Forum:One Piece Wiki User

This is very tiresome. User:Galaxy9000 has caused quite a few edit wars. The recent image wars with the CP9 portraits, specifically and. He's been very rude to many users, on chat AND on the Wiki itself. He's been talking down to a few users, examples being this and especially this, where a user continuously pointed out his rude behavior and yet he still continued to provoke. His constant edit spamming, filling the Wiki activity with minor edits, proposed projects that never progress, and complete lack of respect is a great problem with our Wiki. Other examples of continued edit wars are, this Hody Jones portrait, , and the Unreleased Content fiasco, which is also evidence of his rude behavior. Even on the chat, his dictatorial behavior is evident as he's even talked down to administrators to do their job. It's clear he has no respect for the Wikia or its community, and seems to make edits for the sake of editing. I'm only surprised he wasn't banned long ago. Now is the time. 05:00, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
You're ignoring that color schemes of the author matter. There is no talking down on that Caesar Clown image talk page. I actually apologized to Leo right after that, because I knew my behavior wasn't really acceptable there. You're linking the Jinbe image from months ago? That problem has long been resolved. The Hody image has long been resolved. The Otohime image that I reverted once... And the unreleased content fiasco, where it wasn't against the rules to do any of that. Oh, and sorry I don't finish projects, but they definitely do progress, but that also isn't bannable. Neither is doing "small edits". Chat is a completely separate issue, so not really something that can be brought up on a forum. Can you cite specific examples of me "talking down to an admin" though? I definitely don't remember ever telling DP, or Sff (the only two admins who chat), to do anything, or telling either of them they aren't doing their jobs. 05:03, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

None of those links you sent broke any of the rules on the wiki. You must understand that when there's an edit war between you two you're also part of it, having an edit war doesn't break any rules obviously so I don't see where you're getting at. About the unreleased content poll, that was SeaTerror breaking the rules, so he had every right to do what he did there. I don't see what you mean when you say he's "talking down" to people, I've always seen that as his way of discussing, whether it'd be positive or negative. Calling it dictatorial behavior is outrageous. About the "editing" spamming. It's not spamming if you put on "minor edits", since you can choose not to show those, it's spamming if you let it be seen everywhere and you can't turn it off. It's like saying a bot is spamming because you turned on the "show bot edits" function. Please continue on how he is breaking rules on the wiki.

Oi oi Nada,you calle those edit wars? I understand the unreleased content thing but only this. Image edit wars? If you opened this forum due to image edit wars go open e forum for me and you too cause I've seen yo edit warring on images many times and image edit wars are kinda funny  And you said gal insulted the dude on the yetis page, I'm pretty sure I saw on the recent activity that Gal apolohized to him,isn't that right? And what's wrong with editing much? 06:00, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

The thing with the edit wars is that he should know full and well that we keep it on the default when it becomes a war. Continuing to revert is continuing a war, which is of course against our rules. Galaxy did apologize for it, but it still seems he's keeping up with the behavior. Doesn't sound much like an apology to me. Those wars being months ago don't make them "unimportant" because you still did them. You were still breaking our edit wars rules. I know those unfinished projects aren't a bannable thing, but they slow down the Wiki's progress especially how the projects don't progress at all. It's unhealthy for the Wiki's stability, meaning you're actually making it worse. These edit wars ARE breaking our rules and these projects AREN'T making the Wiki any better. You also seem to decide on things without discussion, like the portrait being manga colors recently. That's not really how we do things, is it? Inappropriate behavior and edit wars are usually what causes us to ban people quicker. So I question how you survived. 14:15, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

Everyone makes edit wars. You edit war, I edit war, Gal edit wars. Also the portraaits thing, he did it because the images were unsourced. 14:22, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

Continuing the edit wars when it's clearly a war is against our policy. Even he knows that. 14:31, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

I do know we use the default when there's an edit war, but you're edit warring too. You know that we use canon images over non-canon images, and yet you revert. Me apologizing to Leo definitely was an apology. Just because I'm not "nice" to you, doesn't mean I'm not nice to others. The wars being months ago kind of proves that my behavior doesn't happen very often, but isn't it ironic that you're involved in every single one? You're edit warring as well. Nothing is being slowed down with my projects, since I progress each one of them at a pretty moderate pace. Your opinion on what makes the wikia better has no place in this discussion. The portraits were changed because they were unsourced, if you didn't notice. All images must be sourced to be used. Looking at this, I've "mostly" followed all the rules, so yeah. 14:31, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

What causes us to vote ban is when they're actually breaking the rules. Anyway, I really don't get what you mean when you say that the projects slow down the wiki's progress... What? If anything, it helps the wiki's progress. Would it be better if the projects hadn't been started from the beginning? I don't think so. About the portraits, we've always replaced the anime with a manga if some color is incorrect in the anime (like skin-tone, eye color, hair color, etc.), it's nothing new. And finally, the edit warring, where is the rule that says when an edit war is started, who can call an edit war, and that the previous image is default during the war, and when & where were these rules instated? Just wondering.

Just let this forum die. You know it's unfair and pretty dumb to ban gal. 16:47, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

Galaxy, when it's been reverted on default and it's clearly an edit war, you keep it on default until it's over. You know that, everybody knows that. An apology isn't an apology if you continue. here's where rude statements and behavior is written. Even your constant insulting and offenses in the past are indeed ban worthy. The fact that you "apologized" and continued shows you're not really sorry at all which is even more disrespectful. I'm aware that I participated in those edit wars. But the difference is, one of us kept reverting while it was an edit war. Keep it on default. Your projects are always sudden and are implemented without discussion. When they are done with discussion, you never do them. How's that Episode page thing coming along? Slow progress like that is not healthy for the encyclopedia. Edit warring, disrespect, and edits that aren't good for the site constitutes as ban-worthy to me. 17:58, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

Wrong. It takes two to have an edit war. You are a part of each and every one, and we could make a ban forum for you using these same examples, but of course, that would be stupid, as this is. Your opinion on what an apology is doesn't matter in this discussion. Once again, unfinished projects are NOT banworthy, so your opinion on that is irrelevant to the discussion. Things take time to do, but you probably wouldn't know that since you rarely take on bigger projects. This seems like nothing more than your petty way of getting rid of me, because you don't agree with everything I do. 18:03, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

So you're mad at him cause he doesn't complete his projects? Nice (y) 18:04, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

As far I see, this is mostly about edit wars (didn't read all). But if someone has brought up the topic already, then my bad. BUT, does anyone remember when Galaxy "annoyed" other users to vote on something? That's another reason~ Even though that might have "died" down, it was a big impact on poll decisions. Anyways, clearly there is bias going on here, such as how Sewil and SHL always side with Galaxy, has anyone noticed that? Galaxy is the master of brainwashing! Like seriously? How did SHL get from like 5,000 (last time I checked) to 14,000 edits?! As I remember, Galaxy said that he cared about edits, and wanted to have a lot of edits for some odd reason. These are "silly" reasons of mine, except the voting one. 19:11, April 29, 2013 (UTC)


 * 1) I don't always agree with Gal. I've been involved in quite many arguments with him'
 * 2) Yeah I edit. I started mass editing before I even met Gal. So Gal is the only user here that edits much? I don't think so. 19:22, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

The voting thing wasn't against any rules at that time, so it's not really relevant here. Apparently me being friends with people is a bad thing? Liking to work is a problem? 19:25, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

It's not just about edit warring. It's about continuing the edit war when clearly there's a talk page discussion started/going on. We've put up users like SeaTerror and Genocyber for the same reason. Also for the reasons of complete disrespect and rudeness to other users. It takes time to do things, yes. But it's different when you don't do them at all. You propose all these projects to things that are fine on their own, and don't focus on them at all. I know it's not ban-worthy, but it shows a lack of responsibility and it's unhealthy for the Wiki. I know what it takes for bigger projects. But summaries, adding episode images to articles, etc. are more important than renaming images. Renaming images is like organizing Lego pieces in the box. Sure, they're sorted and easy to find, but it doesn't change the overall look of your shelf, because they're still in the box. As for "the voting thing not being a rule", that still doesn't make it right. You shouldn't be have to be told not to do things. You're not a child. I didn't open this forum to get rid of you because I disagree; I opened this forum because I've seen the way you've treated other users here and the unorganized way you choose to edit. I opened it for the community and the stability of the site. If you want to open a ban forum for me as well, go ahead. Nobody's stopping you. 19:32, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

Ban ALL the users 19:40, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

You haven't really given any specific examples of disrespect where it wasn't resolved. I work on my projects all the time, so yeah, I'm doing them. It isn't a lack of Responsibility to slowly do projects, especially when I don't spend 24 hours here. Your opinion on how important my projects are is still not relevant, nor will it ever be. The voting thing not being a rule means it isn't bannable (and because it happened months ago. Once again, this is nothing more than a petty revenge sort of thing, but you seem to be the only one who is thinking this way I wouldn't make a ban forum for you because it would be just like this one, useless 19:48, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

You clearly don't understand. Just because it was "resolved" doesn't mean it didn't happen. Many times we resolved because of a clear majority over your stubbornness. Things like that Yeti talk page were resolved without your contribution, because the whole time you just made it even worse. You apologized, but yet you've still shown rudeness since then. As for your projects' status being irrelevant, they're major projects that are supposed to help the Wiki. No, you are not doing them. Instead you're focusing on trivial matters that hardly fix anything at all. You're not contributing, you're just taking up space. 20:03, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

And is it ban worthy? 20:12, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

Once again, I work on the projects as I have the time to. There is nothing wrong with doing them slowly, especially when there are a bunch of them. It IS NOT RELEVANT to this at all. I could say most of your edits are useless, and that you're taking up space, but that would be petty, wouldn't it? 20:19, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

un·healthy adjective \-ˈhel-thē\

Definition of UNHEALTHY 1
 * not conducive to health

2
 * not in good health : sickly, diseased

Yeah his edits are totally unhealthy to the wikia. He's giving One Piece diseases! SeaTerror (talk) 22:52, April 29, 2013 (UTC)

not that anyone cares about what i think, but though galaxy9000 is a bit rude i dont think he should be banned just yet, though if he does continue in his behavior then maybe a three day ban would be appropriate

Remeber folks, that EVERYTHING Gal does, he does for the sake of what he feels is for the best of the Wiki, bad behaviour or not. He shouldn't be Banned. As easy as that. Cool new Sig by the way Canuck (Y). WU out - 05:56, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

Ban him forever. 12:53, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

Calu would miss her servant :'(

You can't look at this forum without comparing it to the Forum:Genocyber, because  as you can see these 2 cases are basically the same, the only difference is Gal has a very vocal set of supporters whereas Geno does not. Both kept participating in image-editwars, while using a tone that is just not good enough. So on a neutral basis they should both get the same treatment, which, if you care to listen to SHLs, WUs, or my opinion is a short ban.

ST, I would consider it unhealthy when one editor, in this case Gal, is the cause for several editors completely leaving or reducing their participation in this wikia. 16:16, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

I have to agree with Panda here. Gal, you might be a good editor, but you don't always go about doing things in the nicest way, like exploiting that old loophole about the duration of talk page votes. I don't know about a ban, but I definitely think a serious change in attitude should be in order. 16:59, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

Panda, Geno is way more ruthless in edit warring than I am. Also, WU said no ban and staw is messing around and saying I should be banned forever. Who exactly is leaving due to my behavior? Seems like people are just moving on with their lives.

DP, it wasn't exploiting a loophole, since it was never written that talk page polls had to last 2 weeks, but this has been resolved in the poll rules forum. An attitude change is fine, even though I think it's good enough, I can easily try to improve it. Some people don't notice that my only real conflicts on this wikia are always with Nada. I'm mostly friendly to everybody else on almost all discussions. 18:46, April 30, 2013 (UTC)


 * I left (mainly) because of you. Banning you would be beneficial to the wiki, so I would support it (and vote on it) if it ever went ahead. Your edit wars and behaviour have been consistently worse than Klobis' ever were prior to his ban, and it's unfortunate that popularity is apparently all anyone cares about around here. 03:16, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

That's sad to hear Zodiaque, but it seems you still hold that grudge from me trying to get Klobis banned. 03:33, May 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * No, that's not it, the last part was more a general comment on the community treating banning as a means of bullying people in the minority, whilst popularity acts as a get out of jail free card. I won't go into detail on the specific issues I had with certain users or the wiki in general, as that would sidetrack the thread. I only posted because the question you asked couldn't be effectively answered by the people participating in this discussion (given that they're all active editors). 06:12, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Ok well, I'd still like to know how my actions caused you to leave. If I remember correctly, I never even encountered you in any wars or arguments, except for that Klobis forum. 06:16, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Me, Coffee, Jade. 18:58, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

You stopped editing way before I started. Source for the others? 19:01, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

Source: They told me. As for me, no, I stopped when you started adding a whole bunch of braindead categories, but that really is beyond the point. 19:20, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

Cool. People disagree with me on a lot of things. 19:38, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

The ban is at hand. 19:51, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

This forum itself is proof of his condecending attitude. I'm going to be honest and say that Galaxy has driven me away from the chat on several occasions. He manipulates, exploits, and insults to get his way on every wiki issue. When he fails to win through a biased democratic vote, he makes the edits in secret hoping nobody notices.

And right now he continues, in this forum, to attempt to justify his specific actions while he misses the big picture. He is offending the community and is being very counter-productive. I think something should be done about this. 22:14, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

Oh, also. To those saying that he hasn't broken any rules: Our forum guidelines say not to be rude to other users on forums or discussions. Galaxy says he's read the rules, he should know this. 22:48, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

Chat is a completely separate issue. I am not acting "condecending" on this forum.. so yeah. You've basically restated everything Nada said, so just read my responses to him further up the forum. Also, I'd love for you to prove that I make "secret" edits, because that sure hasn't ever happened. 23:13, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

If chat is a completely separate issue, would you want a ban from that first? Your attitude there and here both constitute it, it seems. 23:20, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

Not really, since only you and Ryu have outright stated a ban (and even Ryu is saying "something should be done".). 23:24, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

Here's what I'll do. I promise I will be nicer. 23:26, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

First of all, I never suggested banning you for this. Don't put words in my mouth. Second of all, if you really stopped belittling users and using manipulative techniques to score secret wins, I would be happy to move forward and pretend this never happened. 23:31, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

You didn't read what I said Ryu. "Not really, since only you and Ryu have outright stated a ban (and even Ryu is saying "something should be done".)". "Something should be done", implied a ban to me, or something else. Sorry for the misunderstanding. 23:39, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

First off, I'm way too busy to read this entire forum in detail, so forgive me if I'm completely off-base or redundant. But my person thoughts on this matter is that honestly, while Gal is one of the most productive editors on the wiki, he'also the #1 user who needs to be cleaned up after the most, and he's one of the most rude. His actions should not just because he is a prolific editor.

His impatience to deal with issues properly leads to many problems. Issues like the manga portraits should be discussed in a forum first, which is what the Forum Rules dictate (It's a "Substantial changes in image preference across many articles"). The many unfinished "projects" of his make our pages inconsistent and confusing. I'm reminded of this friendly warning when I think of Gal's editing style. In image edit wars, it seems that he is usually the least willing party to go to talk page, and when he is the first to go to the talk, his posts are usually quite rudely worded. Same with his edit summaries during edit wars. There was also a month awhile ago where to me Gal seemed like he wanted nothing more than to argue with me at every opportuity to do so, and blatantly told people in chat (while I was there) that he was "watching JSD's contribs" with the implication that it was because I am a "bad editor". One prime example of his poor attitude was this exchange an old forum. The entire time, I tried to be polite and inoffensive as possible (see my response in the previous link) and not break the rules of the wiki, I did not feel like that was something Gal was thinking about while he was targeting me. This period of pretty much blatantly ended not with an apology or anything, but when I took my week-long spring break off from the wiki as well as school. When I returned there was zero acknowledgement that he had been wrong or unreasonable. And I hope that we can understand from this that if Gal's bad attitude towards users extends out of the chat, then chat cannot be a "separate issue", you cannot acknowledge that the behavior is unacceptable in chat, but acceptable outside of it when the behavior is exactly the same. And if it is decided that some kind of ban should be given, the punishment should also include a punishment for violating the rules regarding polls. I came back in the middle of finals and things because I thought it was important enough to post some of my complaints about him and my experiences with him here for others to read. Personally, I support a ban, but even if that doesn't happen, I want my complaints to be on record now. 05:39, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

We don't have to have a forum about manga images, especially when the color scheme is wrong. Each one of the ones I've changed have been discussed in the talk page after the reverts happened, and the manga was agreed upon. What Unfinished projects confuse you? Jpg replacements? I'm sorry I can't replace thousands of images by myself. Episode Pages - I'm sorry I can't upload hundreds of images by myself. Not to mention how I have to deal with the new chapter images every week, check the grammar every week, deal with the new anime images every week, check other pages for grammatical errors, and replace old low-quality images. Everything has to be done one step at a time. I am never unwilling to go to the talk, and have posted in it before others and still been ignored. Image talk pages get funnier titles because they become quite frustrating to deal with, and it eases the stress. If I remember correctly, I was watching your contribs because you were adding templates when they weren't needed to images, and other things I really can't remember. I do apologize for the "snarko" remarks though, but I kept that mostly in chat, and really, it was rather harmless. Uhhh, that poll rules thing was not me being aggressive or violent. I apologize for that period, but I mostly forget to apologize to people because the time to apologize has already passed, and therefore it would be pretty useless to do so. Most of the things brought up about me have been chat issues (telling admins what to do, which I'm still awaiting evidence for, running Ryu out of the chat (most likely the times I am aggressive towards a FUNi or Viz translation. About the unreleased content poll... there was no rule about that then, but now there is. The no voting for a certain period if you're caught doing it. If you want to continue on that note though, both DP and ST were involved in that same stuff, and DP mentioned that he did it on that very talk page. As I said before, I promise to be nicer. 05:54, May 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * Gal now seriously, your behavior is really bad not only on chat but even on forums. I don't know if you deserve a ban or not but you really have to change your attitude Galaxy. Also it seems that many users stopped editing because of you and that's pretty bad for the wiki. So what I have to say is that you really have to behave yourself and maybe a short ban would help. Especially from chat. 07:30, May 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * And also you keep doing stuff without a discussion first which is unacceptable especially when you change so many things. The most recent case is that you're trying to change all the portraits to manga but you never started a discussion and nobody ever agreed with it so you're just bossing around like you own the wiki. And that's something I consider unacceptable, so yeah a short ban could work. 07:37, May 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * Can someone do us all a favor and shut this fuckwit above me up, his sarcasm is both irritating and crap. Cheers 11:03, May 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * My last comment is serious. If he makes people leave, that's really bad. I never had a problem with him that's why I defended him but If he makes people leave the wiki, he really deserves a punishment. 11:07, May 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * That behavior, Straw Boy, is exactly what we don't want to see. I recommend you stop before the ban forum is about you. 12:24, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Staw, did you read the talk pages on most of those? People have definitely agreed, especially with Kalifa and Jabra. Most of them are being changed because the anime was marked as LQ, or had no source. 13:08, May 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * They agreed AFTER you made an edit war. And there are still people like me and Nada that never agreed. 14:42, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

First of all, it sounds like you've got a lot of projects that you think you "have" to do. You don't actually "have" to do them all. There are plenty of other users who are capable of doing many of the things you mention, you just work so quickly that you beat everyone else to them. Pictures will be updated, grammar will be corrected. You can trust other users to do things, you don't have to do so many things at once. You can focus your efforts.

And making talk pages "funnier" may ease your stress, but this comes at the cost of significant annoyance and stress of others. I've never thought any of of those posts as funny, just rather snarky and arrogant. It makes them more frustrating and stressful. Your entertainment =/= good for the wiki.

And you were watching my contribs for something I was later [http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:JustSomeDude...#re:.22New.22_Image_Rule_clarification. proven correct] on. You should really wait for discussions to finish before you stalk someone's edits eternally.

And you can't call your actions in chat "rather harmless" as you are not in any position to asses the harm of your words. You don't know how other people feel. I almost left this place during that time because you added so much extra stress to my life. And I really hate to toot my own horn, but I think it would be obvious to anyone that the loss of a quality editor with over 5000 edits (non-blog) in one year would be detrimental to the wiki. And it sounds like I'm not the only one who is put-off by you in chat. I'll say it again: Your entertainment =/= good for the wiki. I can discuss things on this wiki without making people feel like shit, and have fun while doing it. If that's not something you can do, you should reconsider whether you should stay here.

And with the Poll Rules thing, DP hasn't done anything else wrong, so it makes sense that he should get the least serious punishment. DP doesn't have an ongoing ban forum named after him. And with ST, I considered bringing up the same issue in that forum, except there was never any actual evidence that ST did anything wrong, only you saying that he did, so I thought it was best to not add that shit-storm to his forum. You have hard evidence against you on this issue, and this forum is making it clear that you are a problematic user in other areas. With that in mind, I think it's totally reasonable to make the punishment more harsh for you than other users. And as far as it "not being a rule then", I think that's a load of crap. While technically, the rule read in such a way that didn't rule out what you did, I think that was the sleaziest use of a loophole I've ever seen on this wiki. I honestly think that every single person on this wiki would call what you did there wrong and not ok. I don't think any person would read the rule and think "It says I can't cheat on forum polls, so that means I can cheat on talk page polls and get away with it!" It's really obvious that if you can't cheat in one section of the wiki, you can't cheat in another section. I sincerely hope that you thought up your "loophole excuse" after you got in trouble for it, because if you cheated on the poll because you saw the loophole, that makes you more morally objectionable in my eyes. And of course, your entire argument hinges on the idea that "because there's no rule expressly ruling something out, it means I can do that something and not be punished." I personally don't think that's true. For example, there's no rule at my school saying "you can't move wet floor signs out of buildings and put them on rocks in the middle of the pond", but I know that if I was caught doing that, I would be in trouble and I would own up to the consequences. (and yes, that is something I actually do)

And what's with Gal using his temporary admin privileges to block users? I understand blocking the sockpuppet, as he was probably causing lots of trouble at a time when no admin was on, but not so much the IPs. Each of the IPs made only one edit of vandalism (and in the case of one of them, many legitimate edits before the vandalism), when I believe the policy (which I've heard from DP) is to not ban until a user has vandalized twice. I don't see why either of those users required an immediate ban by someone who should not have the ability to ban users. He should have used the ban template and left the decision to an actual admin. I know he has the admin privileges to rename images, but I'm uncomfortable with him having the privileges if he can't be trusted to use them properly. Other users can be trusted to rename the images, and to not abuse the admin privileges.

And for the record, I don't even care if Gal gets banned or not, since any ban would be rather short. I just want to make sure he knows which aspects of his editing/actions here are not ok so that he may work to correct them s you the future. 14:04, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

DP told me to ban vandals if I saw them, so I was just doing what I was told. 15:45, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

And what's with you ignoring what I rsaid? I said I would be a nicer edito. No need for this back and forth bickering to continue. Consider it a strike and move on. 15:52, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Seconded. Gal has with his statements "faced" the Community's ONLY GOOD criteria, which was him fixing his (sometimes) bad behaviour and being nicer to people. Now it's time to take some chillpills and leave the Forum for a while. WU out -  19:15, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

The things JustSomeDude has said needs to be addressed. A simple "I'll be nicer" won't cut it. 21:51, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

I feel I should input my opinion in this forum, as this partly involve me, if only a little. So here I go.

Galaxy is a really nice guy when we're not talking about wiki matters. He's hilarious at times and is a great source for information. Not only that, he is a nice guy to socialize around with.

However, Gal is also manipulative, demanding, stubborn, forceful and annoying when it come to wiki matters. He gets in too many edit wars and argue over pointless things. Gal would be rude in edit wars towards people who do not agree with him. When it come to voting, he will manipulate people into voting for his side, or simply annoying people into voting for his side. He would often annoy me to vote for something he want. For farther more clarify, I think JSD got that cleared up.

Gal's attitude is so frustrating for me to deal with, especially in the last few months. Any user can see that I abruptly became less active in the last few months. This was majorly thanks to my personal life, but also due to his attitude. Sometime it feel like Gal is going out of his way to disagree with someone, and normally I would have stop it, but his attitude is just rude and hurtful that I don't bother with stopping edit wars that involves him nowadays (or at least, before I quit editting). Other times, he would be constantly telling me what I'm doing is wrong or the likes. His attitude is not only confined in the wiki, but it appears in the chat, or when we're talking about things not related to wiki matters such as when he would rudely tell me that his opinions is better than mine (which websites, TV shows, movies, etc, is better). I don't really care about trivial matters like this, but when he acts rudely and stuck up, it do hurt me.

Overall, Gal is a great guy, once you actually get to know him and he means well for this wiki, but his attitude is the problem. If he can fix his attitude, great! But if he cannot fix his attitude, I would have to support banning him. 00:27, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Once again, Jademing and I share nearly identical opinions. But everyone needs to take a moment and remember that Galaxy promised to improve his attitude. There is nothing more to discuss unless he ends up breaking his promise. Let's pocket this forum. 01:07, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

The forum is too large for you to pocket. SeaTerror (talk) 17:27, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

we should definately leave this forum open a little longer (maybe like 2 weeks tops) to see if gal stays true to his promise and improves his attitude

That didn't last long. 20:45, May 3, 2013 (UTC)

Too bad you're the only one edit warring there. The talk page has decided on a verdict. You and JSD are the only offenders. 20:49, May 3, 2013 (UTC)

There wasn't a verdict in the talk page. You keep reverting it. One person caved, but there's probably been less people in the discussion because of the other forum. It's also been less than 24 hours from the time a "verdict" was reached. You're barely giving any time for people to give their points. You're being too impatient and continuing the war. 20:54, May 3, 2013 (UTC)

There was definitely a discussion in the talk page, and it definitely led to a verdict. The only one warring is YOU. 20:56, May 3, 2013 (UTC)

You just got a couple more people arguing in there. Sorry, but you don't get to decide when a discussion ends. It's still ongoing, and you're still not keeping it at the original. 20:59, May 3, 2013 (UTC)

Okay, Galaxy. Let's forget about which one of you was warring. According to you, Nada and JSD were still arguing against it and yet some how a decision was agreed upon. Because Nada and JSD's opinions don't count? And knowing that they were continuing the discussion, you reverted the image. Over and over again. And constantly reverting an image without proper discussion is an edit war, particularly one that uses rudeness. And you promised to stop being rude. That is were we have a problem. 01:27, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

well then perhaps a small 72 hour ban would be appropriate-- 01:33, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Just get the stupid poll going already. It will just be another Pandawarrior ban forum anyway. SeaTerror (talk) 01:57, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Nobody took Pandawarrior's forum seriously. Clearly, this is nothing like it. 02:07, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Exactly the point. Nobody really cares here either except you two. SeaTerror (talk) 02:08, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Nada, myself, JSD, Panda, Jademing, Canuck, and Zodiac are openly against his actions. Several others are on the fence about it. I'd say it's a very fair fight. 02:16, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

just to be clear thought i am for banning gal due to his rude behavior, i think it should be a small ban. also seaterror i think the banning of a user should always be taking seriously even if it is a small offense-- 02:28, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * Banning is for the purpose of a big offense. If a small offense is committed, a discussion like this would be good or you give that person a warning. 02:56, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Banning someone for something like this isn't a valid reason. The original purpose of banning is either for vandalism or spam. However, Galaxy has never shown any rude behaviour to me so far, so I can't actually say much. Although, another alternative would be to take away his sysop rights for a while till he fix up his behaviour and learns to be nicer. Then when users begin to feel that his behaviour has changed and his responsibility has improved, he can get his admin rights. However, I don't think this should be necessary since he has already started to be nice. 02:53, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

I have done nothing to break my agreement. The talk page made a decision, then just to be difficult, Nada and JSD started to oppose the decision. 02:59, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Don't forget Awaikage. He posted his disagreement before the discussion "ended". You know that wasn't how we usually end discussions. There was barely enough time for anybody to protest. If that's how a discussion ends, this forum would have been long since over. 03:18, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that 5-6 people agreed on the image in the talk page. Usually, we end it there. That's how image talk pages have been for a long while. I was only reverting because of the decision that was made, not because I wanted to edit war for the fun of it. 03:20, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

You're right Nada. The forum would have been no ban. SeaTerror (talk) 03:21, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Another issue: He's been misusing his admin powers again. He's apparently been kicking Sanji for awhile too. He shouldn't use admin powers to do anything other than rename images. That's why he has the powers. Only in cases where there is obvious spam/vandalism and no other admins/chat mods are online should he use the powers for anything else. I'm really upset that he has an ongoing ban forum yet still has temporary admin powers. There are plenty of other responsible users who can be trusted to have temporary admins who aren't Galaxy. 00:45, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

"Abusing". If kicking people was power abuse, every chat mod would be demodded. That was obviously a joke. 00:51, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

He unbans them immediately after. I'm not going to hold that against him. 00:53, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't really like when any either a mod/admin random kicks because 1. it's kind of annoying, and 2. I've said this a million times, yet it still continues. For me, I have to open a PM with someone because my chat box doesn't work unless I do. 00:56, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

yeah powers should only be given to responsible users, who wont abuse them...like myself-- 01:00, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

I understand that chat mods make jokes like that. I'm fine with that, because the mods are chosen by the community. Gal however was not. He was given the powers for editing reasons only, and for him to use those powers against other users that he should be equal with isn't "funny", it's bullying. 01:02, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

technically its only bullying if he does it repeatedly is told to stop, then keeps on doing it anyway-- 01:04, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

What Canuck said. You're taking things way too seriously JSD. 01:05, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

anyway were not here to discuss his behavior on the chat its only about his editing and whether or not its constitutes edit warring, oh and behavior on blogs(not chat)-- 01:08, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Just put the damn poll up already. This is really just moronic now. SeaTerror (talk) 01:11, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

As much as I love a good shitstorm (wink wink, nudge nudge, I don't), JSD has a valid point. Gal was given temporary admin access in order to complete a job, and as far I can tell that job has been done. There are valid points going for both sides of his ban (which I am not going to go into), but at the very least remove his higher-level access. He isn't a chat moderator, and he isn't an administrator, and as JSD has said, Gal can't be trusted with it unless the community decides.

Gal, I've seen how you've been talking to people lately. You're taking this thing on-board way to much. You were given these rights in order to complete a job to improve the wiki, not play pranks in chat and toy with the others like your personal monkeys. 01:12, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Job isn't even close to done Kuro. All the images are not renamed yet. Kicking somebody for a joke is not serious, and you guys are taking it way more seriously than it needs to be taken. 01:15, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Just had a point like a blunt needle. This is now just beyond moronic and ridiculous. SeaTerror (talk) 01:18, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

This is for Galaxy9000's actions across the whole wikia, not just editing. All of his misbehavior is evidence of his poor attitude and bad behavior. And because of his temporary admin status, the actual chat mods cannot hold him accountable for his actions in chat right now either. 01:26, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Actions in chat don't count. Should I link all 50 million times Sff9 has said that? SeaTerror (talk) 01:27, May 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * Sff9 has never posted in this forum. All of those instances were referring to editing, not ban forums. 01:30, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

As far as I can see, I've kept to my agreement of being nicer, in both chat and wikia. 01:29, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

I disagree. There's not much more that I can say besides that. Let's let other users post here before we say that any "decision has been made" Ban forums can always be opened at any time, so there is nothing wrong with this forum continuing indefinitely as long as Gal continues with actions that are objectionable to others. 01:33, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Nobody cares. You just keep bringing up pointless crap to extend the forum just because you want him banned. This forum should just get a poll and finish it up. We all know he won't get banned so just do the forum and get it over with. I'm completely sick of everybody bringing up pointless actions that have nothing to do with the discussion itself. Sff9 meant everything in the chat can't be used. SeaTerror (talk) 01:36, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

When just a few users continue a forum, we put it to rest JSD. You're objecting to my temp admin powers, but me kicking people from chat isn't ban worthy. 01:38, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

@ The chat disscussion above, No matter how much you guys talk about this, I still agree with JSD that these kicking actions do make me feel a bit "bullied", you could say, at least to me. I don't feel too well when people say it's "fun" kicking me. This discussion might be just about his actions on the wikia, but I hope that a few other admins will see this. 01:41, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

so can someone make a poll, or do we have to wait for an admin, and if we do have to wait for an admin cant Gal just make one?-- 01:45, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

I actually want to hold off on a poll. He has only just made his promise and we need to see how he acts on it before we can make a decision. 01:55, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

I also want to hold off on the poll, though for different reasons than Ryu. I think he has broken his promise (just look at Sanji's post) but I think more people should discuss this. The most recent part of the discussion has only been going on for a couple hours. 01:57, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Kicking Sanji is NOT breaking my promise. You have to understand what "joke" is. He never told me that it messed up his chat. 01:59, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

If all you see it as a 'joke', then it just goes to show how little you actually respect the other users here. "Oh, he feels bullied? I was only joking so he can be quiet now." Sorry, it doesn't work like that. 02:50, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Extensions are fun. SeaTerror (talk) 02:53, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

He never said he felt he was being bullied. He also said that most of you are kicking people for no reason, so it seems it's a general chat mod thought. You are seriously taking a joke that other chat mods do and turning it into a " I don't respect a single user here". It doesn't work that way. 02:54, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

yeah, maybe users should stop editing their original comments and putting their new comments in between old ones, it just messes up the argument-- 03:02, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

He literally used the word bullied all of six messages above your own. You're ignoring and twisting the arguments and comments by others for the sake of your own self-protection. Putting your head in the ground and pretending it isn't happening is only going to come back and hurt you in the long run. 03:07, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Kuro, I mean in the chat, he never said he was being bullied, and laughed it off every time. I haven't twisted the words of a single user. 03:09, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but because he hasn't said it in the chat (where you have power over him) it suddenly invalidates his comments here? 03:13, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Are you seriously doing this?

He never said it at the time. That is the only thing I said. I never disregarded his statements in this forum. 03:14, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

"He never said he felt he was being bullied." "He literally used the word bullied all of six messages above your own." So if you're not disregarding his comments... that must mean you're not aware of them. Therefore not reading them.

Look, when it comes to dealing with others you've never really been that good at it. But nobody ever brought it up before because you weren't in a position to affect others. Yes, you tried to have a joke. It blew up in your face. Be responsible, and do something about it. I don't remember you even saying, "Sorry if I've upset you STC". Just excuses as to why you're void of accountability. That is not a trait anybody with power should possess.

And as for, "it seems it's a general chat mod thought", the solution is simple. List the mods you feel are inadequate in their position, and request for them to be removed. It's not that hard. Hell, I'll even volunteer as I was never voted in for originally. 03:24, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

That statement is me saying "he never said he felt he was being bullied", in the chat. None of them are inadequate for their position, because just like I did, they kicked him for a joke.

I apologized to him in chat by the way, since it's a chat issue. 03:27, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

I would also like to say everything that I've explained isn't completely Galaxy's fault, as he has never said it is fun kicking me, or hasn't done anything extreme. I was partly trying to explain other examples. My apologies for being brief. I didn't think it'd come to all of this, Don't blame every little thing I've said on him, please. 03:29, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Then do what I suggest and actually take action, bring up the people who make you feel 'bullied' and maybe we can then resolve this problem. Because right now this forum is just chasing its own tail with Gal and ST waiving all arguments against the subject, with nobody other then '''JSD, Nada, Panda, DP, Cpt. Canuck, Zodiaque, Ryu, WU, Jade, and myself''' having an issue with him.

Hang on, I seem to be having trouble counting. Is that ten people who have said something about wishing to see Gal either be banned, change his attitude or have his privileges removed? 03:42, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Alright. All the mods that have done anything to me, have seen this. I'm sure they will now know about the problem I get that I've said before. If it happens, I'll just tell them I experience a problem. So, sorry for bringing up this hole in the forum. Honestly, I think we should start a poll and get on with it. My apologies. Also, Galaxy already apologized, so I really don't think the chat issues are a problem anymore. 03:50, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

No that's eleven people. You forgot to count yourself. SeaTerror (talk) 03:56, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

There, are you happy now? This is going to be detrimental to the image renaming process, but you got what you wanted. And what? I haven't waived any of the arguments. 04:01, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Ten, let's use the magic of code.


 * JSD
 * 1) Nada
 * 2) Panda
 * DP
 * 1) Cpt. Canuck
 * 2) Zodiaque
 * Ryu
 * WU
 * 1) Jade
 * 2) Myself

Magic!

And chat issues are a problem if they are continuous. Though, I am in favour of finally opening a poll and getting some results. Like I said in my first comment, I hate shitstorms like this and the sooner it's over the better. 04:02, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Too bad chat issues have nothing to do with ban forums as said many times by sff9. I also said to do the poll. Get the no ban crap over with and everybody can go on their way. SeaTerror (talk) 04:08, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Awww you forgot to add me to that list Kuro. :( 04:14, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Then I guess it's opening now. And sorry Calu, here's you chance to add yourself to the list~! 04:17, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with pretty much everything Kuro's said. The only thing I wish to add is that Gal should have thought about his actions and their consequences before he kicked/banned Sanji, the burden shouldn't be on Sanji to tell others about his feelings (especially after the fact). 06:06, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

can someone tell me why only users that have been here for at least 3 months can vote-- 16:16, May 5, 2013 (UTC)


 * Canuck, it's because of a more "experience" thing. We have to know you're mature enough to know what you're doing, so-to-speak. Like how you can't vote until you're 18 in the United States. 16:56, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

...whatever, judging from the poll it looks like my vote wouldnt have made a difference-- 17:00, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

That's not why at all. I was here for the original forum and it was my idea in the first place. It was made because a lot of people would just try to sign up and vote on a random forum or tried to vote as IPs. SeaTerror (talk) 17:13, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Poll
The poll is currently closed. The poll closed at 04:00 May 12, 2013 (UTC). Galaxy9000 will not be banned.

This poll will decide if User:Galaxy9000 should be banned for reasons described in the discussion above. If the vote decides that he will be banned, a second poll will be opened next week to decide the length.

Should Galaxy9000 be banned?


 * Yes, he should be banned.
 * 04:37, May 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * 06:06, May 5, 2013 (UTC) I'm genuinely disappointed things had to work out this way.
 * 08:43, May 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) User:Coffee Shop Corporate Raider
 * 16:55, May 5, 2013 (UTC) (Look at Genocyber's forum. Now back to this. Spot the differences.)


 * No, he should not be banned.
 * 1) SeaTerror (talk) 04:23, May 5, 2013 (UTC) (http://i.qkme.me/3u8gn4.jpg)
 * 04:37, May 5, 2013 (UTC) Everything has been sorted out is what I've seen.
 * 04:39, May 5, 2013 (UTC) (This is completely unnecessary)
 * 1) (Why are comments allowed here?)
 * 06:55, May 5, 2013 (UTC) (You just got to be kidding me... Has it really come to this?)
 * 1) Klobis (talk) 12:38, May 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * 2) -- 16:24, May 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * 19:13, May 5, 2013 (UTC) (He promised to be good, and I think he might.)
 * 03:33, May 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) MasterDeva (talk) 18:16, May 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * 03:46, May 7, 2013 (UTC)Zori (Eh...another ban forum?!)
 * 14:16, May 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * 19:23, May 9, 2013 (UTC) Ban all the users

Not again
Why does Gal have administrator rights again?! One of the main points of discussion in the section above was that he couldn't be trusted to have admin rights. Regardless of the outcome of his ban poll, I maintain that he still should not have administrator rights for any amount of time. I think discussion above proves that. If you want images renamed so badly, appoint someone else who can be trusted and hasn't had a ban forum opened in their name. There are many users who can do this, Galaxy9000 is not special. 23:29, May 15, 2013 (UTC)

Because I get the job done. Hardly a main point either, since only you supported it. What's even funnier is that the person who you think was oppressed voted no ban above! 23:30, May 15, 2013 (UTC)

If DP or Yata or Deva or someone else saw fit to give Gal a temp admin position, then we should trust their judgement unless Gal starts abusing their power(which i doubt he will)-- 23:38, May 15, 2013 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the job would be done now if you actually did it. I see some slacking off with your contributions, because you're uploading images and arguing in edit wars than renaming images. This past week has been a bit slacking of your job, especially since it's not even that important. You've bragged at other admins like MasterDeva to do their job, so why aren't you? 23:42, May 15, 2013 (UTC)

Except I do do it, so stop making stuff up. When you had the powers, you did like 10 a day max, so yeah...

Apparently doing other wikia jobs is a bad thing? Once again, I've told you how your opinion on what's important DOESN'T mean it isn't important. And I've never done that, so stop making stuff up. Oh look,. Lying gets you nowhere when the proof is right there. 23:44, May 15, 2013 (UTC)

Doing other Wikia jobs is not a bad thing. Doing other Wikia "jobs" which include edit wars more than renaming images is a bad thing. Look here. Yes, you've talked down to MasterDeva for "not doing things", and even debated to demote him again. And now I see you're back to the insulting. 23:53, May 15, 2013 (UTC)

so then lets stop with the insults, both of you, plz 23:59, May 15, 2013 (UTC)

Debating to demote is not talking down. Nothing I said is an insult either. Haven't edit warred either, since I'm using the talk pages (not like I never did anyways). 00:00, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

. Also, those two, and many more, are evidence of you actually making up rules. That alone is against our rules. Decisions are made by the community. That whole "hasn't been a month" is ridiculous and was just an excuse to continue the war. 00:07, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

The default thing was actually a misunderstanding, due to many people using it for the past few months. You exploited it though, even though you knew it was fake. 00:11, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

You abused it for months, then suddenly added a "one month" thing which was never used. That's making up rules. 00:13, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

Like I said misunderstanding, but you clearly exploited it when you knew it was fake. 00:14, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

Let's go over what "getting the job done" entails, shall we? I think you'll find the category is more than a bit over-inflated.


 * Leaving renamed images in the category after renaming it.


 * Apparently, we need to specify that a filler character's infobox is, in fact, from the anime.


 * And we need to have a period after "vs" on every image with it.


 * Apparently, sometimes you can get an image renamed to a perfectly fine name, and still not be happy with it.


 * And some file names just just need to be longer.

Honestly, after looking at the category I think Galaxy is intentionally leaving it large so that he can retain these administrator rights as long as possible. When a user is given temporary administrator rights to do a job, they should try and complete that job as quickly as possible to have the rights for as short an amount of time as possible. Galaxy is not doing that, in fact, I think he's doing just the opposite. Don't believe me? Here's a little bit of incriminating evidence that proves it:

http://i1091.photobucket.com/albums/i389/uknownada/OWAiLGy_zpsc5a712e9.jpg

If you're not renaming images from the category, when does the work end, Galaxy? If you can't answer that question, you shouldn't be a temporary admin, since it won't be long before you're just a temporary admin all the time. 00:44, May 16, 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually about the images that kept being in the category after being renamed, I'm the one who was removing the template from the images as Gal was renaming so apparently I missed some. 06:54, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

I am doing portraits as Staw and others link them to me, and other times as well. They'd be IN the category if I didn't do them. The work ends when all of the images in the category are done, and all the infoboxes and portraits are renamed to the new standards. I AM PERFECTLY FINE with other people being appointed as well in order to get it done faster. About "leaving them in the category", that's because I was renaming as Staw gave them to me, and he said he would take care of it. You seem to misunderstand that the category isn't the ONLY problem. You're also the one who started putting "vs." because it's the correct way to do it, so why should file names be any different? Specifying they're from the anime is to help with the new template. You really should ask Sff about these things if you want to fully understand them. There's also nothing wrong with marking for rename if I feel my older name wasn't specific enough. You are making a big deal out of nothing when ALL I use the powers for is to rename. This is a BAN forum by the way, so maybe you should make a "temporary admin" forum. 00:54, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

You guys will just find any reason to get someone in trouble if you don't like them, and It's really getting pathetic to be honest. Both reopening this and the Nada forum Gal just opened are plain and simple unnecessary and stupid. "We hate SHB now he spoke out against us, lets find someway to get him banned." This is how this sort behaviour make myself and many people feel, enough is enough. Cheers 01:10, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

^ totally agree with Sloth Hat Boy, 02:32, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

Talk about taking Internet seriously XDXD but still, Gal was Temp admin? T^T Why no one tell me anything?? Looks like the "Admin Campaign" we started finally paid off. 02:52, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

I am temp admin MDM. It's to fix images. 02:55, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/File:FUNimation_Season_5_Voyage_1_DVD_Cover.png?diff=prev&oldid=945143 ..... 14:11, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

? Fixing something isn't against any rules. 14:14, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

Fixing something is against the rules when it's actually against the rules. See [http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:Yatanogarasu/Archive_5#.22New.22_Image_Rule_clarification. this] and this. I told people to leave the image alone, since Duelmaster had been warned of the image guidelines multiple times, but Galaxy ignored that and removed my deletion template anyways.

Old news, but telling a user to isn't cool, especially when it's over something as trivial and unimportant as making sure all the words in an image's name are capitalized. In no way is that wrong, and just speaks further to how the misnamed images category is over-inflated. 15:21, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

You're wrong JSD. It isn't against the rules to fix the images, as Yata said it was FINE if I did so. If you have a problem with duelmaster, open a ban forum for him.

GTFO can mean a variety of things, such as get the freak out, or get the fudge out. Making sure the words in the image name are capitalized helps make the search function better. Also, remember that my promise isn't broken by crap said over a month ago. 15:25, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

All of you cool down. Now let's clarify, about uploading images: Does that sum things up? 16:49, May 16, 2013 (UTC)
 * If the image does not have sources, licensing and categories one hour after uploading, then it would be deleted the moment I catch sight of it.
 * If someone else catches it before I do and rectifies it, then I guess the image would be fine for using.
 * However, Duelmaster (or anyone else for that matter) is breaking the rules for refusing to give the source himself. His repeatedly actions makes him indeed a rule-breaker, and therefore, warrants a warning, and eventually a ban if he persists.

Oh this crap again? Just and Nada only brought that up because they were butthurt and trying to bring in chat issues which have no bearing on actual wikia contributions. This section should just be completely ignored and everybody should go on their way and do other stuff. SeaTerror (talk) 17:23, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion 2
Last time this forum was called off on the basis that Gal improves his behaviour. That clearly hasn't happened:


 * Not adding a poll to the Open Polls category, thus allowing his option to win basically uncontested.


 * Editwarring over the importance of bloodshot eyes


 * Editwarring over a flopping tongue


 * Editwarring for the sake of putting in a manga image I guess


 * Editwarring whilst telling people not to editwar


 * Editwar for the sake of foaming mouths


 * Claiming stuff isn't allowed while it is


 * Manga for the sake of manga


 * "canon angle"


 * claiming censorship when both versions are basically the same

I realise that Gal is far from the only editor participating in these manga vs. anime editwars, but he's at the heart of almost all of them. 09:40, May 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * Jinbe totally needs to be in this picture

Well said. Gal's behavior clearly hasn't changed but he keeps edit warring just because he wants to change everything to manga. 09:45, May 24, 2013 (UTC)

I have kept my promise.

The poll thing was a mistake, so not sure how that's bannable.

Reverting to the original... in most of them. That's the rule, and you broke it numerous times. The haki image is barely a war. Apparently having an opinion is bannable now! 12:48, May 24, 2013 (UTC)

Oh this forum again. SeaTerror (talk) 16:55, May 24, 2013 (UTC)

Oh this response again. If you have nothing constructive to say don't say anything ST. 17:05, May 24, 2013 (UTC)

Just to clear something up, about that Buggy portrait, the reason why I didn't un-capitalize it was because it wasn't my job. It's still a "png" image, and it still carries its correct name. I was removing that template because the deed was done. Galaxy re-adding it when it didn't belong COULD in fact be treated as vandalism. And telling a user to get out? I didn't even notice that. Seems very uncivil. I'm just sayin'. Carry on. 23:09, May 24, 2013 (UTC)

That's not vandalism. Your job was to rename images in the category, and you knew that .PNGs messed with the search function. 14:42, May 25, 2013 (UTC)

Panda's examples clearly show that Gal's behavior hasn't changed. the image was polled because Gal kept saying the discussion wasn't over, even though everyone else agreed with using the anime version. Look at the poll result. For the reasons that came up during the previous discussion and for the ones that have come up now, I think he should be banned. 16:52, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

The discussion wasn't over, because it had only lasted for 12 hours. 16:56, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

The discussion was over concerning the original participants but the issue wasn't resolved between them all. That's why I suggested to poll it, which is something we should always do in case no agreement is reached through discussion. I would agree with Awaikage's point if Galaxy9000 was the only one voting against. However three other users supported the manga version, so it wasn't only him opposed. MasterDeva (talk) 17:04, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

Gal wasn't the only one, but he was in the clear minority. Anyway, there's plenty more examples in Panda's comment. Shall we vote? 17:52, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Panda but I'm not a construction worker. SeaTerror (talk) 17:57, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

No Kage, that isn't how it works. You keep trying to close discussions a few hours after it started. That's not how we do things around here. Also, no, since we don't poll for the clear minority. 17:59, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

There's no clear minority here. 18:04, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

I agree we should poll it again for the reasons Deva stated but you all know we won't ban galaxy just because he edit wars because you all know that's unfair. I was pretty sad when Genos was banned because he edit wars since everyone that edits images edit wars. So either ban all of them (me included) or stop opening and bumping ban forums for this reason. 18:12, May 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * Genocyber had it coming. He's been an editor for three whole years and he hardly uses the talk page, to justify his reasons, when image edit wars happen. You on the other hand at least try to participate and you've been only here for seven months. It is not the same thing at all. MasterDeva (talk) 18:47, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

Poll or not, this seems quite rude and I'd say he's broken his promise. 18:34, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

What's rude about pointing out detail differences? 18:43, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

He's referring to this: ''You always like the version that's the lowest quality. You're also being a hypocrite since you go crazy over detail, but look at this and say "Lol! Galaxy loves manga, so I better go for the worst image possible!" Childish.'' 18:46, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

Ah that. Maybe I went a little overboard, but that's hardly offensive. 18:48, May 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * As the person who said it, you're not really in a position to say if it's offensive or not. You have a bit of a bias here. That's for the community to decide.


 * To me, it seems quite rude, especially for someone who promised to be nicer. You don't need to swear to not be nice. It's insulting. That quote certainly makes editing unpleasant, so I'd call it not nice. 19:07, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

It wasn't meant to be offensive. That's honestly how I feel about his voting habits. 19:12, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

Calling somebody childish is insulting to a person it wasn't aimed at. Got it. SeaTerror (talk) 19:12, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

Doesn't matter if you meant it to be offensive or not. Intent doesn't matter, it's how it is the reception of it that counts. You can't just say "I didn't mean it to be taken that way" and get away with it. 19:16, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

I have to agree. Galaxy's behavior improved slightly for maybe a week, but has since regressed and gotten worse. Quite frankly, it's unacceptable. 19:18, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

Check the rules.

"Purposefully insulting or offending other editors of the Wiki is unacceptable and is a ban-worthy offense. The Wiki is a community of internet users working towards a common goal, and petty insults impair the community's ability to reach their goal."

"Purposefully" is the key word.

It's improved way more then that DP. ALL of Panda's examples follow the edit war guidelines. 19:19, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

First of all, I disagree over your interpretation of that rule, but that's useless to argue about here. Just know that I don't agree about it.

Second, my main reason for citing that quote is because regardless of the rules, in part 1 of this forum, you promised to be nicer. I don't think you lived up to that, and I want people to know about it. 19:24, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

Can you cite other examples then? I've seen far worse from other users. I was much worse before the first forum. 19:26, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

Ignoring Gal's sad attempt at finding a loophole, we're not talking about other users, and if you ask me, you're about the same right now as before. Something else I've noticed that I feel I should point out is that you've been getting an overinflated sense of entitlement, mainly about images. You made no attempt to discuss the color manga images, despite it being a potentially huge change. If I hadn't stopped you, would have kept going regardless of what anyone else thought. And holding polls over whether or not to use a manga or anime shot in an infobox when you were the only one who wanted the manga. You may have made some progress since the last time this forum was opened, but the way I see it you still have a long way to go, and frankly you haven't made too significant of an improvement to begin with. 19:48, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

We didn't think the colored images would be that big of a deal. The moment complaints started coming, we stopped. There is no entitlement. 20:16, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

I believe I was the first person who suggested a forum when you guys were uploading them during chat the other day. I guess it's a good thing I did. 20:25, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

Complete agreement with DP about the sense of entitlement. Gal seems to be way too focused on making big changes to the wiki without proper discussion first. I have no idea if he's just too focused on jumping the gun, or wants to increase his edit counts, but I'm sick of it. This hasn't really been discussed in other parts of the forum, but it should be mentioned. Too many times have forums and talk page discussions been created after a pooch he's screwed without talking about it first.

And I've spent several hours over the last month trying to find for every part of this forum. There, I told him that the "Default Version" rule he invented wasn't a real rule, and I was ignored for weeks until it was resolved later. I hate to toot my own horn, but I'm the leader of the Image Team and I know the Image Guidelines. Gal didn't trust me there though, and it led to a lot more edit wars as a result. Trust is key to a wiki running smoothly. 20:26, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

That was for the covers, but the forum has since then transformed into a general colored images forum.

JSD, you keep bringing up issues before my promise.

There is no entitlement. I stop the moment people start complaining. Can you cite other examples of forums and talk pages? 20:29, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

Ok, another example, this time from "after the promise":. . These images are yet another case revolving around image edit wars, and the rules for reverting. For the record, the rule is to revert to the "original version" which was the one first uploaded of the images being warred over. Here, he once again tried to use the rule he made up about a "default version", or some image that was "accepted" before the war. After I corrected it, he tried to take advantage of my words through some kind of imagined loophole, and reverted to the very first version uploaded, which was poor quality, in terms of pixelation, animation quality, and quality of the poses. Nobody would ever want those images for the portraits. In no edit wars before this did we revert to the very first version of the image. And most importantly, if it actually was the rule that we use the very first image, I would have reverted to it. There is no way that is the rule, and Galaxy knew that. There is no "mistake". The only explanation is that he reverted out of spite because of how the edit war worked out.

Galaxy has once again broken the rules and his promise. Reconsider your votes. 19:32, May 30, 2013 (UTC)

He keeps making up rules that's true. 19:37, May 30, 2013 (UTC)

Not really. You stated that it has to go to the earliest image, so it went to the earliest image. Once again, this does not break my promise. 19:56, May 30, 2013 (UTC)

What's that acceptable image rule? A rule you made up. Like the default rule. 19:59, May 30, 2013 (UTC)

I'd love to see the rule that says it has to stay on the original. Can't find it anywhere. 20:00, May 30, 2013 (UTC)

gal has decided to leave the wiki so i believe that makes the poll pointless and i would also advise any users reading this to say their goodbyes to him before he leaves-- 16:38, May 31, 2013 (UTC)

Unless Gal wants to voluntarily be banned to make sure he can stay away from the wiki, the poll must continue. The poll shouldn't be cancelled just because he says he's not coming back, because there's no guarantee there. 17:22, May 31, 2013 (UTC)

if only i joined a month sooner, anyway what would happen if a vote resulted in a tie?-- 02:17, June 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * There would be a 3 day extension, and the community would be notified. 02:26, June 2, 2013 (UTC)

Have you noticed that since Gal decided to "leave" the wiki (he still edits every day though) we haven't had an edit war. that means something, doesn't it? 15:23, June 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * It takes two to edit-war .. just putting it out there.

Um...you don't have to state the obvious. I'm sure everyone has noticed that already. 15:26, June 2, 2013 (UTC)

Loving the attitude there Lelouch. 00:57, June 3, 2013 (UTC)

Poll 2
The poll is currently closed. The poll was extended and closed at June 5th at 21:00 UTC. User:Galaxy9000 will be banned.

This poll will decide if User:Galaxy9000 should be banned for reasons described in the discussion above. If the vote decides that he will be banned, a second poll will be opened next week to decide the length. Galaxy9000 cannot vote.

Should Galaxy9000 be banned?


 * Yes, he should be banned.
 * 18:20, May 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * 20:27, May 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * 22:01, May 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * 12:57, May 27, 2013 (UTC) (If attitude and behaviour improves I might change my mind)
 * 19:37, May 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * 19:38, May 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * 20:29, May 30, 2013 (UTC)
 * 20:45, May 30, 2013 (UTC) (Take some time away, and come back with a different approach to things)
 * 15:06, May 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * 15:25, May 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * 17:26, May 31, 2013 (UTC) :3
 * 1) Hungry made me do it.
 * 2) CSCR ur mum
 * 21:27, June 2, 2013 (UTC) There should be consequences for his actions, even though he apologized for his actions.


 * No, he should not be banned.
 * 1) I like his work, its always in in positive direction and thats all that matters to me
 * 2) MasterDeva (talk) 18:40, May 26, 2013 (UTC) (You are rushing things Awaikage.)
 * 3) SeaTerror (talk) 18:43, May 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * 21:24, May 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Klobis (talk) 05:57, May 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * 13:35, May 27, 2013 (UTC) (He does NOT deserve to be Banned)
 * 13:55, May 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * 17:26, May 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * 19:31, May 29, 2013 (UTC)
 * 19:59, June 1, 2013 (UTC)Zori (Gal is a great editor, he doesn't deserve to be banned) oops!
 * 02:41, June 2, 2013 (UTC) http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:Uknownada#An_Apology
 * 20:43, May 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * 02:41, June 2, 2013 (UTC) http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:Uknownada#An_Apology
 * 20:43, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

Length Poll
This poll is currently closed. It closed June 12, 2013 at 21:00 UTC. You had to have have been here for 3 months and have at least 300 edits to vote.

This poll decided that User:Galaxy9000 will be banned for 1 week.


 * 1 week
 * 21:18, June 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * 02:17, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * 08:09, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * 12:12, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) MasterDeva (talk) 12:13, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * 2) Klobis (talk) 12:26, June 6, 2013 (UTC) The one who should be banned is not Galaxy.
 * 13:29, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) SeaTerror (talk) 18:11, June 7, 2013 (UTC)
 * 18:32, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * 18:32, June 9, 2013 (UTC)


 * 2 weeks
 * 21:03, June 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * 21:05, June 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * 21:05, June 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * 21:11, June 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * 01:19, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * 02:20, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * 03:02, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * 12:04, June 6, 2013 (UTC)


 * 1 month


 * 3 months


 * 6 months


 * 1 year

Length Discussion
Anything from a week to 3 months should be on the table, anything longer seems excessive, since it's his first ban and he actually apologized in a few places. It's my understanding that the options of the length are up for discussion. 21:11, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

i agree with you and i would also like to suggest that we go against protocol and do not ban gal for the duration of the length poll because i highly doubt he would vandalize pages -- 21:22, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

The options can be there. He won't get banned for that long anyway. And no Canuck, we can't just make exceptions like that. It's in the rules. Also he may still edit war, which is what got him banned in the first place. 21:29, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

Permaban option mustn't be in polls about a user's first ban. 21:30, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, the permaban option is not allowed if it's the user's first ban. After the first ban, the permaban option is available. 02:02, June 6, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I think Jade's right. Also, if anyone wants to discuss changing the rule about banning people during the 2nd week of polls, I've made a proposal here. 02:53, June 6, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion 3
I feel Galaxy needs another ban. He has not learned to play nice with others, and has been micromanaging every single picture on this place. He is still unwilling to allow any changes on certain pictures and tends to act like he knows better than anyone else. This attitude is hard to deal with, and its what turned me off from coming here for a long while. Despite my reputation here, I generally try to get along with others as he seems to just want to argue and keep things his way. Genocyber (talk) 21:30, June 24, 2013 (UTC)

i disagree-- 21:33, June 24, 2013 (UTC)

First of all, please make a new section when you post on something about a different topic, Geno.

Second, I wholeheartedly disagree. Galaxy was entirely correct in this situation. None of his words since returning have been offensive or insulting. And for the record, Galaxy isn't "micromanaging every image", he's just making sure our rules and policies are followed. I would have taken the exact same steps Galaxy did had I been online at the time. 22:25, June 24, 2013 (UTC)

If anyone is unwilling to allow changes on pictures it's you. You cling to badly detailed obsolete versions as soon as galaxy tries to improve it with a better version.

You're just being pissy because you're edit-warring with him. 18:47, June 25, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion 4
I want to open a new discussion for galaxy's behavior. I might not be the perfect person to judge but he is really getting on my nerves with various things he does. First of all those spam messages he leaves on random talk pages, with no real importance and full of irony and trolling are anything but productive. Examples: Those are just a few. I have asked him multiple times to stop, on chat and on his talk page (too lazy to find the links, I even asked again once today) but his replies were just the same trolling. This and his overall behavior absolutely does not benefit the wiki since because of his own beliefs, he cause other users to quit on editing and such, only making the wiki look more hostile. Also he has broken various rules such as edit warring pages while it's still discussed and other users telling him to stop (Making previously deleted redirects:Peeker, BB etc, file edit wars that have gone unnoticed and similar things.) Frankly these reasons may sound stupid to even me but due to his overall hostile behavior I really support banning him for a little while. 19:51, February 2, 2014 (UTC)
 * User_talk:Staw-Hat_Luffy/Archive_3
 * User_talk:Staw-Hat_Luffy/Archive_3
 * User_talk:Staw-Hat_Luffy/Archive_3
 * User_talk:Staw-Hat_Luffy
 * User_talk:Straw_Hat_Boy
 * User_talk:SeaTerror
 * User_talk:Red_Eyed_Raven

i agree, he's always causing making pointless arguments that help no one, he harasses people on chat after they disagree with him on a talk page discussions (i seem to recall him saying "lets all look at a retarded comment" more than a few times before linking to a comment disagreeing with him) he has also accused many people of being and/or having socks (like myself, staw and Lord Gaimon) and im kinda sick of him-- 19:56, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

yeah, i agree he's always calling me a sock for no reason Lord Gaimon (talk) 19:58, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

He's asking people to post on talk pages, and he's being very nice about it. There's no arguing in his posts and they're worded with gracious language. If you find that annoying and disruptive then I don't know what to tell you besides suck it up. If you think that trying to get things done and being civil about doing them is a ban-worthy action, then I have no problem telling you this:

Trying to get someone banned for trying to get things done and being civil is the single most retarded thing I've seen on this wiki.

I'm not trying to insult anyone by saying that, I'm just stating that I think it's really fucked up and doesn't make any sense to me. 20:06, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

were not trying to ban him for trying to get things done, were trying to ban him for being rude, and causing pointless arguments as well as dragging them out even when he's the only one disagreeing or there's a clear majority against him-- 20:11, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

This doesn't even seem that bad. Overreaction, much? 20:13, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

I agree, he gets picky over the Anime/Manga thing which is tiresome

Joekido (talk) 20:19, February 2, 2014 (UTC) Yeah... none of those talk page messages break any rules. Reminding you to check a discussion is not malicious. (The ones toward Straw Hat Boy, Raven, and SeaTerror are joke responses. No harm done, and I wouldn't do it to them if they told me not to.)

Would love to see examples of those "edit wars". BB was deleted by you the first time, and you aren't someone with any administrative decision. I'd say your deletion of them when there was protest is more a breaking of the rules. Peeker was remade because yet again, it was deleted with no discussion. Now, there's a talk page discussion for it.

Any file wars have been for the rules actually. You should know by now about the 1 month default rule, which I've followed since it has been implanted.

Sockpuppets... The accusal is there because of the hundreds of sockpuppets that have been created in the past by chat participants (a few by Staw himself, and Raven as well). The message sync factor is also there, but I could definitely be wrong about it. Calling Gaimon a sock once though, is also a "no harm done" thing. If you're legitimate though Gaimon, then I apologize profusely. 20:14, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Gal argues at times. I challenge you to find a user who doesn't. He is (usually) polite, he does a lot of the work the rest of us don't want to, and simply having a point of view and wanting it to be heard is not a crime. I'm against him being banned for the reasons listed. 20:16, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Is Galaxy annoying? I find him to be. Should he be banned? Nope, I never see him doing anything ban worthy. I just think were making a mountain of a mole hill. Though Galaxy, don't accuse people of being socks unless the name is extremely similar to another, and they act exactly like another user.

20:19, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

At the same time, he's been nothing but stubborn about everything even when clearly outnumbered. His ego's getting too inflated. A ban might help put a pin in it. 20:19, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

well if you're sorry, really sorry, really really sorry like really really really sorry then NO apologie accepted Lord Gaimon (talk) 20:23, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

"Pickiness" is not a bannable offense JoeKido. It all leads to a civil discussion anyways. "Stubbornness" is also not bannable. I obviously stand down if I'm the ONLY one in support (and don't list Peeker as an example, since I'm not the only one on the talk page who supports it, multiple are neutral, and there are 3-4 people that outright support the redirect.) 20:25, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:Genocyber?diff=1113813&oldid=1113812 Geno already said what needed to be said before about this. SeaTerror (talk) 20:24, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

no an apology isnt going to cover this, to paraphrase geno, gal is like poison to the wiki, he does edit a lot but he is more harm than good and he needs to calm down, take a break from the wiki for a while and then come back and help the wiki instead of hurting it -- 20:26, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah.. Geno calling me a "cruel cancer to the wiki" is definitely a valid statement... sure...

I was actually only apologizing to Gaimon Raven, since I might've hurt his feelings by calling him a sockpuppet. Once again, I ask you to list the harm (me reverting images breaks no rules if there's no majority/if no talk page discussion has happened) 20:28, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Okay, let's just poll at this point. Let's save time and poll. If Galaxy should be banned, and how long.

20:29, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

dont BS this gal, we all know youre only "apologizing" because this forum was opened, if it wasnt you wouldnt have done it. as for your harm and despite your opinion dragging out talk page arguments and forums that should have already been resolved is harm-- 20:31, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Yep, I would've apologized to Gaimon, if I knew I was wrong about the sock thing. Find examples of both of those please. Discussing something breaks no rules. 20:33, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

NOOO! no poll cause i can't vote in it Lord Gaimon (talk) 20:36, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

The problem isn't that you were wrong, the problem is that you assumed it in the first place and ran on that baseless judgment. 20:37, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Don't forget driving away multiple users from the wiki. SeaTerror (talk) 20:38, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

I am also against Gal being banned, I agree with what Nova said. 20:39, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Also u can understand that Gaimon is having fan here and he dgaf, he's just trolling. 20:42, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

DP, it's not like I harassed him about it for days and days. It was literally a 5 minute conversation, in chat. Nothing to do with the wiki as a whole honestly.

People leaving because of me, why, exactly, ST? Because I like to have discussions? 20:48, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

No gal, it's because of your attitude. And that's what I made this section for, your hostile attitude towards other users, either new users like Gaimon or old users like the ones you have caused to leave (not gonna name them, we know who they are) 20:52, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Really, there's no hostility in most of my comments at all. Maybe you're thinking of how I was acting before my first ban? 20:54, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Ban the man already Supernova X-Drake aka Roranoa Zoro II (talk) 21:01, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Don't use Gaimon as an example while u know he dgaf and almost every one called him a sock. 21:07, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Nobody but Galaxy called him a sock. SeaTerror (talk) 21:09, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

We did call him a sock ST, be it for fan or not, gal just went too far with it. But Gaimon is not the only user being treated like that by gal, I remember countless of times when gal has judged people solely by their edit count and has treated them badly. Like I remember a guy who had come in chat with only one edit saying he doesn't like something on an article and gal kept linking him a screenshot of his edit count instead of actually replying. But that was long ago anyway, maybe even before his first ban, just brought it up as example to show that gaimon is not the first one. 21:15, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

"Too far" being 5 minutes longer? Not really...

Don't remember the incident that you just posted, so yeah, probably before my first ban. 21:17, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

No, too far because you started talking about going to staff to find out. But anyway, chat stuff are not a reason why a user should be banned form wiki, that's for sure. 21:22, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

And yet, you mentioned it in the first post, as a primary reason... 21:23, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Where did I say anything about the chat? 21:28, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

Ah, it was Raven's post, right below yours. Sorry for the mix-up. 21:30, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

I don't think Galaxy did something banworthy. I don't support the ban. 22:25, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

gal what you do on chat isnt by itself ban worthy but combined with your overall arrogant attitude, your insults and harassment, your compulsion to always argue every little thing and never stop even when everyone is against you and the fact that you have driven several users away from the wiki with your actions are-- 00:00, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

Arrogance might be an issue, but I'm not arrogant enough to break any rules. Arguing also isn't against any rules, and I always stop once the majority has been clear. If people are leaving because they don't like the way a user edits, then I don't know what to say.... But none of these "actions" you're describing are bannable in any way. 00:14, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

Gal, I'll be blunt. You don't respect other people's opinions a lot of the time, and you're an argumentative sod. But it's not like you're the only one, so I'm against having you banned while others guilty of the same go without a reprimand. 00:29, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

he isnt the only one, but he's the worst that does it the most-- 00:32, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

You don't have to break rules outright to get banned. Gal, you might stop when the majority is clear sometimes, but if even one person agrees with you, you push on like you have a whole army worth of backers. Just think about it. This is the fourth time a ban has been brought up. Has it ever once registered with you that "Hmm, maybe my behavior is subpar as repeatedly noted by those unhappy with me. I should do something about that." The first time you were banned, you were actually better when you came back. That lasted maybe two weeks. Two awesome weeks. Think about your behavior right after you came back from your ban. That's the kind of behavior you should strive for at a minimum at all times. Your arrogance has gotten to the point that you can't acknowledge your own flaws anymore. Look at how others perceive you. You are by no means perfect. None of us are. Without people to keep us in check we'd, well, we'd end up just like you. Come down from your high horse and join the rest of us again. People aren't getting pissed off at you because they're bored, they actually have viable reasons. Reasons that for some reason you refuse to acknowledge. I know that you'll probably just shrug this off like you do with every other jab at your character, so this probably won't mean squat. Just know that when people get pissed off at you, that usually means you're doing something wrong or disagreeable. Check yourself before you instantly assume they're wrong. A little self-awareness never hurt anyone. 00:48, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

^DP 100% right.--

DP summed it up really damn well. 13:13, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

Gal's attitude is not the best one on the wiki, but it's not the worst either. If people seriously want to ban Gal for having an attitude that's not the best and being a little stubborn, then there are plenty of others who need bans too. If you want to ban Gal for a little while because of his attitude, you might as well ban Staw, Nada, DP, SHB, Joekido, myself and any other user who's been arguing a bit too much with a bit too much rough language. And let's not forget "The King of Never Admitting He's Wrong", and "The Duke of Ignoring Arguments", SeaTerror, who if you think Gal needs a ban, deserves to be permanently banned right now.

Instead of just throwing out bans for more than half the active editors here, let's just take the existence of this discussion as something we can all learn from. Nobody needs to be banned for this yet. The wiki still manages to function ok with all the bad-spirited discussions on it. It won't last much longer if they go on like this, but if everyone learns from this, then we'd all be better for it. So if you want to ban someone for a shitty attitude, fine. But we should at least do it for anything that happens after this point. Let's just take this discussion as a warning for everyone. Let's not hang Gal out to dry for things that half a dozen other people do, and many of them do in a much harsher fashion. 15:58, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

Finally, someone who agrees with me. 16:03, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

I'll happily be banned if it means Gal is also banned. 16:09, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

I don't know where this came from. There are probably things that go under my radar but i can speak about talk page arguments. Where is the harm on using a talk page to discuss for as long as you want on a matter? If people are tired of a discussion, they can stop participating. To be honest, Gal is of the few people who actually have arguments when using talk pages, and doesn't post comments like "No it isn't.". Finally, speaking about myself, 1-2 times I asked something he was willing to help and he did so politely even though I was asking something stupid at the time. I don't know if he is trolling, but he is extremely polite when using user talk pages. Oh, and I can think of 2-3 users that are way more rude and counterproductive in forums and talk pages.

I couldn't agree more with JSD, well said. 18:02, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with JSD too. Everyone here (including myself) argues and can be stubborn but it isn't worth banning someone over. If we really want to stop all the arguments we should all remember that it takes two people to have an argument. 18:20, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

It's not the arguments, it's his behavior. 18:43, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

Everybody else is just ignoring the arguments already said. SeaTerror (talk) 18:57, February 3, 2014 (UTC)


 * What arguments do you think I'm ignoring, specifically? If you tell me what they are, I won't ignore them. I just wanted to keep my post short.


 * If it's the chat thing, that shouldn't be a problem here. If he did something wrong in chat then he deserves a chat ban. That's why chat bans are a separate thing from wiki bans. And that decision is for people who have chat mod rights, not those without them. We don't discuss chat bans as a community. 20:48, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

None of the things listed at the top of this section are ban-worthy either. They are just sarcastic talk page messages in a very civil tone (more so than many users) and are hardly enough to ban him over. Like JSD said, there are plenty of users here who have argued or been rude before without so much as a warning. 21:48, February 3, 2014 (UTC)

Too many sock puppets. SeaTerror (talk) 21:51, February 3, 2014 (UTC)