The Sims Wiki talk:Admin Portal

This is the Admin Portal Talk Page, abbreviated as the APTP. This page is used by administrators to discuss administrative action, responsibilities, and tasks.

While non-administrators are more than welcome to read, browse, and link to discussions on this talk page, they cannot actively take part in discussions. If you wish to contact an administrator, or if you require assistance with anything else that is administrator-related, please start a thread at the administrators' noticeboard.

''These rules have taken effect as of July 31, 2014. Before this date, regular community members were allowed to participate in discussions on this page, so you may see non-administrators posting here. The proposal and discussion can be found here.''

Global Navigation header
There is currently a discussion going on about the incoming Global Navigation header. The discussion is not resolved yet but the prevailing opinion seems to be opposition to the new Global Navigation bar; there has so far been no support on that post for the new feature. As the wiki now has a Site Feature Policy, the will of the community needs to be heard. To that end, the policy specifies that we - the administrators - " take any step, short of violating Wikia's Terms of Use, to ensure proper adherence to [the Site Feature Policy]". The policy is silent on how to apply that directive, but it seems in this case the likely answer is to put in a Special Contact to Wikia Staff.

In the event that the discussion does indeed result in a rejection of the Global Navigation menu, I think we as admins should decide what message we want to send to Staff, and whether we are going to select a single admin to send the message or have individual admins send their own messages. Of course, the SFP does not limit an individual admin's options (except as it relates to Wikia's TOU), so each admin could choose to send their own message or pursue some other method of advocating for the community. However, I think we would benefit from having a cohesive message and a clear goal in our communications with staff.

So, I think we need to decide how we're going to contact staff, and what we're going to say in our contacts. --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 03:03, September 29, 2014 (UTC)


 * We should cite our Site feature policy and ask Wikia to give us time for our community to discuss the change, and then we'll present them the thread, the consensus, and the outcome of the discussion. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  11:02, September 29, 2014 (UTC)

Update: The outcome of the thread is clearly and unanimously (at the time of writing) opposed to the new Global Nav bar. As a result, I've drafted a suggested message for Wikia Staff. I'm not sure if we should all send the same message, but regardless I think the things included in the message below are a good place to start. Should we use one cohesive message, or should different admins write their own? Additionally, how many administrators should attempt to contact Wikia Staff? --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 07:07, October 11, 2014 (UTC)


 * Draft message


 * To whom it may concern,


 * I am an administrator on The Sims Wiki, contacting you in an official capacity on behalf of the editor community on The Sims Wiki. We have held a wiki discussion (located here: http://sims.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:New_Wikia_header_bar) regarding the pending changes to the Wikia Global Navigation header (as announced at: http://community.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:Rupert_Giles/Introducing_Updated_Global_Navigation). As a result of this community discussion, are formally requesting that The Sims Wiki be exempted from changes to the Global Navigation header.


 * While we respect Wikia's desire to update its theme, there are numerous legitimate concerns that the new header will be detrimental to The Sims Wiki and other Wikia wikis. Primary concerns include the inability for local wikis to customize the appearance of the header, a use of the term "wikia" to refer to the local wiki (i.e. the header incorrectly says "search this wikia" instead of the proper "search this wiki"), and concerns that the header is too large and obtrusive. Ultimately, the desire of Wikia to update its global navigation header should not outweigh the right of local communities to determine the look and feel of their wikis, the terms and names used to describe their wikis, or the ability to control how their wiki functions.


 * We are also seeking an exemption due to our official wiki Features Policy (readable here: http://sims.wikia.com/wiki/The_Sims_Wiki:Site_feature_policy). Under this wiki policy, all new Wikia features must be disabled by default, unless the changes are due to an update to MediaWiki itself. This policy exists to protect The Sims Wiki's right to determine its own function and appearance and to protect community consensus and community choice on our wiki. Ignoring this request for an exemption is ignoring wiki consensus, as an official wiki discussion (linked above) has shown that The Sims Wiki editor community is overwhelmingly opposed to these changes.


 * In closing, I politely but firmly request that Wikia abides by the wishes of The Sims Wiki's community, and allow The Sims Wiki to be exempted from the upcoming changes to the Global Navigation header.


 * Thank you for your consideration,


 * Name

I don't think having three administrators all send the same message will work. Sure, it might get the message out, but it will probably be more of an annoyance to Wikia Staff, rather than a request. I think the draft message above pretty much sums up our point. So the problem now is... who will send the message to Special:Contact? Do we draw lots? --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  14:15, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

Anniversary events
Hello admins,

I'm bringing this up here instead of on the CD forum because I don't want to heavily publicize something that may ultimately not come to fruition. I would like for us to come up with some way to commemorate or celebrate the 15th anniversary of The Sims series and the 10th anniversary of our Wiki; both anniversaries occur in the first week of February, about two weeks from now.

I would like to have some sort of game giveaway on the wiki. My rough idea is some sort of public blog, something along the lines of a Monthly Question blog insomuch as it would be a question/answer format, with users commenting on that blog in order to qualify for a random drawing to win a copy of The Sims 4. I can provide one or two copies of The Sims 4 or some other Sim game (perhaps a couple EPs for TS3 bundled together as one prize?), but I wouldn't want to pursue this idea without admin support here. If we were to try and host a giveaway like this, the resulting blog would likely need to be regularly moderated by admins. Additionally, depending on how we choose to give out the game codes, we may need staff involvement. I'm not sure since to my knowledge we've never attempted a game giveaway on the wiki before. I can send a message out to staff and see if they have any particular need to be involved, if this idea is well-received here.

Aside from a game giveaway, I'd love to think of some other ideas for celebration. Of course, anything we do come up with needs to be implemented quickly, as we're barely a week away from the TS1 anniversary date.

So, thoughts? --  LostInRiverview talk • blog  •  contribs 05:41, January 25, 2015 (UTC)


 * Sounds like an otherwise good idea... but I'm not sure if one week is enough to get it done. If needed we could offer a smaller prize or something. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  20:36, January 25, 2015 (UTC)
 * We can (and have) given away games on twitter so that's an option, however I would like to keep it on the wiki (maybe some sort of notice on social media as well). This is just my own preference. Maybe offer a couple of different prizes so we can do some sort of level thing, i.e. first wins TS4, second wins an ep, etc, also would help incase the winner already has the prize.


 * How about we also give a special userbox for those who participate? Of course in the end anyone can really attach it themselves in their own userpage, but I don't think it really matters? If someone uses the userbox while they didn't really participate, they decide. As for the giveaway idea, I'm not really familiar with it. How do we set up the procedure of the event and the prize?  Nikel  Talk  –  Vote!  10:36, January 26, 2015 (UTC)
 * Regarding the giveaway... We would write a blog post on the wiki and open it up to comments. After a certain period of time, say one week, we'd close the comments section down, remove any disqualified comments (i.e. comments by unregistered users, blocked users, or duplicate comments by the same person), and then randomly choose a winner or winners from the remaining comments. Then we would contact that user through their talk page and have them send an email to a member of the administrative team (probably me since I'd be giving the code away) to claim a game code. The game code would be redeemable in Origin for a copy of the game. --  LostInRiverview talk • blog  •  contribs 00:31, January 27, 2015 (UTC)

User:Ilovethesims199
So, PM'd me over MTS:

"Are you Nikel23 from the sims wiki because I wanted to ask if it would be ok for me to disable my accounts and create another for a clean start. Because I truly want to be a editor I just create more accounts because mine is globally blocked for infinite and I wanted a 2nd chance because I can be a good and valuable user. Please I counted and in 150 days all my accounts will be disabled and my new account will make you all proud. I won't sock anymore all I want is a clean start with a new name. I hope to be all you guys friends."

I think this should be discussed here. IIRC, I wasn't really around or paid any attention to him before he got blocked, so I can't really say much about what he has done. I know he's made numerous socks, i.e. Coolsimsplayer, SimsWikiaBulider1234, SimsContributor100, and JustinLovesWikia12345. That doesn't really make any good impression of him. I also noticed there are many other sockpuppetry blocks in Special:BlockList. Do they belong to this user? Last question; is he related to Coolkid1999 and/or ILoveSims5?

Can't they pick any easier names to remember? What do you guys say?  Nikel  Talk  –  Vote!  14:43, February 3, 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't support an unblock in this case, as they have gone straight back to vandalism and disruption after one unblock was made on the AGF principle. The user has constantly made apologetic unblock requests both here and on Wikipedia, and when declined they go back to creating new socks and vandalism. They've also sent me numerous emails asking about the block, and on the other side of the spectrum they have issued death threats on my Wikipedia talk page. There is a discussion on Wikipedia's incident noticeboard regarding this user. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  15:43, February 3, 2015 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose: Evidence shows this person is dishonest and unreliable. They were given chances to improve their behavior and they failed. Any claims they make indicating that they've turned over a new leaf should be treated with significant skepticism. This person has used up all their second chances, as far as I'm concerned.  LostInRiverview talk • blog  •  contribs 18:57, February 3, 2015 (UTC)
 * A definite no-no. It's hard to tell if they're being sincere or are taking the mick in their little note to you. If they attempt to make another account, I say we drop the ban-hammer on them, having a member like that in our community can be pretty messy to clean up. Beds (talk - blog ) 19:09, February 3, 2015 (UTC)
 * Support: This may come as somewhat surprising, but I found JustinLovesWikia12345's behaviors before he was blocked was quite amiable: the dude actually listened to the request that the rumor not be added, and I never suspected that he was a sockpuppet of a former vandal until you guys told me about it in chat. If the whole thing is an act, that's one heck of an act. I believe Give 'em enough rope may be put in place: give the dude one more chance, and if he wastes that... well, we'll simply land the banhammer. Given what Nikel had said, I have retracted my support to a Strong Oppose MILK FOR THE UNYUUFEX, FLAT CHEST FOR THE CUTENESS THRONE, SKULLS FOR THE SKULL PROBES  (user talk:Mathetesalexandrou) 05:09, February 4, 2015 (UTC)

Ilovethesims199 sent me another PM. Something tells me he's read this discussion, so here's his PM:

He admitted that he did bad things with his old sockpuppets and now he said he felt guilty for doing this and tried to prove he'd change... by making more socks to make good-faith edits. If he really wanted to redeem himself, why did he try to do the whole sockpuppetries to make things worse instead of reasoning himself right away? Secondly, he wasn't aware that sockpuppetry is not allowed; and thirdly, he made the first sock to mess around with himself in the first place...? Well clearly this shows that he's acting without thinking. Even if he's harmless, it's difficult for me to be convinced that he'd be constructive enough in this wiki.

K6ka, does the user in your link really refer to Ilovethesims199? If so, then this problem is just worse.  Nikel  Talk  –  Vote!  12:18, February 4, 2015 (UTC)


 * I believe so, as they seem to know a lot about TSW (what with their usernames resembling Corymach, and their constant "I vandelize Sims wiki" or "vandelize sims wiki or die" comments), and they all target my userpage. They all seem to know what sockpuppets are as they did, in fact, request a sockpuppet investigation on me (which did not proceed, and the page has been deleted). The style of writing is also unmistakable. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  12:50, February 4, 2015 (UTC)


 * I also got a similar message on MTS a few days back. To be honest, I deleted the message without reply because I knew that the user was blocked for repeated vadelism and sockpuppetry. There was nothing in the message that made it apparent to me that the user was indeed "unaware" and had remorse for breaking the house rules. Now seeing that contact with others has also been made just makes me wonder more about the user. Was he truly unaware and won't do it again, or is he just going to get his jollies off by doing it again? I just don't think he was unaware. -- Icemandeaf (talk) 15:53, February 4, 2015 (UTC)
 * I remain fully opposed to an unblock. He clearly knows the rules, but his behavior shows he either doesn't want to follow them or feels they don't apply to him. Letting him back on just shows that he can lie, cheat, and violate the rules and get away with it. No, I'm sorry, but that's not how this works.  LostInRiverview talk • blog  •  contribs 16:13, February 4, 2015 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I haven't checked in with my MTS account for awhile and I noticed messages similar to those that Nikel and Icemandeaf got. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  17:43, February 4, 2015 (UTC)
 * No. He's repeated the same mistakes too many times and I'm certain if he was unblocked he would just end up blocked again.
 * Here's his latest response:


 * I checked his socks' history. There were personal attacks, disruptions, and apologies in various wikis. If he really wanted to change his mind, he could've stopped in the second or third wiki but no, he decided to change his mind now. If the intent is to make the wiki better, not starting a disruption is already a good start, and he didn't have to make a lot of trouble in doing so. I'm not convinced when someone did bad enough things, and then insisted on "helping out the wiki" right afterward.  Nikel  Talk  –  Vote!  11:11, February 5, 2015 (UTC)

How often is this guy sending you these messages? I've been thinking a little and I'm starting to think that he might be sincere about this as he hasn't made another sock, along with all this apologizing. However, I still wouldn't like to see him unblocked as when you mess up you have to take the consequences, but I would understand if other people think otherwise in regards to unblocking him.


 * I just got a second message from the same user yesterday. It was very short. "I really did not know the rules and I want to start over a new leaf I had read the rules now and I am ready to move on." I'm still not sure because doing those kind of things once or even twice, and then sending these messages might be believable. But that is not what happened. I have to agree with Nikel on that. -- Icemandeaf (talk) 16:08, February 5, 2015 (UTC)
 * I've received messages on MTS as well:


 * My stance remains unchanged. --  LostInRiverview talk • blog  •  contribs 16:22, February 5, 2015 (UTC)
 * I doubt the consensus needed to unblock the user will ever be developed no matter how many of these messages are sent. I've already added the user to my ignore list to stop the spam. If the user creates a sock on MTS we can contact MTS staff, as sockpuppetry is against their rules as well. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  19:46, February 5, 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree with your analysis of the situation, and I have placed this person on my ignore list as well. Additionally, if this person is looking at this page - and I would not be surprised if they were - then us discussing this is just a badge of honor. I highly doubt an unblock will come of this, so I think we should just close this discussion, rather than encouraging the sock puppeteer to continue with this futile effort. -  LostInRiverview talk • blog  •  contribs 20:13, February 5, 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, I just sent a message to the staff because it happened just as K6ka mentioned. "Mom of 10 kids" just tried to chew me out about blocking "her son". -- Icemandeaf (talk) 22:37, February 5, 2015 (UTC)
 * This user is almost certainly the same user, and it does seem evident that they're monitoring this discussion as well. It should be very evident right now that all of these "Please unblock me" messages are not very truthful, and that no unblock will proceed. This definitely isn't new, but this should make it very clear this user is not here to positively contribute. Only one thing left to do now: "Revert, Block, Ignore." --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  03:57, February 6, 2015 (UTC)
 * I was gone for a day and I got 6 unread PMs in my MTS inbox. 6 different messages from 4 different users. Yep. This guy is not gonna be unblocked for sure, like ever. All 4 of the socks including Ilovethesims199 himself have been blocked. Apparently it was that k6ka or Icemandeaf has reported them all. That user is apparently all over the internet, so try to report him if anyone notices any signs of him.  Nikel  Talk  –  Vote!  18:37, February 7, 2015 (UTC)
 * If that's the case, obvious sockpuppet is obvious. I retract my previous support MILK FOR THE UNYUUFEX, FLAT CHEST FOR THE CUTENESS THRONE, SKULLS FOR THE SKULL PROBES  (user talk:Mathetesalexandrou) 19:02, February 7, 2015 (UTC)

User:EmiEm64 / User:Snauspi
Both these accounts are operated by the same person. I have not blocked either account because the account owner is not trying to disguise the connection, and the account owner has not acted in bad faith. I have advised the account owner via EmiEm64's talk page of our rule against sock puppetry, and await a response. If there is no response, we'll have to figure out how we want to proceed. --  LostInRiverview talk • blog  •  contribs 19:10, March 4, 2015 (UTC)


 * I don't feel that using Warning was a good idea, especially for a good faith user. A hand-written warning with emphasis on AGF would have been more appropriate. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  20:19, March 4, 2015 (UTC)