Not just yet. If you look at the lower right corner of your screen, you should now see the pop-up notification about the move to a different wiki. Nothing is going to be saved here due to the attribution problem described in the blog.
How would you like to get more readers and editors onto your community? We’re building a new feature that we hope will do just that, and you can help shape it.
Over the last year, we’ve been working on a brand new feature - Community Builder, and we’ve identified a few wikis as the best candidates to have this first experience. And, your wiki is one of them! Why? Because it has a great structure for characters, cast, seasons and episodes! We designed the Community Builder from the start in mind to mirror that same structure.
This new layout is still early in its life, and we’re testing a bunch of ideas. We would be thrilled to have you help us learn how to make it even better! Would you be interested in joining us on this journey?
Before you give it a try, I would like to tell you some exciting key points about this tool:
Mobile capabilities: Community builder is designed to work across all devices, including desktop and mobile! It means you can create and view pages super easily. We want the fans of your community can contribute anytime and anywhere, no matter with their phones or their desktops. Simple and easy!
Structured data: All content on your community can display in a more powerful way. Visitors can easily find the information they want to read, and you can even present the information with less edits: by updating a single character page, you can have that data added to all other relevant pages automatically. How cool is that?!
Here is a great example how it looks like: Yellowstone wiki. Feel free to check it out!
I hope this has grabbed your interest. If you have any questions, ask away. If everything looks good to you, we’d love to switch you over to the new layout. Does this sound good to you? Please let me know and I will take care of the rest.
Hey. I don't know if you're available at the moment, but I specifically want to consult you about this since you're familiar with this particular user and advice would be really appreciated.
I have suspicions that "Lady Satsuki" is back yet again on the Villains Wiki under the following usernames: YuXNaoto and TakeruShiba. For starters, YuX, like several of Satsuki's previous alts, immediately went back to the old "Syndrome is PE" debate, except she is somehow arguing against it considering the fact that his comic counterpart rather than his film counterpart qualifies as such.
Secondly, Takeru is a more significant case. While Takeru is probably in turn a sockpuppet of YuxNaoto regardless if they are alts of Lady Satsuki or not due to the fact that she defended YuX in the edit war that got her banned, Takeru has been relentlessly edit-warring over the PE category (which is to be expected if Takeru is Satsuki). Furthermore, I will point out that Satsuki has an extremely long history of edit-warring on the Angel Eyes article by relentlessly removing the PE category in spite of the fact that he qualifies, and suspiciously enough, Takeru has since started doing the exact same thing. I will also point out that Takeru has also started edit-warring over the PE category on the Archie Brener article, which is an article Satsuki's previous "Archangel of Apocalypse" account has been active on. With that said, they are yet to show hostile behavior like Satsuki, but the rest of the other factors peak my suspicions.
But yeah, I'd just like your thoughts on the matter, since while I am convinced that they are sockpuppets of Lady Satsuki, some extra confirmation would help.
I have been working on something that took up a lot of time, so I held off with answering this. That's done now, so here we go.
When I took a brief look at this after you left the message, I did get a kind of Lady Satsuki vibe from both accounts. But sometimes that can be coincidence and sometimes if you deal with a person frequently, it can be easy to take a coincidence and use that as proof that it's a sockpuppet. I try to wait until I see something more conclusive before I take action. Admins have a responsibility not to falsely accuse a user and I've always felt I needed that evidence in case the VSTF or Fandom staff wanted me to justify a block.
As it happens, every time I've come across one of those coincidences, it did turn out to be a sockpuppet of the vandal I thought it was. To be honest, I really think we've got that here. We don't have 100% proof, but the tactics in common with Lady Satsuki are starting to pile up:
Being adamant that a character does or does not fit specific categories and getting into arguments/edit wars about those categories.
Belligerent attitude that goes beyond being passionate about a subject.
Hint of a vengeful attitude ("You're on my list already so don't make it worse.")
Warned at least once about plagiarism.
The last one is more important, since this wiki received a formal complaint from the Villains Wiki and that was followed up with a directive from Fandom of "put in where pages were copied from or we'll shut down this wiki". Lady Satsuki, through her various sockpuppets, has continued to deliberately copy from other wikis without attribution even after numerous warnings.
I think this is enough to say that both YuXNaoto and TakeruShiba are Lady Satsuki. She's burned through any consideration she was due in the past by her continued disruptive behavior. I will be setting blocks on a few wikis in the morning so that we don't have to put of with more disruptions from her.
If this isn't enough for one of the Villains Wiki admins to set a block, you may have to wait a while. Lady Satsuki always tips her hand, usually when she gets to the point where she's angry enough to start making death threats. Being patient and providing sound reasons to counter her edits will get her there faster because she just can't stand not being the one that decides what characters are like.
It's alright if you had to hold off for a bit (better late than never, as they say). In fact, I'd say it's better to have waited in the long run now that Takeru made that "You're on my list" remark, because that's a major red flag. It seems like she has been putting some restraint on her hostile attitude while she has been using this account, but now it seems like (as you already stated) her facade is slipping.
The reason why I asked for your thoughts though is because of the fact that the Pure Evil category has recently received a major overhaul: you can no longer add the category to pages without writing a proposal first (similar to how TVTropes does it in essence), and thus, users like Lady Satsuki who aggressively abuse the category have more or less been halted. And because of that, it's been more difficult to tell if Takeru is Lady Satsuki since she can no longer spam the category everywhere. Her edit wars on Angel Eyes' article among other things are what really caught my attention in the first place however.
With that said, thank you for providing your thoughts. I really appreciate it. I'll get around to notifying an admin some time today.
That didn't take long. About an hour ago, the following message was left for me by an anonymous user: "I know where you live, and if you don't unblock me i'll send someone to take care of you. That's a promise." The IP is from the area of the UK that she's known to be from.
As it turns out, Lady Satsuki may have had another active alt she hopped onto every now and then. The account in question had tactics near-identical to that of her previous StrawberryFan and Stubborn Warlord accounts and was never active at the same time as TakeruShiba:
Another heads up for you. She's back again as Elfen Lied Fan 90 (attempting to impersonate a TV Tropes user) and HopSkipJumpluff, who are both currently active on All the Tropes. For good measure, I have also reported the "Elfen Lied" account to VSTF since they resorted to profile vandalism on a few other Wikis (the Characters Wiki and Fire Emblem Wiki to name a few), as well as page hijacking.
An antagonists tries to kill of the heroes but learned that it was somehow "wrong", maybe realizing they were becoming a "monster". Thus they decide to reform and help the heroes from that moment. ONLY write about how they were BEFORE they decided to join the "good guys". Actions done AFTER they reform are for Heroes Wiki.
Actually, since I am an administrator here, I could unblock myself. If another administrator had to block me, I might leave the block active if I agreed with them after taking another look at whatever situation caused it.
In this case, all we have about a sixth Ice Age film is that it is a possibility. It has not officially been announced. Here's what Co-director Galen T. Chu said in an interview about Ice Age: Collision Cours that appears to have been published around February:
Given what happens in this film, is it the final Ice Age? Are there other ideas out there?
“We definitely approach each one as if this is ‘THE’ film. We never thought this is the final one, but it is a defining chapter. We leave ourselves a back door depending on how this one does. We certainly have other ideas.”
That's it. They could make another movie at this point, but haven't said so. Collision Course made money when you factor in the worldwide totals: $409 million and had a $105 million budget. But the overall review rating is just 15% at Rotten Tomatoes, so who knows if making almost 4x as much as it cost to make is "enough" for 20th Century Fox to greenlight another movie.
I put Collision Course in my rental queue. I haven't watched it since it was in the theaters, so I need a refersher on exactly what the dinos did and what happened at the end of the movie. If it looks like you're right, then I'll tell you so and will support your edits. But if what's in the movie doesn't match what you're saying, then I'll offer this bit of advice: be careful about getting subborn. People who insist on pushing what they want to happen onto a movie pretty quickly cross the line into vandalism and they usually end up being the ones that get blocked. Once that happens, it makes it harder for them to be believed if they do the same thing on other wikis.
This new user, Quarrelsome Pony, is very evidently a sockpuppet of Faceless Illusion. She's been plagiarizing off the Villains Wiki and she made an insulting remark to an off-site user. Can this be dealt with?
Apologizing is a good step. Almost no one ever does it, so it's nice to see it here. However, you left me the exact same message on the Antagonists Wiki, then 90 minutes later, removed it with a reason that contained swearing and insulted the members of that wiki. That was not a good step.
When the block is over in a month, if you have good things to add to the Caillou Wiki, I won't have a problem with you being there.
I never got around to re-watching the movie to settle that question between you and Prince Tamaki, but frankly, I'm likely to rule in your favor by default because in the "Complete Monster discussion" blog, Faceless Illusion was the one pushing for Turbo to be considered one and I just had to block them for a month because they kept copying from other wikis after being told not to. I'm also beginning to suspect that Tamaki's interest in them is a little more than just a coincidence.
Considering this account showed up right after Faceless Illusion was blocked, the similar edits, not to mention the similar sounding names, this is a transparent sockpuppet account. This has been a nasty habit of you; so is getting so many pages locked.
Yes, I feel all these pages should be unlocked, since the Complete Monster category is the only reason they were locked in the first place.
First of all, knock it off with the repetitive reminders.
Second of all, I really don't appreciate that whole threatening attitude you're giving off, what with threatening to cause an edit war if you don't receive the edits you want. It's annoying and childish, which, I might add, is the same reason you got banned from the Villains Wiki.
I'm not threatening anything, I'm just stating a fact. You clearly want those characters unlocked so you can remove them from the CM category, in which case I'd add them again, you'd remove them so on and so on, which was why they were locked to begin with. As such unless you're prepared to leave them in the category unlocking them would be a waste of time.
Maybe, instead of blaming that on me, you should tell yourself that. Every time an edit war starts, you're the one that instigates it. You have consistently equated a CM with a "character you don't like", and I have debated with you on numerous occasions with several of these characters, and you continue to fail to provide sufficiently counter-arguments. I don't know why I have to be told to avoid an edit war; maybe you should accept that just because you don't like a character, doesn't mean they count. The Soto debacle was probably the most ridiculous of them all.
I'm the instigator? You're the one that repeatedly removed Syndrome, Turbo, Machinedramon, Aki Honda, Finn, Mayuri and a number of other characters from the CM category. I didn't add those characters because of personal dislike (I actualy happen to like Ein), I added them because I consider them valid examples. BTW I recently saw the Killing Joke and I agree that Paris Franz doesn't count.
One more thing, you've repeatedly complained about me getting multiple pages locked and protesting when you try to get them unlocked, would you have done anything differently in the opposite situation? For example, Turbo's page on the other Antagonists Wiki is currently locked because of a Complete Monster related edit war, although over there it's to stop him from being added. If I were to ask an admin to unlock the page would you be opposed to that?
"Loving this character only serves to emphasize their evil. If they were decent people, they wouldn't care about this character. The fact that they love this character only serves to emphasize their evil."
Also, using the resources argument on Aki Honda is utter twaddle. The resources rule doesn't apply here. You make it sound like Aki Honda would actually go on a killing spree if she had more resources, but nothing points to this. Literally amy schmuck with a weapon can go on a killing spree; Aki doesn't. When you use the resources rule, make sure they actually apply.
And last time I checked, I got the last word during the Turbo debate.
Another thing to bear in mind is we're talking about a 12 year old here, plus unlike her victim she has no excuse for her behaviour.
Going back to the Turbo debate, we established that he does two things that are CM level evil, the last time I checked there's no specific number of serious crimes a character has to have under their belt to qualify.
Name an example of a child that's more evil than Aki. As for Turbo, trying to erase Vanellope from her game and turning her into a glitch when that failed, manipulating Ralph into destroying her cart (admittedly not heinous in and of itself, but it ties in with the above, seeing how the cart was her one chance to get her life back), and of course forcing Ralph to watch Vanellope get killed by the Cy-bugs.
Henry Evans, Rhoda Penmark (who is not listed), the villains from Lord of the Flies, the villains from Village of the Damned, the list goes on.
So essentially, we have a villain trying to harm the heroes. That thing that every villain does. And destroying a kart is so low on the heinous bar it's laughable; heck, the Sugar Rush Racers did the same thing earlier on.
Judge Claude Frollo had to commit attempted genocide, mass murder, and sexual assault to be listed. Scar had to commit familicide and turn the kingdom into a wasteland to get listed (and even then, he just barely made the cut), The Coachman had to turn children into donkeys and sell them off to slavery. All these villains are directly harming a large number of people, including the heroes.
Turbo is just targetting the heroes. It's very self-contained.
The later two examples are groups, and I'm not familiar with Rhoda Penmark, what does she do that's worse than Aki?
I covered above that destroying Vanellope's cart isn't heinous in and off itself, but it's part of maintaining the status quo he's set up in Sugar Rush. And as I've said before, trying to kill the heroes is one thing, but forcing Ralph to watch vanellope get killed by the Cy-bugs is another matter entirely, that's just as bad as anything Scar does (And for the record turning the kingdom into a wasteland is technically indirect). Another thing I pointed out previously is Percival C. McLeaсh is approved for less than Turbo.
Rhoda Penmark murdered three people, one of whom was her classmate who she beat to death and drowned for winning a reward she wanted. And as for the "groups", they're both being led by one kid in particular.
And people are really over-exaggerating that "Forced to Watch" bit. "Forcing the hero to watch a loved one get hurt" is not an automatic CM-level qualification. And how is that any different than what Bellwether did; heck, she honestly did it even worse. And "that's as bad as anything Scar did". Are you serious? Trying to force someone to watch someone else get killed is as bad as murdering your brother, tormenting your nephew into believing it's his fault, banishing him to die, leaving him guilt-ridden up until adulthood, turning your kingdom into a wasteland, and (if The Lion Guard is to go by) mass murdering your allies for not following your orders? And for the record, did Turbo turn Sugar Rush into a wasteland? No? So how is he worse?
If a 'Forced to Watch' situation is all it takes to be a CM, we might as well just add every villain without mitigating factors.
As for McLeach, who I don't think counts anyways...why don't you actual compare Turbo to villains who are in his scale. Turbo is the ruler of his kingdom; compare him to other rulers; don't you see how he falls short compared to CM Evil Rulers?
I have tried to keep out of this as much as possible. I don't really like having to allocate whatever number of hours to analyze things to settle arguments. It's why I haven't responded much on this subject before, because I didn't want to take that time when I needed to be doing other things.
But frankly, I'm kind of getting fed up with this situation.
From what I see, the "complete monster" label is just antagonist fussing with a different name. It's subjective, not objective, and because of that, people start fighting about who qualifies. And statements like "trying to remove him from the Complete Monster category is a waste of both our time" don't help because that tells me people are going to force them to be complete monsters whether they are or not.
I said it before. If the standard of a complete monster was confined to their actions within the story and NOT comparing them to other characters in different stories like has been done too often, then I'd let it stay. Right now, I'm seriously considering getting rid of it all together.