couple times a day and always check the Recent WIki Activity page. Mr. T. (talk) 21:10, April 2, 2013 (UTC) 


 * Read GTA Wiki:Vandalism. There is a section on how to deal with vandalism. If you come to the conclusion that you need to block a user for vandalism or any other incident, then read GTA Wiki:Blocking Policy. Messi1983 (talk) 06:10, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Our Do not feed the trolls policy is important when dealing with vandals.

"Everytime we respond to those tryin to ruin the wiki, we are giving them what they want. The more we do that, the more they will be back for more. It's best to be calm, and limit contact with vandals. The less attention they get, the more likely they are to move on. Don't play games with the vandals as this makes it more fun for them."

See, those are words to live by :) Messi1983 (talk) 06:15, April 4, 2013 (UTC)


 * That was epic :) -- ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 13:04, April 5, 2013 (UTC)

Read and understood 'em. The "Do not feed the trolls" should be mentioned by any new/normal users should get that memo when they confront the vandal. Like my mom use to say, "Never care for a person if you have no idea of his or her intentions." The care part means anything that you do to the person good. bad or trying to stop his actions, i.e. vandalism. Mr. T. (talk) 06:31, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Background
Since there is new artworks for GTA V, is the GTA Wiki background going to change? Boomer8 (talk) 05:09, February 28, 2013 (UTC)

With regards to Promotion
Hey guys. When someone usually requests a promotion, the same reason keeps popping up time and time again. "I've been on this wiki for such and such time and have such and such edits"

Who agrees with me that this has never been a good reason to request promotion and who agrees that it should be stated on our promotion page? Messi1983 (talk) 20:48, November 22, 2012 (UTC)


 * When I'm promoting someone, I'm most interested in the quality of their contributions, and after that their ability to get along with other users. Linking to work done on another wiki is fine, but saying "I'm a bureaucrat on somesuch wiki" alone doesn't impress me, because Wikia will let anyone found a wiki or adopt an abandoned wiki, and I've met a couple shockingly incompetent bureaucrats. Jeff (talk|stalk) 23:04, November 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah quality of edits, if they've helped fight vandalism on the wiki, and their ability to get along with others is things I usually look for too. Not how long they have been editing here, how many edits they have, or even their status on another wiki. Messi1983 (talk) 23:14, November 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * Edit count doesn't mean that much really, I know many users that do a full character biography in one edit, something like that is a lot more impressive than 100 seemingly unnecessary edits. But experience on another wiki, so long as that wiki is of a good quality and they have actually contributed significantly to it, does get taken into account in my eyes. The length of time someone has been around on the wiki doesn't matter to me, if there are big gaps in editing or there edits aren't significant that is. So yes, maybe mention these things on the requests for promotion page. Tom Talk 13:30, December 21, 2012 (UTC)

Featured Article section
Featured articles are a common feature on almost most wikis. Does anyone think we should have a feature article section on this wiki? Messi1983 (talk) 06:39, December 14, 2012 (UTC)


 * I would love to see a featured article on the wiki. But I would only want it under the GTA games section; not replaceing it. Were "Rockstar Games Twitter" and "Helping Out" is would be a better place for it. I think a Featured Article would be much better than that. Boomer8 (talk) 07:24, December 14, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, same here! I would love having a Featured Article section. -- ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 16:20, December 14, 2012 (UTC)


 * Anyone else have any opinions or comments on this? I wonder what Tom and Jeff think. Messi1983 (talk) 19:25, December 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm fine with that idea. But if we're going to do something like that we should to have stricter and clearer standards for articles. Official layouts and policies and the like. People usually don't like it when I try to make rules though, I get complaints that I'm making the wiki no fun. Jeff (talk|stalk) 21:10, December 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * I think a Manual of Style is needed on this wiki. Messi1983 (talk) 21:33, December 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree with Jeff and Dan, it's a good idea but we could do with a Manual of Style, like Dan said. Tom Talk 13:30, December 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * Okay well us three crats all agree on the Manual of Style, so we'll have to start discussing that soon. Does anyone else have any comments on featured articles? Messi1983 (talk) 16:47, December 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, will the Featured article be marked with a template, like that, or an 'Era' template (small icons at the top of the page, indicating games/groups/etc related to the page), like that? -- ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 16:58, December 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * Just an aside, I'm going away for about a week (give or take a couple days) for Christmas so I'll likely not be responding to this for a while... on the other hand I might end up with hours per day on my hands and put in some actual work on this place. But if I do go quiet that's why. Jeff (talk|stalk) 03:34, December 22, 2012 (UTC)


 * I say we leave the discussion until after Christmas as I'll be busy over the holiday period aswell. Messi1983 (talk) 04:26, December 23, 2012 (UTC)


 * I think this discussion should begin again. The featured articles are also on the Red dead Wiki and they seem good on there, so I also think it's a good idea. VaultBoy Tom (Talk to me this way) 20:09, March 28, 2013 (UTC)


 * We have the featured articles section, but it's been sticky on the ambulance for a long time. It would be nice if it changed only a weekly or bi-weekly rotor. JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 08:54, March 29, 2013 (UTC)


 * We can delete this section and make a new one. Also, a weekly rotor is such an annoying thing, as it would eventually repeat itslef too much. I prefer promoting articles to a "featured status" and then just show them 'randomly' each time when a user views the main page, like this one. -- ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 09:23, March 29, 2013 (UTC)


 * I like the sound of that. JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 10:01, March 29, 2013 (UTC)

Wiki Reconstruction
I say we should bring to the wiki back to life a little bit. We are one of the best wikis, but we lack of new users (50 a month isn't that good). Here are my ideeas:
 * Adding a new background (GTA V themed).
 * Based on the color of the background, we should change the wiki skin color.
 * Re-writing the main article and making it more friendly for new users.
 * Adding "featured articles" and polls.

Of course, this shouldn't happen that fast, but with GTA V on the way, we might catch some new users. We want them to stay, no?  Dodo8  Talk


 * I do agree with you on most things but GTA isn't really the most brightest game so, I don't think changing the Wikis skin colour will do much but the other ideas are good. VaultBoy Tom (Talk to me this way) 20:23, March 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * All those things sound good, espesially "featured articles". The only thing I don't agree with is changing the wiki's background. Great ideas!  Boomer8 (talk) 05:03, March 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * What this wiki needs is a GTA V background image. Messi1983 (talk) 05:54, March 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * We should definetely change the Main Page. It looks "old". Dodo8_logo.png Dodo8  Talk


 * Something with all the three protagonist or a view of Los Santos would be nice. -- ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 09:23, March 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that'd be nice. VaultBoy Tom (Talk to me this way) 09:51, March 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * The main page is fine as it is. It's the background image that needs changing. Messi1983 (talk) 11:40, March 29, 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok, Messi. I thought I could help, but I can't test backgrounds since I'm not an Admin. We might have to wait for someone with experience in making backgrounds. Any ideeas who could be? Maybe a Community Wikia staff? Dodo8_logo.png Dodo8  Tal
 * Sasquatch101 (talk) 03:33, April 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * Changing the backround to a backdrop of Los Santos would be a great face lift for the wiki. The wiki skin should stay dark though.


 * If the wiki is going to have a new background it should be the new protagonists. Like how the wiki currently has the IV Era protags. Not Los Santos.  Boomer8 (talk) 02:16, April 3, 2013 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Well if someone can make a background image, then I'll change it. Messi1983 (talk) 02:42, April 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * I have photoshop, but I'm not used to it. I think we will have to ask someone from the Community Wiki? Dodo8 Talk


 * Well, who made the current background? VaultBoy Tom (Talk to me this way) 08:57, April 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * I am probably not meant to be posting here, but the background was made by JoePlay.v-michael-trunk-mini.jpg V-franklin-trunk-mini.jpg V-trevor-trunk-mini.jpg 13:01, April 5, 2013 (UTC)

Since everybody seems to agree that the new protagonists should be the background, shall I post a request to Wikia? First we should probably decide on an image for them to use. Tom Talk 16:48, April 10, 2013 (UTC)


 * File:The Trunk-GTAV.jpg and File:Trevorfranklinmichael-GTAV.jpg. Can't think on other backgrounds than those. -- ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 18:01, April 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * On the left side a photo of Trevor in "The Trunk", and on the other side Franklin's in the second picture Ilan shown. And the background (of the background, lol) to have the skyline of Los Santos. Dodo8 Talk
 * I think just using the second image would be better, Trevor and Michael on either side. Tom Talk 19:36, April 10, 2013 (UTC)


 * I was thinking that this wiki could be bright like GTA V. Having The GTA V cover or All Three Protagonists in the background image and having the colors being bright like the game looks. That would be great. Matt Seay (talk) 21:24, April 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not really sure how having all three would work, making two smaller and having them on one side would look a bit off. As would having a transparent background. Tom Talk 08:43, April 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes this true, I guess just the Game Cover Art would be good. I mean technocaly GTA IV has 3 protags, and only two are on the background. I am more in favor of the cover art being the background but I want something that is kind of generic for the new game. Matt Seay (talk) 02:09, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

Help from the Spanish GTA Wiki
So, I talked to this Staff member, who apparently is talented in coding and is also a GTA fan. His name is Bola.

He agreed to help us. But first we will have to decide the background(s). Sincerely, I don't want anymore protagonists' faces looking at me all-day long. I thought of using this:



Also, I tought of having a header like on tha Spanish wiki. You know, the navigation thingy with On The Wiki, GTA Games, GTA Info, Community. Maybe we could use the Skyline in this picture:



I don't know, but we must take a decision, since Bola is ready to help us. Dodo8 Talk


 * The skyline one is definitely more user-friendly. The bikini girl background would make the wiki more or less unusable for anyone who wanted to look at it at school or work, and I can imagine female editors not really caring for it too. Jeff (talk|stalk) 18:49, April 24, 2013 (UTC)


 * The girl won't appear on the header, only the skyline beside her will do. Like this on the Spanish wiki:

Dodo8 Talk

I agree with Jeff.

I don't, but if I happened to visit the wiki at school, it wouldn't be easy to explain that good-looking girl in the background...

The skyline background doesn't bring any heat, haha.

Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 20:16, April 24, 2013 (UTC)


 * Skyline one looks best I think. Bikini one is good for a male audience, but females play GTA too. Messi1983 (talk) 22:54, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

EVERYONE LISTEN: the girl won't appear on the wiki, only the skyline beside her will be the header. And the other picture will be the background. So, let's decide already. Am I telling to Bola? Dodo8 Talk


 * I think that if the woman isn't in it, like you say, then yeah, it will be more user friendly. However, I do like the skyline one a lot. I think it would be the better of the two. VaultBoy Tom (Talk to me this way) 11:41, April 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * I prefer the skyline screenshot. It just looks better in my opinion than the bikini artwork, regardless the girl's appearance or not. -- ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 12:59, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * I quite like the skyline shot as well. I'm not so sure about putting the cover girl ahead of protagonists or main characters. JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 14:27, April 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok, I'm going to tell Bola to use this image as the main background. We will think about the header later.

Dodo8 Talk

I think both of these are pretty good for the background. But I prefer the skyline picture rather than the bikini girl one (and I know its only the background and not her included). Either way these both make great backgrounds. --Boomer8 (talk) 02:53, April 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * I decided to use the skyline beside the girl. I already sent Bola a message, now we just have to wait. Also I'll think about the header image at an other time... Dodo8 Talk

Manual of style
I have recently create a page to hopefully try and smoothen the operation of our vehicles department, however I do not want to press ahead with its implementation without community consensus. The Manual of Style for Vehicles  has been created and I would like the Bureacrats and admins to have a look at it.

Also I recently imported the from Drive Club Wiki, I probably should have asked this community first. Is there anybody who would like this template to be removed? JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 16:04, May 4, 2013 (UTC)


 * If you need that template, it shouldn't be removed. You don't have to ask for things you have to do, you are an admin afterall. :) Dodo8 Talk

Chat Problems
So you all know that I'm always on chat to see if anyone is there, but it's always quiet there and I'm always the only there, there has to be a staff here that's not busy with something should be in chat when I'm school, so I'm gonna figure out how to get more users to come on this chat. So think about it if that's a good idea or not! Cloudkit01 (talk) 03:24, May 7, 2013 (UTC)Cloudkit01

Comments
The event has apparently passed, I think the Community Messages advertisement should be removed now. JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 06:48, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Fixing the Staff tags
So, we have thise problem with the tags. Ilan has to add Chat Moderator rights to Patrollers so the "patroller" tag to show up. I asked my friend and Wikia Staff member, Bola, from the Spanish GTA Wiki, if he can help us out. He said he would do it but it needs the Admins' and Bureaucrats' approvement to do it. Just post "Yes" or "No" as a comment and I'll count the votes. Dodo8 Talk

Votes

 * Yes - Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 19:01, May 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes - Tom Talk 18:52, June 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes - VaultBoy Tom (Talk to me this way) 19:19, June 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes - Mr. T., That&#39;s Me! (talk) 03:53, June 10, 2013 (UTC)

Comments

 * I see no problem. - Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 19:01, May 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * I've had the same issue on other Wiki's, if there's a way around it then great. Tom Talk 18:52, June 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it would be good if you could sort that out. I too have had problems with it on other wiki's. VaultBoy Tom (Talk to me this way) 19:19, June 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'm going to tell Bola that he can start fixing it! Thanks for voting. Dodo8 Talk
 * There are also Bureaucrat staff tags. Dodo, talk to Bola about that too. Mr. T., That&#39;s Me! (talk) 03:53, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * I already told him, but he seems to be inactive? Dodo8 Talk

A proposal
I've been thinking that some vehicle articles are quite long and their content has led to a sort of "watering-down" of the information. The HD era has now meant that we are being given very detailed vehicles. For pages which have multiple generations I propose creating a Wikipedia-style subpage layout for HD era forms. This simply means a link that leads to a main article for the HD era vehicle on the page that features all generations. It does mean a bit more work but it would certainly mean that we can get a few more highly detailed articles for the vehicles that allow it. The GTA V Sentinel is a prime example where such a layout could be beneficial.

Votes

 * Yes - Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 21:15, May 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes - Sasquatch101 (talk) 04:57, May 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes - Mr. T., That&#39;s Me! (talk) 07:27, May 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Undecided - Dodo8 Talk   May 27, 2013
 * No - ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 14:57, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Motion Withdrawn JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 06:59, June 10, 2013 (UTC)

Comments

 * Well, though I can only edit in the evening, now, I think this is a very good idea and I will try to help you with it. - Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 21:17, May 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * The vehicle articles are too large now, so breaking down the information will provide a better scope of info for that era. Sasquatch101 (talk) 04:57, May 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Not just the HD era vehicles, all of the vehicles in the series. We should organize the vehicle pages according to the MoS/V criteria. Mr. T., That&#39;s Me! (talk) 07:27, May 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Did I misread this? I though that Banton wanted to revamp the vehicle pages so they would match the MoS/V format? I guess my fast reading gave me the wrong purpose of Banton's idea. Mr. T., That&#39;s Me! (talk) 21:28, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * It would be difficult for people to find the page they are looking for, I'm undecided. Dodo8 Talk
 * No offence but this is a bad idea. Most vehicles, with only a few exceptions, have different models throughout the eras. As for the "Wikipedia-style subpage layout", most of the vehicle articles there (at least the ones I read) keep similar/related/"evolved" models on the same page. It would be also confusing for some people to see several articles about the same damn vehicle, only in a different shape. On a side note, I also don't see the point of seperating every subject (in this case, vehicles) into 3D and HD: the only real differance between those too eras is the storyline. -- ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 14:57, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Let me cut this short: The idea of seperating vehicle articles into 2D, 3D and HD is unnecessary. The only exceptions I would agree on are vehicles such as Tag and Blade, where two completely vehicles in terms of shape (one's a boat, the other is a car) share the same name. -- ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 14:57, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * To be honest my initial plan was only to link off HD era articles where there are more than three forms of the vehicle in the sereis. And only the HD models would be linked off. Though the vote is in favour at the moment, I don't want it to pass through without being optimal. JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 15:13, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Ilan couldn't said it better. That's my opinion too. I'll see what others think, and vote then. Dodo8 Talk
 * I think there's no problem with it...yeah, some cars may have differences between their 3D and HD (and, eventually 2D, as there are one or two vehicles that come from the 2D Universe), but as Rockstar named them the same way, I think we could make this Wikipedia-like structure for the vehicle articles. - Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 22:23, May 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * The vot is even, so what I shall do is go away and revise the idea, so that it's beter suited to our wiki. JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 06:52, June 10, 2013 (UTC)

Anonymous Users Should be Allowed
I have noticed on many active wikis that anonymous users are allowed. And when you check some of these wiki's recent wiki activity you'll see that a large amount of edits are done by anonymous users. So what I'm trying to say is that GTA Wiki should allow unregistered users to edit freely. This would make the wiki much more active and encourage some of these anonymous users to sign up and become registered users. Sure there may be a vandal here and there, but with the large staff this could easily be stopped. And if possible, an admin or Bureaucrat could block the Anonymous User account for a week. Please consider this as I believe this could do great for the wiki. Boomer8 (talk) 04:37, June 8, 2013 (UTC)

Votes

 * Yes - Boomer8 (talk) 04:37, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes - Sasquatch101 (talk) 04:42, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * No - Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 11:16, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * NO - ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 11:07, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * No - Messi1983 (talk) 12:29, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * No - Jeff (talk|stalk)
 * Oh Hell No - Cloudkit01 (talk) 13:26, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * No - Dodo8 Talk  14:12, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * No -Mr. T., That&#39;s Me! (talk) 03:49, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * No JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 06:53, June 10, 2013 (UTC)

Comments

 * The GTA Myths Wiki as well as others I see allow anonymous users and I don't think it would be a big deal. We should try it out; but if there is lots of vandals then reverse it. Sasquatch101 (talk) 04:42, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but what if some of them are anon vandals? - Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 11:16, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * Same as Mikey. It is not a secret that any second anon is a vandal: it is impossible to trust anons, at least in my eyes. Sure, Wikia is all about making a community, but anons are a different story. -- ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 11:07, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * There will not be "a vandal here and there". There will be dozens of vandals per day. Just think about it this way - Wikia and Wikipedia tout their everyone-can-edit rule like it's a religion. For them to turn off anonymous editing completely on this wiki just proves the magnitude of the anonymous vandalism problem this wiki once had. In fact, I'd bet that even if this resolution passes, Wikia Staff would veto it. Jeff (talk|stalk) 12:33, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * We already have problems with registered users, unregistered users would bring even more problems. But I agree we should have more Admins. For example, there's some guy who is adding Fanon content and me and Jeansowaty are the only one who spotted him? I'm voting No.  Dodo8 Talk
 * We already have problems with registered users, unregistered users would bring even more problems - Sums it up perfectly. Messi1983 (talk) 22:56, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * As per Dan's last comment. JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 06:53, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, that ended up quickly. -- ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 13:02, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * thumbs up the last comment* - Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 22:34, June 10, 2013 (UTC)

WE NEED MORE STAFF- Raise the Admin limit to 8
Currently the GTA Wiki has 3 Bureaucrat, 5 Admins, & '''8 Patrollers. '''Once GTA V is fully released there will be a flood of new users. Some users will be good editors, some will unintentionally make mistakes and others will be vandals. My proposal would be to have one of 8 patrollers assigned to one of 8 admins. This would make it easy for one admin not to get overwhelmed with his duties. Of course patrollers could still contact another admin and fellow patrollers but this new reporting system would improve the responce time as in the past, vandals were not stoped for a while. It would almost be like individual teams that would make up the whole GTA staff. I hope you all consider this great plan to assure a promt responce in any situation that could damage the GTA Wiki. Sasquatch101 (talk) 02:52, June 10, 2013 (UTC)

Proposal

 * 3 Bureaucrats
 * 8 Admins (assigned one patroller)
 * 8 Patrollers (assigned one admin)
 * Staff total: 19 (18.75% increase)

Votes

 * Yes - Sasquatch101 (talk) 02:52, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes and No - Mr. T., That&#39;s Me! (talk) 04:12, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Undecided - Boomer8 (talk) 04:29, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * No JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 06:59, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes - but my vote won't count Dodo8 Talk  07:20, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes - VaultBoy Tom (Talk to me this way) 11:38, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * No - ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 13:10, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * No - Tom Talk 13:50, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * No - Messi1983 (talk) 19:15, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * No - Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 22:50, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Probably - Cloudkit01 (talk) 03:57, June 11, 2013 (UTC)

Comments

 * As I stated above this proposal is about further limiting the potential damage vandals and confussed users can do on the wiki. This "team" system will also allow for a faster responce time and more organized effort to secure the GTA Wiki agginst potential threats.
 * I partially agree with this. I do agree that we need three more admins and patrollers to keep the Wiki smooth running. However, the staff can't be on the Wiki all day. We have lives outside the Interweb and the Wiki. That's a problem (and I contribute to that) that will never be resolved. Mr. T., That&#39;s Me! (talk) 04:09, June 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't really see any logic in assigning patrollers to certain admins to report an issue. I don't think any admins are getting "overwhelmed". And about raising the amount of admins to eight seems a little high, but the release of GTA V may call for this. I'm not sure. I'll think about it. Boomer8 (talk) 04:29, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * We already have enough admins and bureacrats to cover the different times zones, except the far east. The only new additions to the Bureacrat and Admin team should be from the far west or far east, so that we have strong coverage for each time zone. JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 06:59, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree we should have more admins, yesterday we were 3 active patrollers who spotted that vandal, but we couldn't stop him until an Admin logged in. Since I'm one of the patrollers who wants to be promoted in the future, my vote won't count anyway. Also, 8 Admins seems a little too much, in my opinion 7 would be enough. Dodo8 Talk
 * Yeah, I think it would be a good idea to have more admins, but as Dodo said, it would be a bit too much with 8. VaultBoy Tom (Talk to me this way) 11:38, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * We don't need more admins, but we do need more patrollers: 6 admins is enough (for now) and our cuurent limit for patrollers is 8 anyway (so your proposal doesn't increases this limit). I personally think that limit for patrollers should be increased to 12.-- ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 13:10, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with Ilan. That's why we're currently allowing requests to become a patroller. But I think we have enough admins at the moment. It's exam time for some admins, hence the current inactivity of me among others, so that may explain why nobody was available at the time. We can revisit this idea in a couple of months, if it's still an issue then we may implement some changes. Tom Talk 13:50, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * We will check this issue during the summer holiday. If there will be periods of time when no staff will be present I consider we should agree to make the staff bigger. Dodo8 Talk
 * Okay, a couple of points.
 * First of all, Dodo, your vote does count.
 * Secondly, I believe we should discuss whether to take on a new admin when GTA V is released, or a little beforehand, so we can deal with the inevitable bad edits, vandalism, arguments over content, and new members.
 * Thirdly, this idea of assigning a patroller to a certain admin is not logical, and is ridiculous in my opinion. Messi1983 (talk) 19:26, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * I hadn't read the part about patrollers assigned to admins. I agree with Dan on that, and on everything else he said. Tom Talk 09:48, June 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Not sure if this is the place to put this, but admins and bureacrats do have those boxes urging people to message us. If any one of our editors actually left me a message I would have been able to come and sort out the issue. When I was patrolling I would send messages to every last admin; if other editors did so as well, there would be a greater chance of a quick solution. I still believe that if we do we need an admin, they should be at least GMT +5. JBanton (Talk | Contribs) 20:40, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Good point. Tom Talk 09:48, June 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * If we're having more admins, make it one more, not three. - Mikey Klebbitz (talk) 22:50, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * My whole logic is that patrollers really don't have any power to stop an aggressive vandal which is why we need more editors with blocking power. The number 8 for admins makes sense since there will be 8 patrollers. The problem isn't that there is not enough patrollers, but rather there isn't enough admins. Adding three admins would fill the gaps that are missing at the moment. As it is there are vandals; once V is out, bet that number to double. Everyone has there own time they are active, so more admins would further protect the wiki. The time is now to be prepared for the near future. Sasquatch101 (talk) 03:39, June 11, 2013 (UTC)