Bleach Wiki talk:Policy & Standards Committee/Archive 1

Omakes

 * Omake pages — There are several different omakes in the anime (Shinigami Cup, etc) and several of them have their own pages. They are fairly short and are not really deserving of their own individual pages. I was thinking of merging them into a single page called Anime Omake Segments (or something to that effect). I think it would be much better that way. The committee would be charged with finding all these pages, merging them into one, coming up with a format for the page, bringing it up to date, etc, and it can be updated as you go along with the summary project. How to go about this: copy/paste the contents of each of the individual pages onto one page and mark the others for deletion using the template. Redirects may also have to be changed. They show up in the maintenance reports on the "Special pages" page (it is in the sidebar - I cannot link to it), but may not show up straight away. I'll take care of fixing them if you are unsure about how to do so. The pages that I am aware of are: Arrancar Encyclopedia, Shinigami Illustrated Picture Book, Kon-sama's Ultimate Shinigami Illustrated Guide, Quincy Encyclopedia and Substitute Shinigami Work Diary.

This is something that has been brought to my attention. My suggestion is to include a brief explanation about which Omake follows the episode below the Summary section. Yyp suggests combining all of the different Omake specials to one page called Anime Omake Segments(this way is easier, but less descriptive). Either way would be better then all of them having a different page. Minato 23:45, December 8, 2009 (UTC)

Just to add to that - I really don't think there is enough information on most of the pages linked above to justify them having their own individual pages. It would be better to combine them in one central location, rather than having them as tiny pages scattered around the place like they are now. I think those pages were intended to be just a basic overview of the omake segments (giving details of what the segments are like and listing what episodes they are found in), while a more detailed description of what happened in each omake would be placed on the episode pages, as is done in the early episodes and the most recent ones. If you want to go with that, or have a better idea for it, it is fine either way. -- Yyp  (Talk)  00:05, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

Actually after some thought, we could always do both. What do u think? Minato 00:24, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

Hm. This is a tough one. But I have to agree with Yyp; the specific articles do not even elaborate on each individual Omake segment. Those should be included in the article of the episode it was featured in, and one big article could be used to give concise descriptions of each Omake series, as well as the episodes that they appeared in. Mohrpheus 00:59, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

I like what u guys have said. On most of the episodes such as The Resolution to Kill only mention the featured character of the Omake. So thats all I am suggesting about the different Omakes being mentioned after the Ep Summary. Do we need any other Admins to agree with this? Minato 05:09, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

I think they should be included in each individual episode (since people do like to go look for those specifically, and it'd help people track down a specific omake they may be dying to see) and then have a separate article with a general overview of what the omakes are like. We could have the current pages redirect to that (in case someone would search for, say, Arrancar Encyclopedia), but I don't think those pages justify their own articles, because each of them on their own, they're kind of useless and lack information. But there's no point in detailing every Arrancar Encyclopedia segment (for example) in the article either. Twocents  (Talk)  02:08, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

That is what I was thinking exactly. I purpose a new page titled "Anime Omake Segments" and describe the different segments on that page. i.e "Arrancar Enclopedia" "Shinigami illustrated book" etc. The redirects to this page can be made in the Omake segment after each Episode which can be done after this page is setup and all of the current omake pages can be deleted after the information has been transferred over. Minato 02:19, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a plan! Twocents   (Talk)  02:21, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

Yyp suggested it, Twocents and Mohrpheus agree. We all seem to be in concurrence. I will make this page. Minato 03:35, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

OK guys got it up and running. Anime Omake Segments It is obviously lacking, but before I go any further I want to get the introductory paragraph more concise and more descriptive, but don't worry about the rest. I am going to add the different segments and give them their own sections on the page. Minato 06:42, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

It could also use a good pic at the top(other pics will be added for their sections). Maybe one of Kon seeing as how he is usually seen in the beginning of many of them. Minato 07:03, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

It has come to my attention that some of the omake segments, such as "Bleach on the Beach," are based on segments within the manga itself. In this case, does "omake" refer to the anime only, or the manga as well? If it applies to the manga as well, then we would have to further subcategorize the article, perhaps even change its name to "Omake Segments." Mohrpheus 17:43, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

I don't remember which chapter that was, but if u say it is then I believe u. Is "bleach on the Beach" the only one? Minato 17:56, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

22.5 KARAKURA SUPERHEROES was also originally an omake (though it might not count since it was adapted as a filler episode). However, several of the omakes are also manga exclusives. Several of the oneshot chapters, especially the "minus year" ones are referred to as omakes, like the Hitsugaya special. We need to decide what is and isn't an omake, or categorize them accordingly somehow. Mohrpheus 18:10, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I will rename the page. The manga takes precedence and could u provide some links(even ones to other websites)here on this talkpage so I can know more about them. If they were Omakes in the Manga then they r Omakes and will be added to the page once I rename it. Thanks Mohrpheus. If u want after I rename it u can start adding the information u have found. Minato 18:18, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

OK Mohrpheus. Its been renamed "Omake Segments". Minato 18:24, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

I know that many of the short chapters are given their own summaries in the volume pages, which is where I'd prefer to keep them, so that if someone wants to find those, they know the specifics of what volume it's included in, what other chapters are in the volume, etc. Plus, a lot of them have been made/included in with specific episodes.

Speaking of, I want to get rid of the Bleach On The Beach article. I think it should be merged with the appropriate volume (as all of the other omake chapters are included in with the related volume), with the pictures taken from the anime added to the anime episode article. Anyone have any problem with this before I do it? Twocents  (Talk)  01:01, December 12, 2009 (UTC)


 * Information added to Omake page. "Bleach on the Beach" marked for deletion. Minato  (Talk)  01:10, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay. Since you seem to be all for it as well, I moved the content to the appropriate articles, and the separate Bleach on the Beach article has been deleted. Twocents   (Talk)  01:24, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

Hrm. It'd appear that we have yet another problem. I looked over some of the descriptions for the chapters, and all of the "flashback chapters," such as -12.5, are identified as omake chapters. I said before that we have to define exactly what makes an omake; this has been confusing me for a while. They seem to range anywhere from canon material to humorous segments - but is this correct? Mohrpheus 02:25, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

According to the wiki entry on omake, omake means "bonus" or "extra." So anything that's not part of the main storyline (i.e. the main chapters, episodes) would be omake, regardless of whether it's a funny snippet at the end of the episode or an additional chapter not related to the current storyline. Twocents  (Talk)  02:35, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * Also. The Bleach Omakes fall into the Categories: Humerous first, Canon second. Mostly they seem to talk about what has been shown in the Chapter, Episode. So yes they r Canon. Minato  (Talk)  02:38, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

If I am not mistaken, Omake just means "extra" and as such the -12.5 chapters and such are Omakes because they were extra content included in the volumes and such. I think the problem is that "Omake" has a negative connotation in some circles as not-canon. But I don't think we really have to factor that into our discussion. I think that as long as something was "extra" on top of the regular chapters/volumes, then we can call it Omake and that doesn't make them any less canon. In addition, Omake's don't have to be humours, although they often are. I think it is perfectly valid to classify the flashback chapters as Omake's because they were extra content Kubo granted us to flesh out the world of Bleach more. At least, that's my opinion. Tinni 01:21, December 13, 2009 (UTC)

Committee Nominations
I have been taking a fairly hands off approach to the committee nominations and at first it seemed like the best thing to do. After Minato came on-board he actively went and recruited and since then Morpheus has come on board. But now request for nominations for the committee has somewhat exploded, as has requests for adminship and rollback rights. It seems everybody wants to be in a position to have an official say in how this wiki is run. Well I for one am not comfortable with the idea of putting forward to the admins every single nominee without comment. I mean, those of us in the committee to actually have to work with these people. Therefore, I suggest from now on those already in the committee can use the "oppose" template to oppose a nomination. Grounds for opposition,

1. They haven't contributed towards committee projects

2. They have caused trouble in the past

3. You have reason to believe that they will not perform their committee duties

4. They are too new

Not a reason for opposition,

1. You don't like them

I suggest that any nominee who has had one or more committee members oppose them be not be considered for membership at all and for others the admins take into account the opposing arguments when making their decision. This is just to put a filter at the committee level so that the admins don't waste their time debating a candidate completely unsuitable. Also, what do you guys say to opening a "6th seat" position? Tinni  (Talk)  04:03, December 27, 2009 (UTC)

Firstly, I like the idea of a Sixth Seat. Initially the Committee was supposed to support 8, but for now 5 is ok and more can be added at a later date, if they r needed and if Salubri says its ok to do so. I will go ahead and put my vote on all of the Committee nominations. Minato (Talk)  00:06, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

KiranTheBoi and Serial Sniper

 * -User:KiranTheBoi and User:SerialSniper14 . Reason, I have dealt with Kiran in the past. He is a nice guy and friendly. He is also on on a regular basis, but not as much as the others. Also, many, many of his edits have been undone(the majority of which was Trivia, considered Junk, that he added). He likes to add Trivia and every time he has added some it has been undone. As for Serial. I don't kno him at all. He just joined this month and still has a low edit-count. Yyp has mentioned to me that he has contributed to the referencing project. Still, if he continues he can be made a member, but at this stage, I don't kno. Minato  (Talk)  00:06, December 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * -User:KiranTheBoi. Reason, has multiple warnings. Violated multiple policies in the past. Does get a lot of edits reverted on a regular basis. Is making no effort to help with projects. Tinni   (Talk)  15:06, December 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * -User:SerialSniper14. Reason, he is making a determine effort to help with the referencing project and as such get's my support above anyone who is not helping with projects. However, he still probably does need more experience and some lessons on good and bad edit styles. So call it support with reservation Tinni   (Talk)  15:06, December 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * -User:SerialSniper14. Reason. After some thought and watching how he edits and his willingness to work with the projects. Despite his low-edit count and short time here, he displays remarkable skill and knowledge. I Support his promotion to the Committee. Minato  (Talk)  19:04, January 4, 2010 (UTC)

TomServo101, Ice Cerberus, and Animeluvr92

 * (Neutral)-User:TomServo101, User:GODKING OF ICE CERBERUS WERE-GARURUMON User:Animeluvr92-U guys might be surprised to see me Neutral about Tom. I was recommended to him, and really haven't worked with him as much as the others. Overall, Tom is attending school and isn't on as often as I would like. If a Sixth Seat or more Seats r added, I can easily be swayed and I think he would be good for 1 of those seats. As for Animeluvr, he doesn't have the edit-count or history to justify his position. He has presented a good reason behind this, but for his time here, he could have many more edits even if they r just minor. And Cerberus. Despite his edit-count I am leaning toward oppose. His user name and the comment about being an Admin on 20+ plus other wikis really throws me. I just don't kno what to think about him as he has never really associated with many people here. So much so, that he was not aware that User:Mili-Cien was inactive. Apparently he and Mili r friends(or so he thinks), as he left a message on Mili-Ciens page asking for him to be made an Admin. I told him Mili-Ciens inactive and referred him to the Committee and the Request for Adminship. So thats pretty much the scoop on him. A good editor, but in my mind hes too much like User:The Shadow Dragon and User:Steveo920, they like to do there own things. Minato  (Talk)  00:06, December 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * - I am happy to support User:TomServo101 based on his willingness to help with the anime project. Tinni   (Talk)  15:06, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

Gold3263301 and Nwang2011

 * -Gold is really the guy whom I feel is best suited for Fourth Seat. Pros: He has a large edit-count, good edit history, and is on more often then ANY other nomination. Cons: he can (at times) be alittle aggressive(tho not flat-out rude or disrespectful). Also, Gold is only 13 yrs old, so yes he is very young and due to his age, it is natural that he would be alittle confrontational. However, his age can also be a good-thing. He is mold-able. He is open to suggestions and other teachings. So his only con is his aggressive behavior, but that can be easily dealt with. And Nwang. I looked at his contributions and recently all of his edits have been directed to the projects. So yes I support him. I don't kno of any cons, aside from the slightly low edit-count and time-on questionnaire. Also, both of these users hate Junk-Trivia and Vandalism and have been very vigilante is undoing it without hesitation. Minato  (Talk)  00:06, December 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * -User:Nwang2011. Reason, he is making a determine effort to help with the referencing project and as such get's my support above anyone who is not helping with projects. Tinni   (Talk)  15:06, December 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * - User:Gold3263301. I haven't really talked to him on the wiki much, but I have seen several of his edits, which have often been quite beneficial to the wiki. He seems to be competent enough, and is obviously an advocate of good grammar and spelling, which is something that I can easily appreciate. I also offer my support for User:Nwang2011, for the same reasons as Tinni. Despite myself position in the Referencing Project, Nwang has gone out of his way to make large contributions to the project, something I have not been able to dedicate my time to as of late. Mohrpheus 17:13, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

Tinni's general comments
At this point in time there are three projects running. Of the people who are currently nominated only User:Nwang2011, User:SerialSniper14 and User:TomServo101 are helping with project. That to counts for more with me then prior edit counts or anything else. I am not going to actively oppose anyone aside from KiranTheBoi just because I he is the only one I feel is totally inappropriate for the committee but I am not supporting anyone who is not making an active effort to help with committee projects. It's a matter of commitment. Someone like User:Nwang2011 wanted to be in the committee enough to start helping out with projects. For User:SerialSniper14 and User:TomServo101 its a natural progressing since they are both already helping with projects as much as they can. That has to count for something. Tinni  (Talk)  15:06, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

Future projects
Anyone have any suggestions for future projects? Remembering that total overhuals are admin responsibility. Tinni  (Talk)  04:03, December 27, 2009 (UTC)

This is just a suggestion for a FUTURE project. The Overhaul project. Many more pages then I thought have been marked for an overhaul. Salubri is currently using the Referencing page to mark pages which need overhauls, so that will work for now. Minato (Talk)  00:06, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

I am not entirely certain what you mean by the Overhaul project. If it is a project that goes through the wiki to find articles in need of Overhaul well then that is acceptable. But the actual overhauling must be done by an admin because of the difficulty of the work involved. Whole sections have to be rewritten, speculative information removed, information referenced etc, etc. It's actually a very long tedius project that is best done while the page is protected. Currently Salibur is doing it with Nnoitra's page. As such, we can't do a project which overhauls pages. Tinni  (Talk)  11:04, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

I apologize. I completely forgot that overhauls have to be done by Admins. I hadn't done something stupid in awhile so I guess it was time for me to do it. Minato (Talk)  14:18, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

It's cool. :) No harm done. Tinni   (Talk)  14:29, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

We already have a Future Project Section on the Committee Page. I feel any further Discussion can be made there. Minato (Talk)  20:12, January 4, 2010 (UTC)

Committee Box
I have created a committee box for inclusion on the user pages of the committee members. It is not compulsory and is just something fun. I opted to use the picture of the lieutenants as the admin box uses the picture of the captains. However, I am happy to change both the picture and the colour of the box. The box also automatically puts the "rollback" category on your page and so can be used standalone without the need to include the rollback box. Let me know what you guys think. Tinni  (Talk)  15:39, December 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * PS. The commitee box can be added to your page by using .  Tinni   (Talk)  15:55, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

Girl thats awesome. :) I like both the pic and the color, but if u want to change the color u can. Minato  (Talk)  15:42, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

Nah! I like shades of purple. Besides, everybody should just be glad I didn't use a picture of Gin. :) Tinni   (Talk)  15:47, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

Archiving
Just to let you guys know your page maybe getting a little long so you might wanna close/resolve old discussions and archive them. Thanks. Salubri (Talk)  19:28, January 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * OK thanks. I'll do that later today. Minato  (Talk)  19:45, January 4, 2010 (UTC)

Alright Mohrpheus and Tinni, I have closed the above sections. Lieutenants of this Wikia are allowed to remove Closed Discussion banners, provided they have a good reason to re-open that discussion. If u two feel u wanted to talk more about something above, remove the banner and state ur opinion. I am about to Archive this page. Minato (Talk)  20:09, January 4, 2010 (UTC)

Committee Wannabe Box
User:SerialSniper14 has created a Template:CommitteeWannabe box and is using it on his page. I am not entirely sure how to react to this situation or even if I should react. Just thought I would bring it to everybodies notice that we now do have a template. Tinni  (Talk)  12:48, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Well, my take on this is that it is a box which users can use while awaiting promotion to the Committee. Right now Serial is the only one using it and I can't imagine the others wanting the Template. Ergo, if or when Serial is promoted to the Committee he will more the likely get rid of that Template and pretty soon now we will have the Committee full. So I move for that Templates Deletion after the Decision on the Current Four, User:TomServo101, User:SerialSniper14, User:Gold3263301 and User:Nwang2011. Also, about the Templates, i.e the on u have created for our Archive box. Do u just create those every time the occasion calls, or do u have a stock of them I haven't gotten around to seeing yet? I also have one other quick question. Should I contact Kiran about the disapproval of his promotion? Minato (Talk)  12:58, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

I agree we can delete the template once we reach the final decision on everybody. As for the talk archive box, I made one for myself the other day since the default one was kind of bland and used one of the pictures I uploaded for the All Colour But The Black article. Since the committee archive was looking kind of bland, I took the layout I made for my own talk page and just replaced the colour, the picture and of course the link. As for KiranTheBoi, yes I think it is best coming from you and not me. Just because KiranTheBoi and I have had issues in the past and coming from me it might look personal. Anyway, I'll contact the admins about a speed-up of a decision regarding User:TomServo101, User:SerialSniper14, User:Gold3263301 and User:Nwang2011. My current inclination is to ask for immediate seating of User:TomServo101, User:SerialSniper14 and User:Nwang2011. With request that a 7th seat be opened up for User:Gold3263301 once and if, User:Gold3263301 completes his initiation. I feel this is a just reflection of the efforts the other three have made towards committee projects and that User:Gold3263301 has not yet done. However, that being said, I see from interaction between User:Gold3263301 and you, Minato, that he is serious about completing his initiation. Given User:Gold3263301's higher edit count. I am also happy to hold the 4th seat in reserve for him and request a 7th seat be opened for User:SerialSniper14. Anyway, I'll bring it all up with the admins and see how things go. Tinni  (Talk)  13:14, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Anime Update
Just providing a brief update for the Anime Summary Project. I'm nearly finished reformatting the Agent of the Shinigami arc, including turning character lists in bullets into numerical order, as well as adding lists that don't even exist yet that have been deemed as complete (obviously not), and correcting general errors and adding links. I've finished correcting and formatting the summaries for the both of the Soul Society arcs, nearly 2 weeks ahead of schedule. I've also just added the Bount arc to the Current Arc list, so that will hopefully be underway soon and (despite the monotony of the Bount arc) will be finished by the end of February.

Also, would anyone be against me archiving the complete lists of the completed episodes by arc? For example, there would be an archive button, which links to the entire list of episodes in that arc, as well as a section for comments per that arc. The main purpose of this would be to provide a bullet-list of every episode that we as the Anime Summary Project have completed based on those guidelines that the project has set forth. And then with the list, we would have a list of user comments for people to bring up discussion about that arc and possible/suggested changes that could be made. The advantage of this is that we would have a definite list of every episode that we have ever made, versus simply looking at the Episodes list, which has no connection to the project.

Sorry if that sounded wordy, but basically what I would like to do is archive every episode (by arc) that the project completes for our records, and then designate a section in every archive that suggests changes and allows for non-members to have input in the summaries.

If you like, I can create a sample archive so you can see what I'm trying to accomplish. SerialSniper14 (Talk)  07:18, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

Great job! I don't see any problem with going the archive route. Whatever you think works best for the project. Tinni  (Talk)  07:39, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, then I'll work on implementing that in the near future, and when Minato returns I suppose he will have the final say. SerialSniper14 (Talk)  07:46, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

Archiving sounds like a good idea; you have my support. TomServo101 11:05, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

Synposis -> plot
It's been decided that in the case of the major character articles the word "synopsis" no longer applies dues to the volume of detail on the page. So the section is to be renamed "plot". So when you find yourself editing a major article, please also take the time to change the section title from synopsis -> plot. Thanks! Tinni  (Talk)  04:33, February 16, 2010 (UTC)

Committee Nomination (Weedefinition)
User Weedefinition has nominated himself for a spot on the Committee. He has pointed out that he has over 1000 edits, has written or helped write many Anime Summaries, as well as a few Fight summaries. He admits to typos and other errors, but all-in-all seems he just want to be of some help. Supermagnum alerted me to Tinni's msg on my page asking me to vote, so I created this section so the Committee members can vote here on whether or not we think he should pass. To the Committee, plz voice what u think, "Support", "Neutral" or "Oppose".

I have no objections. TomServo101 (Talk)  17:44, July 2, 2010 (UTC)

I can support this, but I am reserving judgment until Tinni votes and I will explain why. I took a quick look at his recent contributions, since I haven't been around much. I have known Weede for quite sometime now. He has been around for awhile and I imagine he is up-to-date with the Policies. He is on frequently, consistently(much more so then myself), and doesn't spend all of his time on the Forums or Blogs.

However, I am aware that he and our Cappy, Tinni has had some disputes over some issues. They do seem to be on better terms now, so if Tinni votes either "Support" or Neutral, I will vote support, but if she "Opposes" this I will also oppose it, mainly because I don't want the Committee to have any problems getting along.

I don't mean to bring up any old issues which should best be forgotten, and if they have been forgotten I apologize. Its just I felt I should say something about it since I do remember it. Minato (Talk)  19:35, July 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well personal dislike is not grounds for opposition but even if it was, I wouldn't oppose Weedefinition on those grounds. I am mostly neutral on Weedefinition. I mean, he does contribute a great deal to committee projects but he is applying for membership mostly for the rollback. I am a bit iffy about why he wants rollback given that he does far less vandalism reversal and edit undos then most people. I read his original request for rollback and it seemed to be it was prompted by a spade of vandalisms that were happening at the time. Since then I don't recall seeing a lot of "Undo revision XXXXX by Weedefinition" all that much. My original issues with Weedefinition were his tendency to bring-up discussion topics in the talk pages that were strictly time-wasters, which can be an issue as a member of the committee he would be charged with answering and closing discussions, not something he's all that skilled in. But his solid contribution to committee project does out-weight a lot of these concerns. So really I don't think there is much grounds on which Weedefinition can be opposed. Tinni   (Talk)  03:09, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Huh. So Weedefinition has nominated himself to be on the committee, hmm? Well, there is no doubt that he (as Minato pointed out) is "on frequently, consistently (much more so then myself), and doesn't spend all of his time on the Forums or Blogs" in addition to seemingly to have knowledge of policies and such. Of course, the contributions must also be considered (which are fairly solid). If his membership request really is simply for having rollback rights, I am neutral on that front. I have not had much interaction with him, aside from one minor "dispute" in regards to my edits on the Tōshirō Hitsugaya vs. Luppi page. But he did give an apology for his comments, saying that he was "more seeking an explanation for them." Honestly, I am sort-of between support & neutral so I will be neutral for now. I do admit that from what I can gather, there is not much for Weedefinition's request to be opposed.- Mr. N 03:48, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

While Weedefinition may occasionally cause minor problems on the talk pages, or not really undo much vandalism, I feel that this is far outweighed by the good that has already been mentioned (helping out with committee projects, following the rules, being on frequently, etc.). This is enough reason for me to give a support. TheDevilHand888 05:30, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Even as member of the committee, I feel that WD has contributed more to this wiki than I have, in more ways than just edit count. I have never witnessed any bad conduct from him, and even his questionable comments on talk pages are made with constructive intent. As far as rollback rights being his intent for wanting to join, his contributions thus far suggest that he would only use such that power to benefit the wiki. Mohrpheus 03:14, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

I think the consensus is that given Weedefinition's contribution to committee projects, he should be given a seat in the committee, even if we do have some reservations about him. Since that is the case, I have forwarded him to the admins and assuming none of them have any objects to Weedefinition, he'll join us shortly. Tinni  (Talk)  04:15, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

Resignation
Hey guys I am going to resign from the Committee as soon as someone else from it is chosen to take my place. The Admins have the final say, but they would most likely pick my replacement depending on all of ur answers. Its a bit sudden, and I'm srry for doing this, but I just can't commit the time here that is needed. So please discuss which 1 of u think the best person is to take my spot. Of course Tinni will more then likely be the best judge on who she thinks is the best person for the job, and obviously Morpheus is next inline for my spot. U can vote for another member or ur self. Again, I'm srry but I just can't commit right now. Minato (Talk)  15:58, July 23, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to lose you. I can understand life getting hectic. I hope you'll be able to pop-in from time to time and see how we are going. Have fun and good luck with your studies. Tinni  (Talk)  03:05, July 24, 2010 (UTC)

Awww...Sorry to hear this. But that is how life is. I may not have had as much interaction with you as Tinni and others did...but as Tinni said: "I hope you'll be able to pop-in from time to time and see how we are going. Have fun and good luck with your studies."- Mr. N 18:35, July 24, 2010 (UTC)

Selection of new Fukutaicho & New Committee Member
Well I am open to suggestions. Tinni  (Talk)  03:05, July 24, 2010 (UTC)

As said by Minato, being the 3rd seat supposedly makes me next in line for the position. However, I don't feel that I have contributed enough to the Wiki to take on the responsibility of the position. I have admittedly neglected the Article Improvement Project in part to college preparation, though I have done a bit more work on it recently. Minato himself recently suggested that DevilHand is qualified to take up the Article Improvement project - would he be qualiifed for the fukutaicho position as well? His participation in the committee's numerous projects has been more expansive than my own. Mohrpheus (talk) 03:26, July 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * There seems to be some sort of confusion here. The Fukutaicho position is not linked to any particular project. Minato believes that TheDevilHand888 is the best person to take over the leadership of the Bleach Wiki:Anime Summary Project. I agree and that is why it was offered to him. However, TheDevilHand888 is yet to take up the offer of the leadership of the Bleach Wiki:Anime Summary Project. Let alone shown any interest in the Fukutaicho position. So its a little premature to be talking about that. However, as you (Mohrpheus) feel that you have not contributed enough to be comfortable with the position of Fukutaicho, I am happy to throw the position open for nominations and voting. Personally, both TheDevilHand888 and Mr. N are qualified for the position having contributed to multiple projects diligently and over a considerable period of time. But we have to now wait and here from those two before we discuss anything further. Tinni   (Talk)  07:19, July 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry if I was a bit unclear with my statement. I made a typo in reference to Minato's comment about DevilHand; I meant to mention the Anime Summary Project, not the Article Improvement Project. I'm aware that there's no link between the ranks and the positions; as you said, what I meant is that since I haven't been contributing much to the Article Improvement Project as much I wanted to, I wouldn't be able to handle the additional responsibility of being fukutaicho. I plan to be more active in that respect. I suggested the possibility of DevilHand taking the position instead because asides from him being more qualified, Minato trusts him enough to take on leadership of the Anime Summary Project (even now, I'm having trouble putting that thought into words without it sounding weird to me...). Like you said however, nobody has nomitated themselves yet. Again, sorry for the misunderstanding. Mohrpheus (talk) 08:00, July 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the clarification. As I said, we need to hear from both TheDevilHand888 and Mr. N before we can discuss anything further. Tinni   (Talk)  08:08, July 24, 2010 (UTC)

I'll agree with that; Mr N is next in line, so logically he'll be considered (I'd have him as favourite atm). As for Devil, I know he hasn't been part of the commitee that long, but he has plenty of edits, and has his hand in pretty much all the projects. Tinni said to me that as Fukataicho, Minato normally took care of recruitment and such; while I've not seen either's people skills first hand, I don't think that'll be too much of a problem; I suppose we could delegate that responsibility to everyone if needed.

Now, something I'd like to raise; who (if anyone) will take the place of the new leiutenant on the commitee. If we decide to do so, I propose Lia; it'd give us someone in translation corner on the board. TomServo101 (Talk)  11:00, July 24, 2010 (UTC)

Hey everyone sorry for taking so long to answer. In regards to the Anime Summary Project, I'll accept the position of leading over it, as long as nobody has any objections to this. However, in regards to the fukutaicho position, I think Mr. N would be better for it than me, mainly because he has been on the committee for much longer, and I simply have no desire of taking the position, at least not at this time. TheDevilHand888 (talk) 17:07, July 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for taking over the anime summary project. I'll leave that project in your capable hands. I also agree with you regarding Mr. N, he is the best person for the job. Not only has he been a member of the committee longer, he's also been the leader of the Fight Summary Project. Let us now wait and see what Mr. N has to say on the matter. Tinni   (Talk)  17:27, July 24, 2010 (UTC)

Hey. Sorry I didn't see this sooner. Being the new guy I'm not as familiar with everyone, but from what I do know about Mr. N he'll make a very good choice. WD  Talk to me  17:39, July 24, 2010 (UTC)

Hoo boy! My goodness, a lot of things have transpired in a short period of time. I do apologize for being a little "slow." Okay. So...I am going to try to confirm some things in regards to the Fukutaicho position. It looks to me that the Fukutaicho was in charge of recruitment and addressing issues of following committee and wiki policies (and also the Anime Summary Project at least in Minato's case) and possibly other responsibilities (which may need pointing out). The Anime Summary Project looks to be fine, seeing as TheDevilHand888 will take over. NOW I had initially thought that Mohrpheus would be better suited as he has been a member longer or TheDevilHand888 due to being a little more active on the site than I am. However, they have both expressed opinions that there are better qualified members. I am also going to assume that the Fukutaicho should be someone who is on the Committee. Being Fukutaicho had not crossed my mind before, but I would not mind taking up Fukutaicho'''. HOWEVER my main concern is whether I will be able to properly manage it. I am going to be starting my 1st year of college in about a month and many of you probably know that the university level classes can be...time-consuming. '''Therefore, I am not 100% certain on taking the position (but it is possible). Phew. In addition, if I am readingTomServo101' s comments correctly then he is suggesting that Lia Schiffer be considered as replacment member for whoever goes to Fukutaicho? If so, then I agree with that statement. Lia Schiffer may also be someone that we might consider for Fukutaicho (if we are open to currently non-committee members )- Mr. N 18:35, July 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * Let me to drop in from my week long inactivity to settle this. You don't have to worry too much about the exact responsibility of the Fukutaichio position. As things stand now, the fukutaichio will not have too much addition responsibility. You would chiefly do what you do now, contribute to the fight summary project, article improvement project etc, etc. Only time you would really have extra things to do is if I am not around and something happens with the committee. I.e. a project is finished, a member leaves/we get a new member. If I am not around, you would be basically the most senior member of the committee and would have to close the project, add/remove the new member, inform the admins etc, etc. The only other things that Minato used to do that I would like you to do as well is closing discussion topics on talk pages that are resolved/doesn't need any more discussion/too old. Technically, all committee members do have that power but I guess Minato felt more comfortable doing it because of his position. So really, at this point, the only addition responsibility would be helping monitor talkpages. If you are happy with that, let's finalise this and once it is finalised - TheDevilHand888 will leap-up to 4th seat, [User:Weedefinition| WD ]] will move-up to 7th seat and yes, I will be offering the then vacant 8th seat to Lia Schiffer. Hope that clears everything-up! Tinni   (Talk)  01:47, July 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * Not that it's totally relevant, but I actually had no idea that any member of the committee was allowed to exercise those... "powers," I'll call them. The Committee page gives a small list of responsibilities, being the things that are expected of us. However, now that I think about it, nothing specifically states exactly what capabilities or "powers" we have, such as being able to close discussions as you said. It also doesn't differentiate on the authority the taichou and fukutaichou have with that of the other members. Or at the very least, I neglected to ask anybody about it. Back on topic, it would be great if Nwang could take the job. Ironically, he seems to be the only one on the committee that is interested in taking up the position, but he would be well suited for it. Mohrpheus (talk) 02:59, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

Normally I try not to intercede in your procedures but if I might bring up a point/suggestion. Whomever is placed as second should be active in considerable edits. Tinni herself is very active in that regard and it goes without saying that any committee member by dent of being on the committee is expected to be active along those lines as well. I understand full well that not everyone can dedicate as much time to the site as some others but If not everyday at least someone who is prevalent on the site at least every other day should be in the second position. Also if it will help clear things up I will further specify in detail the powers of the committee members in general and the specific powers of the 1st and 2nd on the committee. So that at the very least people can be sure of what they can do. Salubri (Talk)  03:17, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

Invitation sent. TomServo101 (Talk)  10:18, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

Hey everyone. I kno I am not a member of the Committee anymore, and I am hoping I am not overstepping my boundaries by posting this here, but I felt this needed to be said, in regards to closing "Discussions" on "talk pages"; this might help clarify any questions Mr. N or any of u members might have to this regard. Firstly The Admins initially created this template inorder to have some sibilance of control on talkpages, as some of them would rage out of control, and just go on and on, and ON! Further more, people would just add something to a comment weeks, sometimes months latr bringing something up that had been settled. I decided to use this on pages where it was obvious that discussions were settled, and I almost never closed a discussion unless an Admin had commented on it. The Admins seemed happy with the help and the fact that I wasn't abusing my power in this regard and Yyp modified the Discussion Policy back in late April, please read it if u haven't, which u should already have (wags finger). I don't expect u to kno all of the Policies word-for-word, but the Discussion Policy is rather short, so u all should kno about that. Again, I am srry if I am out of line here, but if anyone has any questions, mainly u Mr. N, since it seems like u will become Fukutaicho, please just ask, and I'll try and respond asap. Minato (Talk)  01:24, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I was made aware by TomServo that I'm beeing considered to become member of the Committee due to Minato's recent resignation, which I was indeed aware of (I do have a habit of checking the Committee's activities whenever there are these kind of major changes) and I have been reading the whole discussion here throughout the past few days. I would be honored and very happy to be part of the Committee, I've always tried my best to contribute to this wiki as much as I can, though I haven't contributed to the Anime Summary Project or the Fight Summary Project because I'm no big writing summaries, but I've always wanted to be more active in the Article Improvement Project and I always keep an eye on edits for vandalism, risky articles and that stuff. And well, I don't think I have a real saying in it, but I do think Mr. N should be moved up to Fukutaicho because I think he's better suited for the position and has been on the committee longer. And thanks again for considering me. Lia Schiffer  (Talk)  06:32, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

So I dropped in to check how things are going around here. Seems like the only thing we have to do is wait for Mr. N to formally accept the fukutaichio position and then we can move ahead with resuffling the seats and putting Lia Schiffer  forward to the admins as a new committee member. Good, good, things seem to be going smoothly so far. Tinni  (Talk)  09:27, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

Okay. First off, I am glad that there have been additional clairifcations to the Fukutaicho position (by Salubri, Minato , Tinni  etc.) I am very thankful for that and it has made it easier in my considerations. I should also clarify something about my "interest" in the position (as Mohrpheus worded). Here is what I was thinking: Truthfully, I initially did not have interest in being Fukutaicho but because NO ONE ELSE seems to want to take it up, I felt that I should be open to being Fukutaicho simply to keep the Committee running (relatively) smoothly. And I cannot deny that sometimes my activity on the site does fluctuate a bit. Normally I try to be on at least once a week (if not every other day) so if my activeness on the site becomes insufficient for being Fukutaicho, please do not hesitate to demote me. Hmm. Well, I suppose that I will take up the position (for the time being anyway). Please don't mistake my intentions. It is not that I NEVER want to be Fukutaicho so I can avoid extra responsibilities but I just don't want to cause various functions of the site to degrade because of my inabilities to fully fulfill the position's responsibilities. Also, I want all Committee members to be aware if you do desire to be Fukutaicho at some point (TheDevilHand888 being the only one so far that might want to be Fukutaicho in the future), please DO bring it up. You just might be able to do the job as effectively if not better than me. - Mr. N 19:50, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

Seems like we've no objections on either front. I'm happy with how things look. TomServo101 (Talk)  20:22, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

It seems I must also apologize for my absence, indeed, many things have transpired in a short amount of time. Reading through this has been mind-numbing, but everything seems perfectly sound. If Lia agrees to join the committee she certainly has my support. In working with Nwang in the past I feel that he is well qualified for the position of Fukutaicho and will do a fine job. And finally I'm glad to see that TheDevilHand888 has taken up the reigns of the Anime Summary Project in my absence and Minato's resignation; I would support him also if he wishes to take up the reigns of Fukutaicho. I'm glad to see things are still running smoothly here and I soon hope to be around more often. SerialSniper14 (Talk)  00:53, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

Great! Everything seems to be settled. I'll finalise the details and forward Lia on to the admins. Then I'll be disappearing for a week. But with this mattle settled, everything should be running smoothly. Tinni  (Talk)  01:13, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

Proposal for procedure to remove members and the captain (me)
We will soon be getting a few new members and so it is about time we start to think about how and under what circumstance people can be kicked out of the committee. That of course includes myself. So here goes,

Removal of seated member
Conditions under which an involuntary (people can always resign) removal would be considered,
 * In-active for three months or more.
 * Repeated abuse of rollback privileges
 * Non-performance/non-communication with the committee - this is different from being in-active. They might still be active in the wiki but if they suddenly stopped talking to the committee and responding to messages or looking after projects to which they are assigned, then its problem
 * Repeated violation of Bleach wiki policies - remember, most people were let into the committee because they didn't have violations to their name

How to remove,
 * The removal request be brought up on the committee page (that's the committee page's discussion section NOT this talk page) by one member and second by another.
 * Depending on the severity of the situation the captain (me) might choose to put the matter straight to the admins for them to vote for revoking roll-back rights and dropping the member from the committee or, if I am unsure I can open up a vote on the matter and provided the majority of the committee members want the person evicted, I will pass it along to the admins with the recommendation that they be dropped.

Removal of the captain
Only thing different here is that the period of in-activity is three months, instead of six. Basically, the captain is suppose to keep the thing running. If the captain is not here... the absence should be more notable then the absence of a seated officer. So. Three months of inactivity and the captain get's dropped down to a seated officer. Three months more of inactivity and the person get's dropped from the committee entirely.

As for how to remove, all members have to agree on the removal of the captain AND, this is very important, agree that the vice-captain should take over as the new captain. If the Vice-captain doesn't want to, then another committee member has to be picked. Then the admins are to be contacted to ask for the removal of the captain and the seating of the new captain. The admins will of course have the final say.

So these are my suggestions. What do you guys think. Tinni  (Talk)  13:52, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Procedure Discussions

 * I agree with the Seated Officer section completely. I am guessing as Vice-Captain the same rules apply for me as with u, right? Eitherway it doesn't matter to me. There is one thing I think might need be added. If u were to be promoted to a Captain(Sysop). While Bleach Wikia is not looking for any Admins u would be the first they would pick. So a third Section should be added saying:


 * "Another way of removal of the Captain would be thru Promotion. If the Captain is promoted to Adminship, then the Vice-Captain should take-over. If the Vice-Captain is not willing then another member has to be picked."


 * I also think that(I kno I am the Vice-Captain and I would take-over if the situation calls for it)if the Vice is unwilling to become Cap, then the Admins should be the ones to decide(on both the removal, via In-active and promotion). These r just my suggestions Minato  (Talk)  14:11, January 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * I forgot to add one thing. If the Vice is unwilling to take command, then it should be decided that he be moved to a Seated Position and the Admins should pick two users to replace the Cap and Vice. Minato  (Talk)  14:28, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Good suggestions. Good suggestions. There is no hurry in deciding any of this. Well codify the policies in due time. For now, let's just leave these suggestions here for discussion, modification etc. We are in no hurry. Tinni  (Talk)  14:38, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Everything seems fair enough. From the looks of things, there won't be a new admin any time soon, though a few of them do seem to be currently inactive. Obviously, Tinni would be the next in line for adminship if that time comes, if they have officially adopted the policy of using Committee members as admin candidates. At any rate, I hope that the current projects are completed before then. Mohrpheus 17:34, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

I am not too concerned about committee members (including myself) leaving the committee by becoming admins, simply because that's a form of voluntary removal. If a member leaves voluntarily, then it is simply a matter of declaring lowest seat vacant and asking for nomination and again putting the nominations up for vote amongst us and the admin and giving the seat to whoever wins the most approval and moving everybody else up one. Same deal if the captain resigns, the vice-captain automatically takes over - 3rd seat becomes new vice-captain, 4th seat becomes new 3rd seat etc, etc and then the lowest seat gets declared vacant. Only time there will be an issue if someone doesn't want to move up. There might be good reasons for this, they don't have the time for the increased responsibility or is happy where they are. If that happens, it is probably best to discuss each individual circumstances amongst ourselves and the admins and act accordingly. Tinni  (Talk)  01:11, January 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * I was reading over some of this and feel I should clarify on my suggestions, or atleast one part. When I said: "I also think that(I kno I am the Vice-Captain and I would take-over if the situation calls for it)if the Vice is unwilling to become Cap, then the Admins should be the ones to decide(on both the removal, via In-active and promotion)." To be more specific, I only think the Admins should get involved if the Vice is unwilling to accept the promotion and that the Admins should pick two other members from the Committee. One for the Cap and one for the Vice.


 * Also I disagree with Tinni's statement above, or a certain part of it. I do not like the idea of an Admin being on the Committee. If one of the Committee was to become an Admin they must first, or right after, resign from the Committee and another user should be chosen to fill that persons role, or we could wait for someone to nominate themselves. Either way. Reason: Having and Admin on the Committee goes against y the Committee was formed, i.e to free up the Admins so they can focus on other things. Having an Admin on the Committee would be like having Ikkaku and Yumichika attend a Captains meeting, its unethical. Minato  (Talk)  00:30, January 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry Minato, I think you misunderstood what I meant. I mean, no one can force a person to become an admin. So if one of the members of the committee is offered a role as an admin, it is still their choice as to whether they accept and leave the committee or decline because they don't want the increased responsibility that goes with being an admin. I didn't mean that they can be an admin AND stay on the committee. That's crazy talk! So in essence becoming an admin is same as resigning, where the resignation is automatic upon accepting the adminship. Tinni   (Talk)  01:12, January 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah. My bad. Srry bout that. Minato  (Talk)  01:18, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

Well, this has been sitting here for awhile. I agree, Tinni u agree, and Mohrpheus agrees. I'm sure the others have read it and agree as well. Yyp brought it up on the Admin talkpage and the Admins haven't objected or anything, so I think they trust us and r letting us run our show. I think its time we made it official. So Tinni do u think we should make it its own page or try and fit it in on the Committee page? Minato (Talk)  00:39, April 23, 2010 (UTC)

Hmm.... we never did formalise this. I will formalise it now but I think if recent events have established anything, its that six months is too long. I am reducing the period of inactivity to three months. Tinni  (Talk)  09:34, October 1, 2010 (UTC)

Contribution Boxes
Just letting you all know that I have made a set of contribution boxes for each of our projects. Members of the committee, admins and any use who assists with the projects may choose to use the box on their users pages. Just a bit of fun and a extra bit of user page decoration for helping with the projects. Anyway, the boxes are below. The control of the boxes are with individual projects. Tinni  (Talk)  06:41, January 26, 2010 (UTC)

Isshin Kurosaki
Hopefully I got the right page this time...anyway, I'm here to note that, according to the speculation policy, for "irreconcilable conflicts in opinion between two possible interpretations from an image in the manga...in-universe sections should make general statements that give no preference to the disputed options." For Isshin Kurosaki's "FU Attack" (the one where he flicks his finger, I'm not sure if there's an unofficial name for it around here), there is a Strength vs. Kido debate. Since choosing one of these sides is speculation, according to the policy, it logically follows that the Powers & Abilities section of the Isshin Kurosaki article is speculating, & therefore should be edited to something that categorizes the attack as neither strength nor Kido.Neo Bahamut (talk) 12:05, August 5, 2010 (UTC)

Well I am personally not getting into this debate. I make a policy of not getting into arguments where I can't cite references and/or policy to back my position up. In this case, I didn't even stop to think about Isshin's finger flick. So I am staying out of it. But I do encourage other members of the committee to voice their opinions and positions on this issue if they so feel inclined. Tinni  (Talk)  12:41, August 5, 2010 (UTC)

Ichigo Kurosaki page
Ok the committee needs to pay special attention to Ichigo's page for the next couple of weeks as it is becoming apparent that people are impatient and dont recognize we can't list what we dont fully understand. Just recently i had to revert an edit someone made and no one had undo that basically had Ichigo with a new bankai in addition to the information already there. I mean it literally had all the chapter description and powers under the heading new bankai. I would figure that we have been at this enough not to allow, excuse me for being harsh, amateur and ridiculous edits like these. I think we have done alot to make this site the most informative and innovative sites out of all the wiki's. Last i checked we were third ranked out of all Anime wikis after yu-gi-oh and narutopedia and having seen them its largely do the amount of content they have. The basic concept here until its explained its gonna be hard to correctly state whats going on here, as usual with ichigo's powers. We will give the community the correct information but lets not jump to conclusions with statements like new bankai and be careful with the information put down until ichigo actually explains which is more the likely to do in the next few chapters. Thank you. --Salubri (Talk)  17:03, September 3, 2010 (UTC)

Redirects
According to <font color="black" face="Verdana">God, someone from the committee told him that redirects were not acceptable. I don't know who would spread such nonsense but it stops now. Editors are free to use redirects and have always been free to use redirects. Gin is perfectly acceptable. You don't have to use Gin. Editors have enough to do without being burdened by being forced to use the | thing when there is a perfectly good redirect available. Have I made myself clear? Good! Tinni  (Talk)  04:20, September 14, 2010 (UTC)

Past Nominations
Ok folks, here's the deal, as we currently have seven members and therefore are no longer "capped". The committee was always designed to have a maximum of eight members. Back when we did have eight members, we had a couple of people nominate themselves for the committee. Now that we aren't capped, I am putting their original nomination statement here. As always, use the and  templates and state your reasons clearly. Tinni  (Talk)  04:24, September 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * I would like to be nominated, especially to edit the Bount's plots. They are too short, and if another person does a bad edit, I will be the one to correct it from the Bount plots. --Morgan silve (talk) 16:02, August 7, 2010 (UTC)Morgan Silve

Morgan Silve is trying very hard to contribute meaningfully to the wiki but he isn't there yet. Most of his edits are still undone by admins and committee members and he still has a lot to learn. Perhaps in the future he would be a worthy candidate for the committee. Tinni  (Talk)  04:24, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

Like Tinni said, Morgan tries very hard but she does not do a good job of it. Most of what she says is hard to read, she does not reference what she writes either. She really only wants to be on the committee because her edits of the bount pages are constantly undone due to a breach of the manual of style. She believes being on the committee will give her some kind of immunity from getting her edits reverted which is not the case. So I have to oppose her.--<font color="black" face="Verdana">God <font color="black" face="Verdana">(Pray)  04:38, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

Nothing new to add. I see Morgan try and try day after day but she never references, her writing is incredibly hard to understand due to her grammar and spelling mistakes, and she seems to have a problem understanding the general policies of the site when editing, so all her edits end up getting undone. -- Lia Schiffer  (Talk)  06:52, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

While she is definitely trying to make the wiki better, I'm still going to have to agree with the others. She continually forgets to add references despite being told many times that she has to add them, and she tends to make many grammar errors as well. Maybe in the future I'll change my vote, but for now until she shows a better understanding of the policies, I'm going to have to say no. TheDevilHand888 (talk) 19:50, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

A little late, but there is little else to add. Morgan clearly has a desire to contribute to the Wiki, but still makes several mistakes, which indicated that she is not very familiar with the manual of style, which is one of the very purposes of the committee. In time she may better herself in these respects, but for the time being, I have to say no. Mohrpheus (talk) 23:06, September 18, 2010 (UTC)

When a name sticks out to you as the name responsible for half your undoings and repair jobs, it does not build my confidence that Morgan Silve could be a contributing committee member. When she has familiarized herself with our manual of style and other policies she seems to be completely oblivious to, then there will be room to consider her nomination, not now. WD  Talk to me  20:53, September 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * I too would like to nominate myself for this Committee. I'm trying to get even more involved with the wiki and help out wherever I can, in the hopes of one day becoming an admin here. I am also familiar with the rollback power, as I have adminship as well as rollback powers on several other wikis. ~ Ten Tailed Fox (My User Page) 04:40, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Again, Ten Tailed Fox is making a sincere effort but his edit history is not extensive enough to warrant and inclusion on the committee. Perhaps in the future he will be a worthy candidate but not right now. Tinni  (Talk)  04:24, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

Ten Tailed Fox is promising. He seems to really want to get involved but he is not all that active. Most of his time is spent over on the Fan Fiction wiki. For right now I have to oppose but if he becomes a serious editor around here, I feel he could make a good candidate--<font color="black" face="Verdana">God <font color="black" face="Verdana">(Pray)  04:38, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

I think Ten Tailed Fox could be promising in the future but his edit count is too low and he's very inactive. When he nominated himself he was all over the page, he did a pretty good work in Yumichika's article, and then disappeared. If he became more active and had some more experience on how the wiki works I think he could be a good candidate, but for now, I'll have to Oppose. -- Lia Schiffer  (Talk)  06:52, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

Ten Tailed Fox would definitely be someone I'd consider for the committee, but like what everyone else has said he is constantly inactive and he needs to have a higher edit count. So until that changes, I'm going to have to oppose. TheDevilHand888 (talk) 19:50, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

Again, there is little to add. Once Ten Tailed Fox's edit history is more extensive and diverse, he could potentially qualify for a position. For the time being, he should just focus on contributing more. However, he is definitely somebody we should keep an eye on in the future. Mohrpheus (talk) 23:06, September 18, 2010 (UTC)

I have no opinion in this matter. I have had very little contact with Ten Tailed Fox, but my impression was that he does know his way around a wiki editor. Still, committee membership requires someone with a longer contributions list. WD  Talk to me  20:53, September 25, 2010 (UTC)