Wikia

SpongeBob SquarePants

  • Why did you block SpongeyTube? If another admin did something wrong, it needs to be addressed more than just a simple block, unless there is some sort of misunderstanding?

      Loading editor
    • Sorry I didn't get to this earlier. I blocked SpongeTube for inserting false information.

        Loading editor
    • Where?

        Loading editor
    • On the Slimy Can Snail Food page. He or she said that it appeared in SpongeBob, You're Fired. 

        Loading editor
    • That's it? You blocked an admin for 1 day for making one very small edit, without discussing it? I see in the article's history that there wasn't any edit war... so was there a larger issue?

        Loading editor
    • He inserted false information, so I blocked him for a day. That is how I work. I do not care if he is an admin or not, he is not above the rules. Also, it was just one day and he doesn't seem to be up in arms about it.

        Loading editor
    • If you go to 5:58 on this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QoAl-3Y1JE

      Slimycan Snail Food did make an appearance in SpongeBob, You're Fired.

      Is this why you blocked SpongeyTube?

        Loading editor
    • Slimycan in SBYF

        Loading editor
    • That's right.

      It's a large cameo in SpongeBob You're Fired.

      So look at the entire section, or watch the whole episode, as you told me to read all the trivia 120d.

        Loading editor
    • I guess I was wrong. This actually makes no sense that it was Slimycan because later in the episode, he makes Snailpo.

        Loading editor
    • Technically, someone could argue about which can of food it was.

        Loading editor
    • You jumped to conclusions and assumed an administrator added false information. Since SpongeyTube is an administrator, you should have looked into the edit a little more, knowing that administrators are administrators because they are trusted to do the right things. While two different types of snail food were shown in the episode, even if someone was wrong to add the incorrect type of snail food, it is not vandalism. It would have been a misinterpretation of the episode.

      It is not necessary to block someone for this, especially for any well meaning contributors and administrators. Yes, no one is "above the rules," but no one is perfect. Had you been correct about the snail food, and had SpongeyTube been wrong, it would only be a small mistake. All that would suffice is to correct the information and tell the user why they are wrong. However, if a user continues to revert (edit war) and ignores your messages, that is breaking #7 of the general policies. I would imagine anyone who believes in helping the wiki would not argue with someone about a piece of information that can be easily sourced.

      Also, there is no rule on inserting false information. The rules forbid vandalism, which is deliberate destruction of an article's content. Had you been correct about the addition of false information, yes, it is false information, BUT it is NOT vandalism. If someone with good intensions makes a mistake, they should not be punished. All administrators should be able to judge this.

      However, in this case, you blocked another administrator for a positive contribution to the wiki. But like I said, people make mistakes, and now you can learn and move on. If you have to go back and watch the episode to confirm something or determine something is incorrect, you need to do that instead of assuming you are correct and a contributor with excellent contributions is not.

      SpongeyTube may not have been online nor complained about the block, but that is not to say that anyone with good intensions will complain later. It's best we prevent things like these so we do not have any controversy.

      When I saw an administrator was blocked, that put up a red flag, so that is why I started this discussion.

        Loading editor
    • He or she does not seem to be as concerned as you are, he or she has not come to me asking why he or she was blocked. The most likely reason was that it was only one day.

        Loading editor
    • If it's one day, it's not too bad.

      Plus, if SpongeyTube felt it was wrong, he could've unblocked himself.

      If it were for 3 or more days, then he may have been upset.

      Maybe we should think before we block admins.

      If a vandal comes and vandalizes us, then we block him.

      A minor detail, can be forgotten, and Admins should only get blocked for a serious offense.

        Loading editor
    • I will block ANYONE who does something wrong, no matter how small the edit is or how powerful the user.

        Loading editor
    • 120d, so if someone with good intensions makes a mistake, you will block them? SpongeyTube may have not been vocal, but perhaps other contributors, and I am talking about well meaing contributors, may be. It's possible that small mistakes resulting in mutiple blocks would frustrate a user and they would leave the wiki.

        Loading editor
    • Well, if someone makes a spelling or grammar error or adds a repeated word I will not block them, but besides that I will.

        Loading editor
    • So if someone makes a trivial error, you will block them?

      [Survival of the Idiots.

      Someone writes: PatBack was gross.

      Get rid of that, and block/warn them]

      Don't make it any longer than it needbe.

      Besides, couldn't you get blocked for blocking someone else without probable cause?

        Loading editor
    • First question, is the thing below the question what a "trivial error" is supposed to be?, if so then yes, that is inserting someone's opinion.

      Second question, I can always get blocked, but it is highly doubtful because I do not do anything wrong. I do not block people without a reason.

        Loading editor
    • Yes that is what a "trival error" is.

      Second, that's a bit strange that you consider yourself to not do wrong.

      Everyone makes mistakes.

      You made one by blocking SpongeyTube.

        Loading editor
    • Upon closer examination:

      I've determined that both Slimy Can, and SnailPo were in SpongeBob You're Fired.

        Loading editor
    • Tanhamman wrote:
      Yes that is what a "trival error" is.

      Second, that's a bit strange that you consider yourself to not do wrong.

      Everyone makes mistakes.

      You made one by blocking SpongeyTube.

      What I meant was that I don't do anything that is against the rules.

        Loading editor
    • Oh.

      I think those (not vandals, and spammers) try to do as you and I try.

        Loading editor
    • 120d: I've said this before - when someone makes a minor mistake its best to warn or start a discussion. At the end of the day, it could have been a misunderstanding. It doesn't matter if it's only for 1 day. At the end of the day, an Admin was blocked which, to me, is rather a big deal.

        Loading editor
    • Because it is a big deal, unfortunetly.

        Loading editor
    • "I do not do anything wrong. I do not block people without a reason." - 120d

      Everyone makes mistakes. What about the time you blocked SpongeyTube for making a positive edit, that you mistook for false information?

      Spongebob456, Tanhamman, and I are trying to tell you that it is a big deal blocking an admin, especially for some minor piece of information. There are two points here:

      • 1. You assumed you were correct, but you were incorrect. You did not fact check (watching the episode)
      • 2. Your "do not make mistakes and everyone be perfect or else you get blocked" philosophy will not work around here if everyone feels threatened that one mistake will get them blocked.

      I will quote myself from earlier, this is important. Like I said, SpongeyTube may nto have consider this a big deal, but the fact that this has happened must be addressed. The two points I make above are important.

      AMK152 wrote: You jumped to conclusions and assumed an administrator added false information. Since SpongeyTube is an administrator, you should have looked into the edit a little more, knowing that administrators are administrators because they are trusted to do the right things. While two different types of snail food were shown in the episode, even if someone was wrong to add the incorrect type of snail food, it is not vandalism. It would have been a misinterpretation of the episode.

      It is not necessary to block someone for this, especially for any well meaning contributors and administrators. Yes, no one is "above the rules," but no one is perfect. Had you been correct about the snail food, and had SpongeyTube been wrong, it would only be a small mistake. All that would suffice is to correct the information and tell the user why they are wrong. However, if a user continues to revert (edit war) and ignores your messages, that is breaking #7 of the general policies. I would imagine anyone who believes in helping the wiki would not argue with someone about a piece of information that can be easily sourced.

      Also, there is no rule on inserting false information. The rules forbid vandalism, which is deliberate destruction of an article's content. Had you been correct about the addition of false information, yes, it is false information, BUT it is NOT vandalism. If someone with good intensions makes a mistake, they should not be punished. All administrators should be able to judge this.

      However, in this case, you blocked another administrator for a positive contribution to the wiki. But like I said, people make mistakes, and now you can learn and move on. If you have to go back and watch the episode to confirm something or determine something is incorrect, you need to do that instead of assuming you are correct and a contributor with excellent contributions is not.

      SpongeyTube may not have been online nor complained about the block, but that is not to say that anyone with good intensions will complain later. It's best we prevent things like these so we do not have any controversy.

      When I saw an administrator was blocked, that put up a red flag, so that is why I started this discussion.

        Loading editor
    • Also, AMK152, would putting little bylines of wording under images in a gallery be bad enough for a block?

      120d blocked Snoetje4 for inserting captions under the pictures.

        Loading editor
    • Everyone makes a mistake! It was 1 day! I get it I made an error! Stop telling me! I will fact check in the future, if I am not 110% sure that it is false! Is that what you wanted to read. I wrote it okay. Yes, I make mistakes, but I do not go against the rules on purpose. Yes, I have "broken" some rules about things that hadn't really been established yet, like transcripts. This is getting out of hand, I am not arguing with you. I was in the wrong. I cannot undo my block. I understand that blocking someone is a big deal, but seriously the user did not complain about my actions. LET IT GO!

        Loading editor
    • We are just making sure that admins, and other users aren't blocked severely without reason.

        Loading editor
    • 120d: the responses you left on this thread never indicated that you acknowledged the significance of the situations. You now know it was a big deal. Spongebob456 indicated that he talked to you about this before, and apparently you did not listen. I hope you are listening now, because it is important. I don't want people to edit in fear of you blocking them. Trust me, your philosophy could scare people away. You need to understand this. That is why I prolonged this discussion on a rather simple, seemingly insignificant situation.

        Loading editor
    • WARNING: this was written right after Tanhamman posted his thing about captions under pictures. So it does not talk about things after that post.

      Captions in episode galleries are not allowed on this wiki. Stop trying to say that my actions are wrong. They are not wrong. Soon enough you will put up the next person I block and then I will banned for this disagreement. I am sick of getting all of the hate. I am sick of bad grammer. I am sick of bad spelling. I am sick of useless facts. I am sick of people adding things they are not supposed to. I am sick of none of the beurocrats seeminging like they are listening to me and then throwing what I say aside like it means nothing. I am sick of people thinking I am power mad. I am sick of having to revert edits. I am sick of spoilers. I just wish people were smarter and nicer. (I know exactly what you're going to do with that sentence so don't waste your time) I block the way I do because I am for justice and I do not care if it's christmas time or if the rules forbid me to let me do what I want. (I also know what you're going to do with that sentence) I want people to listen to me for once. I am someone on this wki. (maybe the most hated admin, but still someone) Everyone just wants to change things. I want things to be the same. I know what you're thinking "It's not all about you" and "Life isn't fair" and "no one hates you, everyone loves you." I am aware that things are not about me, but for once on this wiki I would like to maybe have a proposal pass without question or not have someone speed up a change even though some of us don't want it, or have a poll asking the users wether or not THEY want to change the wiki title instead of just assuming everyone does, or have a beurocrat not ignore a message just because he or she doesn't want to answer it, or talk about if the SpongeBob SquarePants Movie 2 should be spoiler free. I came to this wiki wanting to help and now I feel like no one likes me this wiki is going to change and some of the beurocrats are [insert donkey picture here] that only care what they want to happen. I see why so many people don't like people of power, they come off as jerks. 

        Loading editor
    • You're sick of bad spelling, grammar and usage, picture issues, captions, and trivia errors?

      Well, when you can't spell bureaucrat, I'm concerned. You've had to add a lot of pictures to side pages, and have more "SpongeBob's Face" badges, than anyone.

      It's annoying having to check to make sure someone didn't screw up the wiki.

      However, it's nice to know I'm preventing any sort of vandalism, that can damage us.

      We've resolved the spoiler debate, so anything discussing that, is now old trivia.

      Since everyone can edit the wiki, we should be a bit lax (not 100%), and let some of the neutral - positive edits remain as they are.

      I've noticed in Special:WikiActivity, when you haven't been logged in, or aren't online, more edits stick, than when you are on this site.

      No one blocks anyone as much as you.

      On the Special:BlockList, most of the blocks have your name listed under "blocking admin".

      We don't hate you. In fact I hate no one.

      However, there are certain times where I can dislike you.

      But it passes over time.

      I know you dislike change, but change is a part of life, and it's something most everyone has to live with. Most everyone (who is active, and willing) is alongside change. They want a re-name and such.

      I know you're trying to keep things as they are, which is sort-of OK, but change is good.

      You blocked SpongeyTube for a false information (which turns out was not false).

      You blocked me a day after I became an admin, for inserting a meme into a gallery. Then you wrote: "Any admin should know this."

      Attitude is a major piece of the battle.

      If you weren't as mean to people when you are angry, you wouldn't be disliked/hated by anyone.

      And, no one would feel as bad, or mean as they would if you had your attitude fixed a bit.

      I'm not saying go from: "Inserting false information" to "No block". Just, something from: "Inserting false info" to "Made an error with ____ (whatever)." 

      And upon you're findings of the true info, and you making a bad block, you should right then, unblock said user.

      These are my opinions on the matter.

        Loading editor
    • Tanhamman wrote:

      Well, when you can't spell bureaucrat, I'm concerned. 

      I've noticed in Special:WikiActivity, when you haven't been logged in, or aren't online, more edits stick, than when you are on this site.

      We don't hate you. In fact I hate no one.

      And upon you're findings of the true info, and you making a bad block, you should right then, unblock said user.

      First, I was angry I didn't have time to spell check. (Especially when you people kept adding more posts before I was finished with my message.)

      Second, the reason that edits stick is that I am the only one who seems to notice the problems.

      Third, to me, Speaking for everyone (you used "we") is about as bad as gender assuming.

      Fourth, if you are refering to SpongeyTube, it was too late when I found out, his block was over.

        Loading editor
    • 120d: I honestly believe you are not understanding what we are trying to get across.

      1. You know what we mean, but we don't hate you. We are simple frustrated by some of your actions and your overall attitude.

      2. "Stop trying to say that my actions are wrong." - Actually, I am trying to prevent further controversy and from scaring people away.

      3. "I am sick of bad grammer. I am sick of bad spelling." - all that is required is to fix it. That is why we are able to edit articles.

      4. "I am sick of none of the beurocrats seeminging like they are listening to me and then throwing what I say aside like it means nothing." - I am listening to everything you are saying. I am getting the impression that you are not listening to anything we are saying.

      5. "I am sick of having to revert edits." - if you don't want to, you don't have to. No one is making you. Someone else will be more than willing to fix the problem.

      6. "I am sick of spoilers." - we have already discussed this.

      7. "I block the way I do because I am for justice and I do not care if it's christmas time or if the rules forbid me to let me do what I want." - you basically said you are above the rules, and will block regardless of what the rules state.

      8. "I want people to listen to me for once." - I am listening.

      9. "Everyone just wants to change things. I want things to be the same." - we want the wiki to grow, to improve, and in order to do so changes will happen. From the infoboxes, to the formatting guidelines, to the graphics, to the tabs system, to the renaming, these changes have all taken place in the past 2-3 years. Changes will continue for the better. Think about what the wiki looked like in 2010. Now look at it now. It has grown and improved.

      10. The rename the wiki discussion has gone on for 16 months. The name Encyclopedia SpongeBobia has been discussed fro 9 months. There was plenty of time to be very vocal about your opposition. Despite your opposition, most people support the change.

      11. "have a beurocrat not ignore a message just because he or she doesn't want to answer it" - if you have anything you want me to address, you can always contact me and I will always answer. If I missed something, let me know. Send me a message or an e-mail.

      12. "I came to this wiki wanting to help and now I feel like no one likes me this wiki is going to change" - it's not that people don't like you... it's your attitude.

      13. "and some of the beurocrats are [insert donkey picture here]" - that is a personal attack.

      14. "that only care what they want to happen." - such as?

      15. "I see why so many people don't like people of power, they come off as jerks." - such as?

      Also, please leave the comments regarding the grammar/spelling mistakes out of the discussion. This is a discussion, not an article. No need to get distracted by something that does not pertain to the main discussion.

        Loading editor
    • AMK152 wrote:
      120d: I honestly believe you are not understanding what we are trying to get across.

      1. You know what we mean, but we don't hate you. We are simple frustrated by some of your actions and your overall attitude.

      2. "Stop trying to say that my actions are wrong." - Actually, I am trying to prevent further controversy and from scaring people away.

      3. "I am sick of bad grammer. I am sick of bad spelling." - all that is required is to fix it. That is why we are able to edit articles.

      4. "I am sick of none of the bureaucrats seeminging like they are listening to me and then throwing what I say aside like it means nothing." - I am listening to everything you are saying. I am getting the impression that you are not listening to anything we are saying.

      5. "I am sick of having to revert edits." - if you don't want to, you don't have to. No one is making you. Someone else will be more than willing to fix the problem.

      6. "I am sick of spoilers." - we have already discussed this.

      7. "I block the way I do because I am for justice and I do not care if it's christmas time or if the rules forbid me to let me do what I want." - you basically said you are above the rules, and will block regardless of what the rules state.

      8. "I want people to listen to me for once." - I am listening.

      9. "Everyone just wants to change things. I want things to be the same." - we want the wiki to grow, to improve, and in order to do so changes will happen. From the infoboxes, to the formatting guidelines, to the graphics, to the tabs system, to the renaming, these changes have all taken place in the past 2-3 years. Changes will continue for the better. Think about what the wiki looked like in 2010. Now look at it now. It has grown and improved.

      10. The rename the wiki discussion has gone on for 16 months. The name Encyclopedia SpongeBobia has been discussed fro 9 months. There was plenty of time to be very vocal about your opposition. Despite your opposition, most people support the change.

      11. "have a beurocrat not ignore a message just because he or she doesn't want to answer it" - if you have anything you want me to address, you can always contact me and I will always answer. If I missed something, let me know. Send me a message or an e-mail.

      12. "I came to this wiki wanting to help and now I feel like no one likes me this wiki is going to change" - it's not that people don't like you... it's your attitude.

      13. "and some of the beurocrats are [insert donkey picture here]" - that is a personal attack.

      14. "that only care what they want to happen." - such as?

      15. "I see why so many people don't like people of power, they come off as jerks." - such as?

      Also, please leave the comments regarding the grammar/spelling mistakes out of the discussion. This is a discussion, not an article. No need to get distracted by something that does not pertain to the main discussion.

      7. I can see your confusion, what I meant is that sometimes I can't do things because bureaucrats (mostly you or SpongeBob456) keep using the rules to stop me from doing things, sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse.

      10.  "...most people support the change.", yeah, most people who VOTED on it. Because you kind of pressured them to. You and the other bureaucrats are the leaders and if the leaders vote one way most of the community would vote that way too. Also, you gave a time limit. I don't like that you think that everything must be done with as soon as possible. You didn't even give my poll idea a try, you just threw it out like it meant nothing.

      13. It is more of a general attack, than a personal one.

      14. You and the name change!

      15. Most people hate me. Have you forgotten the proposal to suspend my power and the other proposal to remove my power, both of which had much support.

      okay, I will stop talking about grammar after I say one thing. When quoting, if you are taking a section out of the whole sentence, you must always add "..." at the beginning and/or the end depend on what part you are taking it from.

        Loading editor
    • 7. What did we stop you from doing that was counterproductive and hindered progress within the wiki?

      10. The name change has been under discussion for 16 months. No one was pressured. Everyone is free to give their honest opinion. If we don't have time limits, we will not get anything done. When are things supposed to end? If there was no time limit, we wouldn't have passed any proposals. We would just keep talking about them.

      14. Yes, I want the name change to happen. I do care about other people's opinions. That's why I had the discussion last 16 months. I let everyone give their opinion as to suggest the name and to tell how they felt about changing the name.

      15. I don't see anyone specificially saying they hate you.

        Loading editor
    • AMK152 wrote:
      120d: I honestly believe you are not understanding what we are trying to get across.

      1. You know what we mean, but we don't hate you. We are simple frustrated by some of your actions and your overall attitude.

      2. "Stop trying to say that my actions are wrong." - Actually, I am trying to prevent further controversy and from scaring people away.

      3. "I am sick of bad grammer. I am sick of bad spelling." - all that is required is to fix it. That is why we are able to edit articles.

      4. "I am sick of none of the beurocrats seeminging like they are listening to me and then throwing what I say aside like it means nothing." - I am listening to everything you are saying. I am getting the impression that you are not listening to anything we are saying.

      5. "I am sick of having to revert edits." - if you don't want to, you don't have to. No one is making you. Someone else will be more than willing to fix the problem.

      6. "I am sick of spoilers." - we have already discussed this.

      7. "I block the way I do because I am for justice and I do not care if it's christmas time or if the rules forbid me to let me do what I want." - you basically said you are above the rules, and will block regardless of what the rules state.

      8. "I want people to listen to me for once." - I am listening.

      9. "Everyone just wants to change things. I want things to be the same." - we want the wiki to grow, to improve, and in order to do so changes will happen. From the infoboxes, to the formatting guidelines, to the graphics, to the tabs system, to the renaming, these changes have all taken place in the past 2-3 years. Changes will continue for the better. Think about what the wiki looked like in 2010. Now look at it now. It has grown and improved.

      10. The rename the wiki discussion has gone on for 16 months. The name Encyclopedia SpongeBobia has been discussed fro 9 months. There was plenty of time to be very vocal about your opposition. Despite your opposition, most people support the change.

      11. "have a beurocrat not ignore a message just because he or she doesn't want to answer it" - if you have anything you want me to address, you can always contact me and I will always answer. If I missed something, let me know. Send me a message or an e-mail.

      12. "I came to this wiki wanting to help and now I feel like no one likes me this wiki is going to change" - it's not that people don't like you... it's your attitude.

      13. "and some of the beurocrats are [insert donkey picture here]" - that is a personal attack.

      14. "that only care what they want to happen." - such as?

      15. "I see why so many people don't like people of power, they come off as jerks." - such as?

      Also, please leave the comments regarding the grammar/spelling mistakes out of the discussion. This is a discussion, not an article. No need to get distracted by something that does not pertain to the main discussion.

      1. Is correct.

      2. We don't want for people to get scared of your authority.

      3. We edit to fix bad spelling. Which is a discussion, not a policy corruption.

      4. The Crats (AW10, AMK152, and sometimes CalzoneManiac) are listening. So are the Admins. Me, Spongebob456, and ZeoSpark respect your opnions, and listen to what you say, so we can help boost the wiki.

      5. I'm more than happy to look back, and fix the bad edits, using Rollback. If an edit is positive, with a negative influence, I change the edit, not destroy, and revert the entire edit.

      6. I respect your voice on spoilers, but it has concluded, and the spoilers have won.

      7. If someone is vandalising the wiki, we block. But inserting captions into a gallery, come on! You are stating you are above the rules, and will do what is necessary to keep you happy.

      8. I listen. In fact, everyone listens. Wether or not they vocalize, that's different.

      9. We are making change. And progression. As each day passes, we progress to make everything so much better. I came just last September. The wiki looks soooo much better than it did then.

      10. In order to keep with nice demand, a name change helps us keep a positive influence in the Wikia community, and I support it.

      11. You send me messages. I always respond within 1 day. Good or bad.

      12. No one hates you. But your attitude gives large influence on people opinions on you.

      13. You've commited several personal attacks. On the Crats, and me. For instance you called me a di**.

      14. We all care for change. But what change exactly?

      15. People can come off as jerks. But if you divide, and concur… I mean Mediate on someone's message wall. Then you can resolve your issue matter.

      AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN 

      We don't hate you. But your attitude, and personal influence on the wiki is enough to have people dislike you, and leave for fear of blockages.

        Loading editor
    • 7. Is to protect everyone. This is so no one can try and screw with the wiki.

      10. Everyone likes change. But there are those who can be against it. They don't want to make anything positive happen.

      13. It's both. You personally attacked AMK152, and generally attacked the Crats, and Admins.

      14. 16 months helps for everyone to give their voice.

      15. No one says they hate you. But they may dislike you.

        Loading editor
    • Tanhamman wrote:
      AMK152 wrote:
      120d: I honestly believe you are not understanding what we are trying to get across.

      1. You know what we mean, but we don't hate you. We are simple frustrated by some of your actions and your overall attitude.

      2. "Stop trying to say that my actions are wrong." - Actually, I am trying to prevent further controversy and from scaring people away.

      3. "I am sick of bad grammer. I am sick of bad spelling." - all that is required is to fix it. That is why we are able to edit articles.

      4. "I am sick of none of the beurocrats seeminging like they are listening to me and then throwing what I say aside like it means nothing." - I am listening to everything you are saying. I am getting the impression that you are not listening to anything we are saying.

      5. "I am sick of having to revert edits." - if you don't want to, you don't have to. No one is making you. Someone else will be more than willing to fix the problem.

      6. "I am sick of spoilers." - we have already discussed this.

      7. "I block the way I do because I am for justice and I do not care if it's christmas time or if the rules forbid me to let me do what I want." - you basically said you are above the rules, and will block regardless of what the rules state.

      8. "I want people to listen to me for once." - I am listening.

      9. "Everyone just wants to change things. I want things to be the same." - we want the wiki to grow, to improve, and in order to do so changes will happen. From the infoboxes, to the formatting guidelines, to the graphics, to the tabs system, to the renaming, these changes have all taken place in the past 2-3 years. Changes will continue for the better. Think about what the wiki looked like in 2010. Now look at it now. It has grown and improved.

      10. The rename the wiki discussion has gone on for 16 months. The name Encyclopedia SpongeBobia has been discussed fro 9 months. There was plenty of time to be very vocal about your opposition. Despite your opposition, most people support the change.

      11. "have a beurocrat not ignore a message just because he or she doesn't want to answer it" - if you have anything you want me to address, you can always contact me and I will always answer. If I missed something, let me know. Send me a message or an e-mail.

      12. "I came to this wiki wanting to help and now I feel like no one likes me this wiki is going to change" - it's not that people don't like you... it's your attitude.

      13. "and some of the beurocrats are [insert donkey picture here]" - that is a personal attack.

      14. "that only care what they want to happen." - such as?

      15. "I see why so many people don't like people of power, they come off as jerks." - such as?

      Also, please leave the comments regarding the grammar/spelling mistakes out of the discussion. This is a discussion, not an article. No need to get distracted by something that does not pertain to the main discussion.

      1. Is correct.

      2. We don't want for people to get scared of your authority.

      3. We edit to fix bad spelling. Which is a discussion, not a policy corruption.

      4. The Crats (AW10, AMK152, and sometimes CalzoneManiac) are listening. So are the Admins. Me, Spongebob456, and ZeoSpark respect your opnions, and listen to what you say, so we can help boost the wiki.

      5. I'm more than happy to look back, and fix the bad edits, using Rollback. If an edit is positive, with a negative influence, I change the edit, not destroy, and revert the entire edit.

      6. I respect your voice on spoilers, but it has concluded, and the spoilers have won.

      7. If someone is vandalising the wiki, we block. But inserting captions into a gallery, come on! You are stating you are above the rules, and will do what is necessary to keep you happy.

      8. I listen. In fact, everyone listens. Wether or not they vocalize, that's different.

      9. We are making change. And progression. As each day passes, we progress to make everything so much better. I came just last September. The wiki looks soooo much better than it did then.

      10. In order to keep with nice demand, a name change helps us keep a positive influence in the Wikia community, and I support it.

      11. You send me messages. I always respond within 1 day. Good or bad.

      12. No one hates you. But your attitude gives large influence on people opinions on you.

      13. You've commited several personal attacks. On the Crats, and me. For instance you called me a di**.

      14. We all care for change. But what change exactly?

      15. People can come off as jerks. But if you divide, and concur… I mean Mediate on someone's message wall. Then you can resolve your issue matter.

      AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN 

      We don't hate you. But your attitude, and personal influence on the wiki is enough to have people dislike you, and leave for fear of blockages.

      6. You may remember that it was because of you, Tanhamman, that I lost that debate.

      7. The caption thing is a rule, there is no captions in the episode gallery. It isn't my rule.

      I am surprised that neither of you talked about the SpongeBob SquarePants Movie 2.

        Loading editor
    • 6. Yes, I remember.

      7. I'll have to look at the rules again.

      12. Is a major factor, for many users. They fear to edit.

      What about the 2nd movie? It's spoiler (6) which has been resolved. So I am not entirely sure where you want to lead that topic.

        Loading editor
    • A long time ago, I asked an beurocrat, I can not remember which one, if the SpongeBob Movie 2 would be spoiler-free because it is far more important to me than any of the episodes.

        Loading editor
    • Did they tell you anything?

        Loading editor
    • All he or she said was that he or she will think about it.

        Loading editor
    • Oh.

        Loading editor
    • I am going to protect the second movie's article to prevent speculation for now. If problems arise in the future, we will deal with them then. It's far too early right now.

        Loading editor
    • Sorry for making you block me, 120d. I was actually watching the episode for the first time and saw Slimycan Snail Food can on that episode and that made me add that trivia. I knew after getting blocked for 1 day, I thought I was making a mistake although I thought SpongeBob made his own Snail Po to Gary?

        Loading editor
    • Actually, SpongeyTube, both SlimyCan, and SnailPo appeared in SpongeBob You're Fired.

      Therefore, there was no reason for 120d to block you.

        Loading editor
    • He's right. I should be the one who is apologizing.

        Loading editor
    • Okay.

        Loading editor
    • Good.

      Glad we figured this out.

        Loading editor
    • 54.226.191.80
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message

Wikia Spotlight

Random Wiki