User talk:GoldenChaos

zanramon blacklist
Why has my Zanramon account been blacklisted. The reason you put spam and stuff what does that mean by last controbution was in may. Can you show me what my spam was

the controbutions in may where only on talk Wii and uploading a picture for my userpage


 * You know Jason, I can't really see why Zanramon was put under a six month block. Looking at the user contributions, I can't find anything that warrants a six-month block, or any block at all, after the March 8th block. I hope I'd don't have to remind you that you are not supposed to block a person for something that they were already blocked for. It seems to me that he only created another account to ask his question here. That is perfectly understandable considering that he, as well as I, thinks that the block wasn't fair. His original account should be unblocked immediately. There is no reason to block members for no good reason. This issue is a prime example of why we should have blocking time guidelines. The alleged, but non-existent, spamming would not warrant a six-month block. Three days perhaps, but not six months. 06:37, July 4, 2008 (UTC)


 * Yep. There was some more of my brutal honesty, patent pending.:P You may not like it, but it has to be said, for the good of the wiki. This is not a practice I wan't us to be getting into. If we keep doing things like this, our reputation would suffer greatly. We don't want that to happen. 06:43, July 4, 2008 (UTC)


 * Or, you could actually go around asking, where I would be happy to tell you he comes into the chatroom and spams the place to hell. Pretty much everytime he entered too. Isn't that right Zanramon? 13:30, 4 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Does the chatroom count for the Zelda Wiki account. I think you can still get to it, through another applet, without go through site. Blocking people for things done in the chatroom is not right either. That is basically what a chatroom is. I've seen some of the things said there. Had any others members said them they'd have been blocked too. This block is no good. Remove. 14:16, July 4, 2008 (UTC)


 * You're correct, he can get back in, because I never had a chance to set a ban. HOWEVER, while cursing and the such is allowed, SPAM is not. If you come in, I'll show you spam. 14:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Ahhh, I really don't want to say anything as I reeeeally don't want to be the "bad guy" here, but I feel the need to say something. Have you guys seen this? Imagine that but, like everywhere. There was never really any actual contributions to discussion except maybe once; it almost seemed like he was just saying stuff for the sake of saying stuff, helping to clog up discussion pages (although I have to admit, I found his first sentence here hilarious, although it may be because I know the context). Basically most (most, not all, but most) of what he did was... I really don't have any words here without being just mean, and I don't like doing that. :/ I'm not exactly saying that it completely warranted the full 6-month-with-no-explanation block, but I am saying that there has been a decent amount of spam from Zanramon. Sorry if I've offended you here, Zanramon, as it really wasn't my goal: I'm just trying to state facts and the possible reason for the block. 14:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Sigh. He spammed. Like this:

NO STUFF ON MY TALK PAGE BOY! ~ Jason.

Like that. That's wrong. obviously. 15:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Blockable material. But not six months worth. A month would have been more appropriate. 15:05, July 4, 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, even if I am offensive here, Zanramon had it coming to him. 15:07, 4 July 2008 (UTC)


 * He spammed the wiki too, and not just talk pages (in particular mine, as Ando pointed out). One example was when he uploaded a picture of a Goron Travelling Merchant smoking marijuana, and added it to the article. As you'll see here, I had to give him a number of stern warnings when he first came to the wiki. As you can see from the block log he'd already had two short blocks from me, but I'd refrained from a longer block like Jason issued in the hope that he'd improve. He didn't, and the destructive behaviour persisted, but never to a point where it was serious enough to warrant a permanent block. In short, he had this coming. 18:24, 4 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Good to finally see that there's someone who also knows :) 19:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Here's a compromise. In the future, whenever you block a user, you should state a detailed reason for doing so on the user's talk page. Wikipedia does this, of course they've got extensions to do that. We don't have a dozen or more blocks a day like Wikipedia. We just have a few every couple weeks or so. Therefore, it isn't that hard to state the details of a block to the user on the user's talk page. We should also consider those blocking time guidelines. Aren't blocked users still able to edit their own talk page? I was under the impression that they were. 02:06, July 5, 2008 (UTC)


 * You gotta remember, the blocker was Jason, and he's got, like, no time ever. I'm kind of confused as to why he banned Zanramon when he did (not saying it wasn't warranted, just... why randomly THEN?), but that was probably all that he had time to do. Zelda Universe apparently keeps him very, very busy, which I can't say surprises me.
 * I do agree, though, that except in situations of clear, cut-and-dry vandalism (which is really the most common reason for blocking anyway), a detailed reason should be provided beyond the initial description in the block-drop-down. 05:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Most likely I did it back when the wiki was young - when we didn't have enough users for me to care who was on and who was not. I wouldn't ban for six months now... but I know I did a lot of permanent bans way back when :P ...EDIT: Apparently it was in May - well then, I have no idea why I picked six months! Must have not been paying attention. --GoldenChaos 12:52, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Upgrade
Exactly what time? 00:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Your notice on the main page is all messed up at my resolution. We need to add a '''

''' after the table you just added. 00:49, August 18, 2008 (UTC)

Interview Partner needed
hiho, I already contacted Davogones because I thought he was one of the runners of this wiki. He told me I should contact you for this topic:

I write for a German languaged pdf-mag called lotek64 (www.lotek64.com). at the moment I am writing an article all about Zelda and for this article I would like to interview you about the wiki, theories, the community behind and the zelda universe in general. if you are interested just write me an email to mm@binaerpilot.info cya --MM 13:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Colors
Remember when you had to switch out all the old .php and .css files for the new versions after the wiki software update? You said you'd have to do all the old changes over. Well I'm sure you know by now that you missed some. I guess they are in the monobook.css. I don't know what the exact places in the css are, but I can tell what needs to be fixed. I'll try to find all of them. I'm not sure what uses the same setting but it should be fine. White Backgrounds — these backgrounds are white and should be #1C3855. I think. Examples are included.
 * The background of page diffs
 * The background of the system messages page
 * The selections in the Page History.

That's what I could find. It shouldn't be too hard to find. It should only take up a few minutes of your time. 19:40, October 9, 2008 (UTC)


 * He's said on the staff boards that he's looked around everywhere and can't find them, although a possible location outside of monobook.css might have been found. It's being looked into. 02:09, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


 * MARKOL tells me that the Firefox add-on "Fire Bug", I think that is what it is called, can tell you exactly where in the css files a particular component is. He might want to try that. 02:16, October 10, 2008 (UTC)

Yes, yes. It does just that. That will make it easy. Just right-click and choose inspect element. It'll tell you exactly where to find whatever affects what you right-clicked. The link is. That will help a lot. 02:30, October 10, 2008 (UTC)


 * Almost forgot!. The background in the Special:Preferences needs to be corrected too. 02:55, October 10, 2008 (UTC)


 * This add-on is awesome! It does exactly what we've been trying to do! I'm so happy with it I just gave it a great review. Perhaps this thing will let us make other changes more easily too. We'll have to see. 02:37, October 10, 2008 (UTC)


 * I use CSSEdit, a very pretty and functional Mac program, to edit and create CSS. It's got ten times as much functionality as Firebug, and awesome tools to let you expect and find CSS elements. I suppose it was my lack of understanding of CSS, then, not that I simply couldn't find it. CSSEdit pointed me towards the right object, but I couldn't write any CSS that affected it for some reason. Nothing I did changed the color. --GoldenChaos 12:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

It sounds like you're trying to edit the css through the program. I highly doubt that will work. You'll have to make the edits the normal way. These edits were made once, there is no reason they cannot be made again. Just record were they are in the css, then go to them the normal way and change them. It should be that simple. 15:55, October 11, 2008 (UTC)


 * Haha, I don't think I'm silly enough to make edits through the program and not upload them ;)... actually, my FTP program and CSSEdit work in concert; I can edit the file while it's on the server, and it automatically uploads my changes as I save them. Now, you might be thinking, "But what if it just didn't upload?" Impossible - my FTP program displays a message in Growl when an upload succeeds and tells me what file it just uploaded.


 * To address you other statement, the edits actually weren't made before. That's why the stuff is white; all these white things are new CSS values in MediaWiki 1.13 that were never defined in our old CSS. So, they've never been defined and I have no idea what they are! And to address your most final statement - if it were that simple, I'd have done it already. Don't underestimate my wiki CSS-editing abilities, I built this place. The values for what we're trying to change are not recorded in the default MonoBook CSS file, so I've no way of figuring out what they are. If I was just slightly better at CSS, I could write the values myself. I tried to, actually, but nothing I did worked. I assumed I either wrote it wrong, or wasn't addressing the right classes.


 * Now, all of that is just about the strange white table borders, not the User Preferences page. I can fix that relatively quickly, since I know where those CSS values are now that I know the User Preferences page has changed in 1.13. --Jase 22:49, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Well if you still can't get it to work, then there is only one thing to do. Go over to MediaWiki.org and get help. There will be someone who knows how to do it over there. 02:20, October 12, 2008 (UTC)