User talk:Paul.rea

Do you think you can please, unlock the werewolf article, thank you.Pic18F452 (talk) 19:46, June 26, 2013 (UTC)

Do you think you can please, restore the Cora Hale article, thank you.Pic18F452 (talk) 19:46, June 26, 2013 (UTC)

Do you think you can please, restore the Derek Hale's pack article, or the Derek's pack  article, thank you.Pic18F452 (talk) 19:46, June 26, 2013 (UTC)

Hi!

I need to ask you a question, do you know, if I make someone admin, like me, on my wiki, does that mean that I stop being an admin? I know that there can be more than one admin but I wanted to be sure ;)

(CCarolinee (talk))

Farnzy24 (talk) 10:59, June 29, 2013 (UTC)I wasn't speculating. I said nothing definitive about either type of character within the show. As far as the demon wolf comment goes Deucalion gave himself that moniker I did not state he was a demon wolf I was referring to the name he had given himself. My blog post was a question to the other members that if an Alpha form Kanima were to fight the Alpha of Alphas if you would prefer that terminology who would win? Isn't a blog suppossed to be an open forum for me to voice my thoughts on a subject? Speculation would be saying that the Alpha Kanima is the strongest creature there is, which based on nothing is completely redundant. Am I not allowed to ask a question to other members simply because I value everyones inputs? Or are you going to delete every one of my blog posts?Furthermore as far as commenting goes, a comment in itself is my own personal critique of a subject or I could simply be weighing in on someone elses question. What does it matter? None of my comments are meant to inflict harm upon anyone else, I'm not abusing anyone else on here. My earlier blog about Alphas and their eyes was merely a theory as was my other comment that you deleted regarding the eye colour being a reference to the character of the individual; an indiciation of their capacity for good or evil. Until all knowledge regarding this season is revealed at this point in time all we have is speculation, wouldn't it work to everyones advantage if you allowed us all our say? I haven't been editing articles and such and rewriting them with ficitonal works just merely indicating my thought process. Or would prefer if i just remain a silent member?Farnzy24 (talk) 10:59, June 29, 2013 (UTC)

I pretty much left you a letter 4 or 5 days ago, the least you could do is have the courtesy to read/respond...

So again, kindly restore my blog about incubi/succubi since your reasons for deleting are pretty much unfounded considering MariaTrimble has a similar blog which I based mine off of and seeing hers is still around and didn't get deleted I wonder why mine was. Both have encyclopedic information and neither looks like an official article, but if it helps you sleep at night I could always place a 'THISISABLOGNOTANARTICLETHISISABLOGNOTANARTICLE...' at the beginning.

I'd say yours sincerely and thanks in advance, but I'm kinda done being nice and patient about it.

Simplyme (talk) 16:17, June 29, 2013 (UTC)

Both blogs are informational, how else can you accurately describe how you envision a creature you'd like to see in TW. I just created a detailed picture of succubi/incubi and wanted feedback of others to see if they could find themselves in how I pictured them. If they would rather see them otherwise, if they had any other ideas, if they had some more weaknesses to add since I found that section rather meager and couldn't really think of something else at that moment. If they weren't too overpowered etc. You understand what i'm trying to say? The blog itself was more of a ... beastiary entry of sorts and I wanted to hear ideas and comments on how it could be improved. Even if you won't restore it permanently, could you at least restore it for a little while so I can copy the text since I forgot to save it on my laptop and can change it a bit if necessary?

Thanks for responding btw, I appreciate it

Simplyme (talk) 17:44, June 29, 2013 (UTC)

I guess I got a badgePrlol (talk) 07:32, June 30, 2013 (UTC)

Hi I'm new to this,and in my country MTV is not available still I try to watch TEEN WOLF in AXN I wanted to thank you for updating new details.That helped me so much to know about season 1 and the episodes I missed unfortunately.Thank you

Are you planning to create the Cora Hale page today or later another day? --Maximumxero16 (talk) 00:06, July 2, 2013 (UTC)

Protection
How exactly do you expect to develop a community if all your pages are protected so that only administrators are able to edit them? You won't always be here to update information and create new pages, so why did you lock key pages so that only you can edit them, seeing as you're the only active administrator, I'd consider building up an administration team, and start unlocked pages, maybe start developing policies, just in case there's trolls, honestly though, there's no need to lock pages, the Wiki's not yours to burden. Let others help you! :) ~ Minx

hi, thanks for the notice. i will ask if i need help, thanks for your help. i do have a question, who did Derek first bite after he became Alpha? i saw th question, and i put Jackson, but it said i was wrong, and it was Scott. i hought Scott was bit by Peter.Gruniper (talk) 19:08, July 2, 2013 (UTC)

thanks, i hought so, but just double checking. are you up to chat?Gruniper (talk) 19:36, July 2, 2013 (UTC)

Wiki Critique
Hey Paul, do you mind critiquing the main page of my wiki? I'm trying to get some feedback from people to see if there's anything I need to change. Maria Trimble (talk) 01:57, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

RE: Wiki Critique
Thanks for the feedback! Your opinion really means a lot.

About the editorial image - I'm going to add a slider and more images that size. Like how the TVD wiki has the small pictures of the main cast. I'm going to do that once I upload more images and articles. I hope to have at least six more images that size and either a slider or main graphic above it. And I was thinking about adding a subtle background image. Thanks for your advice :) Maria Trimble (talk) 02:37, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of theories and comments
Hello Paul,

Im writing to you about concerns over how and what you deem appropriate on the comments section. Any speculations regardless if they are based on fact or not get deleted.

Ive spoken to Brandon Rhea, the Wiki Community Support member and he has suggested we should come to a middle ground.

I propose that all articles remain fact based. However, the comment section should be allowed speculation such as theories and discussion about possible plot lines. Otherwise what is the point in a comments section. A comment section is an invitation to opinion and theories are opinions.

The deletion and editing of comments is ruining the enjoyment of this website for myself and from other comments, others too.

So I propose that as long as they are not offensive or claim to be true, and its clear that it is an opinion. It should be allowed within the comments section.

Looking forward to your reply,

Stuart Ferguson

A concerned wikia fan.

Deletion of Comments
Right I have an account now. Ready to discuss a middle ground?

Deletion of comments
Well you can't go on just deleting comments because it has a theory in it. To have a comment section is to invite opinions, a part of which is theories. Looking at other comments, like ones that talk about characters clothing and hairstyles they like. Why should those particular bits of fandom stay and others get deleted.

Its unpleasant for users to get their comments deleted. Speculation based on fact is allowed. Theories about what might happen on the show should be allowed. Im not saying in the articles but in the comments. People know that the facts are the articles and the comments are just opinions.

Looking at other comments, Im not the only one who feels this way. And as a community based website you should allow the community to express their opinions freely within the comment section without being deleted, provided it is not rude or claiming to be fact.

Like I said Brandon says a middle ground.

So what sort of ground can we meet in the middle of this.

I get your proud of your wiki work and I like it, but as a community website, if a comment section is there, opinions such as theory should be allowed.

Stuartfergie (talk) 21:10, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

The comment section deletion chronicles.
Im not talking about the articles, Im talking about the comments. How is a theory any more invalid than a discussion about hair or clothing of characters?

No offense to you, since you have done a good job on the articles, but an increase in visits to the site isnt a measure of your work, or an arguement point to invalidate my point. It is most likely due to as the series progresses so does the fanbase and thus views.

What is a comment section for if not for fans to discuss the topics and theories of what the facts in the article state. Like I said from other comments on this wiki and along with those attached to your talk, Im not the only one who feels this way.

You seem to delete any and all opinions in the comments. And it upsets people. Like I said rude or disrespectful comments yeah. But whats the point in a comments section if I cant comment my own opinion on what might happen. As long as my reasoning has a base on the show it should be allowed. It even says on the wiki that speculation is allowed in the comments.

Im not saying your doing a bad job, Im just suggesting a less harsh deletion of comments. Its upsetting for users. True some do not care but people who do care, make comments. People like myself, who is so upset. Ive made an account to talk to you about it.

It doesnt reflect poorly on wiki if the comment section has theories in it. Because people know that the comment section is individuals thoughts and reactions to the show and the fact of the article. As long as its clean, there shouldnt be a problem.

True, I am assuming the Alpha pack works the same as the a regular pack. But you are assuming it doesnt. We havent been given any other rules on packs. Therefore, surely if Im wrong to make one assumption, you are wrong to make the other assumption? It seems like I have to write my opinion like a scientific paper, in order for it to even be recognised. It is just a show and it seems really harsh to delete comments and opinions, calling them false information, when they are theories, not facts. Speculation based on what we have seen in the show.

I respect your opinion and ability to argue your point. But others should have that option too, instead of just deleting them.

Stuartfergie (talk) 21:58, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

Comment Section does not contain any Facts
From your argument, there shouldnt even be a comment section then. What a characters hair is like or if a character is sexy, isnt factual information. Why is this accepted?

The transfer works for all Alphas if they kill their betas. Its a perfectly logical theory for the same to apply to an abnormal pack.

Scott eyes may have glowed red, but then returned to yellow. Yet you have put it as Werewolf Status Unknown. Surely he is an Omega until a change in his werewolf status is confirmed. Even the actor said that in the beginning of the series he is an Omega. The show hasnt confirmed factually a change. Its implied by his eye colour that he has the potential to change, but not confirmed as eye colour has not been confirmed in their meanings. You cant even call it Alpha Red since Scott hasnt been confirmed as an Alpha, yet went briefly red.

The wiki clearly states that speculation is allowed as long as it has a basis on the facts of the show. Tell me what you deem to be an acceptable speculation.

You say that the majority of people dont comment. People come for the articles, not the comments. However, I go to a page and at least one person complains about being deleted. So why dont you recognise this as a problem?

The comments may be attached to the articles, but why is a person commenting on if a person is sexy and more relevant than a person saying a theory? Surely if a persons theory lowers the standard of the wiki, then those sorts of comment do to. They dont contribute any factual information to the wiki, and looking at most comments, they dont either.

Speculation based on fact is allowed on the wiki/ abuse of power
I am not being obtuse. I am trying to get you to recognise that there is a difference between a fact and a person's prediction. True most users dont comment but like I said, looking at people you have banned and people commenting, they are protesting to your methods of deletion and editing.

If you had other admins to keep you in check and make sure your doing the right thing, then fair enough. But at the moment you seem to be the sole admin and you seem to be abusing that power. The wiki clear states that speculation is allowed as long as it has a basis in the facts of the show. Theories are speculation based on what is seen on the show. You seem to be using some twisted scientific accurateness that doesnt work on a fictional show.

The red eye colour is a trait seen in all alpha's except recently from scott. Since eye colour hasnt been explained yet and hasnt factually been stated on the show to have a connection with status. (It probley is). But you are logically speculating that eye colour means something to do with status due to observations on the show.

I write and read scientific papers for a living. I do know what I am talking about. A persons prediction is not claimed as fact, so cannot be inaccurate information. And according to the wiki, predictions are allowed as they are speculation based in fact.

It is you yourself that seems to have the problem. According to wiki, people arent doing anything wrong and are being deleted.

We have to find a middle ground on this. You should either allow theories or shut the comments down, like some wiki sections have, like the walking dead and true blood wiki's. Im not saying I want it shut down, but you are upsetting people, and you seem to be very obtuse about it. How can we find a middle ground when you find it unacceptable.

Stuartfergie (talk) 11:39, July 4, 2013 (UTC)

May I?
Is it okay if I change the picture for Season 3 of Teen Wolf (Spideyforeva (talk) 15:46, July 4, 2013 (UTC))

Community support for changing your deletion of comments
Is there a forum to gain support of other users on this policy you have of deleting comments containing speculation based on fact. Brandon told me that this is the best way for a community to change something. So where is this forum on the wiki or where can I gain support from the community?

Fair enough if others agree with how your deleting the comments, but if others agree with me, will you change how your deleting and editing comments and allow theories?

Stuartfergie (talk) 22:38, July 4, 2013 (UTC)

Acknowledge the community
Surely if the community doesnt like a particular way your doing things, you surely must heed them. Looking at other what others have said, they dont like this either. Im looking at simplyme and farnzy24 just skimming.

You have people posting in the comments that the Kanima is a dragon. That is something to delete. But someone asking what others think about what might happen should be allowed. It is a productive conversation on possible ways the show might go based on canon.

In your questions, Jeff was asked about a theory if Gerard was behind the killings. If that is posted in an article, then surely why cant people ask such things in the comments and gain opinion?

Im not saying that this wiki is run badly at all. You do a fantastic job and I would even call you a super fan. You talk about theories as if they are fantasies and how they are unacceptable on wikia. Yet there are wikias based solely on fan fiction, such as Maria's for example.

Ive asked you to help set up or point me in the direction of gathering opinions of the community on this. Like I said, If they agree with how things are done, then fair enough. But if they agree with me, why wont you conceed? This is perfectly middle ground and resolves on what is best for the community. Yet you dont seem to want to acknowledge the community. Why?

Stuartfergie (talk) 02:30, July 5, 2013 (UTC)

Comments
Did you remove the comment section from the articles? Maria Trimble (talk) 01:11, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

Ugh!
It sucks that things have to change just because a small group of people have a problem. Now they're really going to bitch because you didn't go with their idea of a "middle ground". Maria Trimble (talk) 01:17, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

Sigh
Well, could I at least suggest a FAQ or Q&A talk page? That way people can still ask their questions and they'll all be in one place instead of having 60+ blogs asking the same or similar questions. Maria Trimble (talk) 01:27, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

Examples
I don't know of any wikis dealing with tv/movies that do this but my dad uses a wiki dedicated to cameras that has a FAQ page - CHDK - FAQ. I know it's not a great example but not many wikis do FAQ. But what I meant by FAQ was that you can take those questions that you would answer at least 3x a day (like questions about the eyes colors or questions that Jeff has already answered but people keep asking anyway) and post them into a page/blog with an answer below it. It's just something I thought of as an alternative to the comments section.

Here's another example - Starting Strength - FAQ.

Maria Trimble (talk) 01:43, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

You're not giving me much to work here with. You disable comments now you're deleting my blog. This blog is the last thing we have.