Talk:Main Page/Moderator Stuff

From Custom Mario Kart
Jump to: navigation, search
Moderators only
This page is reserved for moderator discussions! So it is protected.

SPAM and hiding page titles

Moderators can now hide page titles and more:

  • Enter the deletion log
  • Select the entries you want to change
  • Press Show/hide selected log entries
  • Select the options. Generally Hide action and target is enough.
  • Apply and verify.

I thought, I had done it before, but after tests with Wuumm I know, that an additionally view right is necessary.

Wiimm (talk) 10:53, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Works for me now. Thanks.--Jefe (talk) 14:40, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
I dunno if this is working for me. What am I doing wrong? I thought the page title was supposed to disappear.
-- Have a nice day, from ZillaSpaz 15:10, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Have you selected "Hide action and target"? I think not! -- Wiimm (talk) 17:17, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Protected Pages

Can any moderator edit the main page or any other protected page? Wuumm is Moderator, but can't edit it.

Wiimm (talk) 11:04, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Still works for me. I don't know if trial moderators can do it, though.--Jefe (talk) 14:40, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Wuumm can't edit at all, because its registration was never confirmed -- Wuumm (talk) 14:58, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Changing Registration

At the moment we have much more SPAM registrations that real user registration. What do you think about changing the registration, so that a moderator must confirm it manually. This will reduce our work.

Wiimm (talk) 09:17, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

This is not a bad idea, as long there are enough moderators active it won't take longer than a hour before a registration is confirmed. But there can be false-positives and not each bot will be blocked, so you won't 100% solve the problem. Tock said that new security questions may solve the biggest part, maybe we will have to try that solution first.
kHacker35000vr (talk) 12:09, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
I have now disabled all old questions and replaced them by new ones. Now let us see, what happens.
Wiimm (talk) 19:21, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
It seems it works :) -- How long is the question. -- Wiimm (talk) 15:49, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Talk with jimbo1qaz


Unban me, That edit was a joke.
But a bad joke. For me it was vandalism, which is just as bad as spamming.
Can you just do it?
It's a team decision.

I will not decide this alone. -- Wiimm (talk) 23:37, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Bad apology. Also, I guess "CrapTools" was a [bad] joke too. I don't think he's ready to be unbanned.
-- Have a nice day, from ZillaSpaz 02:43, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
There is a chance, that he change his manners after this block. I think, a block of at least some days is appropriate.
Wiimm (talk) 07:23, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
That was more of a demand than an apology. I agree, joke edits aren't any more welcome here than spamming or vandalism. A ban of several days is appropriate, especially with that kind of "apology." --Jefe (talk) 12:53, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
I only banned him for a month because I thought that was long enough for him to learn his lesson. He still needs to understand that jokes like that do not belong on the wiki. As Wiimm rightly said, it's vandalism, so it will not be tolerated. -- WorldsBoss (talk) 18:49, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
I have changed it to infinite, because I wanted to suppress an automatic activation. Today he ask me again for reactivation. I'm on the way to accept this minimal excuse (I think, he's a very young boy). It seems to be important for jimbo1qaz and so I hope he have learned. If you agree, we can unban him. (I think the agreement needs 1-2 more days.)
Wiimm (talk) 19:20, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
Ok, that sounds good to me. -- WorldsBoss (talk) 23:46, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
After 3 days I have unblocked him. I think/hope, he had learned and don't do it again. -- Wiimm (talk) 09:43, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Fresh from getting unbanned he added this to his user page: Don't mess with me. I know how to hack computers. I set up an indefinite ban since it could be taken as a threat towards moderators "messing" with him. Whether it is or not, it's clearly inappropriate under any circumstances. Opinions? --Jefe (talk) 11:22, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Wow, that was fast. It seems right after we said not to joke around, Jimbo jokes/threatens. I think he was not ready for being unbanned.
-- Have a nice day, from ZillaSpaz 16:03, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
No comment, I agree to all -- Wiimm (talk) 17:15, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
I have a feeling this was jimbo. His previous edits and the time frame fit. --Jefe (talk) 02:28, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

More Moderators

I have the feeling, that only some moderators patrol the changes. On the other side, some non moderators do many edits, especially in translations. So I think it would be good to hire more moderators, but only people we believe in.

Wiimm (talk) 13:47, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I cannot patrol translations as I am not part of that department. Chris would seem to be the only moderator capable of patrolling translations right now, with the other non-English moderators patrolling their respective native languages in the translation department. Therefore, I vote to leave the appointment of additional moderators in Chris's hands, should he need more. --Torran (talk) 15:25, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
9Horsti12 is editing many things in a good way. So I recommend him for a moderator job. -- Wiimm (talk) 16:17, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Even though I know that Horsti will get this the wrong way but I am against that. Only today on the Recent changes Tab I see 2 edits made by him which are not conform the Wikis rules. He created a Page for Igors old track which got an Update which is done by the same person + another one which is similiar to SNES Bowsers Castle 3. If Igor made it on his own it would be okay but to decide a change for him isnt correct. The second thing was the deletion about his question and answer about the Downloadlink on the Talk page of Igors Page.
Tock (talk) 18:04, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
That are normal different and subjective views in a wiki and very easy repairable. And the edits were made independent of the moderator status. The point is, that only very few of the current moderators patrol the edits. Sometime I see >30 unpatrolled edits. And here we need more people. And I think, Horsti can help here. I have no problem with your veto, but please make other nominations.
Wiimm (talk) 22:08, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Altough there are sometimes many unpatrolled edits, I belive that the current number of (active) moderators is good enough. Mostly, when such an amount of edits stay unpatrolled, an user or two made many edits at a time at which there aren't mods active and when a moderator comes online, is can be quite overwhelming and consequently he only patrols a few of them, leaving the rest to others. Adding a new moderator won't completly solve the problem. Being a moderator is more than just patrolling, and like Tock says, his edits are sometimes not following the rules and therby, a few days ago he moved a lot of distribution pages around, leaving dead and double redirects and delete requests for used redirects. Perhaps in the future he can be useful, but not right now.
kHacker35000vr (talk) 22:25, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Cleaning of announcements

See for example here: List of Retro Tracks from Mario Kart: Double Dash!! There and in other lists are very old announcements for new tracks, also from the moderators. A while ago we planned to remove all announcements without progress and older than 3-5 month.

Wiimm (talk) 20:14, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


I have been informed that YellowFlare is an imposter of this user: User:SolarFlare, which Jefe immediately banned on suspicion of multi-accounting. If an Administrator has proof to backup this claim, then they may unban User:SolarFlare. As for impersonation, what would we do in such a situation? --Torran (talk) 21:38, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Both users used the same IP on Dec. 13. -- Wiimm (talk) 09:13, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Five minutes after YellowFlare finished editing, SolarFlare registered. The time frame and similarity of username made it highly probable that it was the same person, and Wiimm just confirmed that. If there's a different person attempting to claim the Solar Flare account, I suggest they simply register a new account with a slightly different name, like Solar-Flare. I don't know how feasible recovering or removing "dead" account names might be. I'm sure Wiimm and Tock will have some opinions. --Jefe (talk) 20:24, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Checking the votes I have found out, that we also have users Flare (Jan 2013), BlazingFlare (Jan-Aug 2013) and YellowFlare (Mar-Dez 2013). The dates are first and last vote. SolarFlare never voted.
Wiimm (talk) 20:38, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Download Link War

Users TheMygoshi, 9Horsti12 and BulletMKW run a download link war. At the moment I have not time to look analyse the details. So I Have added this comment on all 3 user talks:

Stop editing any download link until the war is proofed by any moderator. At the moment I have no time to do it by my self. If you edit a download link again, I'll (or any moderator) will block you immediately.

Wiimm (talk) 16:20, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

I have removed by prohibition for 9Horsti12 and BulletMKW. For TheMygoshi see his user talk.
Wiimm (talk) 19:04, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

I specifically told mygoshi to not undo any more user edits. Discuss, don't undo. And what did he do? Got in an edit war. We'll have to analyze what happened here, but it's clear that he ignored my warning. I think we've given him more chances than anyone else on this wiki, and I don't believe he deserves another one. --Jefe (talk) 19:25, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

My nature is to be tolerant with young people — they learn the life. But perhaps, I'm sometimes to tolerant.
Wiimm (talk) 19:40, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
You also have to be set clear limits and expectations as a parent or teacher... otherwise children will continue pushing until they find some sort of boundaries. Maybe in six months this kid might be able to handle himself. Maybe. But he has willfully ignored moderator warnings time and time again, refuses to acknowledge any criticism, and he only got to come back because you gave him another chance. I believe you wrote somewhere that it would be his final one.
Khacker also gave him a final warning, albeit in an edit summary:
(Stop readding your removed videos, good reason or not, listen to what you are told. Take this as a final warning.)
He has been entirely too disruptive. He had his chance, and he squandered it. Giving him yet another chance right now is like giving a screaming kid a piece of candy because they're screaming for a piece of candy. It just reinforces the bad behavior. We set clear expectations (don't undo edits) and instead he started a massive edit war. It is our duty to follow through with his punishment. --Jefe (talk) 20:01, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
I know all, but he was also the only persons who apologized without a request. So I gave him a chance ...
Wiimm (talk) 22:14, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Apology or not, what he did was totally wrong. He has been misbehaving before, he has been banned for the same reason and while being banned he made many clone-accounts to continue his behaviour. He was lucky to get a second chance and in my eyes he totally ruined it today. There is a moment where we have to draw the line. --kHacker35000vr (talk) 22:28, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Wiimm, the apology (and presumably agreement) he made with you was ok the first time. You gave him a chance and then he screwed up massively. He doesn't get another chance, at least for several months. And while Mygoshi definitely instigated this, it doesn't necessarily absolve the other participants. It takes more than one person wage an edit war. --Jefe (talk) 01:44, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

I've taken some time to view some of the disputed pages. It seems the common thread is that several people were attempting to moderate and fix pages, including MyGoshi, which resulted in the edit war. The circumstances aren't the same on each one, but most of them start like this: Bullet or MyGoshi adds a new link. Other users attempt to fix MyGoshi's link, or MyGoshi simply undoes Bullet's link. This goes back and forth several times, and on multiple pages. And as you all know MyGoshi was specifically warned not to undo other user's edits, but did it anyway.
So, what to do here? First on our rules page, we do say "Even if you aren't a moderator, if you notice problems or rule violations, you should do what you can to improve pages on the Wiiki." This is something I added a long time ago, so I must take responsibility. In most situations that is the correct course of action. Unfortunately this lead to the edit war we saw. So I think we need to modify that section to add something like "We do not tolerate edit warring, flooding and conflict between users. If another users reverses your edit, do not immediately change it back, even if you are certain the changed page is in error. Discuss it on an appropriate talk page, and allow the moderators time to check the page. If you intend to update a large number of pages, please clear the proposed changes with a moderator first or it may be considered flooding."
The other problem I've seen here, and I must take some responsibility here for pointing out issues with MyGoshi's videos, is that people were being far too critical of video quality. If there's a major revision of a level, and someone adds a video with minor or moderate issues (for example, this one of [Royal Castleway]) it shouldn't be removed just because it isn't perfect. In that example, the track was scaled to 70% so it needed a new video. The major issues with that video is that it is emulated and has noticeable artifacting (a large blue square overlaying the upper left quadrant.) Otherwise the video is suitable, and shouldn't be removed unless a video that better fits the guidelines (non-emulated, no artifacts, in-game audio, etc.) is found. And to be honest, it doesn't matter if the video is perfect. If the video gives a good approximation of the level, then it's fine for the time being.
So in summary, this situation can be averted in the future by clarifying the rules on flooding and edit warring. I do not propose bans for any of the participants except MyGoshi, although the edit warring was the result of several individuals. --Jefe (talk) 03:04, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
It was my fault to think, that mygoshi will change his behaviour. And yesterday, when I'll tried to find a fast solution, I removed the wrong video. But it was an action of hecticness (while I'm cooking) and frustration.
Now it's all over — but watching the new registrations.
Wiimm (talk) 22:15, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


In the next week I'll will visit the wiki only rarely and only in the (german) evening. So I can't help to moderate (or only minimal). However, if there are any administrative problems, write to my talk page.

Wiimm (talk) 22:26, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Today I found >100 edits not patrolled by anyone. I think, many mods (I too) were absent over xmas. Now I have patrolled the last edits and found, that User:Avenir marked many pages as category:Stub. We must discuss, what a "stub" is ⇒ Category talk:Stub
Also the 200 un-patrolled edits must be patrolled in the next days.
Wiimm (talk) 18:47, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
Because I'll spent many time in the MKWii-Server Project, I'll moderate this wiki only minimal and stop patrolling.
Wiimm (talk) 09:05, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
I thought there were some new moderators? I'll try to check in a bit, but I'm busy with other projects. --Jefe (talk) 20:45, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Distro Exclusivity

I think it's important for you guys to weigh in on this. Talk:Wii U Excitebike Arena (NinYoda1) --Jefe (talk) 17:16, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Who currently patrol edits?

Who of the moderators frequently patrols edits? My impression is, that Maczkopeti does the most patrols. I patrol only rarely, most if I want something in the wiki and see not patrolled edits.

In my opinion, inactive moderators should lose the moderation right to identify the oderator members clearly.

-- Wiimm (talk) 08:40, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

You can check the patrol log.
--maczkopeti (talk) 14:41, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Lazy Moderators

I discussed it with Tock. Moderators have not only the right for special edits, the have also an obligation to patrol other edits to detect illegal infos and SPAM. In the last month, only Maczkopeti and I patrol and do other moderator activities. And no other moderator answered the point above. And so we degraded moderators to a new group "auto patrol".

It is possible to revert it. And yes we need some more moderators or people, that at least patrol the edits.

btw: Thanx to Maczkopeti who is the most active moderator and does a very good job!

-- Wiimm (talk) 23:40, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

We continue this discussion here. -- Wiimm (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Pages marked for deletion with not a good reason

This is something that somewhat bothers me. Some pages of CTs or Texture Hacks have been deleted today. Some were marked for deletion because they were dead projects, and I can understand that, but for some pages it seems very unnecessary. Examples: Thwomp Desert 2. It's listed on my user page as a project that's still in progress. Why remove it? (Wiimm restored it for me, thanks, by the way). Another page is Pfirsich Arena. It is marked for deletion without reason. Based on maczkopetis latest edits, as he was the one who marked the pages for deletion, I assume it's because that page has no download link. Same with Blue Sky Beach, I think this is the biggest problem. It was marked for deletion because the download link has gone missing. I find this a bit silly. Now, the wiki is where most information about custom tracks are saved. I would like to quote what Wiimm said about this on another talk page, but I can't find it right now. It was something with the words "The wiki is for saving new and old information, not destroying it". My reasoning: Blue Sky Beach is in various Custom Track Distributions. What if a player plays that track in one of those and then tries to find following info: The author of the track, a video of the track and maybe some info about it's development. Of course, the first place I would go is the wiki, because that's where I'd expect such information. I find it silly to remove all that from this wiki, just because the download has gone missing (but it has been reuploaded now)... Now, back to Pfirsich Arena. It has no download link because it was never meant to be released. But it is a video, a showcase of some older test, which may be entertaining for some people, who, for example, want to know something about my very first tests of custom tracks making, and I don't want it removed too. There are some other pages that only showcases things, or more tracks without download, that would be a lot of lost info if that no download thing were applied to all pages. What are the other moderators thinking of this?--Buschkling (talk) 00:57, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Thwomp Desert 2 and Pfirsich Arena (other tracks not checked) are vaporware = announced, but never available for the public. That is a very good reason to delete the useless page.
-- Wiimm (talk) 15:11, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

New kind of a bot

Read this: Talk:Main Page/Moderator Stuff/Text Edit Bot -- Wiimm (talk) 12:15, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

I have now removed the lines: <!-- please insert distributions in alphabetic order -->
used function: Show text
Status: 175 pages modified of 3517 pages total in 16.312 sec
The status of a second run: 0 pages modified of 3517 pages total in 723.860 ms
-- Wiimm (talk) 17:22, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Looks like I need to learn some PHP then, I really don't understand its syntax.
Have this bot changed "==Text==" to "== Text =="? I may be wrong but I think most pages was without spaces before.
--Wexos (Talk | Contribs) 19:39, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Un-uglifying the headings and adding spacing was the masterpiece of the bot. I tested it add a test wiki.
-- Wiimm (talk) 22:17, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Could you run the same bot on the MK8 wiki? (the one that makes the headings look better). I don't want to edit it manually.
--Wexos (Talk | Contribs) 21:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
done -- Wiimm (talk) 23:45, 5 May 2017 (UTC)


I think this is a good idea. I agree and maybe this is something we should do to all remakes?
--Wexos (Talk | Contribs) 06:24, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

I agree -- Wiimm (talk) 08:31, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
I think we should keep the original at the page title but move a remake to title (author). There are people already moving pages. I am currently very busy so I can't change anything.
--Wexos (Talk | Contribs) 19:59, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
There are also other things. The translations should stay on the original article. Should remakes be mentioned on the original track page?
--Wexos (Talk | Contribs) 20:11, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Also, I think we should make a category for remakes.
--Wexos (Talk | Contribs) 05:56, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

4shared links

As the third main rule says, download links that require registration are NOT allowed, however, there are many pages that use 4shared links, which needs registration. Should we stop allowing 4shared? —Atlas (talk) – CT/MK8 Wiki Admin 11:24, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

--Wexos (Talk | Contribs) – CT/MK8 Wiki Admin 16:39, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
I think: NO
But is a registration really needed? I asked, because I load every track I found and can't remember, that I created an account.
-- Wiimm (talk) 18:16, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Damn, I have an account there -- Wiimm (talk) 18:18, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Yes, registration is needed. —Atlas (talk) – CT/MK8 Wiki Admin 21:31, 25 January 2018 (UTC)