User talk:Glowbomb12

♠WELCOME!!!♠
Hello everyone! I am glowbomb12 and I have some rules for my page, if accepted. I'm in eastern time and I'm on the wiki A LOT. If any questions about my actions, please state them here and I will respond to them the best way possible. Rules: 1) No editing any posts that are not yours and changing them. 2) No adding inappropriate content.

Question
Hello I'm cat9dog9 and I have a question: may I ask questions on your page?
 * Cat9dog9 (talk) 03:02, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Sure. Glowbomb12 (talk) 11:39, 12 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Okay but did you send me a friend request? Cat9dog9 (talk) 00:45, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Blade of Grass
No problem, looks like someone just vandalized it. In the future, the best way to go about fixing almost all problems like this is to go into the affected page's history and check to see if someone has altered one of the filenames. The timestamps are in UTC or something, but basically just hit "prev" on the entry on the top of the list and it'll compare the changes. If they're bad, undo them, but check the revisions before it as well. Seems complicated, but you get the hang of it eventually.

Also, while I'm here, regarding your questions on the community noticeboard- uploading or modifying images isn't necessary too often, but there's not much to it besides using Special:Upload. Just make sure your image has an appropriate name and that it isn't a duplicate- most images are named for the things they represent, like, so if a page has a red link asking for something different it's likely been vandalized.

If you need any other help, don't be afraid to ask. --Gearzein (talk) 01:25, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

--- Thanks for the tip! Glowbomb12 (talk) 01:34, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Admin
I've promoted you to admin so you can continue your work cleaning up vandalism and spam. Here are a few guidelines to read over — Game widow (talk) 14:13, 15 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you, I will do my best. Glowbomb12 (talk) 15:51, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

The Meatball
Protecting The Meatball was unnecessary, in my opinion. I don't feel this is a matter that requires administrative intervention- I intentionally avoided protecting it myself, both because I believe that this is ultimately a small issue that can be resolved through more diplomatic means, and because I'd personally feel it to be a misappropriation of power. Locking a page to stop someone from making changes you disagree with runs entirely counter to the idea of a wiki, and protection is meant to be used as a maintenance tool, not a weapon. Gearzein (talk) 16:30, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Ok don't know if u wanna change it back or what. Glowbomb12 (talk) 16:43, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I've already changed it back. Sorry if I seem like I'm lecturing, but yeah, generally you want to avoid using admin powers if at all possible. Block people and stuff, sure, but there's usually other ways around these situations. Gearzein (talk) 16:54, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Blocking
I've already switched this back, but you should avoid blocking IP users indefinitely, as there's no guarantee they'll remain the same over time. Long-term blocks against unregistered users, especially those who only have a single instance of vandalism, is generally frowned upon. One week is enough to dissuade most vandals, three months for repeat offenders; I'll often leave IPs that only vandalize once unblocked, as they're unlikely to come back at all, so blocking them only really punishes the next person to have that address. Gearzein (talk) 17:18, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Please stop using the block tool as a weapon. It is an administrative right, not something to be abused as you please. The majority of the time, 1-2 week blocks are enough to dissuade vandals, and they likely won't come back afterwards anyways. Blocking users or IPs infinitely is almost always unnecessary, with a few exceptions: page blanking, spam bots, inappropriate usernames. See the general guidelines for blocking.  Chrisf1020  (talk)  01:54, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Glowbomb, you didn't respond at all when I first warned you of this, and this behavior hasn't stopped. Furthermore, I've noticed several incidences of reverting edits without justification, including one below that just went entirely unanswered (I tested it; that user was correct). I'm honestly beginning to worry whether you're unaware that you're receiving these messages, confused as to the true nature of your talk page, or just unwilling to check your talk page or respond in any way now that you have authority. None of these answers are acceptable in a position where you basically have to be willing and able to justify everything you do, and in any case, it's making me regret not admitting to Game Widow that you weren't ready when you asked to be an admin. Please re-read the Administrator Guide and actually do what it says this time. I'm probably being way too permissive even now, but if this behavior continues, I'm going to have to have your sysop status revoked. There's enough garbage coming through here daily that I don't need one of the admins contributing to it. Gearzein (talk) 02:48, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Woah...didn't get these alerts at all. Umm.....sorry I've been leaving it up to Chrisf for now lately and I'm terrible at coding sometimes, not even the sandbox can help with some of the things I'm trying to fix. Also sometimes (noticed it 24 min ago) that when I try to see an edit, my device registers what I pressed the rollback option instead the view edit option and I try to back out before the page finishes loading. Then it ends up undoing the edit that I wanted to see and then someone else suddenly undoes my accidental edit and I'm too late. Glowbomb12 (talk) 03:01, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * If you are bad at coding (though I would hardly call this coding), then try to get better at it, because it's a pretty basic requirement of an admin, or anyone who edits the wiki alot. MediaWiki syntax is easy to learn, and there are many guides across the internet to help.  Chrisf1020  (talk)  19:54, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Spear trap
I just edited some issues related to the spear trap and you've just undone it. Could I ask you why?

Scourge of the Corruptor
I removed the note you added to Scourge of the Corruptor because comments that refer to specific combinations of individual items are too narrow in scope to merit inclusion in main pages. So far we've tried to push those sorts of comments into guidespace, and the failures of that project are perfect proof that if we allowed them on main pages they'd quickly devolve into unreadable messes. Notes sections are meant to list noteworthy nuauces of an item's operation, not arbitrary player observations. Gearzein (talk) 04:15, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Oh...so where am I able to put stuff like that? Don't see a guide where I can put that sort of info in there. Glowbomb12 (talk) 11:36, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * It doesn't belong anywhere, except for maybe the forums. Most people are aware that melee-oriented armor and melee weapons pair well together, and in this case it's just a single combination of interactions, not an inherent property of any of the included items like a set bonus. Like I said, it's too overly specific to really warrant mentioning. Gearzein (talk) 15:55, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Blindfold
Dear Glowbomb12,

Two weeks ago,you removed my addition to the blindfold page and blocked me. You maybe remember that it was because of a comment about the name of the accessory. I honestly don't see any sense in the name, but English is my secondary language so I may be missing something. However, I think you could have messaged me and explained me your action. What I fail to understand is why I deserved to be blocked. I was merely sharing my observation and the block offended me greatly. The Wiki is built by people like me and I think the treatment I received was inappropriate. On behalf of all the users and me, I'm writing to you to please you to think your actions through before you block someone, because I think something like this should not happen in the future. The comment I added was, I believe, an intelligent and honest one, so I think even considering it a vandalism is an overreaction, not to mention blocking.

Thank you for reading this, I hope we all can avoid misunderstandings like this one in the future.

Peter Polacek
 * Jeez, I don't know how I missed this. The actual content of your edit aside, blocking a user with dozens of verified contributions with no notice or discussion is completely over the line. While I'm tangentially interested in what Glowbomb's response to this might be, I doubt there's any justification for such a mystifying misuse of power. Honestly I'm embarrassed that this slipped by me- this isn't the first time the rest of the wiki sysop staff has had to apply extra oversight to Glowbomb's decisions, but it's quickly proving too problematic to have to "train" a new user to do relatively simple duties. Gearzein (talk) 22:50, 3 March 2015 (UTC)