View source for KHWiki talk:Mirage Arena/Archive 1

{{TNE|time=02:13, July 11, 2010 (UTC)|text=Will we, by any chance, be archiving these rounds ?}}
Probably. We need something to look back on for the Joint Struggle. It'll probably be something like ''Kingdom Hearts Wiki:Mirage Arena/Previous Winners'' or something like that. {{KKDSig|1}}

{{R&D|time=02:18, July 11, 2010 (UTC)|yes=But of course. As KKD said, it's extremely necessery for Joint Struggle. I think the name Kingdom Hearts Wiki:Mirage Arena/Previous Winners sound pretty good, but we could make like the DNC archive pages. Now... why do you ask TNÉ?}}
{{TNE|time=02:22, July 11, 2010 (UTC)|text=Or Kingdom Hearts Wiki:Mirage Arena/Hall of Fame ?

I asked simply because we haven't thought of an archive page yet !}}

{{R&D|time=02:26, July 11, 2010 (UTC)~|isee=Hall of Fame... that sounds good... But of course it will need several subpages so it doesn't get to crowded.
Sorry if I sounded rude. :"(}}
{{TNE|time=02:35, July 11, 2010 (UTC)|text=Not at all ^_^

Anyway, we could have it like the Trinity Report's archives or even the Featured Media archives, where it's done per year. As for Joint Struggle, should it have its own archive page or shall we shove it all in one page ?}}
Since we have four-month rounds and then the Joint Struggle, we should do it by round. Cram all the winners, and the complete tourney bracket in, and then start a new section for the next round. sound good? {{KKDSig|1}}

{{R&D|time=02:42, July 11, 2010 (UTC)|yes=More than good. Perfect. And what the page will be called? Any ideas?

EDIT: Maybe we should call the Round Archives Kingdom Hearts Wiki:Mirage Arena/Previous Winners and the Struggle Archive Kingdom Hearts Wiki:Mirage Arena/Hall of Fame}}
{{TNE|time=02:53, July 11, 2010 (UTC)|happytext=Good thought... ^_^}}

== Edit Count ==

I thought you guys had agreed on 100?[[User:KrytenKoro|<small>Glorious</small>]] [[User_talk:KrytenKoro|<small>CHAOS!</small>]] 00:02, July 12, 2010 (UTC)
:I have no idea what made them change to 75... {{User:Troisnyxetienne/Signature}} 00:06, July 12, 2010 (UTC)
We agreed (Me and R&D) that it would be more appropriate due to the slower activity here. {{KKDSig|1}}

I hadn't noticed the part that said "quality edits". How do we measure whether an edit is "quality" or not? Save for vandalism, and a vandal would be banned long before they hit 75 edits, what makes any mainspace edit better or worse than another one?{{User:LapisScarab/Sig}}04:06, July 12, 2010 (UTC)
:We're the team, right ? We can always keep a tab on those who are voting through Contribs. If the user's bound to be a vandal, we confront him and if needed, we remove his vote. {{User:Troisnyxetienne/Signature}} 04:15, July 12, 2010 (UTC)
::"Slower activity"? Redeemer himself doesn't have 100 mainspace edits. It would be hypocritical to tell users they can't vote when the one who helped start the whole thing hasn't even achieved the required goal. And anyway, we don't want to be complete Nazis when it comes to this. 100 mainspace edits are a bit much, after all. I think we need a number that isn't too high, but not so low that we accept users who barely contribute. The idea is to have something fun for regulars, and we do not want people coming to the wiki just to participate. U suggest a number between 40 and 70. Also, I think Image contributions should count as well, as there are many users (such as myself) that participate in the wiki and have mass image-contributions. That's all I ever do around here anymore anyway. --{{User:LegoAlchemist/Sig}} 04:20, July 12, 2010 (UTC)
Now that I think about it, we need to re-consider the edit thing a lot. {{KKDSig|1}}

:::Lego is right... I belive Images contibution must be counted too... I think I'll add it to the rules. But I must discuss with KKD first.{{User:Redeemer & Destroyer/Sig}}04:24, July 12, 2010 (UTC)
Okay, spaces to be accepted : '''Mainspace, Image, Template (if we know the person has been contributing to templates on the Main Pages), Card, Walkthrough (in future), Kingdom Hearts Wiki, MediaWiki'''. This is just like mod elections. Other spaces will be taken into account only if we have a clear background of what the user has done in general. {{User:Troisnyxetienne/Signature}} 04:26, July 12, 2010 (UTC)

:This changes everything. Altought, keeping track of all this will be hard. Thank God we have the Contrib pages. So I'm changain quality mainspace edits to quality edits.{{User:Redeemer & Destroyer/Sig}}04:31, July 12, 2010 (UTC)
Good thought. It's never too late to mend ! ^_^ {{User:Troisnyxetienne/Signature}} 04:32, July 12, 2010 (UTC)

 
So far I have 67 Mainspace edits, and 1 Kingdom Hearts Wiki edit. That's 68 quality edits(Right?). But I'm making maps for TNE's walkthrough. Does that count?--[[User:Keyblade0|Keyblade0]] 03:05, July 14, 2010 (UTC)Keyblade0
:I'm not sure... That would easily make 26 edits from there. I think I'll let the rest decide. {{User:Troisnyxetienne/Signature}} 03:07, July 14, 2010 (UTC)
::Yep, it counts. In a way, it's a quality edit. Fine by me.{{User:Redeemer & Destroyer/Sig}}03:12, July 14, 2010 (UTC)
:::So we're going with 75 edits? Man, I won't get on here in a while (not much to do, don't own a KH game...) --[[User:SilverCrono|<font color=darkkhaki>'''シルバ'''</font>]] [[User talk:SilverCrono|<font color=black>'''クロノ'''</font>]] 03:13, July 14, 2010 (UTC)
:Just a thought... what about Talk pages? Not usertalk, but the ones linked to articles... usually those are productive edits, and go toward bettering the article. Lego thought of this first, but he's not here to ask right now. {{KKDSig|1}}
::Truth be told, 75% of Talk Page edits are useless stuff. The users [[User:Hotdragon 295|Hotdragon 295]] and [[User:Oh,how the sea calls|Oh,how the sea calls]] are exemple of this. They revive old topics just for the heck of doing it, using information that is known to almost everyone and sometimes <s>Oh,how the sea calls</s> they are bashful on their messages.{{User:Redeemer & Destroyer/Sig}}03:24, July 14, 2010 (UTC)
Speaking of whom... he's rather frustrated right now because no one actually gave him a lowdown of the rules. Had anyone even thought of showing him the MOS in my absence ?! No ! {{User:Troisnyxetienne/Signature}} 03:37, July 14, 2010 (UTC)
:not even crossed my mind, sorry.{{User:Redeemer & Destroyer/Sig}}03:40, July 14, 2010 (UTC)
/me sighs. This is PATHETIC ! But I forgive you. The next time, if someone asks for how the rules and spoilers are dealt with over here, show the MOS and the Spoiler Policy. Those are two core documents which we can't afford to even forget. KHFR sums it up into one - the MOS - so it's easier for the side of Darkness ; yet, it's still not an excuse for driving a new user to resentment. For all you know he'd have been a great contributor had he truly understood everything. {{User:Troisnyxetienne/Signature}} 03:46, July 14, 2010 (UTC)
:Wait! For what I "talked" to him, He didn't ask for the rules... now I see he asked to Lapis. So it isn't technically my fault. Only if I fault on not stalking him enough.{{User:Redeemer & Destroyer/Sig}}03:52, July 14, 2010 (UTC)
:No one showed me the MoS or spoiler policy when I got here, and look how i turned out!<small> No joke.</small> {{KKDSig|1}}
::This is nonsense. We have the [[Card:Main Page]] which is begging for edits, is ''not'' gnome work, and requires NO PHYSICAL RESOURCES. We also have the Gallery: space, where all you have to do is go to [[Special:UnusedFiles]] and post the images in whichever galleries they apply to. There's no reason to be lowering the bar here - you should have at least 100 edits in mainspace articles ([main], Card:, and Gallery:). Talk pages should absolutely not count, as well as Templates (since that is mostly fiddling with talkboxes). Images and Kingdom Hearts Wiki maybe.[[User:KrytenKoro|<small>Glorious</small>]] [[User_talk:KrytenKoro|<small>CHAOS!</small>]] 05:33, July 14, 2010 (UTC)
@TNE: He just asked about (really just passively mentioned) the rules today, and never asked about the spoiler policy.{{User:LapisScarab/Sig}}05:38, July 14, 2010 (UTC)
:Not accusing anyone here, but *shrugs* I just showed them to him. I don't know how it is going to be easily controlled or monitored... if we don't want to have users flouting the rules. I think we have to make it a point to remember them nonetheless.

:As for spaces... the only few people who have been helping us with Templates can get their votes counted - Kryten being part of the fray - MediaWiki edits are for those with admin capabilities only, mods and below can't touch them - so is a restructuring in place or... ? {{User:Troisnyxetienne/Signature}} 11:45, July 14, 2010 (UTC)
::Well, the rules covers all that, including '''Cards'''. For Media... I found it unecessary, should I take it out? Main Templates, well, few users actually edit that stuff, and it doesn't have many edits to be done there, but it is still important.{{User:Redeemer & Destroyer/Sig}}17:58, July 14, 2010 (UTC)

What!?!? I thought you guys agreed '''''only''''' on 75 edits. Why’d you change it to 125?  :( --[[User:Keyblade0|Keyblade0]] 01:09, July 15, 2010 (UTC)Keyblade0
:Pfffft. We need to avoid the situation where after 75 edits, people would concentrate on the MA. This is not the purpose for it. It should be an ''incentive'' to edit. {{User:Troisnyxetienne/Signature}} 01:19, July 15, 2010 (UTC)

== Might I recommend... ==

{{TalkTextTest2
|image=Axel (Talk sprite) 1 KHCOM.png
|color=black
|color2=red
|textcolor=red 
|textcolor2=black 
|line=lawngreen
|fonttype=Trebuchet MS
|name=Falcos
|sig=So you really do remember me this time? I'm SO FLATTERED!
|time=But you're too late!
|text= Might I recommend that you have a link to the Mirage Arena on the mainpage, in its own box?
}}
{{TNE|time=13:46, July 13, 2010 (UTC)|shocktext=In its own box ? I'm not sure. I'll ask the admins. One thing's for sure - we can't direct everyone's attention to the MA first.

Staff and regulars, please throw in your feedback here.}}

{{R&D|time=14:18, July 13, 2010 (UTC)|squall=I don't know. It is still to soon to do such thing. Waiting is the best. Once the users are more used with the Arena, maybe we could do that.}}

{{TalkTextTest2
|image=Axel (Talk sprite) 1 KHCOM.png
|color=black
|color2=red
|textcolor=red 
|textcolor2=black 
|line=lawngreen
|fonttype=Trebuchet MS
|name=Falcos
|sig=So you really do remember me this time? I'm SO FLATTERED!
|time=But you're too late!
|text= I just thought it might be a good idea. You know, so people get their attention drawn to it as opposed to having to actively go searching for it. But I do understand what you're saying.}}
{{KKD|time=[[User:KingdomKeyDarkside|KingdomKeyDarkside]] 17:09, July 13, 2010 (UTC)|roxas2=Not quite yet. It's a bit too early to be throwing it on the front page. However, it's there already (in the form of a Trinity Report entry). If anything, it should be put under the "community" section on the sidebar for now.}}

== Tie ==
{{Keyblade0|time= July 19,2010|text=Is there some kind of way to choose a winner during a tie?}}

{{LA|Vtext=Joint Struggle.

But the Arena is on hiatus right now, so we're not doing anything soon.}}

{{R&D|time=20:29, July 19, 2010 (UTC)|yes=This is still being worked on. Once everything is ready, the battle will be untied.}}

{{Keyblade0|time=July 19,2010|text= Is there a way I can help with the Joint Struggle?(also, are we going to move on to round 2?)}}

{{R&D|time=03:44, July 20, 2010 (UTC)|text=Help? I'm not sure... I mean... people are helping the way they can but considering the circumstances of the reason the Arena is closed for now I don't know if your help is currently needed. Once the Arena is open again, you can help through vote checking (making sure the rules are being followed).

If youn wanna know more about the reason the Arena is closed and when it next battle will be check these foruns:
*[[Forum:Dragon's Neck Colosseum, KH style|Dragon's Neck Colosseum, KH style]]
*[[Forum:Bye-Bye, Mirage Arena|Bye-Bye, Mirage Arena]]}}

{{LA|Vtext=Keyblade0: "Hiatus" means to be on an extended period of time where there is no activity.}}

{{Keyblade0|time= July 20,2010|text=Sorry, I didn't see the word hiatus}}

==And the next one ?==
{{TNE|time=23:43, July 29, 2010 (UTC)|text=The next battle should begin on Sunday (which means Week 2), right ?}}

Yep.[[User:Redeemer &amp; Destroyer|Redeemer &amp; Destroyer]] 23:53, July 29, 2010 (UTC)
:Sweet. ^_^ Which means noms and voting should end. {{User:Troisnyxetienne/Signature}} 23:58, July 29, 2010 (UTC)
::Nominations for next round are now open. {{KKDSig|1}}

== Increasing Edit Requirement ==
As we now have the increasing editcount, We need to regulate it. I say that we should reset the editcount for each round, to allow new participants to get in easier. Otherwise, we just end up having users who are near-permanently inable to reach the required quota of edits, and only users with insanely high editcounts can get in (although 10 edits per week is no unreal feat...). So, we start this round at 125, and at the end of this round, when the joint struggle rolls around, we plateau at 295 for the entire tournament, and then go back down to 125, so new users have a chance to get in. Thoughts? {{KKDSig|1}}
{{TNE|time=01:58, August 2, 2010 (UTC)|text=I suggest the increasing editcount rule should only be applied to returning users.

Like say, we have a series of rounds (to which the user returns) and a required number of edits to be fair to everyone.

Example :

*First time - 125
*Second time - 295
*Third time - 415

and so on and so forth.

This way no one who's new gets left out. But at the same time, users who want to return to the MA must really WORK HARD ! :D}}
:I disagree, that would require keeping track of users who have already participated. That would be a large amount of hassle, and would likely mean that the 125-reset would only apply to a handful of just a few users. --{{User:DoorToNothing/Sig}} 02:17, August 2, 2010 (UTC)
{{TNE|time=02:41, August 2, 2010 (UTC)|text=We can keep a tab on the users, and this can work for a short while. Though, as you raised, once the users start flocking to the MA, it'll be difficult to keep track of every single user.

If we raise the bar and then relower it again, should we do it like, by tier ?

*Tier 1 - 125, 295, 415, back to 125...
*Tier 2 - Not sure ?
*Tier 3 - 1000 - 1205 - 1550 - back to 1000 ?}}
::Er, no, I think you need to think a bit away from tiers. Monitoring or logging the MA activity of every individual user, and then checking each user who votes is just going to be a pain, and certainly is avoidable. Remember, the Mirage Arena is another element of the wiki that is not so "business", and is for more fun and kicking back. You users who want to "reform the wiki" should know what I mean, and hopefully agree that the edit count to participate in a fun activity for the entire (general) community should not have to become so high as to require tiers. --{{User:DoorToNothing/Sig}} 02:54, August 2, 2010 (UTC)
{{TNE|time=03:13, August 2, 2010 (UTC)|text=On second thought, BK has another suggestion. We're going to momentarily do away with the EC requirements.}}

{{R&D|time=17:07, August 2, 2010 (UTC)|happy=So? What was decided?
EDIT17:58, August 9, 2010 (UTC):I had a simplinimagigantincrediblasterrificmagnifislpendiferextremamazing idea! What if we raise the edit count by 20% every battle?<br> It doesn't raise that much nor that little:<br>
From 125 it would go to 150 and then it would go to 180 and it goes on.<br>
And once the editcount gets so high that almost no one can vote anymore we just reset back to 100.<br>
What you guys say?}}

I say no. We should leave it be, and go from there. {{KKDSig|1}}
{{Keyblade0|time= 19:48, August 9, 2010|text= I say that we increase the edit count by 10 or 20 edits for each round. And, for the ''final'' round, we should let '''''everyone''''' participate by lowering the edit count to zero.}}
== Who are the "Staffers"? ==

{{R&D|time=02:00, August 8, 2010 (UTC)|text=I belive this is something that needs to be settled: Who are the actual <s>so called</s> Staffers of the MA. I know there are a lot of people helping, and that's nice, but I want to know who are the official ones.<br><br>
There is me and KKD. Wolf (ZACH) is helping with the userbox, TNE is watching the MA for typos and sometimes broken rules. Lapis too. There are others names that can be said here too. But who can be consider actual Workers of this MA? Please, this is important, so I'd like to know the answer all of those who are helping.<br><br>
I know we had a initial crew, but it eventually got disolved. Also, some members of the crew are under the required Edit Count, should we still consider them Staffers?}}

{{Auror Andrachome|text=I think we need a discussion and a list of staffers on the Mirage Arena page. That would be good!}}
{{R&D|time=02:00, August 8, 2010 (UTC)|yes=This the whole point of this topic. There is a staffers list on the MA navigation template. But only me, KKD and TNE are listed. And I'm not even sure if TNE can, and wants to be an official staff member.}}
{{LapisScarab|time=03:00, August 9, 2010 (UTC)|text=I'd have no problem checking the editcounts of newer contributors. Anything to help the Arena!}}
{{KKD|roxas2=I'm not too sure... I'm in this for sure, but we need to have a larger staff than what we originally did. I'd say something around ten would work well. We give put one person in charge of each section (DS, you've got the Arena Proper, I've got Nominations, we need someone to organize the Joint Struggle, etc.), and then place a few more people with them to work on the segment of the project (Which we need, because Nominations were unmanned when I was gone for a few days).}}
{{ZACH|text=hm 10 staffers would be enough i still want to help out with the MA i think we should have this. 2 staffers will do the same thing so if one has to leave or gets sick the other can do it.}}
{{TNE|time=06:34, August 9, 2010 (UTC)|shocktext=Consider me more of a ''helper'' than a Staffer, ya ? I mean, that's pretty much what I've been doing almost everywhere else, ''n'est-ce pas' ?}}
{{Dan da Man36|time=09:41, August 9, 2010 (UTC)|lion=I'm the same as TNE, I'm more than willing to help out, so ping me whenever you need something. =)}}
{{Bluer|12:37, August 9, 2010 (UTC)|Let me point out something before we go on, kupo, that here in this wiki, it's more towards mainspace editing than this arena, kupo. Maintaining this space is a volunteer effort, kupo, and no serious "staffing" is required.

I'd suggest creating a policy that everyone agrees on and stick to it, kupo. You'll have your term of reference and you can regard yourself a "staffa" or whatever you call it just by following them,}}

{{R&D|time=14:53, August 9, 2010 (UTC)|yes=We all understand that. But, one of the main complains is: ''The MA will end up like the DNC, a living hell of chaotic, angry users who break the rules all the time and start pointless fights.'' With a regular crew, people who are willing to keep their eyes on the MA all the time, and yet, keep their regular wiki schedules.
Actually, only 4 people are actually needed. 2 for the MA, two for the Nominations. Once the struggles starts, all other activities stop, so this 4 people will solely focus their MA jobs on the Struggle. This can be done in a way that the regular wiki editing isn't affected.
Basically, with me and KKD already in charge, we only need another two people here.}}
{{ZACH|text=i'm helping with everything and no ones stopping me. *evil laugh*}}
{{R&D|time=17:37, August 9, 2010 (UTC)|text=I belive that instead of using the term Staff, we use the term '''Supervisors'''. Cause that's what we do, we supervise the votes, battles and rules of the MA.}}

== Votes... ==

{{The Inexistent|text='''Am I out of it right now, or isn't the vote requirement supposed to have been raised for week three?'''}}
{{R&D|time=22:13, August 10, 2010 (UTC)|squall=The thing is that we are still trying to decide how this raise thing will work. Check the above topic [[KHWiki talk:Mirage Arena#Increasing Edit Requirement|Increasing Edit Requirement]] to see.}}

{{The Inexistent|text='''Then shouldn't we take down the "count will raise by ten each week" thing for now?'''}}

==MA Warning templates ?==
{{TNE|time=05:47, August 21, 2010 (UTC)|text=Should I work on them or is it too early ?}}

== Is this... ==

{{Randomnessity|garland=... a typo or a miswording?
*If the battle ends with a tie a Sudden Death match will happen. During the time of 1 hour the users' contestant that receives more votes wins. 
*If after 1 hour another tie happens, the time will be raised to 30 minutes and kept until the time ends with a winner.

How can 1 hour be raised ''to'' 30 minutes? I can see what it's getting across, but it sounds... Wrong.

EDIT: It has been done by the Lapisman.}}
{{TNE|time=00:48, August 26, 2010 (UTC)|text=Phew ! ^_^ I had missed this message earlier and I was wondering what was going on...}}

== Re:Edit Count ==
Before someone starts complaining about the removal of the rising editcount rule: CALM DOWN. It's going to stay like that for the rest of the round, and we'll work out all the kinks for the next round. Bear with us, please. {{KKDSig|1}}

==First problem==
The user Gonhegon broke the rules twice, so we removed his votes, and I gave him a verbal warning.  Should I have done that?  {{The Inexistentsig}}

:Oh, and D.Dark. did the same.  {{The Inexistentsig}}
Explain what exactly happened.{{User:Redeemer & Destroyer/Sig}}17:00, September 4, 2010 (UTC)
They just didn't have sufficient edits. {{KKDSig|1}}
:Oh... it's not that bad. Just leave it like this for now.{{User:Redeemer & Destroyer/Sig}}17:15, September 4, 2010 (UTC)
D.Dark demands an explanation. I'm not sure if he understood the Special:Editcount part, because his total is well above 300. {{User:Troisnyxetienne/Signature}} 00:13, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
:I'll check. EDIT: Most of his edits are from user talkpages.{{User:Redeemer & Destroyer/Sig}}03:07, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
Okay. I'll tell him the next time he pings. Or the next time I'm available. I'll be signing off, perhaps signing in after lunch and after practice. : ) {{User:Troisnyxetienne/Signature}} 03:12, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

== Joint Struggle ==

Hey, after 16 rounds, are we going to have a gaint extraveganza with all of the past victors pitted against each other?  Just curious.  No one needs to respond to this.  {{The Inexistentsig}}

== Removal of "Supervisors" ==

So apparently none of you read Bluerfn's message above, and I think that is because you know that he is right. The ''Kingdom Hearts'' Wiki is completely oriented toward mainspace edits. Yes, we have had complaints about that before, but all wikis should focus on their mainspace articles, not user talk pages and auxillary games and events. Also, these "supervisors" have nothing that makes them special or any more than any other user. It is undeniable that these "supervisors" are the Mirage Arena's form of "staffers", which is completely unnecessary. A staffer is given new tools and rights to take part in certain discussions on the ''Kingdom Hearts'' Wiki, whereas there is not one tiny, even diminutive thing that seperates a supervisor from a staffer. Who is to say that I can't give someone a "Mirage Arena warning", or remove a post form someone who has made too few edits? In addition, the Mirage Arena is based on the Dragon's Neck Coliseum over at the ''Final Fantasy'' Wiki. The DNC has no "supervisors", yet it has a much more complex system and at least five times as much activity as this little arena gets. And yet, this one needs people to watch over it? No, it does not. That's absolutely preposterous.

From what I can see, anyone who follows the rules of the Mirage Arena is a supervisor, because there is no need for them. There is no need for any users with a higher autohrity or place as a part of an auxillary arena for fun. If everyone watches over the Mirage Arena for users who do not fulfill the edit requirements or post too long or offensive messages, there will be no problem, and I can see that this is already being done without any "supervisors". It is for these reasons that I am going to request<!--and quite possibly initiate--> the remove of "supervisors" from the Mirage Arena. They are just editors who are glorifying themselves for absolutely no reason. --{{User:DoorToNothing/Sig}} 19:43, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

I didn't even need to read your huge (and expected) wall of text to know that I agree with you. I never liked that either. I was meaning to take it out, but some people said it was ok to stay. I'll end this right now.{{user:Redeemer & Destroyer/Sig}}19:49, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

Look who's talking, DTN. You said yourself, a while back, that the DNC was a cesspool. So what issue do you have with trying to re-structure something so that it doesn't fail? Just because it's based of something doesn't mean it has to follow it completely. The whole damn Kingdom Hearts series is based off of Disney stories, that don't follow the originals to a "T". However, Me, DS and Wolf didn't even add the "Supervisors" thing. Auror did it for some reason, and due to communication issues, we all thought someone else approved it, so it stayed. {{KKDSig|1}}

I would rather we ''don't'' follow anyone to the T and decide for ourselves already ! Are we or are we not ? And under what reasons ? You know the pros and cons. Weigh them yourselves for once ! {{User:Troisnyxetienne/Signature}} 01:19, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
:Okay, I don't understand your message, Troisnyxetienne. If you could reword or clarify it, that would be great. Second, KKD, I have ''never'' said that the DNC was a "cesspool." The DNC works for the FFWiki because they have less community events, unlike this wiki. Their community is also much more mainspace-oriented, unlike this wiki. That is why I had a certain dislike for the Mirage Arena being created at this point in the ''Kingdom Hearts'' Wiki's history. And the Mirage Arena is ''trying'' to be like the DNC. The opening paragraph is a direct copy of it, is that not obvious? The forum that initiated its creation was even named after the DNC. To say that they are trying to be different is not true in any way. Also, a wiki doesn't embody its subject; see [[Forum:Bad words are bad on here.|this]]. --{{User:DoorToNothing/Sig}} 02:07, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
:Let's not bring this into a Mirage Arena discussion. The Mirage Arena was indeed a leaf taken out of DNC, only that I wonder if Joint Struggle was taken out from there, or if it was our own idea. But it doesn't mean that we are copying the DNC willy-nilly. We are just going our way and we see what happens from there. Now the natural decision we actually took was to have at least a few people supervise this page. Which, I believe, is normal. Whilst they can't be called "staffers", Blue didn't in any way say that they should be removed completely. See his "staffa" message above.

:My two cents on this is that we continue as we are, and we see where we head on from here. After all, so far, despite the technicalities, the MA has been a great page overall. {{User:Troisnyxetienne/Signature}} 02:24, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
The MA was based on the DNC, that's not a secret. The JS was our own idea. (I hade no idead that the Magicite Madness existed). We used the DNC as a model, a seed so that we could grow our own tree, the MA. It's not a ripoff, a copyright, a clone, replica... or whatever you wanna call it.

Now, one thing about the supervisors, staff, mods, whatver. At first it was me in charge of Starting and finishing the battles and making sure people folowed the rules. KKD was doing the same to the Nominations. We didn't call ourselves staff. And more people start helping us. The above topic about the staffers was to see if there was going to be a actual crew or not. It was never settled. And then, Auror suddenly came up and made that Mods thing on the Page. KKD and wolf though she had my permission, I though she had theirs, and from some Admin. Turns out it was just a communication problem.

So, anyone can help with the MA. And if the rules of voting are broken, anyone can use the Vote Policy, as long as they leave a message here on the Talk Page about it.

I hate to join discussion when I find they meaningless, but this time I had to do it. Now I hope you guys stop "fighting" and annoying me.{{USer:Redeemer & Destroyer/Sig}}02:35, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
:Thank you, Redeemer. It was much needed. : ) {{User:Troisnyxetienne/Signature}} 02:43, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
::Glad to see everything settled. So, in conclusion, never assume that you have permission from a user by an indirect source. Thanks guys! --{{User:DoorToNothing/Sig}} 05:07, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

==Improvement of the Rules==

After a accident involving warnings and rules, which I'm not going to enter in details, we decided that the rules should be reviewed, simplified and improved. I came with a draft for the rules and I'd like that everyone which participates on the MA, helping or voting, gave they opinions. Here is the draft:

----

#You may vote only once.
#You '''must be a registered user''' to vote.
#<big>You must have at least '''145 edits''' before voting. Check your editcount [[Special:Editcount|Here]], by typing in your username. </big> Please check for: '''Mainspace, Image, Main Page, Template, Walkthrough, Card, Kingdom Hearts Wiki,''' and '''MediaWiki''' edits.
#''If you are not logged in when you vote, '''your vote will be removed.'''''
#To vote, type the following "#", afterward including any reasons for voting you may wish to include, keeping it with the maximum of 30 words. Unsigned, offensive and/or extraordinarily lengthy shall be removed.
#Additional comments go in the Keyblade Graveyard. Conduct yourself with courtesy. Keep in mind that the fights are between the contestants, and not the users.
#Do not alter the format of this page.
#If a battle ends in a tie, Sudden Death will occur. After one hour, the contender with more votes wins. Keep in mind that Sudden Death matches happen at random times!
#If sudden death ends in another tie, 30 minutes will be added onto the clock. This will repeat until a winner is clear.
'''''Any failure to adhere to these rules will result in your vote(s) being removed or loss of voting privileges. '''''

----

Please, leave your suggestions and comments bellow. I would make a forum for this, but MA foruns die fast... >.> {{User:Redeemer & Destroyer/Sig}}17:21, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

===Comments and Suggestions ===
'''''Leave your comments and suggestions here.'''''
I'll be revising the rules of the Nominations page, as well. I'll get on those ASAP. {{KKDSig|1}}

== Sudden Death ==
Exactly when is the sudden death of a match?{{User:Keyblade0/Sig}}
:If there is a tie, the Sudden Death takes place in a random time during the week next to the fight. {{User:Redeemer & Destroyer/Sig}}23:46, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

== Word Limit ==

Due to the fact that the keyblade graveyard is only for comments related to the fight, I'll rant about this here. This is a bad idea. I can see just by looking at the current fight that users are either already breaking the rule or just barely ''not'' breaking the rule. The fact that the length of a vote has been so controversial is unbelievable. You can users not to leave too long of a comment, but setting an actual limit is too frustrating. If a comment is so long that it disrupts the match ''that's'' when you know you've got a problem. --{{User:JFHavoc/Sig}} 02:55, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

: I see where you're coming from, James. But the reason we even have that rule is because we're having people damn near write bloody essays on why they chose x over y. The problem with saying something's "too long" is that everyone has a different definiton of that. 30 words is easy to define. If anyone has a bright idea on how to fix this, I'm all ears. {{KKDSig|1}}
::I've never seen a fight where people posted soul-crushingly long comments, except maybe once. Is that serious enough to garner a ''rule''? And, honestly, who's gonna sit there and '''''count the words in every vote'''''?! This isn't that serious to net a rule restricting words, for [[Pete]]'s sake... <small>No pun intended, but linked for teh luz</small> --'''''[[User:SilverCrono|<span style="color:cornflowerblue;">A Crono</span>]] [[User talk:SilverCrono|<span style="color:gray;">of the Silver kind</span>]]''''' 04:10, October 3, 2010 (UTC)
::Exactly. Everyone has a different definition of "too long". For example, 30 words is not "too long" by my definition. And words can be pretty darn long, if I wrote "Hexakosioihexakontahexaphobia" thirty times, it'd be a tad more obnoxious than a thirty-one word commment that explained something.{{User:LapisScarab/Sig}}04:17, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

:::See here, there doesn't need to be a word count, or anything of the sort. I would say that the two line limit is a good idea, but the screen capacity of most computers differ, making this impossible to establish directly. I say we could just say something along the lines of: "Please do not post something extraordinarily lengthy. Please keep it short." And if you decide it's too long, you delete it. You may say this is unfair to the voter, and biased could be used, but as long as both parties assume good faith, there should not be a problem. --{{User:LegoAlchemist/Sig}} 04:19, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

===Moved from the Keyblade Graveyard===

:Honestly? A ''word limit''? That's just petty >_> --'''''[[User:SilverCrono|<span style="color:cornflowerblue;">A Crono</span>]] [[User talk:SilverCrono|<span style="color:gray;">of the Silver kind</span>]]''''' 02:47, October 3, 2010 (UTC)
:Yeah, if we need a limit on the comments, the 2 line one was better. Not only did it give more freedom to the commentor, but it made it easier on the monitor.{{User:LapisScarab/Sig}}02:51, October 3, 2010 (UTC)
:Look, Nobody followed the rule either way. We don't want essays on why you're voting for x over y. The "Two Sentence" Rule was a failure: If we removed stuff, they semicoloned it back in. Why is it so hard to say something simple, like "I like ice cream better."? {{KKDSig|1}}
:Beacuse some of us like to be a little more intelligent than "I like this because it looks cooler." No one was leaving obnoxiously long comments before anyway. The only time anyone violated that two sentence rule was when they accidentally had three sentences. And this rule is far easier to violate by accident.{{User:LapisScarab/Sig}}04:04, October 3, 2010 (UTC)
:We defined it as two short sentences, which is apparently <!-- According to DTN --> unmeasurable. And there were obnoxiously long comments before, during the Two Sentence rule. 
*Exhibit A:It cannot be said that light is good and darkness is bad, as they have both spawned beings that fight on protagonists' and antagonists' sides. However, according to Kairi's Grandmother, Light was at one point a constant force, but even then selfishness and greed were born, and as such Darkness came in; this proves a balance between the two forces is needed, and Darkness is what created that peaceful balance.
*Exhibit B:It is true; light and darkness have always been mortal "enemies" of each other, as long as anyone can remember; even outside the realm of Kingdom Hearts and into the real world - our world - light and darkness have been used to personify and identify characters in books and Shakespearian plays; but the question is, which is superior, which is better, which can holds its own? The standalone answer, is light; for without light, shadows cannot be cast and darkness cannot be given form, and this balance between the two could have never come into existence; without light, there could be no darkness.
:Now, note that both of those are ''two sentences'', and also obnoxiously long. I reiterate what I said on the talk page: '''If anyone can come up with a good, fair ruling for this, please speak up.''' {{KKDSig|1}}
::How about this? 

::''Please don't make long comments. Any votes that are particularly long-winded will first be asked to be modified or moved to the Keyblade Graveyard, and will be removed if not followed. Long votes include ones disrupting the template or over 4 lines, give or take.''

::--'''''[[User:SilverCrono|<span style="color:cornflowerblue;">A Crono</span>]] [[User talk:SilverCrono|<span style="color:gray;">of the Silver kind</span>]]''''' 04:15, October 3, 2010 (UTC)
:::Works for me. I'll put it in. {{KKDSig|1}}
::::Sounds good.{{User:LapisScarab/Sig}}04:20, October 3, 2010 (UTC)
:Okay, it's in. Lapis, please feel free to put your vote back to the way it was before I messed with it. ^.^ {{KKDSig|1}}

My comment was destroyed ._.

I said pretty much the same thing, but cut back the line limit, seeing as screen capicities of most computers differ, and line count can be shortened or lengthened depending on the moniter. --{{User:LegoAlchemist/Sig}} 04:22, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

:::Ah, I wasn't miffed about my comment, it's fine how it is now, I was more concerned about future instances. I'm just glad this got to be solved with so little conflict. A rare feat around here.{{User:LapisScarab/Sig}}04:25, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

:Riight... That's why we didn't use Lines in the first place... dammit. Now what? {{KKDSig|1}}
::No no no no no no no. No. You canNOT use lines to define the length of a message, since it is dependent, and therefore different, on the size of one's screen. Sentence limits work better, if not a more exact word limit to make sure someone doesn't just comma-in a bunch of unnecessary messaging. --{{User:DoorToNothing/Sig}} 04:58, October 3, 2010 (UTC)
:<!-- Because you totally haven't done that before. --> Sentence limits get broken. Word counts are a hassle. Line counts are dependent. What the hell do we do now? We can't just say "Don't post anything too long" because someone <!-- I.e. YOU --> Will say that too long cannot be defined. Any ideas, genius?
<br>EDIT:Okay, let's go over this.
<br>Sentence limits: ''were'' perfectly good, that is, until you, DTN, broke the rule, I fixed it, and then you just went around it by semicoloning everything back in.
<br>Word counts: Everyone's complaining that it's too much work, when I'm the one counting. Also, according to Lapis and such, 30 words is too little.
<br>Line counts: They are dependent, so they wouldn't work anyway. 
<br> So, sentence counts could work, as long as everyone cooperates, doesn't just semicolon everything back in if it gets removed, and keeps the sentences within a reasonable limit. Or, word counts could work if we could find a more reasonable number that works for everyone. In history, some of the votes took up as much space as 2, 3, or even 4 votes did. They were two sentences each, too! That ''can't happen.'' {{KKDSig|1}}
::"''Sentence lines work better, if not a more exact word limit to make sure someone doesn't just comma-in a bunch of unnecessary messaging.''"
::With '''''that''''' having already been said, there are no identifiable consequences for abusing the message limit. If someone breaks that rule, all that is done is the message is shortened. A user can literally leave a too long message and actually expect for someone to shorten their message, without them having to do a thing. I suggest keep the sentence limit, but actually ''remove'' the vote if it is too long! Also, it is completely irrational and unfair to blame this on my ''unintentional'' mistake, I have fixed many other votes that were over two sentences. --{{User:DoorToNothing/Sig}} 05:29, October 3, 2010 (UTC)
::Removing the votes in response to breaking the rule is a horrible idea. It could result in an inaccurate result for the match, because one side had a lot of really long votes. --{{User:JFHavoc/Sig}} 05:35, October 3, 2010 (UTC)
:::Sure, you unintentionally broke the rule, but nevertheless, you went around the rule by making two absolutely massive sentences by semicoloning everything back in again <!-- Great to see an admin setting such a good example. -->. Nevertheless, removing votes instead of shortening them could be an option. As James said, it could tip the balance of the votes, but then again, they forefeited their voting rights by breaking the rules, and they could always re-vote after it getting removed, providing they do it right the second time. {{KKDSig|1}}
:I have a tendency to break the two sentences rule, because, well, it's too short for me to voice my opinions - indeed, it is quite easy for someone to make two very long sentences, and a word limit doesn't count either. My suggestion would be a classification of ideas : not more than two ''main ideas'' per comment. For example : "I like Void Gear better because it's beautiful. And it's more effective as well. It is helpful !" would be valid, because there are only two main ideas in the post, while "I like No Name because of the design, because of its astounding boost in Magic and because it's a cool reward to get after beating the Unknown" wouldn't, despite being a single sentence. Opinions ? <choose>
<option><big><sup><font color=indigo>—</font>[[User:Xelias0|<font color=midnightblue>Nihil Perdere Posset </font>]][[User_talk:Xelias0|<font color=indigo>Qui Nihil Est</font>]]</sup></big></option>
<option><big><sup><font color=black>—</font>[[User:Xelias0|<font color=silver>Emptiness, </font>]][[User_talk:Xelias0|<font color=black>and yet Infinity</font>]]</sup></big></option>
</choose> 19:00, October 11, 2010 (UTC)