Bugthe

The changes has been either minor fixes or notation breakdown by section. Our mainpage is used for layout purpose, providing an quick overview of what we use and allowing an easy way to move thing around, it shoudn't not contain extra formating elements (like line breaks) these should be in the individual templates. Overall no content or functionality was changed that should require disccussion.

But I assume you are asking mainly asking about the final fluff section copied from community. Those are generic magic words, that serve no immediate purpose to you but doesn't hurt either.

__NOTOC__ - Would prevent auto Table Of Contents creation if we were to use headers in the future.
__NOEDITSECTION__ - if sections are used, hide distracting edit section buttons.
__NOWYSIWYG__ - bypass visual editor.

Okay, magic words. That's all I needed to know. You should probably clarify that next time.

Thank you for your consideration Taya, but no. I am not a good fit as a line of communication nor have your patience for IPs. Besides you already seem to have a good team in place, while I still struggling to give a hundred precent even to members of our community.

Although, if the need arise I am still going to help, just won't be doing so in an offical capacity\colors.

Alright.

I just offered because you have been doing a great job for the community :)

But that's fine, no problem :)

Just got rid of all the needless repetition. You have some nice ideas in those templates, (I wanted to split it into two columns) but changes usually require suggestion\discussion and atm i'd rather not. If you or anyone else want to take a lead on that go ahead.

If you're going to apply Template:Appearances to S3, then it's style must match S1 & S2 (i.e. cell borders). If by "split it into two columns" you mean a total of 4 columns, that would make this relatively-mobile-friendly template into mobile-unfriendly template. Your implementation is not how I would do it, thus I cannot take the lead.

Btw the magical 10 was left out because I was hopping to eventually split the list into two columns like here i.e. col A(1-9) and Col B(1-9). And obviously the field numbers means nothing beyond the order they appear in.

Edit: Just seen your post.

No it won't you simply replace most of the table with the inline div elements I posted in the other thread. And yes, I always forget that border tag also effect cells.

I don't see how the current implementation effect future ones.

First, as mentioned above, I oppose steven-universe version since it's mobile unfriendly vs our current version is mobile friendly. Second, what's wrong with col A(1-10) and col B(11-20)? For The 100, it'll be more like col A(1-8) & col B(9-16) anyway. Having episode names not match episode numbers is inconvenient & error-prone. But again, all this means nothing as long as we're pretending to care about mobile users.

Because I would literally erase all your work. Thus I have no interest in taking the lead.

As noted above, not an issue, with a minor change we can add a second column and keep it just as mobile friendly ( you probably missed it in the intermediate comments\changes we made .)

There is nothing wrong either way, since fields number has no effect on the way its used on character pages, leaving space where you participate changes make sense (like with Wikipedia infoboxes) instead of having to rename everything. And renaming the Label1x to LabelBx would have been easier without magic 10.

Anyway, our season have 13-16 episode each, so we need to offer flexibility in terms episode numbers, and if we are to use two columns, it would be easier to manually Fill ColA1-8 and ColB1-8 (which would correlate to their placement on the table visually) than to have to invent a way to count how many labels were used and dynamically build the columns accordingly i.e. Col8 is on left in S3 but on right in S1...

So? If we decide to make a change that require to change the template, then I expect you to ;)

Anyway, I am done with templates for today.

Btw, I am not sure this is a "fix". If you look at S1-S3 template code, "Absent" hasn't been one of the values we catch, only "appears/mentioned/flashback/credit" as noted in the documentation, and I have seen people purposefully removing it from pages.

As for the sort key, I need a category for quick input checks. We are too small to spam a category for each template, and sort key allows to avoid confusion with more than one template checks in use.

Damn you fast typer.. I Just left you a comment about this on the transcript page. Anyway, that sounds great! and really no problem, I just told AWB to replace all everything using the string I posted, and drank my coffee while it did all the work ;)

Btw when editing transcripts are you using your web browser or something else?

My web browser typically. Though I use Microsoft office to make large edits and paste the updates here. 

I do the same only with notepad++, its free, light weight program which has much more useful things then word. Although while typing this comment, I realize that it might seem a bit overwhelming and I am not the right person to write a long post of tips about. So I am not sure where I am going with this aww :/

That's ok but thanks for the suggestion! I'll certainly take a look at it.

Initially, I was planing to use it for Cast and Crew only, however, since the recent interest in Bellamy page I noticed the infobox 'age' entry and I think it can make it work for both.

• Cast and Crew - We can use Template:Birth_date_and_age to format the date and show the age. Which would pass the CURRENT year\month\day by default (I have no intention of typing them in manually every time, its just a test to confirm it updates properly on wikia)

• Series - You don't need an exact date. The difference between 2149 and 2150 is essentially the same as 1/1/2149 and 1/1/2150. For example, we could use it to say that character that we know to be Under 18 in the Pilot (year 2149) current age is "approx. {{Age|2131}}" which would update as the show timeline progress.

• For how many characters do we actually know the age?
  • A lot of the infoboxes seem to be filled with user guesses. (E.g. when did we learn that Kane is 42 or born in 2107?)
  • For the 100, we know they were under 18 when they were sent to Earth, but we don't know their age. Are we assuming they were all 17?
• Using January 1 will make ~85% of the characters a year older than they are. Better to count from episode we learned someone's age (e.g. if we learn someone is 14 during "Inclement Weather", count age from 13 October 2135 (date timeline guesses for that episode minus age) unless we were given time to/since their birthday.
  • Given the slow nature of the show (4.5 months in three seasons). Perhaps it's best to wait until the show reaches 12 months.
• Editors will have to make sure to edit the template when a character dies to stop character from continuing to age.

I can only think of 5 characters for whom we have an age info.

• Clarke was about a month from turning 18 on 13 September 2149, making her date of birth in October 2131. Per timeline, we can state she's 18.
• Finn was a couple months from his 18th birthday when he got arrested. Depending on how much time he spent in the Skybox, his date of birth is between September and November 2131. He was 17 or 18 at his death.
• Raven just turned 18 when Finn was arrested, making her date of birth between July and September 2131. She is currently 18 (but her page claims she's 19).
• Octavia was discovered on October 1st, at almost 16. Given she spent almost a year in confinement, she was almost 17 on 1 October 2149. Since 4.5 months have passed, we can guess she had her birthday, making her 17.
• Per JR tweet, Bellamy is 23 – presumable in September 2149, thus born between September 2125 & September 2126.
• Assuming all of the 100 were at least 12, their birthdays are between 13 September 2131 and 13 September 2137. Calculating age is a bit absurd since that's an 6 year range. Unless what you want to do is on every September 13 (series time) add a year (e.g. change "Under 19" to "Under 20").
• Anyone else?

Not to discourage your endeavor, but I'm unsure of it's benefit at the current time. Perhaps we should wait until there is a fifth season or when the show reaches 13 September 2150.

Btw, if you do have ages/birthdays for anyone else, I am interested in that info (& where it came from), thanks.

This is simply about options, with this you have an option to add in-world character age (or any other 'years ago' statement referring to current date), that you don't need to keep track off and update. Unlike right now that you need to guess who has an age set.

Whether we want to use it in how and where that is another question. Btw IMO the infbox age entries should have some anchor mentioned like (season 1) to avoid confusion.

perhaps: <small>(as of [[Timeline#In the series|<date>]])</small>

e.g. Monty is "Under 18 (as of September 13, 2149)"

While I prefer using dates for setting pages, I think that the character infoboxes would be better off with something like "as of season 1". We should really address this as part of character infobox suggestion.

Sure no problem, I told you from the start that I can help with the blunt format conversions, you just never took me up on that and I didn't want to get in the way ;)

I must have missed that message than whoops. You can do ahead and do as much format conversion as you want considering I finally finished Blood Must Have Blood Part 2's conversion. Thanks again for your help!

No problem, just keep inmind that this is a format pass i.e. I don't have the episode in front of me so I am not updating the content. So if you spot any inconsistencies with how we do things, like with the two episodes from last week, just go ahead.

I'll take care of checking content, if you don't mind helping me with some format that'd be wonderful. I'm going to add the actions to the Long Into An Abyss transcript since those are missing.

No problem. And on unrelated note, how hard would it be to add note Acts? Simply because something like this on top could be useful:

Other than that just remember to be bold and when possible document the practice in use to the guide.

The only issue with that is my transcripts tend to be split into scenes rather than acts. Otherwise it's a worthy addition.

I thought using Scenes but their number is much higher and more varied. Thus harder to track and less useful to the reader unless we include scene description, so basically a TOC (like on the Book Summary pages), which I think would throw off the layout (even if we use a horizontal one)

We could use something along the lines of:

 
{{transcript|header| ACT # <br> Scene: ...}}
{{transcript|header| Scene: ...}}
{{transcript|header| Scene: ...}}
{{transcript|header| Scene: ...}}
{{transcript|header| ACT # <br> Scene: ...}}
..

Basically the same just with act info when applicable.

Sure, I like that suggestion. What I mean by scene more or less is the setting change so it would be like Scene 1 - Arkadia or whatever else.

But, I like your suggestion better.

Thanks. After making a big change I always prefer to do something else for a couple of days, to give people a chance to catch up so they can revert, tweak or offer input. So unless something comes up, I am certainly planing to add those to the reset of the seasons.

Alright, that's understandable. In my experience, I make all my big changes at once if they happen to be connected so I suppose that's just a difference in our individual methods

I do it also with discussions sometimes. After all it is a small wiki and I feel that we can do more\better through collaboration e.g. your and Janus100's input have been very helpful in our discussions. And besides I don't have your English skills ;)

Anyway, I'll add those soon.

Hi Mason.

I just got informed about this ban by Bugthe, so I came to take a look at this ban. And I have a few questions.

Most notably, why did you block someone untill I came back? You have the authority to execute bans, you're expected to use that authority and not use it to delay and move the matter over to another admin. This is exactly the reason why this wikia has several admins, so that not each admin is involved in each little discussion.

However now that I'm here...

Since it's become a bit unclear as to what exactly happened, can you give me an overview of some links as to why you executed the ban. Because you should always clarify that so that anyone not involved can always refference. So next time instead of saying 'I warned you, and you clearly did not listen' try something like 'You did not follow policy X and Y, and therefore I'm giving you a ban/block of X days'

Just post the reason down below, so that I can get an overview. Thanks.

Well this all happened around the start of June. Basically SkyZy felt like she was being harassed by Bugthe, and she asked me to do something about it. I talked to him, and I thought we had a clear understanding, but he kept on doing it, so I had to take action. He did not follow chat policies, since he was constantly harassing and targeting SkyZy. Finally I had to make a final decision. I blocked him until September of 2030. 

Mason.

Okay, so Skyzy's involvement in all this does changes things.

Firstly, considering the nature of my working relationship with SkyZy at this point, her accusations are to be kept an eye on. She falsely accused me of censorship not that long ago, so I'm not just going to take her word on it. Can you maybe provide me the link to where she was presumably harassed?

Secondly, Skyzy did the right thing not to give out a ban/block on a situation she was involved in, but you could have handled that situation right? I don't really see the need in calling in a third admin.

Thirdly, can you tell me exactly what you had told this user the first time you warned him, and what they did afterwards to break that agreement? Because I find banning someone for 14 years very harsh. I always like to assume people can change, and I prefer to give them a chance to return to the wikia in a time sooner than the next decade :p

To give a bit of background, the start of the problems arose because Bugthe continued to add biased POV and did not understand how to write NPOV. I (along with several other contributors) spent over a week correcting their edits and explaining in significant detail what was wrong with their edits. They not only disagreed with the NPOV policy and refused to follow it, but they also were completely disrespectful and antagonistic toward anyone who tried to explain to them what they were doing wrong. They continued making bad edits and bickering with other contributors who disagreed with them. According to our wiki policy, that would normally result in a block but I didn't want anyone to be able to make any claims against me for it so I held off and asked Panorama to step in.

They continued to follow around after me, harassing me in comments on threads and demanded that I not be allowed to edit on any page they had made edits on (which by that point were a good portion of the pages that I NORMALLY work on anyway). They started editing on pages that I had made edits on, so according to their own wiki rules, I could no longer edit those pages, either. They were basically running roughshod over the wiki, adding subjective and biased POV and removing significant portions of content and that's when Panorama finally blocked them.

It took two weeks of me and two other contributors to clean up the mess they left behind.

Hello Skyzy.

While I read the above statemet, and took a look at the info, I don't think you needed to interfere in this discussion between me and Mason. As one of the people involved in the original dispute, your information here is biased. Considering this all seemed to originate with someone adding biased POV, I'm sure you'll understand when I say that you should stay out of this matter.

Because not only is Bugthe not here to speak for themself, but the information you provided is not neutral either. You only linked the things that you did right. And while I appreciate the cleaning up you clearly did, I don't have the links of the places where he was being disrespectful and antagonistic so at this point it's just accusations, as they would say in court.

While your testimony is appreciated, and I know you just want to clarify things, I will need facts and I honestly can not look through this entire wikia based on your accusations. I can not look at this case in a neutral way untill I have all the information. So either that information comes from Mason or from you, Skyzy.

Then I can confirm or deny the grounds for Bugthe's ban, and then we can hopefully all move on from this.

Okay so I did almost the entire day of digging through this situation, and I have come to some conclusion. 

NOTE : I did this investigation because several members of the community told me their were concerned for the wikia in my absence.

- First of all, Mason I must say I have been let down by your ability to handle this situation. I know it's not fun to settle disputes like this, but as an admin this is part of the job. It gets even harder when other admins are involved, but staying neutral is key. And I do feel like you forgot about that sometimes, favouring the word of another admin over the facts. I would like to advise you to be careful about this, otherwise people in the community might start to feel like you won't listen to them anyways. Seeing as the job of an admin requires to listen to the community, that's a problem. So consider this a warning.

- Secondly, Skyzy, while I appreciate your professionalism I can not say that you are having a lot of grounds to make accusations off. Refering to the 'Ark' page situation, the fact that a user edited something you edited first is circumstantial at best, since you were on the wikia before them and you've edited pretty much every page before them. Also, referring to the 'bossy' situation, I see no reason why you would assume that Bossy was about you. If you did think that, then I conclude that it was a misunderstanding. 

Combining the fact that the offenses were minor offenses blown out of proportion by a member of the wikia who previously has made false accusations, and the fact that the admin who was to settle this argument made errors in dealing with it, I have decided to fix things in the following way :

• Bugthe's ban has been removed by me. They do not deserve a 14-year ban, and I think the time they have spend enduring this battle was enough to learn from. They will be kept an eye on like any other member who was previously banned. Any further accusations to this user will be send to me, and I will handle them neutrally if this happens.

• Skyzy, consider this your last warning. This is not the first time you've accused people on things blown out of proportions. Meanwhile the entire wikia knows you don't even want to be a part of the fandom anymore. And while everyone is free to be on this wikia (even if it's to hate on the show), everyone's not free to cause trouble and stir up arguements like you have. If you have any more accusations to make, I hope they have FACTUAL evidence. If there's another accusation without truth, I will demote you as an admin. 

• Panorama500, I hope you can learn from this situation so that you understand how important neutrality is. I know you were thrown into the deep with this one, but keeping the wikia in mind is the most important thing to do at any time. If there is any more questions from you regarding this matter, I'm glad to adress them.

As of now this case is closed. 

Taya

I'm still adjusting into adminship, and I am learning how to properly react, to these situations. Thank you for taking your time to go over my mistakes, and where I can learn from them.

Mason.

You're welcome. I totally know this wasn't exactly a easy christening of your admin duties. Everyone makes mistakes. It's important what you take away from them.

Hello Mason.

I find your insinuation offensive. When skyze was accused of "harassment" and "insults" to another user, you gave her the benefit of the doubt stating "I just want to know, what exactly happened, as it wouldn't be fair to make assumptions by just hearing one story".

When skyze accused me of doing what she did, for which she got nothing for. You gave me no benefit of the doubt, and banned me for basically making an edit and something vague about "behaviour and such". Even though I have explained my edit and asked for clarification, I have yet to receive ANY.

Now, When skyz again accused me of a RIDICULES thing** !!! You AGAIN gave me no benefit of the doubt, and immediately labelling this as "Harassment Continues..." ?! Continues!!

Does she feels harassed?!?! did she even said that???? Because, I feel harassed, I am continuously targeted by Skyze; I have been contacted by Skyze even though I Specificity asked not to; I have been constantly insulted by Skyze, most recently called as "asinine" when she contacted me; And I still waiting for a clarification on what polices I have broke, so i can avoid them in the future!!

I am sorry for the all the extra exclamations, but I am just speechless at the handling of this whole matter. Did you even read my post?!

 ** "Originally its this, but I commonly see it used as gender slur, like "Bossy"."

WHY would anyone think that "Bossy" in this context is anything but an EXAMPLE of a common gender slur i.e something that should be avoided?! How self-absorbed is she?!

Just because SkyZe copy&paste a policy, that she commonly breaks, to appear like she speaks from authority, as to her ridicules claims, doesn't make it so!

I am waiting for your comment.

I am stuck in between this fued, between you two, and most of the time, I don't know whats going on, either make up between you guys, or don't ever talk to eachother again as it will lead to more arguing. I'm dead serious about that ban, if I here you causing another argument the punishment will be very bad. Just stay away from eachother, and nothing like that will happen. 

Excuse me. I have already asked SkyZe not to contact me twice. On your page, I made a note of her valued contributions, hoping that she won't escalate into personal. I haven't contacted her and have been trying to avoid her and her reverts, on this rather small wiki.

Today, she instigated both contacts, acted antagonistic, and accusing me of an act which she recently did herself (as another user pointed out). After just the other day she used this trick to ban me without due process, and tried again todo so today with this preposterous accusation.

Please tell what level of harassment is too much for you?

You keep say that I should stay away from her?! that if I cause another argument?! that my Harassment Continues, that I broke countless policies and "such", that I have yet to see a single example of.

I understand your predicament. But unless you are warning me that you can't handle Skyze and that if Skyze decide to make yet another false accusations then you'd kick the chair under me, i don't know what you are saying.

Well, I guess I'm wrong then, otherwise I'm done with this matter. 

Hello Mason.

I don't believe this ban is warranted. Removal of content in it self doesn't constitute a ban. I don't believe I have violated the BRD rule or any rules, and certainly are not aware of any behavioral issues in that regard.

The edit I reverted. Has been a recent major change, by an IP user. That edit created a whole new section titled 'surviving components', which is a topic already covered within 'Station Components'. Assuming good-faith I have attempted to merge the content, but other than the few bits I did add, I was unable to salvage anything as most of it is repetition, speculation and errors of fact. Since it is not a member, but an IP contribution, I have followed the usual BRD rules reverting the change and adding what I could

Can you be more specific in what way have I slipped?

Quick overview of the reasons for the above:

"presumably will not appear further in the series. Without thrusters, is will likely burn up in atmosphere similar to modern day satellites albeit much larger."

Crystal ball speculation, also what is possible is up to the Writers see Jaha missile ride.

"Also with the medical wing and sick bay on the Go-Sci, the Sky People have much limited synthetic medical supplies including surgical equipment."

Offtopic, This article is about the Ark, and this doesn't explain anything about it.

"Due only to the efforts of Clarke Griffin and the 100, Arkadia was able to successfully colonize a small portion of Trikru territory on the border to the Ice Nation. It is now inhabited by additional Sky People, from Farm Station, but because of the artificial intelligence A.L.I.E. it is left mostly derelict besides delinquents Raven, Jasper, Monty and Harper."

Completely off topic.

"It is unknown where Arrow Station landed during the Exodus Project. it presumably reentered earths atmosphere somewhere on the east coast of the former United States. Since Farm Station landed the farthest north is presumably landed somewhere in the Carolinas or northern Georgia. With an unknown population and without the 100, the southern Grounder Clans and Arrow Station personal could be engaged in a "turf war" over territory and resources, although this is pure speculation. Due to its proximity to Mecha Station it could also have landed west of Arkadia in what was West Virginia."

Crystal ball and Offtopic. Speculation about where it might have landed, who survived and what they might be doing, when we don't even have confirmation on whether the station survived reentry.

"Cliffside east of Alpha Station and significant portions collapsed into the ocean. Any survivors would have drowned, trapped inside the Station if they hadn't been killed on impact. Without this station, it will be quite difficult for the Sky People to manufacture and recycle various manmade resources as the surface facilities have likely fallen into disrepair after 97 years and a nuclear war."

Error of fact, it landed more than 100 miles of the Ocean, speculation on the manner of their death is uncalled for, and how this would effect the Sky people isn't content for The Ark components article.

"Although the loss of several hundred people is a significant loss, natural water is still present on earth and was the least needed of the twelve stations"

offtopic

"For unknown reasons it was abandoned by the Sky People in favor of Alpha Station, possibly for strategic importance as it was fairly close to the 100 dropship. It seems to have landed near a lake, as was Alpha Station and they could presumable be across the "bay" from each other. Any mechanical devices such as vehicles or machinery were likely brought over to Alpha Station leaving only a empty husk of little importance. It is worth noting that Alpha Station is located at the south end of the unamend lake, a border between the Ice Nation and the Trikru clan, and without realizing it, the populace of Mecha Station unknowingly saved themselves as the Trikru are much more friendly towards Sky People than the Azgeda."

According to the writers they fell into a river. The rest is crystal ball speculation and off topic.

"The Skybox, as it was called by it detainees, also landed on earth intact. Its location and populace are unknown but it is of little strategic importance, as their is little need of a prison ship on earth."

Source? that it survived reentry let along survived intact

"The power hub of the Ark, it also successfully landed on earth somewhere to the south or west of Arkadia. As the Floukru, who live on the coast to the east, have not reported any massive space ships crash into the ocean, it is unlikely Tesla or the other unaccounted station landed in the Atlantic. Although with little known information on this station, ........"

all the above.

p.s. If this accusation was brought by a user I had a recent disagreement with, who subsequently target my edits, then her behavior would be borderline hounding.