Editing Forum:User Talk Conversation

{{Forumheader|The Realm of Sleep|The World that Never was}}
<!-- Please put your content under this line.  Be sure to sign your edits with either your talk page template or four tildes ~~~~ -->
{{DTN|time=07:52, January 24, 2010 (UTC)|text=As I have noticed in the past month from watching over the Recent Changes, our policy for no socializing or non-wiki conversation on users' talk pages has been completely ignored. Since there has been no reason to uplift this policy from the time that it originated and that this is not just being done by new users who are unfamiliar with our policy, I am going to start slapping warnings on users who continue to use users' talk pages for socialization and conversations not related to matters dealing with the wiki in the future. However, since a user should most certainly not be permanently banned immediately for this matter, I would like for the following bulleted system to be used when dealing with a user who was received all of their warnings due to conversation on users' talk pages. I also think it would be best if a warning for conversation on a user's talk page could only be given x time after the last one, so that a user isn't bombarded with three warnings after three messages, and ends up with a ban due to posting three messages.

*Banning
*First need of a ban: blocked from the wiki for one day
*Second occurance: blocked from the wiki for three days
*Third orrurance: blocked from the wiki for five days
*Fourth occurance: blocked from the wiki for one week ''<u>or</u> permanent ban''

I run into a problem here, since I am not sure if the pattern should continue after the fourth occurance or if it should just be plainly obvious that the user is going to continue conversing on users' talk pages and should just be permanently banned. Please leave your input here, so that this may be immediately put into action. I'm pretty darn tired of seeing so many edits to users' talk pages crowding up the Recent Changes, and I want this to be where it stops.}}

==Discussion==
{{Malevolence Crystalised
|text = NAY! Bad yet Cruel Idea!
|time = SENATOR MALEVOLENCE!!!
}}
{{Demonic Kunai|time=11:52, January 24, 2010 (UTC)|text= That's a stupid and unfair idea!}}

{{HOO|time=15:49, January 24, 2010 (UTC)|text=Although you think he's being mean, DTN is right. The talk pages are meant for talking to other users about projects, help or questions. Didn't you [[User:Malevolence Crystalised|Malevolence Crystalised]] just bring this up [[Forum:Talk Page Policy|here?]] From what I'm reading on that, is you basically restated what we said the first time we agreed that talk pages should not be used for random idle chat. 

The problem is although we keep saying that's what the pages are for, we have never really enforced it. DTN merely came up with a solution so people spend more time on here adding to the Wiki instead of just talking about Kingdom Hearts or whatnot. I would also like to point out that any user, new or old, can give warnings to users as long as it is justified.

DTN is not targeting anyone specifically like he said. There are people who have been around when we first created the rule that still only edit on talk pages. I myself used the talk pages to talk about Dissidia once or twice. And [[User talk:Bluerfn#De-modding|going to the Admins]] and asking for DTN to be de-modded is very rude. DTN has put in more work on this Wiki than many users combined. He put this up here so there ''could'' be feedback from the community especially from the Admins who are in charge of banning users. That and he, like many others, are tired of having to look through all the talk page edits on the Recent Changes page to find actual work being done.}}
{{SSC|time=16:42, January 24, 2010 (UTC)|F-text=This sounds fair enough.}}
{{EO|time=17:11, January 24, 2010 (UTC)|hooded=I find myself surprised to say that I'm in favor of DTN in this matter. The purpose of the IRC Channel, as we all know, was to reduce the RC clog. From what I've seen, people merely use this as a sort of convenience, a "part 2" to the chatting, if you will, rather than the intended purpose. I find the "warn/block" idea a tad harsh, though. If this is what we decide to do, it should be the person starting the chat that faces the punishment, not the victim. I know a few users who come to me (as well as others) and start talking away, and it is my (and others) obligation not to be rude and respond. The decent editor shouldn't be punished for a simple matter like this. When one doesn't know the policy, I could see where this makes sense. I know that I, along with a few others, have attempted to reduce the amount of chit-chat on his or her talk page by placing "talk page rules." If warnings/blockings are necessary, by all means, they should be used. We need to be fair about this, however. It will be a matter of enforcing the policy this time, and sticking to it. Attempting to cease this chatting and the difficulty resulting is inevitable. What are we to do if we receive issues of chit-chat, however? I thought it was also against the policy to remove messages? Would it be a simple "meet me on the IRC ordeal?" Then again, that would also open up the issue of some not having IRC access, to which I'm not sure a "well tough" is the best response...}}
{{DTN|time=18:03, January 24, 2010 (UTC)|text=HeartOfOblivion: Thank you ''very'' much for that compliment, and I think that according to [[Forum:Warning Templates|this discussion]], only staffers can place warning templates. Other editors should leave a polite, non-aggressive text warning on the "vandal"'s talk page, and then contact a staffer to have a warning template placed.

EternalNothingnessXIII: This should eventually "slow down" or even cease once users can receive warnings for such conversation. After all, it is ''just'' a warning; when you have three warnings and therefore are right on the edge of a block/ban, then it is something that is definitely serious. To answer your question, what should be done if a user does try to chat away on your talk page is to reply kindly, but then remind them of the policy and invite them to the IRC Channel if you and/or they wish to continue the conversation. However, when a user continuously posts socialization-intended messages on your talk page after having been reminded by the talk page's user, then they need a warning from a staffer. So, in the future, just reply to their message, and tell them that (if tyou and/or they want to continue chatting) need to move the conversation to the IRC Channel in a private Query.

Also, if an Admin wouldn't mind putting this back into the site notice, that would be great. Thanks!}}
{{Xion4ever|time=19:12, January 24, 2010 (UTC)|text=I'm gonna save some time here and just copy/paste what I wrote on a previous discussion about this. This is for all users who disagree with the current policy:

I strongly agree to keep this policy. The IRC channel was created exactly for this reason; we've discussed this topic numerous times. Many users were using the Wiki as a MySpace/Facebook and talking about irrelevant topics that didn't pertain to Kingdom Hearts. Problems with this were that users were moving up in the community list and such due to talk page edits. This differs from the mission Wikis/Wikias have! Also, you couldn't even look at the Recent Changes without having to search through the flood of talk page/blog edits. Socializing is a nice and fun thing to do, but it should be kept on the IRC channel. 

'''Past Discussions'''
*[[User:BebopKate/Sandbox]] :"User Talk Pages are, as the name indicates, for communicating directly with a specific user. It should be used to ask questions about wiki subjects only and relating to that user, such as their recent edits, ongoing projects, current uploads, or similar questions. It can also be used to ask a specific user for assistance. 

User Talk Pages are not discussion pages! Conversations of a non-wiki nature belong in the Twilight Town Library Forum or IRC. You may leave a brief message on a User Talk page asking someone to join you in either."

*[[KHWiki:IRC]] :"The Kingdom Hearts Wiki's IRC channel is the wiki's main mode of socializing. It is used for chit-chat and is also a different and quicker way to notify a staff about a problem with the wiki."

''Past Forum Posts''
*[[Forum:KHWiki IRC]]
*[[Forum:Blog removal petetion]]

This is the same reason we removed the blogs- they were very trivial and unnecessary. This is a wiki, not a Facebook/MySpace/blog! Granted some users cannot get into the IRC channel. With some persistance they might, a few users here once had problems getting into the IRC, now they're able to get on. (Example: [[User:PrincessAndie8thprincessofheart|Andie]]). Also, if safety is a concern for parents (I know mine were -_-) the KH Wiki IRC channel is one of the safest internet chatrooms. We have numerous Ops who are on most of the day who keep the behavior in check. No major problems have been reported or verbal bashings/degradation from other users in months.

Don't believe the past problems with talkpages? [http://kingdomhearts.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Editcount Go] here and type in a few usernames, I'm not going to name names but THIS is why we removed blogs and created the IRC channel. One user had 2,937 edits to talk pages and 543 edits to the mainspace! If users want to talk about irrelevant topics that differ from Kingdom Hearts/editing help/invitation to the IRC they can do so through e-mail, online social networking sites, blogs or even through on-line games; this is not the place for it!

To conclude my speech, asking for DTN to be de-mod/de-oped was indeed rude. Even if you don't like the user, you must respect him for his relevant and numerous contributions to the wiki. Also, saying he's "rude, harsh, annoying, mean", etc. take a moment and reflect on yourself. Everyone can be found to be all of the listed traits above at somepoint during their time on the wiki, be it here or the IRC; I know I have. Finally, wanting to degrade a person just because you don't like them is an ignorant and egotistical move. And from what I've seen so far, DTN has not abused his "powers" (yay rollback!) as a moderator. Done, thank you. *steps off soapbox*}}
{{Randomnessity|isa=Oh right. I completely forgot about that. My bad. But yes, even though I have had some unnecessary conversations on my talk page myself I agree with this. I need to tone it down a bit now that I remember this. I don't really come on here to chat anyway.}}
{{KKD|time=02:40, January 25, 2010 (UTC)|saix=Cut people some slack! I don't think bans or blocks should be given for casual conversation at all. warnings could be given after a lot of offences, but if somebody wants to see the most recent changes(not including talk pages), that's what the sidebar is for. most of the people who are socializing on the talk pages (including me) were unaware of this rule. And another thing. It's called a ''talk page'' for a reason. it's not called a "Help page" or "Edit Discussion page". The only punishment involved should be a warning, if anything at all. If anyone sees excessive unneccesary conversation between users, they should be reminded to take it to the IRC or forums, and ''then'' if they disobey, give them warnings.}}
{{LA|Vtext=Although I understand what everyone is saying about this, and how it is against the rules to post conversation on talk pages, I completely disagree with it. I need to ask, just to clarify, where exactly does it say we cannot have conversation on talk pages? Also, the link to the IRC is broken, the last time I checked, so not everyone can get on. I just got a message from someone who said that they had no idea what the IRC was, thus backing up my point.

Reading KKD's post, I completely agree with him and I will back him up on this. It is not a completely serious matter to be ''talk''ing to people on their ''talk'' pages, so how can we give bans or even warnings because someone asked their friend how they are doing? 

Plus, the IRC is way to public. Everyone on the IRC can read what someone is saying. Meanwhile the same thing is true with Talk pages, however it is much more private. And I've been on the IRC, and there isn't much seriousness there. I beleive the last time I was there, a wierd story about how people were blowing up cars and killing each other was going on. Random nonsense that is completely irrelevant. DoorToNothing was there, as was maggosh. They can prove this.

If we are going to officially enforce this rule, so that people get banned if you converse on your own talk page, we should at least put it in the manuel of style or tell it to people we welcome here on the wiki.

In a nutshell, I beleive warnings and bans for talk page casual conversations should be given only on article talk pages, not the user's talk page, and that the IRC isn't all that it's cracked up to be. And as you've seen for yourself, and as it will be implied in the future, it will be way to much work to stop almost every single user from talking to their friends.}}
{{LapisScarab|time=03:35, January 25, 2010 (UTC)|text=I am curious, what if someone is not allowed to go on the IRC (i.e. their parents don't want them on)?}}
{{Yuanchosaan|time=03:40, January 25, 2010 (UTC)
|text=<small>Edit conflict</small>:I, too, would like to object to the use of warnings and blocks for socialising. The use of these conflates the act of socialising with vandalising - we are, in a sense, treating people who socialise as vandals. I feel that the two acts should remain separate and not be confused with each other. Vandalism is an act of harm to the wiki directly, while socialising is done with no ill intention, and only affects the wiki's image if done in ridiculously large quantities. The solution to the last (which appears to be the situation) should be to cut it back, not to punish all harshly (I do think a ban is far too harsh for a minor infringement).

This is not to say that I disagree with having less socialising on the wiki - I do think we should focus on the mainspace - but I believe that using such stringent methods is inappropriate, and user unfriendly. A community that says "If you socialise here, we will ban you" is not one I would wish to edit. To give a personal example, one of the things that attracted me to the FF wiki was the community there. I enjoyed having a vehicle to talk to people about linguistics and mathematics, both subjects I enjoy. Both the community and the main space are important parts of a wiki.

Additionally, what would be considered "socialising" and the level which would result in a warning or ban is highly subjective. Is talking about one's opinion on KH socialising? Strategies for bosses? Clarifying a plot point, or showing someone a self-created KH fanart? These are equally as likely to lead to an extensive conversation as any off-topic conversation. 

Also take into account ''why'' the wiki is used, and not other sites, the IRC or email. The answer is accessibility, and the wiki as a base. Obviously, the users socialising here have met each other over the wiki - and thus will use it as their main means. A discussion on the wiki is viewable to the audience which the poster wishes to affect most, and is open to participation from said audience. It also allows one to cross time zones - it is difficult for some users to discuss with others on instant chat when they live far apart, while talk pages solve this problem. Not all users will have the same accounts such as Facebook, Myspace, MSN etc. Others will have objections or computer issues to socialising sites or the IRC. Email lacks the open participation of wiki discussions. All in all, the wiki constitutes a superior form of communication for these users than the alternatives suggested above.

Ideally, the solution would be self-moderation, for users to use their own discretion in having discussions. That is another reason why I disagree with the use of blocks: because I believe that self-moderation is a better choice, one which affirms one of the basic tenets of the wiki - '''assume good faith'''. We should have faith in our fellow users here, in their ability to keep their socialising in control. Wishful thinking? Perhaps, but is the solution which we should have.
----
The issue is tangenital, but I would also like to give my hearty support to DTN as a moderator.}}

{{LA|Varmor=hear hear.

You said it all, Yuan.}}


Omamus: In all honesty I really don't care since I only edit here. I do however this place needs to act more wiki like on talk pages.



{{Template:TFO

|talk = I really object. I see people's points about the recent edits page but that's no reason to penalize users for talking to their friends. Honestly I find this wiki superior to most because how open and friendly the people are. I think this is a poor move.

Sure sometimes users (including me) get off topic and have idle chatter, but like others have said the IRC isn't all it's cracked up to be. I mean there are so many conversations going on at once no one can keep up, and there never is a point to most these IM's any way. Also why are there talk bubble templates if you are encourageing users to rarely talk to each other? 

Isn't there a way to show the recent changes page while excluding talk pages? That would be something to work on! I can see people getting annoyed if a discussions page is being filled up but not a user talk page. I think if people start getting punished for using talk pages too much many people will leave the wiki. I can see why too. I don't mean to sound harsh but I find this ridiculous. People are just trying to enjoy themselves and that's what things like Kingdom Hearts were made for!
}}
{{DTN|time=05:41, January 25, 2010 (UTC)|text=<!--It really is something to wake up in the morning and notice that someone is trying to have you de-modded. Oh well, I'm not going to comment.-->Based on the opinions that users are stating, and trends that I've researched in users' contributions I have found that:
*There is a vast amount of users who are coming here to edit at first, then find friends, and then only edit the users' talk pages for friendly chat. This is a ''wiki''; a source of information with a community that wishes to improve it. However, it is being treated as a chat room or place for friends to meet and talk about their real lives, and that does not contribute at all to the goal of the wiki. In fact, this actually hinders progress and improvement, because it clogs the Recent Changes, takes users' time away from editing the mainspace like they are encouraged, and attracts more users who are just here for the community, ''not for the wiki''.
*The IRC does not work for some users, and therefore are "forced" to use the wiki's talk pages. However, in response to what Yuanchosaan said about the wiki also being used as a "communication base", there is a handy-dandy feature in the side-bar that says "Email this user". So if you have a message that you need to send immediately, or you have conflicting time zones with the recipient, then you can just email them instead. A common issue with many users who have computers that "don't work" with the IRC is that they are likely having an issue with the port that Wikia provides. It is for this reason that I am changing the link on the main page to the commonly used freenode port, which is much more user-friendly than Wikia's.
*There is no common decision; we're even at six users for and six users against.

I really want to hear more of the community's feedback on this, because that I wish to receive further strong discussion like Yuanchosaan provided and that my own viewpoint on the issue has changed as well. Let's definitely forget bans and/or blocks, simply due to how ridiculous it would ''seem'' to be. However, warnings can therefore not exist toward this either, as you cannot have warnings that do not lead up to a ban/block; it defeats the purpose of a warning. Perhaps it would just be better to do similar "warnings" that non-staffers leave for vandals; no template, just text from a user.}}
{{BebopKate|time=07:07, January 25, 2010 (UTC)|text=Apologies for being late on the conversation; I've been out of town.

As I've said before, I think part of the problem has long been we hadn't explicitly posted the wiki rules and guidelines anywhere; it was entirely based on word of mouth, or being "in-the-know".  Well, we [[Help:New user guide|have them all in one place now]], so that issue is now moot.  And I encourage ''all'' editors, old and new, to take a look at the guide as a reminder as needed.

As has also been pointed out before, we have many users who have issues with IRC, either due to age or technology.  While DTN's new link will hopefully help with the latter issue, it does nothing to address the former.  In addition, some younger editors may also not be allowed to exchange e-mails if they have access limited by their parents.

I would like to propose an option that I don't think has been suggested before, and apologies if it has and I somehow missed it.  Until Wikia's options for forums improve, why don't we create an wiki forum somewhere off Wikia?  That would essentially allow us to move the more casual aspects of the community off-wiki and give people who have met here a place to socialize while allowing the edits here to focus on the actual wiki.  Yes, I know there are already many ''Kingdom Hearts'' communities out there, but I don't think it's fair to them to "invade" them and upset their already existing social balance.  And if Wikia ever does actually create improved forums that can handle our needs, we can always move them back here.

It's not the best solution and is a bit extreme, I admit, and if anyone has a better one, I would love to hear it.  But it would seem to solve the major issue at hand and allow the maximum amount of people to be satisfied.}}

{{KKD|time=07:34, January 25, 2010 (UTC)|sora=I agree with BebopKate. The forum outside of wikia is a genius idea.}}

i agree with it.--[[User:ZACH|ZACH]] 07:42, January 25, 2010 (UTC)
{{Bluer|09:50, January 25, 2010 (UTC)|Forums outside the Wiki, kupo? The Final Fantasy Wiki had something like that before. It never worked the way it was intended, and as far as I remember, kupo, it's inactive. I wouldn't put my hopes on that, but then again Hecko use to think the FFWiki IRC channel will go unused, kupo.

I confess that I'm more of a "leaving users a polite note" person myself, kupo. That's why you see me personally "invade" user talk pages asking for such and such than leaving them with a robotic, pre-built standard warning template, kupo. That way, they might listen to what I tell them, or at the least I have a better chance in delivering my point across, kupo. Usually, I would include a solution to the issue that I raise, or perhaps proposing that they might find a better alternative, kupo, to chatting about subjects irrelevant to the wiki. It usually works, kupo.

I have to admit, too, that I am one of those people who would rather see mainspace edits more, kupo, and we are a wiki first and foremost, but a wiki without its myriad of users won't work rather well. I think this "socializing" aspect, as well as anything else happening in the wiki, must be balanced, kupo. Too much socializing can only go so far before you start divulging personal information to the whole public, and that's what we have to avoid from happening, kupo. I'm more concerned about this ever since the decision to allow under-13s to edit,}}
{{MM841|16:03, January 25, 2010 (UTC)|Personally, I am a bit conflicted by this topic, which is something that I am surprised at. I have to admit, I am one of the users who cannot stand the RC to be crowded with talk page edits, as, it is harder to spot vandals, and other edits that may prove harmful to the wiki in some way or another. But, I do think people should be able to make friends here if they wish to. Although, I do believe everything should be in moderation. People should not be constantly talking to people on the wiki, filling talk pages, but it is nice to have a little chat every so often. Also, LegoAlchemist said that it would be way to much work to deal with everybody talking to their friends. People should not be detered from the task just because it would take a long time to complete.}}



{{TFO|time=19:52, January 25, 2010 (UTC)|talk=I think this is looking a bit better. I really think someone might want to see if there is a way to exclude talk pages from the recent edits page. If people are having too much idle chatter a polite message would be more efficent than a warning. Not all users have it set up so you can email them. I've looked. But you guys are closer to a solution. }}
{{Firaga44|happy=I agree 100 percent with bebopkate's idea.}}
{{MM841|21:10, January 25, 2010 (UTC)|@TFO: there is actually. When you enter the RC, there is a drop down box with all written in it. Simply change the all to User talk and click go and then you have no user talk pages in the RC. But I have to say, the RC looks a bit bare like this.}}
{{KrytenKoro|I understand the concerns about the IRC being difficult for some to socialize on, but I have to stress that ''that is not the wiki's responsibility''. We are neither required to allow socialization here, or to foster it elsewhere. If the editor's problem is with parental permission, ''we absolutely should not be encouraging our editors to find "loopholes" in those rules.''

We can't remove the talk pages from the recent changes list, because then admin's couldn't spot vandals to them. We can't ban people for talking on talk pages, because it's not vandalism, and all of us have done it at one point or another. A forum is a good solution, as long as we can make sure such discussion stays there - we already have our own "friendship forums", and those are barely used.

Would it be possible to give people 1-day blocks ''to the talk pages only''? That way, if someone is spending all their time bothering other editors, we can give them a "you need to get back to work" nudge?

Of course, these would have to be very lax rules, because we shouldn't discourage socialization itself - we should discourage its abuse, to the detriment of the wiki.

So, if it ''is'' possible to block an editor from user talk only, we give warnings up to a 1-day block if an editor has a "User talk edit count"/"Work edit count" of some significant fraction. We ask them to get back to work, and if they continue to just be WikiPrincesses, we block them from the talk page. The exponential nature of this would mean that, to keep away from the specified ratio, they would need to do more and more mainspace edits each time, which would also get them more familiar with that side of the wiki.


Then again, this is purely theoretical, as I've never heard of a way to block from only one namespace.}}
{{Saxisai|time=[[User:Saxisai|Saxisai]] 21:16, January 25, 2010 (UTC)|mobile=I would like to say that I had no idea of this rule, so I am sorry for posting my random convos on talk pages. But now to my main point, as LegoAlchemist said, the IRC gets spammed with so much nonsense that it's not funny. I agree with Bebopkate about the forum, or some other way to chat in more privacy, or like Terra Fae said, find a way to remove certain changes from the recent changes page...though I do also agree with the main point of this. People should be aware of the rule, heck, they should be notified of the rule when they join! But I think that the idea you came up with to punish us members is a little too harsh, well, somewhat...because as someone else said, (sorry, to lazy to scroll up and see who it was...I think it was ENX), it would be wrong for the responder to get punished, well somewhat, because now that we know the rules, and we go ahead and respond to it anyway, then we are aware that we are breaking the rules.....So in retrospect, I have to go with the opposing side on this debate...sorry

EDIT: Just saw Kryten's post, and I agree completely}}

{{PrincessAndie|angry= I see no point to the way of punishing chatty people. I'm willing to wager that anyone banned for a day just for socializing would either become a WikiTroll or just continue being chatty to protest. I realize the IRC is the place for this, but some people can't get on, such as the 'rents won't let them or they have a ban. So people are gonna get banned for having strict parents or because they were already kicked off the IRC? I think this is just a WikiTroll breeding ground waiting to happen.

In other words, I find myself neutral. I think something should be done about this, but I don't think banning someone for being chatty is completely necessary.}}
{{LA|Vtext=I like were this is going.

Actually, there's something that's been bugging me ever since I saw the confirmation of this rule:

Why exactly was this rule made, besides the part of cutting back vandalism and cluttered talk pages? If someone could tell me ''that'', then things would be a bit clearer to me.

I have a solution to all of this.

As I said, getting every user to convert to non-socialization would be a long task, why don't users who are faithful to the rule just say that they don't want socialization on their page? That way, the users who do want to talk to their buds can still do it, if their buds are okay with it, and the people who really care can have it their way too. This way, everyone's happy. And if any vandals are spotted on pages, the vandal can be warned (or any other action necessary). Of course, it still violates the "rule" that more people dislike than are for, but who says rules can't be taken down if wanted or necissary)? This is, after all, a fan made wiki, and socialization really won't damage the information here on the wiki.

Thoughts?}}

{{BebopKate|time=04:12, January 26, 2010 (UTC)|text=As stated above, socialization is an inevitable and important part of a wiki.  Trying to stop it would be as useful as building a sand castle to stop a tsunami.  It's going to happen.  Goodness knows none of us are perfect.  And honestly, I'm not going to patrol back and forth on people's pages looking for "off-topic" stuff.  I'd like to actually, you know, edit the wiki. ^_^

Bluer, you've mentioned that the FF Wiki has tried the forum experiment before.  I'm curious...have they managed to strike a balance, or is it as much of an issue there as it is here?  And for anyone else posting on another busy wiki, same question.  Maybe we need some insight into how others have handled a situation like this.}}
{{Randomnessity|isa=Well this has gotten interesting. I can't even find a thing to say and that's unlike me. What I do have to say is that I agree that banning is a little over the top. I agree with Kate right above me. It would be a never ending cycle of going from to talk page to talk page to talk page...etc. And I see that user talks can crowd the RC but if you really look hard enough it isn't hard to see the normal pages that were edited in the meantime. I do think that the chatting needs to be dialed down a bit. This places main function, after all, is being an information center for KH. That's all I have to say on the matter. Also forget what I said above.}}
{{Riku's Love|time=18:11, January 26, 2010 (UTC)|text= I agree with Randomnessity.}}
{{Malevolence Crystalised|sad=Very Well said Yuan. so far I agree with Yuan...sort of...}}
{{Bluer|15:06, January 27, 2010 (UTC)|FFWiki used to have forums outside of the wiki, kupo. It never got used, people log in for a short time, but then forgot about it completely, kupo. In any case, I think FFWiki was pretty lax on this sort of stuff, kupo, and usually the dedicated users would step in to say something before any chitterchatter got far too irrelevant to the wiki's subject. It once had a thread dedicated to all this irrelevant jibberjabber, kupo, until the administration deemed it too intrusive and banished it all,}}

{{KKD|time=02:05, February 4, 2010 (UTC)|sora=I don't know if this could help, but [[User:SquareEnixRocks|SquareEnixRocks]] just made a KH fansite with FORUMS on it... Nothing says we couldn't use that for socialization. We ''could'' test it out, and see how it goes. If it's a failure, SER will just keep it the way it was. After all, it is her site... anyway, here's the link. [http://kingdomheartsgamers.ning.com/]}}
{{ZTG|time=06:32, February 7, 2010 (UTC)|ven=There is a rule agaist that? I didn't realize. Still I do agree we shold make it so that we can only talk about other stuff on the IRC channle. It is easier, and we can see important changes insted of those to talk pages.}}


{{ZTG|small=Hey, I can see where you are comming from, but some of the users can't get onto the IRC channel (like myself()f). It is unfair to penalize someone when they can't get to the IRC. STill, if anyone has any suggestions beside looking at the forum for the problem (I already tried there) any help would be greatly appreciated!}}

{{DOH|time=19:55, February 16, 2010 (UTC)|text= I like the idea, but no need to go to BANNING! Maybe it wouldn't hurt to drop by and say "Hi, how are you?" once in a while. It's fair but also not fair. Yes, we shouldn't go overboard with talking, but I'm one of those people who nearly got in major trouble with a parent because they think chat rooms are the devil. Plus, the IRC doesn't work on my computer. 

Going with what others said, it really IS pointless going to each user talk page and being stalkerish >.> but maybe a few times, admins could look on a back-and-forth conversation to see if it's okay to have it there.}}



{{SDC|time=21:26, April 10, 2010 (UTC)|text= I have an idea. We could have chat pages for each user here on the wiki instead of the IRC. Something like Talk:Sora, only it would be this Chat:(username).}}
{{MM841|23:26, April 10, 2010 (UTC)|Something like [[User talk:Ultima The High Seraph]]?}}