User talk:Reception123

Post your messages BELOW the others

Adding NotAracham as an IRC operator
Hi, per the conversation at #miraheze on IRC, I would like to ask if you would be okay with giving op permissions to NotAracham. OrangeStar (talk) 16:44, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * First, why did you post this to multiple user's talk pages instead of to a centralized place?
 * Second, there is currently a precedent that IRC op permissions are exclusively given to stewards, SRE, and bots. Changing that would likely require something like IRC/RfC or similar.
 * Third, I am sorry to say but I actually do have a problem with this. There have already been enough issues with the current user rights they have, and I don't see a reason to add even more especially to a platform that they don't even use. This is another way to create "power-users" and repeat previous mistakes of Miraheze. Naleksuh (talk) 17:19, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you're right, it would've been better to just open a thread at the CN and ping them.
 * I do have to say though: IRC/Global ChanOps mentions how non-SRE/Stewards may become IRC ops. It's not like I disagree with you on your third point, but there aren't really many people to pick from for IRC op. If you want though, you have my support. OrangeStar (talk) 17:39, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree with #1, a centralized message with pings would have been best. On-wiki notifications weren't strictly needed as all of them I assume would have been notified via IRC of the request already. Well, it's done. #2's precedent is weak enough overall that it probably wouldn't require a full RfC, but clarifying a change to the precedent or establishing a better one is something that should be done soon. #3 is going to need something in the way of evidence because you are the only one I've even seen make jabs at NotAracham (which I've never seen substantiated anyway) let alone expressed a valid issue with the rights he has or their use. --Raidarr (talk) 18:14, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Free Editing Wiki
If the rules I proposed were instated, could the wiki be reopened? Bbbtest (talk | contribs | e-mail | please vote on my adminship ) 18:26, 9 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Since I (the wiki's founder) closed the wiki and not Reception123, it would depend on whether I feel like reopening it with the new rules, which right now, I don't. Sorry. Tali64³ (talk) 18:38, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * What do you currently have against my proposed changes? Bbbtest (talk | contribs | e-mail | please vote on my adminship ) 18:57, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * As Raidarr mentioned below, Free Editing Wiki was intended to be a wiki in which you could do anything that didn't violate the Content Policy. Your rules would be contrary to that, so I wouldn't reopen the wiki with those rules in place. Tali64³ (talk) 19:01, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, but I am wondering: are there any rules you are particularly bother by? Bbbtest (talk | contribs | e-mail | please vote on my adminship ) 19:06, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I can name this rule in your deletion policy: "Test pages, pages consisting of "keyboard spam", automatically-generated pages*, pages consisting of overly-repeated insignificant content, blank pages, and other insignificant, low-quality, and low-effort pages." The kinds of pages that would be banned under this new rule are the same kinds of pages that set Free Editing Wiki apart from other "do anything" wikis that prohibit such pages. Tali64³ (talk) 19:10, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * What if we had a namespace where such pages were allowed, but that namespace was noindex? Bbbtest (talk | contribs | e-mail | please vote on my adminship ) 19:15, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Again, users should feel like they could add anything without such namespaces/restrictions. Tali64³ (talk) 19:18, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but that would violate global policies as Reception123 said. Bbbtest (talk | contribs | e-mail | please vote on my adminship ) 19:19, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Another thing to note is that the creation of test pages and the like is not against my rules, it just says that they will be deleted. Bbbtest (talk | contribs | e-mail | please vote on my adminship ) 19:45, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The rules you suggest are a bandaid/muzzle to a concept that Tali quite openly admitted was supposed to be anarchy in nature. What you propose contradicts with its scope, anything near which would not be approved at this point anyway as a change or as a new wiki. --Raidarr (talk) 18:38, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Can you please explain more specifically what is wrong with my proposed rules? I don't see how it isn't in line with free editing. Bbbtest (talk | contribs | e-mail | please vote on my adminship ) 18:40, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The issue is fundamental: the wiki expresses the intention to do whatever. That is what it was meant to be. The more rules however noble, the less it is feasible. It's in the name, the request, and Tali's own admission as the progenitor of the idea. A do-anything wiki is fundamentally incompatible with the Content Policy as it stands and the rules or other truly major changes would leave it either being a general wiki with no purpose or more likely a practical clone of wikis that are already whatever wikis with rules. The issue is not x or y rule is wrong. It is a conceptual issue. That is why the final warning mentioned scope. --Raidarr (talk) 18:45, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Could the scope be changed? Instead of 'free' as in "free to do anything", it would be 'free' as in 'free to create content about nearly anything'. Bbbtest (talk | contribs | e-mail | please vote on my adminship ) 18:49, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * You now overlap with at least one but I know there are more wikis which are exactly that. --Raidarr (talk) 18:50, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Re: Speculative Evolution
Can you review this Speculative Evolution request (#30861) whenever you have the time? You were pinged about it a couple of days ago, but still haven't responded. Tali64³ (talk) 13:53, 24 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Sorry I didn't see the ping, I only recently returned from my wiki brake. What exactly would the concerns with the wiki be? Feel free to ping on Discord if it's easier to discuss there. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 13:55, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Some time ago, there was an administrator who wanted to fork the Speculative Evolution Wiki here; the problem with that is that the administrator was abusive in their edit summaries, resulting in them being globally blocked on Fandom. You instructed all wiki creators to put any Speculative Evolution request on hold pending your review. Tali64³ (talk) 16:53, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The main page on the Fandom wiki was replaced with a notice that the wiki had moved, implying that Spinosaurus111 (the admin who the other user was concerned about) was the one who submitted the request for the Miraheze wiki. It's now especially important that you investigate this situation (e.g. to determine if there was community consensus for the move). Tali64³ (talk) 18:45, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

I urge you to reconsider:

Warning about an abusive user on your service: https://speculativeevolution.miraheze.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Pterophyllum

Also abusive behaviour in the wiki that they changed to here:

https://speculativeevolution.fandom.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Spinosaurus111

I already WARNED YOU about this, yet you refused to listen. Please ban this user, they have a history of abuse as shown above
 * Apologies for that. I put that request on hold when I saw it, per the instructions of Stewards; however, another wiki creator approved it sometime later. I assume that wiki creator didn't know about the situation or had forgotten it, which is why it's always important for wiki creators to check the private wiki creators channel periodically (every day I'd recommend, if possible). Tali64³ (talk) 14:09, 28 March 2023 (UTC)