User talk:Jhonevans

Welcome!

Hello, Jhonevans, and welcome to Wikisimpsons!

Thank you for your edits to the Bart the Genius article and taking an interest in our wiki. If you have any troubles, feel free to ask questions on any experienced editors' talk page. Also, you could look at a help page.

Here are a few pages to help out new editors such as yourself:

• Help pages, your first stop if you need any help
• Editing help, in case you have questions on how to properly edit articles
• Policy pages - Failure to abide by these will result in consequences.

Please sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your name and the date. Signing your comments is important, as it lets other editors know who has posted which comments.

Again, welcome! Solar Dragon ^{(Talk • Contribs.)} 08:59, 16 November 2011 (EST)

Warning

Welcome to Wikisimpsons. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions here, at least one of your recent edits , such as the one you made to the Wikisimpsons:Administrators article, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the policy page to learn more about contributing constructively to this wiki. Please note that further infractions may result in a block for a short duration, at an administrator's discretion. Thank you. The Solar Dragon 04:17, 30 November 2011 (EST)

You are NOT an admin. The Solar Dragon 04:17, 30 November 2011 (EST)

Changing comments is against another policy. One more thing wrong and you will be banned. The Solar Dragon 04:39, 30 November 2011 (EST)

Ok fair enough. I thought it was pretty funny. Let's continue our conversation here, the messaging system is rather frustrating.--Jhonevans 04:41, 30 November 2011 (EST)

Oh, you left me a message on my board. 1) It was our info in the first place. We worked long and hard on building it up. 2) I changed your edit because you are not an admin! 3) We don't have many ads because we are NOT Wikia. ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 04:43, 30 November 2011 (EST)

So the same could be done to you? And I was saying Wikia doesn't have many ads at all. --Jhonevans 04:44, 30 November 2011 (EST)

Wikia does have many ads. Have you tried editing as a logged out user? It's horrible. Ads everywhere. And the same could be done to us but you'd have to do it properly. You have to attribute us as the people who made the content by linking back to us because of our licensing. Unfortunately, the stupid admins and staff on Wikia didn't listen to my request to whitelist simpsonswiki.net so that is impossible without allowing us to take Wikia to court and getting Simpsons Wikia shut down or getting a large sum of money from Wikia. So, you can't legally steal our content. ^{(Talk - Contribs.)} 04:47, 30 November 2011 (EST)

My problem with that is the information isn't certain authors. To say you created all the previous information would be wrong. So taking all that information does not mean all the authors joined this site and it was all of your work. However I have done some research on you. You edit a fair amount. Oh yes and a side question. I've noticed on wikia certain badges are no longer active, making it difficult for me to beat your #1 status. Any reasonw hy this might have happened? --Jhonevans 04:53, 30 November 2011 (EST)

No, not all editors moved over. Many went inactive and haven't edited since. The entire active community at the time of the split moved with us, with the exception of a couple of lesser editors who didn't edit as much. Wikia allowed us to do this. Plus, I do not know what is wrong with the badges except Wikia are stupid so the chances are, they cocked up somewhere again. Anyway, we are the better wiki by far, look at our article count and quality of articles to see that. Simpsons Wikia is a fail in comparison to us and I don't know why no one else sees that and are too stubborn to give up on a dying wiki. Solar Dragon ^{(Talk • Contribs.)} 04:56, 30 November 2011 (EST)

I know, I know. But you just stole all the information from the previous wikia. Say what you want but that was not all your work, so how was ethical (or legal) in teh first place? And don't worry, I'll get it up to standards, just give it awhile. --Jhonevans 04:59, 30 November 2011 (EST)

It was legal. We are fully allowed to do a database dump and start on a new wiki. Wikia's license allows that. As for ethical, Wikia staff screwed us all over so we deserved to move away. Simpsons Wikia is a shit hole of crappy articles and stolen images (images stolen from and not sourced back to us). If anything, you guys are in the wrong for carrying on with the wiki on Wikia. Solar Dragon ^{(Talk • Contribs.)} 05:02, 30 November 2011 (EST)

Ok this will probably make me sound like an idiot, but I am a newbie. This skin I hear about, what does that actually change? Am I to understand that this is how the wikia used to look and operate? --Jhonevans 05:06, 30 November 2011 (EST)

The skin you currently see is not the one Wikia used. We do have that skin choice though in your preferences. We also have a new skin too which you can also access through your preferences (called simpsons). Wikia's skin takes ages to load on some computers, is hard to navigate as an IP (no recent changes links etc.) and it is hard to find anything on it (it took me days to find the history link when I was beta testing the skin). There was a massive outrage and about 70% of the community didn't want the new skin, sparking a massive exodus from Wikia (several large wikis, including WoWWiki, the third largest wiki on Wikia, moved away). The staff banned users and removed admin rights for no reason, against the communities decisions and just simply were horrible to anyone who disagreed with the skin. They wouldn't give us the option to have Monobook or Monaco (which they removed entirely) as skin options and so many wikis moved away. I was an admin on 13 different wikis and Wikia staff used to like me. Now, I am globally blocked infinitely because staff are evil, horrible, spiteful people who didn't even give me an excuse for my global ban. The Solar Dragon ^{(Talk - Contribs.)} 05:13, 30 November 2011 (EST)

Although I am sure at the moment you will oppose this, I sense a fanaticism amongst the groups. But I shall mention this: peace treaty? I've listened to both of you. The admins of wikia are quite friendly. They don't dislike you or anything, yet the vandalism which stemmed. Perhaps we can work out something. From what I gather everything was fairly rash and everyone left as a retort to your apparent "unprovoked" block. --Jhonevans 05:31, 30 November 2011 (EST)

The only way a peace treaty would work is if every admin and user on Simpsons Wikia give up on that and merged with us. Otherwise, there will still be a rival Simpsons Wiki out there which we don't want. We are the bigger and better wiki and carrying on with a smaller lesser wiki is pointless. ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 05:38, 30 November 2011 (EST)

I see what you're saying and I see you have a lot more articles. Which is hard for me since I've put SO much work into the wikia. But I will be honest I find no problems with the other skin. Also, the whole point of wikia is for people to get information away from wikipedia. Wikia is much more attractive, therefore more appealing to people just wanting information. Yet you complained about some functionality errors, could these not be altered to fit most peoples' wants? Also, I know I sound like an idiot for saying this, but badges are really helpful in pushing people to edit. I am not experienced enough to give proper reasons why the other is better. But as far as I can see the quality you speak so widely about might not be as truthful as you believe. --Jhonevans 05:45, 30 November 2011 (EST)

Look I'm sorry for being such a pain, just sucks to know all my hard work is for nothing. I will try to work something out. I think both wikis have positive and negatives. --Jhonevans 06:47, 30 November 2011 (EST)

I wasn't going to get involved but Solar is probably away right now. As for a treaty I think the closest you can get to that is each wiki leaving each other to get on, as I know things would never go the way Solar wanted. Also I'm guessing it's you that posted on our Facebook wall? I just replied.--Cook879 06:52, 30 November 2011 (EST)

Yes that was me. Perhaps I can speak with you. I know you guys seem rather happy in your own little world, but I think both wikis can learn from each other. I agree you have many better features and depth, but again the other wikia is a lot more user friendly, I know some of you may disagree, but remember most of people visiting the site aren't actually suppose to be editors. It looks a lot better and the badge system really does help. I just believe that this site right now was started because of a misunderstanding and fight, let's rectify that fight. I suggest we get the older wiki you guys dislike, edit it to a degree where it is both visitor and editor friendly, and also as thorough. I know you will strongly disagree, but I believe it could benefit the both of us. If we could do something like this, I as well as many of the users on the older wikia will be more than happy to help build a gigantic wiki that may eventually turn people away from wikipedia. If there is a more easier way to talk please do. I am not here to start a fight, but hopefully create a better wiki that can involve all of us and attracts all. --Jhonevans 06:59, 30 November 2011 (EST)

It would be an idyllic situation to have just one wiki, but bear in mind the advantages of an independent wiki: We have a lot more control over the wiki, we have subwikis, analytical data, email addresses (those these may go after the server update). Also, I believe the general consensus for visitors is that independent wikis are generally better, and dare I say more trustworthy. I know i'd rather click to visit and independent wiki then a wikifarm one just because you know the chances are a lot f care and attention is being put in compared to some wikifarm wikis, as in many cases the users will be paying for the independent wiki (luckily we have advertisements covering us), and so they won't give up on it like many (like I have before, not Simpsons related) give up on wikifarm wikis.--Cook879 07:12, 30 November 2011 (EST) P.S. Don't expect an instant reply after this - I'm going offline a bit.

Very well then. I guess can see this, but ultimately is our point not to get the information across to people who want learn about Simpsons? Perhaps the wikia people will be impossible to convince. But this current wiki would also need changes. I reckon if you have it more similar to wikia than you could get more people to leave. Honestly wikia for me is a lot more fun and relaxing. I guess I am fairly insignificant, but wikia is a lot more rewarding. If you brought in a layout similar without destroying functionality. I know I am asking a lot but I think you could really give wikia a run for it's money. I reckon if we give a bit for both wiki and wikia users we can create a site everyone will want to join. Even though I see functionality is a winner on this site, prior commitments makes me believe that I will have trouble actually becoming addicted to this site. I know this is all from one wikia user, but at this stage I'm working at about 200 edits a day, I'm keen to help, but just not all in vain. --Jhonevans 07:34, 30 November 2011 (EST)

It would take an awful lot of work to ever get something like that working, and you'll never be able to please everyone. If you want to spend time and effort working on ideas, that's fine with me, i'd love to see it work, but the odds are stacked against you. As you said - we want to get information out - being "fun" can detract from that, and we may have a slightly tenser atmosphere because we want to get high-quality information out, and to do that it does require us to go through every edit and pull them to the same level. Surely all that makes the site addicting is knowing people will be reading your work - just as 1763 people did yesterday?--Cook879 12:52, 30 November 2011 (EST)

Hey, sorry about earlier, I had to go christmas shopping. Anyway, we would not want a similar layout to Wikia. Their thinner article content ruined the layout of many articles, especially those with infoboxes and other templates. Plus, we do have a new layout now, which is currently in testing stages, you can see it in your preferences. Vector, the skin you currently see, is by far better than Shittia's skin. We already do give Wikia a run for their money. Lately, we've been getting more IPs edit and more users joining, which is great! We're also getting more and more views on average every month. Basically, we are constantly improving and becoming an even bigger threat to Wikia. Ideally, I would love for Simpsons Wikia's editors to realize that we are the better wiki and come and help us. There's no point in making a rival wiki. Independent wikis often fair better, look at Bulbapedia and Pokemon Wikia for instance. Independent wikis, I have always liked more than Wikia wikis. Plus, Wikia may have a few people who love it and would never leave it, but there have been a lot of people saying they hate it. Amplicate has a 68% vote on hating Wikia, to a 32% saying they love it for instance. Wikia continues to go against the users wants, removing user talk pages for message boards now. Basically, Wikia will continue to make enemies. While we will continue to grow and become ever better. ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 13:38, 30 November 2011 (EST)

Look...

You have to stop doing stuff like this. You can't become a bureaucrat until you have done a lot of editing and have became an admin. ^{(Talk - Contribs.)} 04:51, 1 December 2011 (EST)

Just having a go at it... So was I accepted?--Jhonevans 04:55, 1 December 2011 (EST)

---

The people at the Simpsons Wiki at The Host That Shall Not Be Named (hereafter, abbreviated SW@THTSNBN) have been demoting rollbacks and admins who have those rights both here and there, as they see it (justifiably, IMO) as a conflict of interest. In my case, I don't have a problem with that ... the Wikia skin is crap and annoying to edit on, so there's no point in my having rollback rights there. However, I've noticed that Jhonevans was recently given Admin status at SW@THTSNBN. By the standards that SW@THTSNBN has put forth, Jhonevans should not be granted any extra privileges here, and by those same standards, he's jeoparding his privileges at SW@THTSNBN by even making rights requests (frivolous or otherwise) over here.

Jhon, I am not going to rat you out (not my job), but I thought you should be aware of the issue. Besides, since the SW@THTSNBN folks have been making enough visits over here to determine who had rollback or admin status on both wikis, there's a fair chance they might find you out anyway. In that event, they can make their own decision about what to do. -- Mythigator 09:46, 21 December 2011 (EST)

---

Block

"Thank you, come again!" ―Apu Nahasapeemapetilon You have been blocked for a period of 2 weeks due to disruptive editing. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|your reason here}}, and your appeal will be reviewed by the blocking admin. ☆The Solar Dragon (Talk - Contribs.)☆ 04:59, 1 December 2011 (EST)

I've blocked you for general annoyance and the fact you don't seem to want to contribute anything to the wiki. ☆The Solar Dragon ^{(Talk - Contribs.)}☆ 04:59, 1 December 2011 (EST)

Oasis Skin

Hi, Jhon ... the only one of your questions I haven't answered is about the Oasis skin. I think that if THTSNBN had kept Monaco (sp?) available as an option, none of this ugly business would have happened and we (and a lot of other wikis) might never have moved at all. As it is, I think their handling of the situation was both ham-handed (cramming Oasis down everyone's throats) and hypocritical (offering WOWwiki an alternate layout, when it became clear that they were about to lose their biggest wiki). As for what I personally would have done, my interests have always been with 1) Improving the wiki via writing and editing articles and 2) Collaborating with the community in the interest of bringing #1 to fruition. The Oasis skin made writing and editing less fun and more a pain in the ass, so I would have made the move even if the bans and other assorted ugliness hadn't happened. As for my Scottish roots, I usually don't have a brogue, and my speech and writing patterns have more of a UK flavour :-) than the typical Yank, thanks largely to family background. What brogue usually comes out when I tell my great-uncle's favorite jokes, such as the one where the punch line is, "Ah dinnae ken whur ye bin, laddie, but ah see ye won fairst prize!" LOL ... Gotta rush off again. If there's something I forgot to answer, drop me a line (a reply on your talk page is fine, I'll be sure to check here). -- Mythigator 11:58, 21 December 2011 (EST)

We do have the Monobook as an option though..? Jhonevans 12:07, 21 December 2011 (EST)

That's news to me, and might be a recent option. IIRC, when we made the move the "party line" from THTSNBN was "It's Oasis, period, and if you don't like it, too bad." -- Mythigator 13:29, 21 December 2011 (EST)

Monobook was always a skin option. However, you couldn't set it as the wiki's default skin. It was on a per-user basis. Basically, we still rejected Wikia because our users would have to suffer the headache Oasis caused (yes, it actually caused people headaches). Plus, many of Wikia's featured are broken on Monobook, forcing people to use Oasis anyway. The Solar Dragon 13:39, 21 December 2011 (EST)

Warning

Hello. Please note that if you continue copying information over to Simpsons Wikia, without proper copyright, you will be blocked from accessing Wikisimpsons. This is for the good of both wikis - there's no point in having the same content in two places.--Cook879 16:22, 26 January 2012 (EST)