Welcome to my Talk Page.
Vapingheathen (talk) 16:45, September 1, 2017 (UTC)
This is admittedly very confusing:
George R.R. Martin has himself remarked that he probably should have come up with more specific names for the different tiers of nobility, i.e. "Baron, Duke, Count" etc.
Only someone holding the title "Lord" is referred to as "Lord" with a capital "L", and listed as "Lord" in infoboxes. Thus Randyll Tarly is listed as "Lord" (the specific rank) in a battle infobox, while Dickon Tarly is not.
Members of the nobility in general are loosely called "my lord", lowercase "l". This isn't a title.
If someone is both a "Lord" and has a knighthood, "Lord" is more important so it supersedes that (Tywin has been a knight since before his father died, but his title as "Lord" of Casterly Rock is more important).
I appreciate that amount of great edits you have been making but when one of your edits is undone, don't come back and re-do it. You have done this several times in the last couple of weeks. So the block I just placed is only for 2 hours - just long enough to get your attention to tell you to stop acting like your edits are always correct. If you keep acting this way, the blocks will get progressively longer.
Just to be clear, your edits generally have been really good - so keep making them but let go of the occasional reverts.
Stop Calling Danaryes a Lady! If someone in or out of universe calls her that then leave the changes. Every one calls her Queen
The Queen Across The Narrow Sea
The Dragon Queen.
The Silver Queen
Loras Tyrell and Lancel Lannister
It has been agreed for some time now that the Sparrows are not the same as Maesters and therefore the articles Lancel Lannister and Loras Tyrell should not be renamed. Please leave as is. Thank you. Shaneymike (talk) 15:55, October 20, 2017 (UTC)
Use of Green & Black Heraldry
I saw that you have been adding Green and Black heraldry to various characters. Before you joined, there was a discussion of doing that and it was decided that we would show which side the characters were on in a different way. So please don't add Green and Black heraldry at this time.
Understood. Vapingheathen (talk) 11:35, November 4, 2017 (UTC)
Possesives for singular nouns
I have, and I will stop. :) Vapingheathen (talk) 11:34, November 4, 2017 (UTC)
1. We don't do step-children, step-parents ect. (look at the Arryns/Baelish).
2. We do include twins (look at Freys, Cargylls, Forresters)
3. Walder Frey... we don't need a reference for every confirmation of age (look at Shae), but if you feel like most users don't know this, then leave it up (I'm not too bothered about this).
Otherwise, these edits are following the terms of which admins have disccussed previously and agreed upon.
Vegan God (talk) 17:13, November 12, 2017 (UTC)
Telling me to look at other pages on the wiki is not convincing at all. They can very well be mistakes as well.
Hm, where is that "twin" remark coming from? I never removed twins from infoboxes. I'm only pointing out that adding "(twin)" after one's name is completely unneccesary.
Also, in the future, please reply on your own talk page, not mine.
Vapingheathen (talk) 17:30, November 12, 2017 (UTC)
I'm saying we DO note which sibling is a twin and you still added step-children to info boxes. Also, you need to stop acting so almighty... you need to step back and let others make more constructive edits that have been a part of this Wikia for ages. Additionally, there is a problem with a replying on my user page... don't ask. Vegan God (talk) 18:02, November 12, 2017 (UTC)
Testing new signature
VapingHeathen, the Raven 13:13, November 14, 2017 (UTC)
Telltale Related Content
I wanted to give you a heads-up that the Telltale related content might all be deleted from this wikia since none of the story in the game has been mentioned in the show itself and because there is a separate wikia for just that game. So if I were you, I would prioritize the non-Telltale pages to minimize your work getting delated at a later date.
- I agree with this. While you're at it, articles that are merely based on book-related content should also be deleted.
- Regards, VapingHeathen 06:32, December 22, 2017 (UTC)
Actually we do base stuff on video game content, as part of the wider "TV continuity" (cheating a bit).
New signature, again
Regards, VapingHeathen 06:30, December 22, 2017 (UTC)
Jon Snow status
Jon Snow is still the head of House Stark until made otherwise. He hasn't formally given up being King of the North yet. Sansa is "acting" ruler (per Bran's apparent abdication).
Neither Jon, nor Sansa, nor Robb, were ever a "Lord Paramount" - that's a title under the rule of the Iron Throne. Nor were they ever Wardens, also a title under the Iron Throne.
- Jon formally rules the North, but he doesn't formally head House Stark. If he did, he would be the Lord of Winterfell, not Sansa. His name would also be Stark, not Snow.
- Ruling the North =/= heading House Stark.
- Now, on the title of Lord Paramount: The HBO Viewers' Guide has already stated that the title is inherited. It is not the same as a Warden. Lord Paramount of the North literally means "The most important lord in the North".
- Now what's this? You're saying Jon isn't a warden, despite this?:
- Regards, VapingHeathen 09:38, December 25, 2017 (UTC)
The props department made a mistake, and/or the TV writers have no idea what they're talking about. It is in error.
NO...."Lord Paramount" is inherited under the Iron Throne. When Balon Greyjoy tried to declare independence, he stopped claiming to be a "Lord Paramount".
...what, specifically - answer this - what, specifically, are you basing the claim on that "they established that Lord Paramount is hereditary" as a defense? Yeah....for the Iron Throne's vassals, not independence movements.
It was extremely presumptuous of you to set up an official Discord channel for the wiki. This is something myself and the other admins had already been debating, but the pros and cons need to be weighed first... IE: is anyone actually going to use it? For a new user (you've only been here a couple of months) to come in and start unilaterally making decisions like this is... arrogant, to put it mildly. - 09:28, October 26, 2017 (UTC)
- Start responding to your talk-page please. You've ignored every single message that's been left for you so far. - 10:41, October 26, 2017 (UTC)
- It's quite difficult to know that anything has been left on my talk page when there are no notifications indicating it whatsoever. Now, I never claimed that said server is "official". I'm only trying to help make things a lot easier. Vapingheathen (talk) 11:33, November 4, 2017 (UTC)
I am permanently banning your account from this wiki without hope of appeal.
You've been arrogant, which to be honest I don't care at all about, so long as someone produces quality work.
Instead, you've been producing bad work, at very high levels, straining our ability to police it. This was just sloppy. And this, I do not forgive - combined with the fact that you ignored our attempts to rein this in.
You made a complete hash of handling the Histories & Lore content. You did not create a "Roger Reyne" article. You clicked the "create" button and slapped in an infobox, then moved on to the next article without bothering to finish the one you started. And you repeated this for all of them. I'm going to just delete and recreate those from scratch.
You didn't pick particularly good infobox images for several of them and I will delete and replace those as well.
And in terms of netiquette, it was...bizarre and arrogant that you sign almost every message with "Regards".
You didn't even bother trying to work with others on things like naming conventions: "What do we call the first sack of Highgarden before the Targaryen Conquest?"
Yes, I believe in throwing people off the wiki for "pervasive incompetence" (combined with unwillingness to learn.
You didn't "help" with anything, all you've done is added to the work of the other, actually productive editors who now have to clean up your mess.
Time spent making a Lord of Haystack Hall page is time you could have spent finishing the Reyne character articles you already started. We don't NEED more "Titles" articles, we need work on the core cast members (in which sense, getting Jon Snow's titles straight wasn't the worst expenditure of time, which is why I overlooked that until now).
I'm not angry and fuming about this, I'm just exhausted. I wanted to avoid this. I wasn't devoting full attention to it, but on a day by day basis for the past month you weren't improving but just causing more problems, ignoring other warnings and discussions posted on here. Such as, I hoped you'd get back to earlier work you began instead of starting new projects.
You've displayed that worst mix of...incompetence and addictively active editing. You joined after Season 7 ended, and yet got 2,200 edits since then? While, paradoxically, not finishing work you started? Focus intently on the following sentence: time spent sparking old arguments about Jon Snow's official titles now, is time you could have spent finishing the House Reyne character articles you started. This is a drain on limited time resources.
You might try to complain that I and the other Admins should invest time in trying to "Train" you to higher work standards. First, yeah we did what we could...and you kept barreling through making large numbers of edits: not 2,200 focused on practicing with the "Roger Reyne" page, but just constantly moving on to another task, instead of - and this is the key - sticking with one project to try to get it right. So second: we have finite work-time from our core members to either work, or clean up bad articles you write and hold your hand while we train you, but not both.
But all of that, ALL of that, I was gritting my teeth and willing to set aside.
I'm serious. It's Christmas break, maybe you were doing finals or whatever (amidst 2,200 other edits?) but I wanted to just wait this out, or at most, give you a stern talking-to about "you need to finish articles you started" - if you say "This page is under construction" when you started the Dornish sack of Highgarden article, you shouldn't be moving on to a large number of new, unrelated articles in the following days (maybe if it was related content from the same video, just the order you got to it in).
But again, up until this instant, Christmas night, I wanted to just ignore all of that....until I looked at your Talk page for other warnings I had missed the past few days:
....Holy Christ, you...installed a "Discord" chat channel without even asking permission?
How the heck did you even do that? You don't have the user rights, physically. You didn't even suggest it. I could even have forgiven putting it on a Sandbox page as a test run to show us what it would look like or something.
But this? Combined with already skating on thin ice from all the other accumulated stuff...that's it, you're out. This is harming everyone else.
Now I will have to waste time the next few days going through your contributions tab to clean up all the mess you caused: gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Vapingheathen
The Discord thing wasn’t something he did here on the wiki... he set up a Discord channel on Discord, under the name “Game of Thrones Wiki” and then came here to start advertising it... “good news guys we’ve got a Discord channel now”... it was just as offensive, to be honest. I support this decision. - 06:53, December 27, 2017 (UTC)
I support this decision too. While many of his actions cerrainly betrayed a degree of arrogance, I refrained from taking punitive action against him because I didn't notice anything particularly egregious...although that was probably because he was moving WAY too fast. Plus, some of his contributions at first glance looked ok albeit a little nitpicky. There may have been times when his point was valid but like I said his responses more often than not betrayed a degree of arrogance, which can be seen as intimidating behavior. So yes, I support this decision. Shaneymike (talk) 11:25, December 27, 2017 (UTC)