Bleach Wiki talk:Administrators

Bleach Movie 4
I was wondering, since we are likely to see an influx of edits about it, how are we going to deal with the new movie. Would any plot info from it be treated as a spoiler? If so, a new section for it should be made on the spoiler page. And how would we treat it considering the timescale involved here (a year until its release and likely another 9 months until a sub becomes available) - do we not allow plot details to be added until it is released in English, or would we allow details to be posted once it is released in Japan? 12:57, December 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * I was thinking that since we created a page about Heat the Soul 7 and protected it until it is released so that nobody other than the admins could edit it, should we consider doing the same with the new Bleach movie, as it will likely be the source of a lot of edits. This way we would be able to better keep control over it. 20:36, July 9, 2010 (UTC)

Petition to re-open discussions forum
Tinni has suggested the following:


 * Hey, I was just thinking about closed discussions and how we don't actually have a mechanism by which to re-open it. All we really have is the ability to start new discussions on the same topic. It occurred to me that perhaps we should have some mechanism in place for people at least make a case for why a discussion should be re-opened. So I was wondering what you thought about starting forum thread in the "Improvements" forum where people can place petitions to re-open discussions. Doesn't mean we will re-open, but it does give people a place to lodge their case. Plus since it's the forums, it's out of the way etc, etc. Of course, we might want to take some topics off limits like the old and tired "Vizard" discussion. Or Viz translation vs fan translation discussion and other things like that. So what do you think? Tinni   (Talk)  12:59, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Seems reasonable to me. 11:06, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Yea I was thinking about this. A page where people can give their petitions to re-open discussions. They can then be evaluated by the committee and if a majority ruling is given by the committee on the accurate and consistent argument given for the reopening it can move on to the admin and again its the majority rule to determine whether its to be opened. Thats my general thoughts et me know what you think. I would agree with Tinni on the no longer bringing up the Vizard, Viz translation vs. Fan Translation, Tosens race, or character status. Other then these specifics im ok with the idea. Salubri (Talk)  12:28, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Scaling down and alot of work
Ok so now with some of the articles done with great work but with the fights articles we can start to scale them down some. The fights provide in-depth detail of the information regarding the fights, events and battles. In an effort to address the space we can summarize the articles a bit so to stop redundancy.

we can also start linking the specific character battles to their specific pages. Also on that note i notice the gallery pages link to the character articles but not the other way around. we should address that.

There are some articles in need of alot of help. Rukia, Renji's history and plot which is uncalled for being such important characters as well as Yumichika. Reiatsu and Reiyoku need some severe references.

What are your thoughts on this? Salubri (Talk)  15:25, July 16, 2010 (UTC)


 * When we link a character article to a fight/event page, how should we do it? Is "Nel is the only one who catches up to Ichigo, arriving just in time to see Dordonii Alessandro Del Socacchio, a Privaron Espada. As Ichigo and Dordonii fight, the difference in power between the two quickly becomes apparent" alright or has anyone got a better idea? About image galleries: where would be the best place to link to the gallery? The infobox? 22:01, July 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well we could do it like that or we could just summarize the articles and list the fights at the bottom of the article. The gallery would probably best link in the infobox. Salubri (Talk)  23:33, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

Inactivity
Im pretty sure that unfortunately Twocents is gone for good its been 6 months with no response or even log on which sucks but if there is no objection he should be dropped from admin status. The same for the inactivity of Maul Day who hasn't been involved at all that I can remember. Im still on the fence about Whitestrike I know Arrancar109 still goes to him for help but thats something a user could accomplish he is currently not involved at all on admin level and doesn't remotely edit anymore at all. I already put a message out to the committee members who are not as active as well to determine whats going on there. Any thoughts?

Masked Character Book & Changes Needed
A raw has been released and there are a lot of name changes, full names & new characters. To keep the chaos that all this will cause to a minimum, I think we need to get organized quickly. A project to oversee the name changes and creation of the new pages etc, finding all the bits that need to be changes etc. I am protecting several names so that articles cannot be created about them until we are ready (same for page moves). I will set up something. Still going through the raw.

The interview covers espada, arrancar & other character origins (seems we now have proof for certain arrancar being named after designers/architects, but only for some), other random stuff. For part of it, see here. 15:05, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

Featured Article
Em, it seems that this has slipped under our radar again. The vote for feat. article is tied between Ukitake & Isshin. Tie-break vote needed. I vote for Isshin's article. 15:05, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

Yea i guess I can go for Isshin as well, Ukitake will more then likely have a more promote roll to be up again at a later date. Salubri (Talk)  15:20, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

I'll vote on Isshin as well. Arrancar109 (Talk)  17:06, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

New Site Design
With the New change in the look of the main wiki I have been thinking. We should think about a new redesign to the sight to make it more in line with the serious aspects of Bleach. I was thinking along the lines of black highlighted by Blue, Red and White. Streamlined sections on the main page. Template colors more in line with the motif. A much better up to date logo in the left corner possibly a wallpaper of Ichigo overlooking Soul Society or something at the top background. Also I like the personal info fill in for user pages as well as the use of boards on the Bleach Answer Site, maybe there is a way to incorporate that. It seems we maybe running on the general old code of when Wiki's first started, as this site began in 2007 is considerably old in the computer standards. I think an update with all the trimmings to go with is exactly whats needed. What are your thoughts on this?--Salubri (Talk)  17:50, August 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm in favour of a new, more Bleach-like theme and improved logo, though I think it would need to be voted on by the community. I'm not great at visualizing things like that, so I'd need to see a mock-up of it to say whether its good or not (a lot of templates would need to be recoloured though). Logo Creation Wiki make skins and logos for wikis. Don't know about the boards, but something like the personal info thing can be done here too using MediaWiki:Welcome-user-page. It would only appear for new users though. As for wikia's new skin, it seems that we don't have a choice in the matter - the staff have said that Monaco will only be enabled for a limited time after the new skin goes live. That could mess up a lot of things for every wiki there is as it will be different coding, but since it hasn't even started beta testing yet, some of the bigger changes may be scaled back by then. Well, that's something we can look forward to dealing with in the future. I applied to be a beta-tester, so I'll report back on what its like if I'm one of those selected. 13:55, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

Simple Change
Apparently its come to my attention. Godisme addressed me with "So Devilhand found where all of those people who wanted Gin's status changed. They all come from the bleach forums. Scrolling through their thread on it, I found that they are using Bleach Wiki:Simplified ruleset to justify their actions. They believe that rule 3 gives them free reign to do what they want because they believe it is helping the wiki. Seeing as all of our other policies are easy to find and well flushed out, is there even a reason to have the simplified rules?"

I personally dont see why we have that up, for a regular wiki thats fine but it undermines all the policies and allows people to act like vandals and allows them to attack other users. We dont claim to be like any other wiki and as far as how other wikis do things we stopped that long ago. The amount of false information and vandalism that occurs on the sight is far to much and its the policies not the rule set that has allowed us to be where we are currently. Some policies aren't perfect but that rule set is plain counter productive, i say we just delete it and move on. --Salubri (Talk)  22:44, August 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * If I'm right, that is something that comes with all new wikias as a basic guideline/advice to helping to set up the new wiki and leading it through the early days, outline how to edit in general, rather than being a binding policy. It would have been there since day one, but we have long since move on from that. We have no need of it. "Rule" 3 is most certainly not meant in the way that these people have been using it. The other "rules" (where useful) can be incorporated in the other policy documents if they have not already been, but the document as a whole can be scraped, imo. 23:05, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

Featured Votes (September)
Featured vote is a three way tie between Sōsuke Aizen, Hiyori Sarugaki & Kensei Muguruma. I vote for Kensei. 22:46, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

I too will vote for Kensei.--Salubri (Talk)  14:44, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

Kensei <font color="teal" size="2px">Arrancar109 <font color="teal" size="1px">(Talk)  15:52, September 2, 2010 (UTC)