Hi RRabbit, haven't spoken to you in a while. Hope all's well. :)
I got bored the other day and decided to play around a bit in Photoshop, and I ended up making a new wordmark for this wiki (crafted from DreamWorks' new logo). You're free to use or not use it, but hopefully it helps in sprucing up this place a bit - had a little bit of concern after cleaning up the front page some.
I made two versions: one light (for use on the dark-colored header) and one dark (for use in other places with lighter-colored backgrounds).
Also, I'd like to ask if you'd be interested in affiliating? Not sure if you're currently managing that on here, but I did notice there's an Affiliates section on the main page. The KFP Wiki affiliation info is located here if you're interested; it'd be a good opportunity to show off the new wordmark if you decide to use it. ;)
This user has been repeatedly warned to stop adding false information to articles, such as this one. They keep saying that Mr. Tweedy became good at the end which is blatant rubbish. He never became good. He became neutral. Since we have no way of knowing whether he ever "did" become good, we can't add that to the page. I tried to explain this to that user but they were unable to heed what I said, as they have continued to add that information, even after I told them it was wrong.
For some reason, Nerfmaster8 thinks I'm DiegoSmilodon when I was simply helping him out with his issue. He asked me to start the demotion vote which Nerfmaster8 tries to inflience and hinder it illegally by accusing and eventually blocking me and every newly joined member before he would have checked their IP.
I think this is unacceptable behavior from and admin and apart from him still threatening DiegoSmilodon, he's trying to arbitrarily entrenching his status of being an Admin, using several illegitimate tools against him. Par exalmpe: Diego told me he just got blocked again but this time Nerfmaster8 put it permanently on him which I can't consider elsehow but a revenge from Nerfmaster. I don't think Diego's recent responds on Davidjimnez's post, was showed any sign of concept about providing rude behavior. However I noticed how Davidjimnez responded with a visibly rude manner, taunting, calling names, even blaming the Wikia Staff on the demotion vote thread about not being "Supportive enough" with an inappropriate manner. Yet Nerfmaster rather gives credit to him, turning a blind eye over Davidjimnez's extremely rude and threatening manner. These all make me believe that we did the right things for starting a demotion vote against someone who unable to control his temper anymore causing him taking several unfair actions towards innocent members on the community using his Admin rights as a weapon against them and therefore I find it a clear proof of the case of misusing Admin rights. Please take a look at the demotion vore and read the comments of the members who supported his demotion. They also noticed the visible signs of Nerfmaster8's inaptitude as an Admin to operate the Community in the proper way. Please prevent his childish revenge campaign to influence the demotion vote we started clearly and fairly.
User:HunterThomassen452 keeps vandalising movie pages to claim that the movie is being developed by Illumination (owners of the Despicable Me franchise) and, in the latest instance, also by Blue Sky (who did Rio). To my mind, action needs to be taken.
Boyz in the Sink: a VeggieTales Movie: As noted in its history and on the Category talk:Candidates for deletion page, please delete this blatant fanon page and give its creator and persistent vandal editor User:Mattmatt418 (who seems to reckon that his fanon is more important than this wiki's policies, or the consensus of its users) at least a cooldown block. (Nearly all his edits have been to this one page, and to my mind his few other edits are also suspect.)
Mattman418 has now attempted to "prove" that this movie is real, by uploading and adding a "logo" image which is clearly the logo crudely and incompletely cropped from the 2005 record cover image (he missed some of the background) plus a VeggieTales logo and some text. Plus, he continues to refuse to add any real evidence that this is a real movie which is really being released in just 4-5 months' time, probably because there isn't any to add (two web searches have failed to turn up any such evidence). Hence, this is another fanon page to delete.
I spotted that same page on the Scratchpad Wiki yesterday, which has a fair amount of fan fiction. I will delete it, but I'm heading out in a few minutes to take care of some things. I also want to provide the official reason to Matt about why it's being deleted.
Over the recent months there have been several incidents, involving at least three different editors (one of whom, a confirmed vandalism-only account, has been banned), of delete nominations being done in a way that amounts to vandalism of the articles concerned.
On any well-run wiki, the delete process involves debate, usually in the form of a central Category talk:Candidates for deletion page. Hence, the correct way to nominate a page for deletion is to add a delete tag (including a reason, so that the nomination clearly isn't a malicious one made for no reason). If the content is replaced with the tag, what that editor is saying is in effect "I don't care what the community consensus (if any) is, mine is the only opinion which matters". Someone who is that arrogant (that is, stupid) to my mind has no place being a wiki editor at all, much less making delete nominations. If the article has been blanked, how can anyone else (short of going back in the article history) judge for themselves the merits (or otherwise) of the nomination?
Hence there should be a policy (like the one I implemented on the Beatles Wiki) whereby blanking an article, even in the name of nominating it for deletion, is treated as the vandalism that this is. The only exceptions should be if the article content is illegal (e.g. pornography or hate speech) or perhaps a violation of the Wikia ToU (I usually replace any spam URL with www.spam.com).
[...]If the content [of an article] is replaced with [a delete] tag, what that editor is saying is in effect "I don't care what the community consensus (if any) is, mine is the only opinion which matters".
And the same is true of someone (usually the page creator) removing a delete tag (when such a tag has not been applied with obvious malicious intent, such as to a key article); they're in effect also saying "so what if this is fanon and hence against wiki policy, it's mine so it's important." The same comment re. arrogance applies at least as strongly in this case.