On the Hidden Immunity Idol page, the person in that row is the finder. Idol finds have been credited in Survivor statistics for years, so it only makes sense to have the finder there. In other instances, the first person listed is the owner (such as in the Extra Vote page when Rick found it on the Edge of Extinction, but had to send it to Aubry; Aubry is listed there and Rick is noted in the table as having found it).
Bureaucrats made the call. Personally, I can empathize with considering mental disabilities in the category, but that would open up a whole new can of worms with determining who has a mental disability.
I was not made aware of the block while I was on break. First off, I was making updates while paying attention to detail in each ep including where the title of the episode came from. As for the content I removed, I removed one of them cause I was creating a page for a challenge that has now been featured twice on the show. Now can we please put the accusations aside.
The content is there for a reason. If an admin places it there, then it most likely has been determined by the admin panel as a whole or at the very least has the support of the other admins. You should have first confirmed with an admin and messaged a suggestion of how to go about things instead of adopting a cavalier attitude and removing content on your own.
Second, your edits have repeatedly failed to meet our standards on this wiki. You keep editing without observing how content is properly written. Your edits will continue to be reverted unless you improve on them.
Your block was not based on simple accusations. They are based on facts that you did not follow our rules or our Manual of Style. The admin panel was aware of your block, yet no one contested it because yours was a clear cut case.
You weren't sure if an admin was active? That's a flimsy excuse. Did you expect us to be online 24/7? We have lives away from this wiki too, you know? Any reasonable person would have known to message an admin their suggestion and wait for a response before making a change. That you did not do that implies that you were badge editing, which is a blockable offense under global Fanon rules.
Furthermore, that was not the first time you removed content deemed necessary by admins. Let's look at your edit history:
Let me quote myself above: "The admin panel was aware of your block, yet no one contested it because yours was a clear cut case." Your 7-day block was more than warranted. As I mentioned in my reasoning for giving you the block, you could have taken the time to learn from this. If you have not learned from this and continue to deny the reasons for your block, then our head admin, IAmNothing712, has given me the go ahead to give you an even longer block until you learn.
Please link to said web preview, so long as its contents do not violate our Spoiler Policy. Regardless, it was deleted because it was poorly done. We have a standard here for how pages are supposed to be, and what you were doing was far from the standards we have.
Furthermore, you cannot call it a "work in progress". We have a preview button for that. The fact that you consistently edited and saved when the preview button would suffice also indicates that you were badge editing, which is a blockable offense under global fandom rules.
Oh totally my mistake. I should have never done it as a WIP I had never done an entire page here before and totally wasn't thinking. One other thing I couldn't seem to find the file name for TBD and that image wasn't showing up for that.
I also was looking for the preview button the whole time and didn't see it. I see it now though, I for whatever reason thought those big buttons that said desktop and mobile were for what version I wanted to edit, but I see now those are preview buttons.
Anyway could I get the code back so I can edit it so its up to standards? I thought I had read all the rules, but I guess I missed something. Totally my fault and I apologize if I did something wrong like I said it was my first time and I must have misunderstood.
Hi! I'm messaging you again, about a different topic. One year ago, you re-named the articles on Matt Elrod and Roxy Morris. Those changes were welcome, but I think there are two more contestants' articles that I think are not named correctly.
- First, about Ruth-Marie Milliman. Upon rewatching Panama, I've noticed that her name is spelled with a dash only in the first episode. In the later episodes, her name has been corrected to "Ruth Marie", both in the intro and in confessional chyrons. Her name is also spelled without a dash on her official profile. So I think her correct name should indeed be "Ruth Marie Milliman", in a similar fashion to Bobby Jon Drinkard.
- And secondly, about Mark "Papa Bear" Caruso. It seems that the wiki favors confessional chyrons over the intro (as evidenced by the re-namings of the Matthew/Matt Elrod and Roxanne/Roxy Morris articles), and in this case, Mark's chyrons were changed into "Papa Bear" after he asked Probst on how to be called, just like "John" changed into "Cochran", or "Jud" into "Fabio". Apparently, the problem was that it was a two-word nickname, so that it couldn't fit in the article name. At first I agreed with this, but then I realized the wiki has already accepted a two-word nickname in an article name: Cao Boi Bui. And ultimately, "Papa Bear Caruso" doesn't make any less sense than for Cao Boi, or other silly nicknames like Chicken Morris, Wardog DaSilva, etc.
I think that for consistency's sake, it would be better to re-name these two articles. Again, this is only my take, I understand this can be debatable, and I don't know how much this topic has been discussed in the past. If there's already a consensus on how those pages should be named, then nevermind.
Thank you for bringing this up. I renamed the articles for Matt Elrod and Roxy Morris after obtaining a consensus from the other admins. To give a little insight into how the admins make decisions, we have a group chat where we discuss, among other things, wiki matters and policies. What usually happens is that one admin brings up a proposal (sometimes with statistical or visual proof to back up their arguments, such as what I did with the Matt and Roxy situation when I provided screenshots of their chyrons), the other admins give their two cents, and we continue to discuss until we come up with a consensus.
Regarding the Mark Caruso article: I was not yet an admin when this particular decision may have been made, but I do believe the reasoning behind this is the absurdity of having an article named "Papa Bear Caruso".
Regarding the Ruth-Marie Milliman article: I do believe that the article has been named that way since its creation back in 2007. I myself have noticed inconsistencies with the hyphen in her name ever since the airing of Panama back in 2006. Of note, her Instagram account (her only social media account linked to this wiki) spells her name as "Ruth Marie" (without the hyphen). Perhaps you can provide visual proof for your argument to help the admins decide?
Will definitely bring this up with the other admins.
Okay, so I've consulted with Ian and it seems that the reasoning for the Mark Caruso article is in fact the absurdity of the name "Papa Bear Caruso". Regarding the Ruth Marie Milliman article, given the inconsistency with the hyphen, we have decided to change it to "Ruth Marie" since that's how she spells her name on social media (similar to how JoAnna Ward was renamed given how JoAnna spells her name on social media). Thanks for bringing this up! :)
About Papa Bear, it's just that it's the only article that doesn't follow the wiki's naming convention is "name/nickname they were officially referred to in the show + last name" (except for the ones who were referred to by their last name). Yes, the name "Papa Bear Caruso" is absurd in itself, but is it really more than "Cao Boi Bui", "Wardog DaSilva", or really any of the silly nicknames that were never really meant to be followed by the contestant's last name? And we could say the same for the contestants who were referred to by combination of their first and last name, like J.T. and Benry, or a play on their last name like Figgy, or even Ziggy and ET from Australian Survivor.
Also, something completely unrelated but while I'm talking to you, I've just changed the airing dates for the episodes "Friends?", "The First 24 Days", and "The First 30 Days" which were wrong according to CBS.com and epguides.com, but I can't change it on the episode guides templates, could you do it?
Welcome to the admin panel! About the Papa Bear thing, Ian made the call on that way back in 2011, and I can't say I disagree with his reasoning. There's really no hard and fast rule in our Manual of Style for this particular case, so it's more of an executive decision. As always, you can bring it up with our fellow admins. We're usually a pretty chill group anyway. :)
Hi! I'm messaging you because in the last few days, I've been checking the contestants' ages in every season to correct any mistakes I could find, and I found out there were a lot of them, especially in the 20s.
My understanding of the consensus on the ages is that you always take how old they were during filming (since you recently changed Kathy's age in Marquesas to 46 instead of 47). So that sould leave no ambiguity for contestants who had their birthday outside of filming dates.
The problem is for contestants that had their birthday within filming dates. One of the options would be to take everyone's age either on the first day or last day of filming. The cons of that method is a contestant's age could be a month off if an endgamer has their birthday in the first days of filming, or if an early boot has their birthday on the last days of filming.
Ultimately, the method I've used when checking everyone's age was to take their age on the last day they were in the game, as I thought it was the fairest method of representing everyone's age. The hypothetical issue with this method would be that two people having the exact same age would be listed under different ages should they have their birthday during filming, and one is an early boot and the other an endgamer. But fortunately, Natalie and Nadiya did not have their birthday during filming, and the probability of a problematic case happening is lower than with the other method.
I thought that this method was the consensus, and I've made a spreadsheet of every contestant's age using this method and was I about to ask for the green light to correct every wrong age on the wiki, until I saw your edit today of Tijuana's age in Pearl Islands. She turned 27 the day after her elimination, so under this method she would be listed as 26. Now I'm a bit confused about what the consensus actually is for contestants who have their birthday during filming, so I want to ask you (or any other admin that reads this) what the wiki's policy is regarding the contestants' ages, so I can edit my spreadsheet if necessary.
I've highlighted the contesants whose age on the wiki is wrong according to my method. In RED, the contestants who had their birthday outside of filming dates, so their age on the wiki is wrong regardless of the method used. In BLUE, the contestants who had their birthday during filming, and whose age on the wiki is wrong according to the method I've used, but could be correct if using a different method.
Though, I've only highlighted the ones that are wrong according to my method, so if this method is incorrect according to the wiki's policy on ages, then some of the ages that are listed as correct on the spreadsheet could turn out to be wrong, so I'd have to check again.
Hi, thank you for this. You obviously put in a lot of work.
This new policy came about due to the then-impending release of the Island of the Idols cast in early September, as well as an observation by some admins that some contestants have inconsistencies with their ages (i.e., some follow filming date, others follow air date). To standardize contestants' ages, the admins came up with the following consensus:
1.) We follow contestants' filming ages.
2.) If a contestant's birthday occurs during filming, then we follow the age they turned to while filming occurred.
3.) We do not edit official profiles for posterity's sake. However, in all other instances where age is referred to on this wiki, we follow the filming age. (ex., Molly Byman this season has her age as 27 in her profile, but it was discovered on her social media accounts that she was actually 28 at the time of filming. We retain her age as stated in her profile, but she is listed as being 28 elsewhere)
As I was the one who brought this up with my fellow admins, I was given the go-ahead to push through with the changes. Other than the three above stated rules, I was given leeway to work out some kinks that I may encounter while implementing the changes. Thus far, I have only added one other rule:
4.) Following rule #2, we go with a contestant's age during filming (defined as being from when the cameras start rolling during the marooning on Day 1, until the conclusion of the Final Tribal Council on Day 39/42). That particular definition is important here since it is entirely possible that a contestant may have still been present during filming, but not in the game anymore (i.e., they were on the jury at the time of their birthday, such as Tijuana in Pearl Islands). If they were eliminated from the game pre-jury, and thus not present during filming anymore even though their birthday occurred sometime between their elimination and the Final Tribal Council, then we go with their lower age.
Generally, in determining a contestant's age, I follow two things:
a.) the contestant's birthday, as stated on their wiki profile (this of course can be wrong, so we would have to change it if we get a new date for their birthday)
b.) the filming calendar for every season, as posted by Jeff Pitman on his website, truedorktimes
Due to my personal schedule, the only seasons I have been able to go over thus far are Borneo to Pearl Islands, Kaôh Rōng, and Edge of Extinction. It is of course entirely possible that I may have made some mistakes, so you're more than welcome to help me out in correcting them, as well as going over the remaining seasons.
For Island of the Idols, I have taken note that of the following:
-Dean turned 29 on Day 23 of filming, so we have to change his age if he reaches that point
-Tom turned 61 on Day 26 of filming, so we have to change his age if he reaches that point
-we have to verify Vince's age once we get his real birthday
Thank you for your answer! About True Dork Times' filming calendar, do we take it over the dates that are currently on the wiki? I'm saying this because for Palau, the wiki says the last day of filming was December 4, while True Dork Times says it's December 9. And that's a bit problematic because Stephenie's birthday is December 6. There's also Edge of Extinction, with the wiki saying it ended on July 8 (Reem's birthday), while True Dork Times says it ended the day before. Should we edit the wiki's filming dates with the ones from True Dork Times or is there another source?
Anyway, with the correct rules in mind, I've double-checked everything used the True Dork Times dates like you said, so minus the possible confusion with Stephenie in Palau and Reem in Edge of Extinction, everything should be good. Here is what should be the definite spreadsheet of every players' age: https://i.imgur.com/QGpUKtI.png
The ages that are currently wrong on the wiki are highlighted in red.
Yes, I do believe we follow the truedorktimes calendar, and that any mistakes about the dates are on this wiki. With that in mind, I say go ahead and implement the changes. I'd really appreciate the help. I can double check once I find the time since I'll be going over every season anyway. :)
This might just be me, but what you did write seemed a bit wordy. There may be some things that might be included in Kellee's summary by the time her game ends, but I highly doubt everything you wrote will come back up later.
Essentially what Ghoul said. We don't add summaries of players' games until they're eliminated. That section isn't meant to be a running commentary. Furthermore, what you wrote was way too long considering that it's only been one episode.
Also, that last line of what you wrote is unacceptable, whether true or not. Please read our Spoiler Policy to know what this wiki's definition of a spoiler is. Consider this an official and final warning. I highly recommend that you do NOT mention what you wrote in that last line again anywhere on this wiki as that in itself would violate said policy and result in your immediate ban.
That's fair. I had a feeling that what I wrote was too wordy, and funny enough I was actually about to go in and chop it down to size before I realized it had been deleted entirely. Sorry about that last part, too. It's in an official preview that's been released into the public sector (the entirety of the preview is about it, in fact), so I figured it was past the point of spoilers and thus OK to mention. I'll just have to be more careful in the future. Thanks for the responses!