StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Ok, first I get banned for a week by Graestan for being snidy towards a dumbshit "Inquisitor" and then defending myself, then I see Lord Hydronium changing all references to the Imperial-class SSD back the the non-canon name once I'm gone. What gives?

I also notice from Graestan's posting history that he's a McEwok hanger-on (even deleted a post praising that fucknut earlier on). I think I know what's going on, but seriously. Laps of judgement in giving that guy an admin post.
My main point is reverting the reverts made by Hydronium, since now they're inaccurate. He's either never heard the audio book of Dark Empire or doesn't care. Either way, it's non really encyclopedic of that guy to erase official info.

Take this away if it's too non-SW related, I wasn't sure where to put it myself.

EDIT: This apparantly sent him over the edge.

There's always the alternative of SDWiki, you could grab anyone who agrees with you and help Stark and Shep. I'm sure they wouldn't mind detailed articles. The whole point of the wiki was to keep up to date on the state of the Vs Debate and Canon, since Lord Wong can't really be expected to update the main site every time a book (and eventually episode) comes out.

We need to make some kind of an amendment regarding copy & paste, at least to build a solid base of articles. There could a group of Wikiers who systematically go through Wookiee articles, pure and fix them and properly post a not bullshit-wiki version on the SDWiki.

I'd like to see SDWiki more active, but we really need something more cohesive to make it work plan-wise.

Frankly, our wiki is fucked. Topics like trolls are poorly strung together, actual facts are replaced with utter nonsense (who the fuck put in that bullshit about a galaxy having trillions of stars), and a solid grounding in math and science over technobabble is missing despite the premise of this site.

Ender wrote:Frankly, our wiki is fucked. Topics like trolls are poorly strung together, actual facts are replaced with utter nonsense (who the fuck put in that bullshit about a galaxy having trillions of stars), and a solid grounding in math and science over technobabble is missing despite the premise of this site.

Shep and I would agree with you, and moreover policy is thin and I'm not sure how much Shep and I are supposed to do. If people want to make a success of it, it's certainly possible, but some definate plans need to be laid out and we need to choose editors rather than rely on the open-wiki layout which has either failed or created heaps of work for admins/moderators, depending on your perspective.

Ender wrote:Frankly, our wiki is fucked. Topics like trolls are poorly strung together, actual facts are replaced with utter nonsense (who the fuck put in that bullshit about a galaxy having trillions of stars), and a solid grounding in math and science over technobabble is missing despite the premise of this site.

There are galaxies with trillions of stars, but not many.

Illuminatus Primus wrote:

Ender wrote:Frankly, our wiki is fucked. Topics like trolls are poorly strung together, actual facts are replaced with utter nonsense (who the fuck put in that bullshit about a galaxy having trillions of stars), and a solid grounding in math and science over technobabble is missing despite the premise of this site.

There are galaxies with trillions of stars, but not many.

Granted, but the GFFA is your standard spiral arm galaxy only slightly larger then the milky way. We know it only has 10^8 stars from other sources and we know that its layout is consistent with known properties of galaxies. Instead we have people throwing shit in just to get high numbers instead of accurate ones.

Stark wrote:

Ender wrote:Frankly, our wiki is fucked. Topics like trolls are poorly strung together, actual facts are replaced with utter nonsense (who the fuck put in that bullshit about a galaxy having trillions of stars), and a solid grounding in math and science over technobabble is missing despite the premise of this site.

Shep and I would agree with you, and moreover policy is thin and I'm not sure how much Shep and I are supposed to do.

Very well, I'll bring it up in the senate and see if we can define your roles and responsibilities.

If people want to make a success of it, it's certainly possible, but some definate plans need to be laid out and we need to choose editors rather than rely on the open-wiki layout which has either failed or created heaps of work for admins/moderators, depending on your perspective.

I don't think some structure is out of line, at the very least we could do with some info boxes for the ships entries.

Absolutely; shortly after the Wiki was opened I threw together a quick and dirty replacement main screen, with clearer categories etc, but due to the low activity it never went anywhere. Some SDN people are quite experienced with the Wiki thing, and if some policies were available Shep and I would be all over whipping the place into shape.

Stark wrote:Absolutely; shortly after the Wiki was opened I threw together a quick and dirty replacement main screen, with clearer categories etc, but due to the low activity it never went anywhere. Some SDN people are quite experienced with the Wiki thing, and if some policies were available Shep and I would be all over whipping the place into shape.

Senate thread. Hopefully this can get resolved. I don't have the time on hand to do it myself, but I know I mailed my "Holocron" (a spreadsheet full of technical data, calcs, and notes) out to several people. Hell, the GAR size controversy gets about 5 lines.

Ender wrote:

Illuminatus Primus wrote:

Ender wrote:Frankly, our wiki is fucked. Topics like trolls are poorly strung together, actual facts are replaced with utter nonsense (who the fuck put in that bullshit about a galaxy having trillions of stars), and a solid grounding in math and science over technobabble is missing despite the premise of this site.

There are galaxies with trillions of stars, but not many.

Granted, but the GFFA is your standard spiral arm galaxy only slightly larger then the milky way. We know it only has 10^8 stars from other sources and we know that its layout is consistent with known properties of galaxies. Instead we have people throwing shit in just to get high numbers instead of accurate ones.

Andromeda may have 10^12 stars. I think you mean 10^11 (hundred billion) not 10^8 (hundred million).

Illuminatus Primus wrote:

Ender wrote:

Illuminatus Primus wrote: There are galaxies with trillions of stars, but not many.

Granted, but the GFFA is your standard spiral arm galaxy only slightly larger then the milky way. We know it only has 10^8 stars from other sources and we know that its layout is consistent with known properties of galaxies. Instead we have people throwing shit in just to get high numbers instead of accurate ones.

Andromeda may have 10^12 stars. I think you mean 10^11 (hundred billion) not 10^8 (hundred million).

Shit, quite right. Yes, it is on the order of 400 billion stars.

Also, how does one create a template? I want to set up an info box

I've started massively expanding the starship listings for SW, so I have generated a lot of stubs in the process. Hope that doesn't create too much of a hassle, will start filling them in with text as the week goes by. Already input in all know star frigates, star destroyers, and star cruisers, I'll likely wrap it up with dreadnoughts and battlecruisers tonight, but I might add all the unknown capital ships as well. I'm shuffling a lot of stuff as I go through (e.g. creating new pages with full class names and copy pasting the old info over), hope that doesn't step on any toes.

Hmm, that's true, I wasn't really aware of the SDWiki until a while back, I might try doing some stuff for it as well. Thanks.

VT-16 wrote:Ok, first I get banned for a week by Graestan for being snidy towards a dumbshit "Inquisitor" and then defending myself,

One, "snidy" isn't a word. Two, your first edit after being told to stop insulting people was to insult someone.

VT-16 wrote:I also notice from Graestan's posting history that he's a McEwok hanger-on

Actually, no. Quite the opposite in fact. He's one of two admins who has blocked McEwok for habitual dickishness, and I'm the other one.

VT-16 wrote:Laps of judgement in giving that guy an admin post.

Nobody gives anyone adminship.

Anyway, what it boils down to is this: Wookieepedia is not SDN. Anyone who wants to edit Wookieepedia needs to keep their attitude in check. It's difficult for those few admins who favor realism over fantasy when the users who share that mindset act like assholes most of the time.

Alright, but I take some issue with this:

Two, your first edit after being told to stop insulting people was to insult someone.

How did I insult someone? In the edit summary, I didn't mention any names. I only mentioned the "inquisitor"'s name after Graestan posted. I also made a legitimate complaint, which was that he had used a bad example for something that needed "improvement". How can you source a paragraph that already has a source? That might have been sloppy, but I interpreted it as intentional, and remarked on it for being childish, in an edit summary after doing a legitimate enhancing of that part of the article. That in turn might have been extreme, but the particular user has come across as snidey in other issues that had nothing to do with me.

Heh, I meant this word:

Adj. 1. snide - expressive of contempt; "curled his lip in a supercilious smile"; "spoke in a sneering jeering manner"; "makes many a sharp comparison but never a mean or snide one"

Secondly, I thought Graestan had actually given McE some support earlier on (including a post he later erased from the site), sorry if that wasn't the case. My initial dislike of him began when, after having apologized to Grand Moff Ganner and taken his advice, resolving the issue, he lashed out at me despite having nothing to do with the preceding arguments.

Sorry for giving others a bad name, I'll keep my usual low editing profile from now on. My only concern is the complete disregard for facts shown later on the same day, when Lord Hydronium deleted every single reference to the (badly named) Imperial-class Super Star Destroyer, which was actually used for both the Allegiance and Eclipse's escorts in the Dark Empire audio book. I assume he did this not knowing what the dialog was, which I can add to the bts section of that article. The problem now is, a canon name was exchanged for a fanon one, the provisional "Allegiance type".

Darth Culator wrote:Anyway, what it boils down to is this: Wookieepedia is not SDN. Anyone who wants to edit Wookieepedia needs to keep their attitude in check. It's difficult for those few admins who favor realism over fantasy when the users who share that mindset act like assholes most of the time.

You do know you're making a style over substance fallacy, correct? Which would make you and your entire retinue of retards and gaggle of morons.

Well, to be fair, Culator is one of the best and fairest admins on Wookieepedia, in my experience. It isn't fair to call him a retard because the site itself changed over the years (my arguments with McEwok would have had me thrown out a long time ago if it was done today). It's just the way the site evolved, but it's nowhere near as bad as TFN.

General Schatten wrote:

Darth Culator wrote:Anyway, what it boils down to is this: Wookieepedia is not SDN. Anyone who wants to edit Wookieepedia needs to keep their attitude in check. It's difficult for those few admins who favor realism over fantasy when the users who share that mindset act like assholes most of the time.

You do know you're making a style over substance fallacy, correct? Which would make you and your entire retinue of retards and gaggle of morons.

No, he isn't. He is stating that common politeness greases the wheels with other people. Even if you want to tretch the definition of style over substance past the breaking point, you are still wrong because he wouldn't be making it, he is just reporting that others do.

But hey, lets ignore that so you can keep being a douchebag.

General Schatten wrote:

Darth Culator wrote:Anyway, what it boils down to is this: Wookieepedia is not SDN. Anyone who wants to edit Wookieepedia needs to keep their attitude in check. It's difficult for those few admins who favor realism over fantasy when the users who share that mindset act like assholes most of the time.

You do know you're making a style over substance fallacy, correct? Which would make you and your entire retinue of retards and gaggle of morons.

Man, just shut the fuck up. You're not Mike. Some battles are worth winning by playing ball. Wookieepedia's civility requirements are not changing - Wookieepedia is not a message board - now, are we going to want the content to reflect rationalism or dogma.

I felt like helping out a little with the wiki, so I wrote some temporary short descriptions for a few of the ships. They don't give much information, but at least there's something in a few of those articles so they aren't all empty until they get proper descriptions.

To any wookieepedia admin reading this: Can I please have my editing powers back? I see that no-one has asked Lord Hydronium to consider the audio book and revert the name (since he asked for proof), so I'll have to do it myself. It's already Sunday, doesn't that constitute a week?

Someone to fight? How do I join and who do I shoot?!?

Long since dead, and an affair between another poster and another admin