User talk:UnSub-Zero

___________
 * ARCHIVE #1: December 26, 2011 – July 6, 2012
 * ARCHIVE #2: July 9, 2012 – June 12, 2013
 * ARCHIVE #3: June 14, 2013 – November 16, 2013
 * ARCHIVE #4: November 22, 2013 – April 1, 2014
 * ARCHIVE #5: April 2, 2014 – September 12, 2014

Unsubs: Psychopaths or Sociopaths?
Based on their M.O.'s, profiles, behavior, and how their are seen throughout the episodes they appear in, which of these unsubs would you say are psychopathic and which are sociopathic?


 * Robert Adams
 * J.B. Allen
 * Karl Arnold
 * Joe Bachner
 * John Vincent Bell
 * Ronald Boyd
 * Robert Burke
 * Sarah Danlin
 * Phillip Dowd
 * Malcolm Ford
 * The Footpath Killer
 * Gary
 * Franklin Graney
 * Mark Gregory
 * Wayne Gulino
 * Charles Holcombe
 * The Hollow Man
 * Bill Jarvis
 * Robert Johnson
 * Walter Kern
 * Michael Kosina
 * Owen McGregor
 * Paul and Johnny Mulford
 * Lee Mullens
 * John Nichols
 * Robert Parker
 * Ryan Phillips
 * Robert Reimann
 * Cortland Bryce Ryan
 * Russell Smith
 * David Roy Turner
 * Pablo Vargas
 * Terrance Wakeland
 * Blake Wells
 * Shane Wyland

Main criminals' articles
Have more than enough faith in you, so haven't been paying real attention to how those articles ended. BUT I've noticed in the last one that his History wasn't separated from what happens/he does during the episode. As a reminder, those 2 parts MUST be marked as different in those articles; "History" for previous whatever happens before the hours/days the episode comprises, and "Episode Title" for what happens during the time the episode shows. - Mvpl TALK 22:24, October 16, 2014 (UTC)


 * Nothing they did happened at the time of the episodes... They're remembered, and the current events at the time of their episodes may be connected to their past actions (hence why they're important enough to have their own article, and why there is enough info to write one to begin with), but they're not the MAIN unsub in either ;-)) - Mvpl TALK 22:34, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Undos
Why the undos? Lauraloo77 (talk) 02:56, October 17, 2014 (UTC)

Oops, my bad. And I've totally made this mistake before. I'm terrible. Lauraloo77 (talk) 03:11, October 17, 2014 (UTC)

Help
Wikia is about to impose a change upon all wikis that cut customization features... AGAIN! This time will be the galleries with images that are NOT links to other pages; for instance, the Main Characters' one will be unaffected, but the gallery showing all those revolvers would change (would because is already protected).

Thankfully there's a way to protect them from this change and keep the customization, which will keep them looking good AND being useful. I want to add the code needed to all now that I know what to do (my memory is bad enough that is a sure bet I'll forget sooner rather than latter!).

Why I'm telling you all this? Because don't know how many galleries there are, and in which pages they're included, while I think you've a good idea about that. Can you hunt them down (the Behind the Scenes batch not included, I've got those) and pass me a list? No need to go nuts, just whenever you can, start a list in my Talk page and add there anytime you find another one. THANKS!!! - Mvpl TALK 22:30, October 20, 2014 (UTC)

Changing Editor Mode
Go here: Special:Preferences and in the drop-down menu select which mode you want as default for your edits - Mvpl TALK 14:40, November 8, 2014 (UTC)

Character article idea
Considering how much these characters a;;ear in the episodes they're featured in, I thought you might want to think about creating articles for at least some of them. You don't have to create articles for all of them, it's just an idea I had


 * Ben and Jane McBride
 * Erika Silverman
 * Matt, Lyla and Tammy Bradstone
 * Maya Carcani
 * Sheriff Georgia Davis
 * Leanne Tipton
 * Tara Rios
 * Gina Mendes
 * Liz Foley
 * Russell Holmes
 * Erika Taylor
 * Chris Jensen
 * Yvonne Carpenter
 * Deacon Rogers
 * Brooke Lombardini
 * Ian and Abby Corbin
 * Helen Garrett
 * Angie Stanton
 * Carrie Ortiz
 * Connie Foster
 * Stan Wolcott
 * Sarah Hillridge
 * Charlie Hillridge
 * Aimee Lynch
 * Mike Acklin
 * Debra Acklin
 * Mackenzie Acklin
 * Braden Acklin
 * Anisa Gold
 * Kelly Shane
 * Gary and James Rhymer
 * Mitchell Ruiz
 * Eddie Langdon
 * Tony Cole
 * Wick Griffith
 * Rebecca Hodges
 * Wally Brisbane
 * Joe Muller
 * Samantha Wilcox
 * Claire Thompson
 * Doug Summers
 * Kate Phinney
 * Emma Churchill
 * Molly Grandin
 * Lyle Donaldson
 * Agent Olivia Hopkins
 * Chad Dumont
 * Penny Hanley
 * Molly McCarthy
 * Stephanie Wilson
 * Rosa Trejo
 * Sharon Harris
 * Andrea Harris
 * Rebecca Daniels
 * Sam Carter
 * Cheryl Davenport
 * Alison Sparks
 * Diana Mitchell
 * Nancy Riverton
 * Sid Rutledge

BAUmaster628 (talk) 21:29, November 14, 2014 (UTC)

Serial Killer article
I was thinking. Considering all the psychopaths, poisoners, pedophiles stalkers, serial rapists, spree killers featured and/or mentioned in the show are put in their respective articles, why not all the serial killers. It only makes sense and it doesn't just have to be the serial killers who have made more than one appearance in the show.

BAUmaster628 (talk) 23:11, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

Writers
My source for the added info in the Erica Messer and Edward Allen Bernero's pages is [THIS BLOG]. If you want, and have the time, there are more interviews and other articles about most of the former Criminal Minds writers there. I'll try to do more in the next days, but I can tell you now I won't have enough time to revise and complete many more :-) - Mvpl TALK 22:59, December 30, 2014 (UTC)

Accuracy
Is there a reason you keep editing pages to be  less accurate?


 * I don't understand. What am I doing to make pages less accurate? UnSub-Zero (talk) 02:59, January 2, 2015 (UTC)


 * When people make changes adding more accurate information, you keep deleteing them. It seems a little ridiculous and kind of biased.


 * Because it's not information; it's vandalism. All those people are doing is messing up coding for the articles' texts by removing key-signs, adding inappropriate words, and even blanking out the entire articles. That isn't accuracy at all. UnSub-Zero (talk) 03:08, January 2, 2015 (UTC)


 * I am talking about one specific page my friend edited to add more information. It was perfectly readable, and if it was messing up code there's no reason to not just fix the code and keep the conent rather than reverting it to a less accurate page.


 * Which page was that? UnSub-Zero (talk) 03:16, January 2, 2015 (UTC)


 * The Savannah Hayes page


 * That? Well, I kept reverting the content because an unsigned user was posting it, and since all of the vandals I mentioned were unsigned, I didn't trust the legitimacy of the content, nor did I ever recall learning that info in the episodes I watched. But a signed user did repost the content and I fixed it now. UnSub-Zero (talk) 03:42, January 2, 2015 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. Thank you!

Re: character hate
Is there any way to deal with people editing and re-editing articles when they clearly hate the character? Not going to name names at this point, but it seems REALLY terrible to me that characters (that are not unsubs of course) have been written about in really negative ways. I feel like that consitutes as vandalizing and to be honest, it seems like something that should possibly lead to being banned from contributing; I'm new here though, so I don't know if that's something that can get you banned. If it can't get someone banned, then what is the procedure for getting someone to stop changing the page back to their negative opinions? Afdork (talk) 00:56, January 2, 2015 (UTC)


 * If it's repetitive, then that can get the user banned. :) UnSub-Zero (talk) 02:10, January 2, 2015 (UTC)


 * I'd really like to hear that from the admin, but in the mean time, could you 1) edit the Morgan page to say that he's dating a DOCTOR from Bethesda General since "nurse" is inaccurate and 2) stop undoing my changes to the Savannah page. They are not personal opinions, just additional information. The thing you keep changing it back to is extremely negative and if you don't like the character, fine, but your personal opinions are showing in that article, so it needed to be edited. Afdork (talk) 03:28, January 2, 2015 (UTC)


 * Also, I would like to clarify that I 1) did not make the comments on the Savannah talk page, nor did I encourage the anon commenting on your page; I complained to some friends and she didn't tell me about it (I only noticed because your talk page was in the recent edits). Because you've been deleting things willy-nilly, I'm talking screenshots. Afdork (talk) 03:39, January 2, 2015 (UTC)


 * Who said I hated the character? I have no bias against any of the articles of this Wikia. I only kept reverting the information because you were unsigned at the time and a lot of unsigned users run around vandalizing articles in this Wikia every single day. Therefore, I didn't have the time and patience to verify the legitimacy of the info and reverted it. And if you want to avoid having to get your info reverted in the first place, you should've made an account and began editing several other articles in addition. Vandals are a real problem in this Wikia these days and it's good ethic for users to identify themselves as they make edits. UnSub-Zero (talk) 03:48, January 2, 2015 (UTC)


 * I can see where there was some misunderstanding on both our parts. Because you were the last person to edit the article, it seemed like you wrote it, but I'm now realizing that you make as many edits as you do because you're having issues with anons. When I read the initial article, parts of it sounded like it was written by a jealous 16 year old and had more negative bias as compared to the other love interests, even ones that the fandom tends to hate. While I made my original edit as an anon, I will assure you that I wrote each section as I watched the sections of the episode that Savannah was featured in, so everything I put in was accurate (right up to her pug being named Rusty). I made an account after that and then went to watch the ball drop. When I saw it had been changed back, it seemed like I was dealing with someone who was resisting the article being made neutral because nothing I wrote had been kept. I also thought I was logged in when I did that, but looking at the history, I can see that I wasn't, my bad. I'm sorry if I've frustrated you, I'm just tired of characters getting ragged on for legitimate issues (being upset that your boyfriend might not meet your parents, even though it's the 5th time you've planned it) or minor character flaws (oh gosh, she can't cook, how terrible!) and having the article changed back to such negative language multiple times really just looked...not great. I get it now and the current status of the article is much better than it previously was. Please realize that you should maybe review the edits more carefully though, even if they are anonymous; the editor makes it really easy to see what is the same and what is changed and if it's not one line that's like "garcia must have thought she could get away with any thing but derick new better" (which I just removed from the Garcia article), then it might be worth looking into? Especially when it's a minor character who has mainly only shown up in the first/last 5 minutes of episodes. Afdork (talk) 06:04, January 2, 2015 (UTC)


 * Excuse me, I was the one who actually wrote the initial article, and I made sure it was as neutral as possible, because that's obviously not welcomed in the Wikia. So, I don't know how in the world you saw anything negative in the article's previous form. The only thing I did wrong was leave out that extra info, which was on accident because I don't remember everything from the episodes I watch as I publish the articles. To say "a jealous 16 year old and had more negative bias as compared to the other love interests" wrote this article is offensive, because I know what I'm writing for. UnSub-Zero (talk) 07:15, January 2, 2015 (UTC)


 * So here is the story of how I came to edit the Savannah Hayes page: I was at work and my friend texted me, asking if we knew her speciality (pediatrics, ER, etc). I said I wasn't sure and suggested she check the wiki page. Her response was "I don't think the person who wrote the entry liked her v much. the tone is contemptuous if not exactly hostile." When I looked at it, the first sentence was enough to make me frown and it didn't get any better. I don't know your fandom history, but I caught up with the show in season 6 and have seen fandom rip new ladies (especially love interests) to shreds over and over again since then; the "we know absolutely nothing about her" was a very familiar "complaint" about Beth after her first episode, as if not knowing a character's entire backstory the second you meet them was a crime. I'm glad to know you don't outright hate Savannah and that you meant to be neutral, but I guess you weren't entirely conscious of how your wording came off because when I posted on my blog about my intention to edit the page, I had 9 other people agreeing that it was negative and needed editing. "i didn't know politely calling a partner out on something bothering you was 'lashing out' at them" was one such comment. others commented on the "she was unable to cook food properly" line. There was nothing in the entry about them saying "I love you," even though that was a pretty big thing for Morgan. I wasn't trying to be offensive with the line about 16 year olds, but I am far more used to seeing similar wording (the cooking line was particularly close to a post when the episode aired) and lack of acknowledgement of certain things (like "I love you") coming from die-hard Garcia/Morgan shippers on tumblr/livejournal than I am from a dude on wikia. I didn't even know you were a guy until that one anon comment on the talk page off-handedly mentioned it. So, I'm sorry that I offended you, that was not my intention at all, but please know that it was not just me who felt Savannah's article was overly negative. You seem like someone who takes pride in what they do, so maybe it's hard for you to hear that some stuff slipped by you? That you came off negative when you didn't mean to? That's okay! I'm not meaning to take a dig at you or the hard work you put into the wiki. Just...you're human, it happens, no big deal. Like I said, the page looks much better now, so I hope we're all good? Afdork (talk) 16:11, January 2, 2015 (UTC)