FANDOM


  • That sure was a good discussion we had about merging the Gunsmith pages, wasn't it?! Did you even look at it? Two people said "let's keep it" and then you just delete the whole page. Is that your definition of "merge"? Now you've got a Talk page floating around out there with no base page for it, and there's still a link to Gunsmith (RDR II) on the Gunsmith page!

      Loading editor
    • We as a staff team are already merging the RDR2 and RDR pages if they are of the same thing. I simply forgot to remove the link which I have done so now.

        Loading editor
    • The merging of pages is one of the projects that the staff teams has been pursuing. Many pages are unneeded, as the two things are effectively the same thing in both games. This applies to pages involving horses, items, and in this case, the gunsmith. The function of the gunsmith is the same in both games, and this lead to the merging of the pages.

      Also, even if two people state it should be merged, doesn't mean they'll be listened to. It takes a majority to do something, and even if there is a majority, we'll rule against it if we feel that our decision is best for the wiki.

        Loading editor
    • That's right. It is the duty of the staff to rule over the editors. Not to help, but to make decisions in secret and enforce them to the letter. Govern us, O staff, in your great wisdom!

        Loading editor
    • We simply have whats best for the wiki at heart. This decision was agreed upon by all staff members.

        Loading editor
    • It is a fact that we know the most about the wiki. While democracy and the opinion of editors is important, two people is harldy a majority, or enough to be even considered a proper vote. I would also tone down the sarcasm, it's unnecessary.

        Loading editor
    • Also, I stated that I was merging the pages in the editors bullpen of our discord server. No one disagreed.

        Loading editor
    • Exitwound 45 wrote: That's right. It is the duty of the staff to rule over the editors. Not to help, but to make decisions in secret and enforce them to the letter. Govern us, O staff, in your great wisdom!

      We do our best to allow editors the most freedom possible when editing. However, there are times when we must go around the editors. If they have a problem with it, they can go to our community noticeboard. However, it seems that most wiki editors almost never get involved in any form of voting. It seems likely that most wiki editors don't care much about the wiki's politics or what goes on behind the scenes.

        Loading editor
    • Just my two cents about "However, there are times when we must go around the editors.". I didn't see the discussion here on the RDR Wiki. Maybe you should move all staff decisions or discussions to the wiki and not have it on Discord or any other plattform so the editors and users can write down their opinion about the certain topics and merging pages.

      Maybe people didn't want to vote in the last months or weeks, but you certainly see that there are editors like Exit or Wag, who seem to care a lot about creating a better content. And these users shouldn't be left out, since they are the ones feeding the wiki with a ton of informations.

        Loading editor
    • Alright, well if the merge was discussed on Discord, then I apologize. (I've never used Discord before. I looked today and could find no such discussion.) I disagree, but I will try to accept the decision. However, the page "Gunsmith (RDR 2)" should have been made into a Redirect to "Gunsmith", rather than deleted.

      I also feel like I should bring to your attention your own policies: "Administrators and other staff are only here to help keep the wiki in good working order, they are not automatically correct, and they must stick to the rules like all other users." (Red Dead Wiki:All Editors are Equal) and "However, all editors are equal, and administrators should not be considered as being "in charge." Administrators can help resolve discussions, but they are there to uphold good behaviour, not to to tell other users what to do." (Red Dead Wiki:Administration).

        Loading editor
    • Cyanide3 wrote: Just my two cents about "However, there are times when we must go around the editors.". I didn't see the discussion here on the RDR Wiki. Maybe you should move all staff decisions or discussions to the wiki and not have it on Discord or any other plattform so the editors and users can write down their opinion about the certain topics and merging pages.

      Maybe people didn't want to vote in the last months or weeks, but you certainly see that there are editors like Exit or Wag, who seem to care a lot about creating a better content. And these users shouldn't be left out, since they are the ones feeding the wiki with a ton of informations.

      As staff members, most of our discussions on the wiki are supposed to be discussed in private. It may not be things that are on a CIA level of secrecy, but we still enjoy privacy in what we say and do.

      Also Exitwound, we do our best to not tell other users what to do. As I've stated before, we give users as much autonomy as possible. We stick to the rules, however there are times when we use another rules which states "If there is any rule(s) that is inhibiting from making this wiki a better and/or more descriptive site, ignore it.".

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.