Alright, so there's two things I wanted to bring up, one minor, the other not so much.
I think that in pages for unsubs and characters, the introduction should note if the person appeared in a Criminal Minds spinoff. For example:
[UNSUB] is a serial killer, abductor, and one-time cop killer who appeared in the [CRIMINAL MINDS SPINOFF] episode "[EPISODE NAME]".
Also, to differentiate between characters from all three shows that are included in the wiki because of the Merge, there should be different categories for each of the shows, including a new one for characters from the main series. It could be a hefty task adding pages to it, but I believe it would help out with organization if there were the overarching category (Criminal Minds Characters) with everyone, plus three smaller ones for each show.
First thing will be noted. For the second, I will include spinoff agents and criminals categories "Suspect Behavior/Beyond Borders Main Character[s]" and "Suspect Behavior/Beyond Borders Criminal[s]". Any further ones, such as serial killers, terrorists, etc. will be included with our current categories.
I'm currently looking over our Criminal Pathology and Terminology categories - the main purpose of those was to define commonly misconstrued and misunderstood labels such as psychopaths and serial killers. However, I've noticed several pages such as Poisoner or Burglar that, I don't know, don't need further elaboration and explanation. Abductor and kidnapper is also included in the latter list, since I am sure every reader knows what an abductor and burglar is.
Going from the Poisoner page, the types of poisoners listed all seemed to correlate with the reason of the poisoning. Yes, there are several types of poisoners, but overall we know what a poisoner is and does and the types just specify the motivation and M.O. of the poisoner. Honestly, the types of poisoners is on the same level as what type of poison was used, and we know there are hundreds of ways people can be poisoned from.
The same can be said with abductors - we know what an abductor is and does and their M.O./motivation is the differentiation between the types of abductors. It's on the same level as how the abductions happen, which we know there are multiple methods how a kidnapping happens.
Point is, we cross the line into irrelevant, and I daresay 'useless' information if we go deeper into common classifications such as arsonists, poisoners and abductors. We don't want to give out information such as "parental kidnapping is a type of abduction where the parent abducts their kid and escapes", "this type of abduction uses financial motivation and gives out a ransom", etc, no matter how smartly we word the information.
I am not sure. The code for that new design on Wiki Activity says it shouldn't interfere with the See More button. I am not so hot on the new activity look right now because it interferes with our current sprites, so I can delete it and see if it returns the edit button underneath.
This has probably already been discussed by others, but I was wondering if I could start moving pages over from the Beyond Borders and Suspect Behavior wikis on to this one. Reasons why:
The shows remain a part of Criminal Minds canon. Although no event from either show has severely impacted Criminal Minds, the shows still use the Criminal Minds name and feature characters from the OG show.
Other crime shows that are part of a franchise are bundled together in the same Wiki. Franchises like CSI, Law & Order, Chicago, and NCIS have each produced successful and unsuccessful spin-offs, and all wikis feature pages about characters and episodes from each TV show. NCIS used to have separate wiki's for NCIS: LA and NCIS: NO, but they have since moved over to the regular NCIS wiki, where pages related to those shows continue to get updated.
Neither wiki has had much traction over the last several months. This may stem to both shows having ended for several years now, but the most activity either wiki has gotten has revolved around minor edits or comments regarding certain unsubs.
Thanks to using similar templates, it'll be easy to move each of the pages. Since all three shows revolve around catching serial killers, all we'd need to do is just copy the information that's already on the pages and post it onto a new page. Plus, most of the categories the pages are filed under already exist on this Wiki, so we won't have to create any new categories (Except in the case of overseas serial killers).
The Coronavirus cancelled all my classes and I have nothing better to do. This last reason is very petty, but it's always bugged me that we've always given Suspect Behavior and Beyond Borders their own Wikis when wikis for shows like NCIS and Law & Order practically pride themselves on having information from decades worth of shows. Since I finished my finals and have nothing else to do thanks to COVID-19, I can easily take the time to move pages from both wikis on to this one.
I have agreed to this a long time ago and admittedly it was something I personally should have dealt with, but I have not been as active as I should be the last year or so because of personal issues as well as a change in my university plans. I now apologize to all of you for not being a good active bureaucrat and a good leader in the community, and this is something I will try to change now that Coronavirus has given me some free time (my classes were changed to online but now I have hella free time as well).
You don't need to add all of these pages - we can request a merge on both wiki here by sending FANDOM an email explaining that we want the wikis merged. Give them a link to this thread as proof that most of the admins (3/5 of us at this moment) are in agreement. A staff member will automatically help transfer these pages - we don't need to do anything ourselves.
Sure! Judging by the rules to merge Wikis, it looks like one of the criteria for a successful merge is to have confirmation that all of the content has been transferred from the smaller community into the one that is to stay open. I'm going to take that to mean that we are going to need to start moving pages and photos from both Wikis, so you could take on Suspect Behavior while I took on Beyond Borders, then that could work.
The Beyond Borders episodes? I guess you can get started with Season Two.
From what I'm looking at, it doesn't look like you've uploaded the photos from Suspect Behavior onto the Wiki. I tried uploading the screencap for Two of a Kind and it worked OK for me, so if you don't wanna try and re-upload the photos, then you can work on Season Two.
I've uploaded the screencaps for the Suspect Behavior episodes. They are under different titles, so if you want me to work and Suspect Behavior so you can work on Season Two, or vice versa, let me know.
I'm afraid I am currently taking on another project involving a massive overload of our unreferenced criminals at the moment, finally putting a final decision on what pages be kept or not. I have almost 200 pages to review, so I cannot be directly involved with the merge but send updates regarding if all the BB or SB pages have been transferred.
Just uploaded the last of the Beyond Borders Minor Character pages. There are still some pages regarding IRL serial killers on the Beyond Borders Wiki, but considering the fustercluck regarding IRL serial killers that's currently being battled here, I think we can leave those behind.
As you may or may not have noticed, there has been a drastic uprise in the number of unreferenced criminal pages on this wikia in the past few months. Now unreferenced criminal articles alone aren't a problem (as long as they're not poorly done), but i personally think the number of them is too great.
Seriously, why do you think i made a category for them, AND put disclaimers in it?
A while back, Profiler10 enlisted my help in thinning out the number of unreferenced criminal pages. I would browse through the category and look for any similarities between them and any criminals on the show (a lot of them have blank "On Criminal Minds" sections or simply none at all). I would mark ones that i couldn't find any connection with for deletion and then he would delete them (or at least a few, a lot of them are still marked and haven't been deleted yet). In this manner, i believe we succeeded in reducing the number of unreferenced criminal articles.
But i still feel like more should be done to truly solve this issue.
So what's my proposal? Simple: I have lots of ideas for some new rules and regulations to be put in place to combat this problem. By enforcing them, i think we will drastically reduce the number of unreferenced criminal articles and keep them from becoming too rampant.
Now don't get me wrong, i don't hate unreferenced criminal articles, and i'm certainly not trying to fault anyone for trying (i haven't made on myself). I actually like a great deal of them because there are some really great comparisons. But there still needs to be a fine line between what's acceptable and what isn't. So what do you say? You still interested?
I agree. At first I didn't mind unreferenced criminals, especially big-name one of crimes that have happened as of recent times, but I agree that there has been a list of rather irrelevant pages that I find do not have a place in this wiki. We may be the biggest criminal database on FANDOM, but there is one big restriction line that we unfortunately crossed a long time ago and that being criminals that have been said in the show.
Also, this applies to finished unreferenced pages of a length typical of articles here. I will say now that any unfinished unfenced page be deleted effective now.
This is a project I would love to help with. Personally, I would rather just look over the pages and see what should be kept or not, but I'm afraid I'll accidentally delete pages that are acceptable. How do you suggest we proceed?
Like i said before, i have ideas for new rules/regulations to enforce in regards to unreferenced criminals if you're interested.
Or if you think mass deletion is the way to go, i already marked a vast majority of pages for deletion. You can browse through the candidates category and delete pages (if you can't find any similarities).
I'd personally like if you hear out my ideas, but you're the boss. We'll do this how you want it.
Now before we begin, i would like to make a quick DISCLAIMER
I am in NO WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM attempting to bully, condescend, tarnish the reputation of, or otherwise speak ill of any of the users i am about to mention. Honestly a lot of these guys are really talented. But at the same time their skills could use some improvement.
Okay, now onto my ideas. I hope you will read them all and give each one careful consideration. The list is also quite long so just be ready for it.
Minimum required number of similarities - There should be a minimum required number of similarites. I'd say maybe four, five, somewhere in that range. I see a lot of articles about criminals with almost no connection to an unsub (like one or two).
Pathology similarities - Furthermore, pathology similarites (no matter how many) shall only count as one similarity. For example, if the decided number is three, no one can just go (both were serial killers and rapists who targeted women). That's ridiculous and unimaginative.
Vary comparisons - This is another issue i've seen with some articles - numerous articles with the same comparisons. For example, Wade Hatchett has been compared to several different serial killers with (both were serial killers who targeted women, were truck drivers, and operated over state lines). And Floyd Feylinn Ferell had a similar problem with like (both were serial killers and cannibals who dismembered their victims and fed them to customers). Not those words exactly but you get the idea. But i came around and tried to fix it (i'll let you be the judge if i did a good job on that). Point being no articles are to be created for the almost or exactly the same comparison. Let's have some variety shall we?
Negative similarities - Negative or maybe similarities (like ones that say possibly in so-and-so's case) do NOT count as a similarity.
Time - I've noticed that some users who make unreferenced articles tend to make them in clusters. What i mean is that some like ThomasBisaschi and SolVic1337 tend to make another article whilst not finishing the first. This creates clusters of stub article pages and it has to stop. So my solution is that there should be a required time of completion for unreferenced criminal articles (or maybe any article for that matter, as The Man of Many Names has made hundreds of stub actor pages too). Like let's say that when an article isn't finished on the first try, the creator will have up until (decided time, maybe a year or a few months) to complete it. That means filling out all sections (including the comparison). Like Thomas's Russell Williams page has been incomplete for over a YEAR. We can't have this.
Required completion - Furthermore, the user must finish one unreferenced page before moving on to another.
Permission - Pretty self-explanatory: a user shall need admin approval to make an unreferenced criminal page. They must come to one (preferably you) and present their idea and explain what the criminal has in common with at least one unsub.
Experience - I also see people who make an unreferenced criminal article as their first edit here. And some seem to have next-to-no idea how to actually make a criminal page or to do it right. So i propose that a user should have a minimum required amount of experience first. Like maybe after a certain number of edits, a certain number of points on the board, a certain number of badges, etc. Maybe even someone can write a tutorial on how to make an unreferenced article (if one doesn't exist already) and the user should be required to read it. Creating unreferenced criminals here should be an earned privilage, not a right.
As for what to do next, how about you go ahead and delete a few pages, using my ideas to help scope out which ones need to stay or go. And then we make these rules official (you add them to the rules page). Then their enforcement will be carried out from this day forward. I have ideas on how to enforce these rules (or if there's any more you'd like to add), but i'd rather not list them on this reply (i think it's a bit too long and no decision has been reached).
In fact, Profiler10 said he would make a decision on what to do next, but that was quite a while ago. We need action ASAP.
Minimum required number of similarities - Very much agree on everything including the subpoint
I'm fine with some comparisons, especially of criminals having a similar nature, however, I would prefer comparisons to be of a paragraph with meaningful connections made. Like you stated, comparisons quickly summarized in a sentence or so I would rather delete. I also agree on negative similarities not counting as similarities.
I absolutely agree - finish your unreferenced page before starting the next one. Failure to do so will result in your pages being deleted (however a warning first).
Permission - yes of course. that has been standard.
Experience - that's a point I agree on. users should establish themselves as active, bordering on trusted users and fans of the show at least.
Also to keep track of what's approved or not, I leave a message on the comments under a page saying "Approved" meaning the page has been judged by me to be in good writing and therefore accepted. I will go by alphabetical order in the unreferenced category pages. Deleted pages will be deleted without notice, especially those that have been started months ago but never finished.
So do you agree with the vary comparisons idea? Those comparisons weren't word-for-word. What i meant was that we shouldn't have articles with the same (or almost the same) comparison. Like with Hatchett and Ferell (before i fixed the latter, did i do a good job)?
If you agree with the numbers rule then what's the minimum required number?
Wait so has it always been the rule to have permission to make an unreferenced criminal page?
Do you agree on the time rule? If so what's the time-limit for pages now?
If you agree with the experience rule, then what's the criteria for users?
So are the rules official? If you could you please add them to the Rules page?
Wait hold on, that seems a little drastic. If the rules have been approved, i have an idea on how to go about enforcing them. So i will browse through the category and look for a page that doesn't meet the requirements. Once one is found, i will message the creator and ask them for a full list of their unreferenced criminal pages. Once received i will browse the list and look for pages that don't meet the requirements. Then compile the offending pages and give the user a chance to explain themselves before reporting back to you on a new thread i will title "Reports". From there it's up to you on what to do. Does that sound good?
These are not just simple guidlines, but actual rules that users must follow and may face discipline if broken.
And one more thing: what is with this merging of the spin-offs? I for one do not agree with this sudden and drastic change. Why is is nessecary? Those shows have their own wikias, right? It seems rather excessive to basically recreate what i am led to believe is information straight from said wikias. I get that they're part of the 'continuity' or something like that, but still. I believe information for one show should stay on its own wikia (including spin-offs/parodies of another). Not to mention all of the drastic changes i believe this wikia will have to implement for the sake of them. Like adding a whole bunch of new criminals to portals (for unsubs from this show, not the spin-offs), new categories accommodating them, creating what i personally believe to be too many articles (some of which i predict will be stubs, which doesn't help the fact that this wikia has too many stub pages as it is). Those are just my thoughts.
Comparisons are quite an arbitrary thing to approach given some criminals have more in common than others. All I'm looking for in a good comparison is something long-ish but in depth and actually worth comparing. Truthfully it's all to the beholder, I suppose. As for the number, there shouldn't be a max or min number about how many criminals they're compared with, but rather there should be a minimum number of similarities with an in-show criminal, specifically about their character like M.O. or stuff along that line.
And yes, people had to ask permission to make unreferenced criminals but I believe they have not been. Time is about a week to create a good article. Minimally 100 edits but quality over quantity always matters for edits.
As for the merge, it's been a long time coming and admittedly it was something I should have been on top of. We are certainly not the first wiki to house the parent show and their spinoffs, and it was something me and the rest of the active administration firmly believed it was something to be addressed and done. I respect your thoughts but this was a move we wanted - merging in general is always something big and especially given we were doing two shows on top of that. Mostly all of the spinoffs' pages are actually well done thanks to our previous pseudo-bureaucrat Unsub-Zero's work. Categories will be discussed later but we will overlap the spinoff criminals with the parent show's as its still in the same universe.
Okay, you seem to have misunderstood some of what i said and left several things unanswered:
I wasn't talking about how many criminals are compared, i was talking about how many similarities they have between them and a show criminal. The minimum required number of similarities. What did you decide it to be? And we shouldn't have two articles with the same comparison (or with mimimal differences).
But now that you mention it, i think there should be a limit on how many real-life comparisons an unsub can have. I just don't want the section to become too flooded. You know with some typical serial killers like (both had abusive mothers, raped and strangled prostitutes, etc) it's pretty basic and generic, and it can be used to describe a lot of them (both real and fictional).
So have you actually approved of the rules? Are they now official? if so will you add them to the rules page?
What do you think of my idea of enforcement? I personally think that just going around deleting articles could cause an upset. A while back SolVic became upset over his articles being deleted and was rather heated about it. You can view the discussion on his wall under "Can i Help?".
But if you ultimately do decide against my idea and go about editing articles, there's something i'd like you to do for me. You know how on unreferenced articles they say "While so-and-so has yet", i'd really appreciate it if you changed it to "was never" since the show is over now. Thanks.
Okay 100 edits sounds good to me. But i think a week's time is a little short. On Christmas i started an Al Capone page and didn't finish it until January (almost a month later). I would suggest maybe about a month or so? But then again Capone is referenced so i'm sure that's different.
I still don't agree with the merge, but let's save it for another time, shall we?
Hey, i just had another thought: a possible exception to the rules? What about unreferenced criminals that have a confirmed comparison? Like how Thomas Yates was based on Henry Lee Lucas (i know he's not unreferenced, but you get it). In the mentioned discussion, SolVic claimed that one of his pages had a connection because of some film or something mentioning it. What if we allow an unreferenced criminal, but there's a confirmed inspiration? The article MUST include a link to their confirmed source (and by confirmed source, i mean a statement from like one of the show's creators or something similar).
And one more thing, i'd also appreciate it if you would remove any deleted articles from any portals they're in. You've torn a few 'holes' in some of them.
Hey Echo Spy! I just wanted to drop by to say you're doing a really great job on the wiki. I've been talking with Profiler10 and I wanted to make it clear that you're free to join in with that thread and anything I say there applies to you and Fashionable, not just Profiler.
It would be great if we could chat as a group some time as I feel you guys are a great team and the wiki is in good hands for the season premiere next month!
Hi, I would suggest to introduce a specific category for both real assassins and real criminals who, despite not quite acting like assassins, fit the assassin personality type. Please consider it. Thanks.
It would seem there is not a category of "Real Assassins" exists yet - that can be created,
I have concluded some research - there isn't an "assassin personality" type defined by any major justice or medical institution for starters, so while an assaying might share a lot of psychological and personality traits with other types of killers like black widows or white collars. There is also no approved "assissin checklist" - hence people who don't commit assassins but say have the weapons or the mentality aren't assassins yet. Once you become an assassin, you are an assassin.
Well, the term "assassin personality" was coined by John Douglas and a Secret Service guy as part of a crime classification system, which provided the basis for the Crime Classification Manual, which actually IS an institution. But if you don't see the category as useful, i can understand, no problem. Thanks for caring.
Apologies for intruding but I feel like this needs to be said.
You made the same proposal to Fashionable101 a few days ago, almost word for word, and she looped me in on things and we discussed it at length. Apologies for not getting back to you on the matter, Thomas, we've just been busy working on other projects, both on the wiki and in real life. I'm sorry about that.
In summary, what we concluded was that creating an "Assassins Personality" category could potentially make things messy/confusing because what we would essientially be doing is classifying criminals as "Assassins" even though they don't behave like them in terms of their pathology. That is how I interpeted your suggestion, personally. It's my understanding that we class them based on the crimes they commit, not personality types, so deviating from that may complicate things. It is my opinion that we keep things straightforward, however, if other moderators weigh in and think this is a good idea, then I'll come on board too.
Sorry again for forgetting to get back to you Thomas, I sincerely apologise for that.
Hi again! I'm just dropping by to let you know of a new scheme introduced at Fandom called Editor Rewards. This is a great new scheme designed to reward editors on Fandom, with merchandise ranging from free video games, hoodies, collectibles, and more!
To find out more about the scheme, please feel free to read the Introduction to Editor Rewards blog post Fandom staff posted. Also, please do leave feedback in the comments section of that blog as staff will be able to respond quickly and answer any questions you may have.