This Forum has been archivedVisit the new Forums
I formally put forward the request that User:Ch'vyalthan be permanently banned from this wiki.
(The Dragon Demands Neck Lifts Ch'vyalthan, and continues speaking...)
I did not want it to come to this, I have tried to be understanding, patient, tolerant, and merciful, but Ch'vyalthan has abused our trust too many times, and his continued editing now or at any point in the future is a serious hindrance to the operation of this wiki, which I love. Thus I am compelled to act as The Mailed Fist of the Wiki:
Why Ch'vyalthan must be banned
The reasons for this are multiple and a long time coming; part of the problem is that his actions were not outright "abusive", but are best described as "pervasive and extreme incompetence" combined with "ignoring all criticism and warnings from admins to correct the quality of his editing". While we normally tolerate such things in small amounts, but Ch'vyalthan has been burning through literally hundreds of edits in a single day, so fast that we simply could not keep up. The count currently stands at around two thousand since just October when he signed up. This is tantamount to spam posting, because these constant errors were simply repeated no matter how many times we complained, and it made more work for the rest of us.
Ch'vylathan, by chance or design, came upon this wiki in late fall, when I think many of us were too busy to respond (and Hurricane Sandy shut down my ability to respond in late October to early November, at which point finals season started). I personally was too busy with end-of-semester projects to significantly respond. But for those of you who were here (the dozen or so regulars on here) I believe you remember the blizzard of edits Ch'vyalthan was making from October through December. He only stopped in the past month because I (and I think other users) had enough of a break from school or work over Christmas holiday to start actively addressing the high number of awfully composed edits Ch'vyalthan was making.
I shot Christmas break systematically going through Ch'vyalthan's Contributions tab to check articles he'd edited and to fix them; I have wanted Ch'vyalthan banned since Thanksgiving or so in late November, but he was editing too fast for me to respond -- so I at least kept a running list of links to bad edits he made so I could fix them over Christmas Break. This took weeks to fix. I have blanked, sponged, purged, and when needed, blasted all of Ch'valythan's awful edits off of this wiki. He has contributed nothing of value to it, and now, nothing of permanence.
As I said, I started feeling that Ch'vyalthan must be removed since late November, but I didn't take action because I felt I needed to make a stronger "case", seeing as he wasn't being overtly abusive....he's simply a talentless, utterly inept editor who ignores all criticism even from admins to follow basic wiki-standards, and with bizarre spelling and grammar mistakes; he has no regard for the other users here, and seems oblivious to how much of everyone else's time he wastes when we have to go back and correct bad additions he's made.
Ch'vylathan's edits are the pinnacle of ineptitude, to the point that I more than half seriously suspect that he's just a very subtle troll, making bad edits that are just "presentable" enough that they simply come off as sloppy writing. Well, that's just a suspicion, and even if not true, does not change the need to get rid of him forever.
In short, Ch'vyalthan has systematically broken almost every standard of wiki-editing and quality we have, shown utter incompetence at every aspect of this wiki; he has no idea how to add images so he just points in inappropriate ones, he doesn't know how to write "in the books" sections so he just writes in a jumble; recaps that read like direct transcripts rather than actual recaps.
Were I to hypothetically describe the antithesis of a quality editor, similar to Bizarro-Superman being the antithesis of Superman, I'd come up with something approximating Ch'vyalthan: Ch'vyalthan is not a "contributor" to this wiki, not an editor: Ch'vyalthan is so alien a travesty that actual "contributors" are made more obscene for the vague resemblance.
It wasn't just the mistakes Ch'vyalthan made, but again, the sheer volume of bad edits. Just yesterday, he added incorrect categories to literally 200 articles, then when Admin Gonzalo84 ordered him to fix them, he ignored him and kept editing an episode recap until Gonzalo84 had to demand that he stop.
Ch'vyalthan effectively shut down this wiki for the past three months, and I question any editor to say otherwise. Yes, we've gotten some things done, but we're essentially in "standby mode" because for ever one step we took forward, we had to take three steps back. For every hour I've spent writing new material, I've have to spend three hours revising and correcting mistakes Ch'vyalthan made. I know this has taken time away from many other editors I could mention by name here: who attempted to walk Ch'vyalthan through step by step how to do processes like "load an image" or "write a relationship article" or "how to write an in the books section", wasting hours of work-time only for him to get it wrong anyway, AT BEST throw up his hands and say it is impossible and stop doing it (in the case of "in the books"...even though other new editors get the hang of that very quickly), and AT WORST, ignores our criticisms and advice, and simply going on doing it the wrong way.
I am in all honesty convinced that were a paid saboteur hired to intentionally disrupt this wiki, their attempts to shut down this wiki would very nearly match the degree to which Ch'vyalthan has hamstringed and stalled the ability of its editors to function.
Why then, did I wait until now? Partially because I realized that Ch'vyalthan robbed us -- ROBBED US -- of three months of work-time that we can't get back, and the Season 3 premiere is only two months away now. Partially because out of a respect for the rules, he hadn't overtly broken one particular rule, just clogged us up by making dozens of mistakes a day. Partially it was, as I said, because I had to build up enough evidence of his bad edits to present that objectively, he has no idea how to edit, isn't getting better, and is obstinately ignoring out criticisms (though he makes token apologies along the lines of "sorry I'll try harder" then promptly makes the same mistakes again - I think he just says that in the hope that it will shut us up and make it go away).
If I tried to make a request for banning without a strong case, even I barely succeeded, there would be controversy over banning such an editor. But Ch'vyalthan's editing has been so horrible, such an affront to the rest of us, so inconsiderate that he's taking time away from everyone else on here, that support had to be widespread if not unanimous. Ch'vyalthan needs to be shamed and made a pariah, specifically as a deterrent so future editors will be afraid to simply slap in such low-quality edits without fear of the repercussions.
For you see, I am an American.
- America is a very all-or-nothing society. We like the big win, the touchdown, the knockout in the first round. We like to know, and for everyone else to know, that our victory wasn’t only uncontested, it was positively devastating. -- World War Z
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that a user long established should not be banned for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience has shown, that other users are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by lightly banning another. But when a long train of abuses becomes evident, action must be taken.
Ch'vyalthan had no idea how to add images to the site for months. Instead, he'd bizarrely try to re-use images already on the wiki out of context on other pages, i.e. if he didn't have a good photo of Petyr Baelish from "Valar Morghulis", he'd re-use a crowd shot from the victory scene with Littlefinger standing about Tywin's shoulder, in the background and out of focus. He did this numerous times. When I finally, in exasperation, explained point by point how it's done, he said his iPad can't save images, so it isn't really his fault that he keeps trying to use images that way. Which begs the question...why not just spend that time on writing text? If you can't contribute good images, and indeed can only find out of context ones, why bother?
Ch'vyalthan has shown a pervasive disregard for numerous minor conventions on the wiki, things such as that episode titles need to go without quotation marks. I can find hundreds of examples. He did wise up eventually...as in LATE December, but even now, it's a problem he continues to make, as seen in this edit from January 8th: 
"in the books"
He's so ridiculously bad at editing "in the books" that he officially abandoned attempting to write them. As opposed to trying to get better at it, he simply stopped trying to, and insisted that there must be a skill to it...no, no, even new editors quickly grasp that the "in the books" section isn't just a COMPLETE re-iteration of a character's profile from A Wiki Of Ice and Fire.
Case in point, the travesty of what he did to the "Tyrion Lannister" page -  - an "in the books" section as long as a main article, describing even minor or tangential difference from the books by going into detail about how the Battle of the Blackwater was different...on Tyrion's page.
As Gonzalo84 has pointed out,  "Character articles are about the characters, not the entire episodes or scenes)"
and Gonzalo84 also said:  "(removing speculation and stuff about OTHER characters... the "in the books section" shouldn't be a long summary, thats why we link to the wiki)"
Ch'vyalthan started randomly adding categories to pages, in what I'm CERTAIN was an asinine attempt to increase his wiki points ranking. Either that or he honestly doesn't understand that we DON'T HAVE AN IMAGE for "Tysha" or "Luthor Tyrell".
Ch'vyalthan makes frequent, embarrassing spelling mistakes. Excuses he's given are partially that he's admitted he contributes exclusively with an iPad, which isn't good for word processing (but how is that his fault?, he says)....OR vague mentions that he's working late. Given that he's in Florida and I'm in the same time zone, I can confirm that I've seen him editing from 11 pm to 2 am when I might be on...but even edits I make at 2 am don't contain the pervasive errors he's committed. Even if he's using an iPad and can't type well, he makes no effort whatsoever to proofread his contributions before or after he's submitted them.
Worst of all...I honestly think he has no idea how "Night's Watch" is spelled. On literally (seriously, literally) dozens of occasions, he has used pretty much every conceivable variant except for the proper one, such as:
"Night Watch" - 
the uncapitalized "night's watch", or combining the two to achieve "night watch" - 
Repeatedly, Ch'vyalthan has misspelled "Kingsroad" as two separate words, "King's Road" -- which wouldn't be that weird, except he sees it in TYPE, written-out, all the time...how he's gone on for so long and so many times misspelling it is baffling: 
Distinguishing plural "s" suffix from apostrophe-s possessive
Ch'vyalthan pervasively confuses the plural ending "s" ("Starks") and the possessive "s" ending for plural nouns ("Starks' "). This has been done in all conceivable combinations. Using possessive when it should be plural subject - "the Lannisters are fighting the Starks' " and making it plural subject when it should be possessive, "the Lanisters are fighting the Stark's".
Examples: "Stark's and Direwolves" - 
"Lannister's" instead of "Lannisters" - 
Bizarre and persistent "Transcript" recap style
Ch'vyalthan - despite weeks of criticism and being explicitly told that wikis are not written this way - has the habit of not so much writing "recaps" but "transcripts" -- simply writing down word for word the sounds of the episode, without setting them off as is done in standard prose...making for a bizarre, stream-of-consciousness writing style.
He pervasively quotes dialogue by simple inserting it into the flow of a sentence, instead of setting it off with quotation marks. This means that he bizarrely makes direct quotes of sentences using "you", even though wikis are written in the third person:
Specifically, instead of writing: "Viserys says that next, Daenerys will probably want him to do his hair like the Dothraki" he will write: "He insults her dinner and the gifts of clothes she tries to give him (he is still dressed in his now ragged clothes from Pentos - Daenerys wanted to dress him like a Dothraki Lord so others will respect him). He says next you will want to do his hair like theirs, but Daenerys mistakenly says no he can't wear his hair like that, until he wins victories in battle he would not have the right. 
 "She tells him he should be the new Hand of the King, but he doesn't want the job. He feels there is too much work, and too little satisfaction. Cersei accuses him of taking nothing seriously."
Ignoring direct warnings and criticisms from other contributors, even admins
Ch'vyalthan just ignores all criticism and keeps right on going with his mistakes. Even when admins tell him to stop 
Notice how he's also removed "delete" tags that admins have added, with no explanation 
In another instance, I warned him that women with married names are referred to as "Catleyn Stark, nee Tully", not "Catelyn Stark, formerly Tully"....naught but two weeks later, he made the exact same mistakes and I had to revert them yet again: Part 1, Part 2 - note that, despite his constant sycophantic hand-wave that "oh hush, I'm doing better now"...this last incident with "nee" happened only two weeks ago.
He's also in the habit of making token apologies, at which he goes write on doing things. Sycophantically. I don't know if he honestly thinks the meek half-hearted and glib "apologies" dupe us about his behavior. Gonzalo84 has also noticed this: he gives glib, shallow "progress reports" saying "see I'm doing better and trying harder" when he's doing nothing of the sort.
Bizarre writing style of using long sentences with ablative absolutes and commas, alternating with short, choppy sentences
This is one of the biggest complaints: a fundamental, baffling flaw in Ch'vyalthan's writing style and grammar choice. Prose isn't written this way.
Basically, and this is not only "pervasive" but a persistent and fundamental character of his writing style,....he makes alternatively really long run-on sentences, or short, choppy sentences....it's as if he has no idea how to use contractions such as "and".
As for the long run-on sentences....he uses a bizarre, strange writing pattern in which he separates clauses out using a string of ablative absolutes and participles -- I know these grammar terms from Latin, but it means he'll just making a run-on sentence that looks like "with the Lannisters controlling the capital city, Yoren begrudgingly goes up the kingsroad, yet following goldcloaks, searching for Gendry, attacking them kill them all" etc. That's a made up example, but here's some solid ones:
- Yoren - "Even if he had to leave the wagons and give up the possibility of continued recruitment, he wishes he had hired passage on a ship. It is because the Night watch was supposed to be neutral and left unharmed, but now he takes his recruits on difficult paths to avoid groups of soldiers who would take their wagons supplies and possibly forced conscription besides."
- "When Tyrion is told that a man of the Night's Watch wants an audience he firsts asks if it's one named Yoren (as they are friends and he is unaware that Yoren is already dead because of Cersei's orders to find and kill Gendry). When he is told it is Ser Alliser Thorne, Tyrion remembers his distaste for the man and tells the guards to make him wait for days in a shabby room. It's weeks before Ser Alliser gets an audience, and by then the hand rots to pieces, so the royal court does not believe him."
Arya approaches Rorge and Biter, she is looking for Jaqen - 
Alternatively, he'll follow a long sentence with a short, choppy sentence, which should have been combined with another using a comma or the conjunction "and":
"She is reading letter, Lancel asks her if it is about the war, and tells her that it all exciting. He asks what "our next move is." Cersei is irritated and tells him to stop talking and get back into bed." 
"They can sell the eggs and travel. Ignoring Jorah's pleas, she strokes his cheek. Daenerys sets the pyre alight and then calmly walks into the flames. She stands below the pyre as flames appear to consume her." 
Worst of all
Worst of all, he took off work on the wiki last week for what he claimed was "the Hamburglar's Birthday"...on both Monday and Wednesday! Which is it?!
Ch'vyalthan effectively shut down this wiki for three months.
We were able to make some edits but projects we need to get to before season 3 were ground to a halt, and the wiki largely went into "standby mode" from October to December. Only in the past month, during Christmas break when we had more time, have we had any hope of reacting against Ch'vyalthan.
But this is still a serious drain on our increasingly limited time.
Ch'vyalthan has contributed absolutely nothing of value to this wiki. He has grievously harmed it and shown no regard for other users. Multiple users have taken time away from their editing to try to advise him and walk him through editing; he has failed in every attempt. Again, new users quickly grasp concepts he has not in months, to the point that I wouldn't be surprised if this is a warped form of trolling -- going onto a wiki and acting like a fool, albeit an innocuous fool, to drain time away from the other editors. I think this is unlikely, but a startlingly plausible theory.
We have been more than patient. Ch'vyalthan took advantage of our mercy and our tolerance.
He hasn't learned the most basic of editing concepts in three months; is it fair for the rest of us to waste over a year more attempting to train him? He isn't listening, he's ignoring complaints and warnings, even from admins. What's more, that's just "twelve months" reckoned as the last three months of "off season" -- once Season 3 premieres, we're in for 10 weeks of what others have called a "Cambrian explosion" of new edits....one-off edits by an influx of anonymous users (usually meant in good faith, but we need to integrate these edits). Even if other editors weren't coming in (which they are), we'll have our hands full with Season 3. Ch'vyalthan already shut us down in the Off Season. IN THE OFF-SEASON! Do any of you think we can handle his nonsense, spamming dozens or hundreds of crappy quotes, in the busy time ahead?
But that's just stating the obvious, and I don't want to use Season 3 as an excuse for removing him; even if these were twelve more months of "off season", just look at how productivity has dropped off since October....not simply because editors have left. Even among you few editors who are still regularly editing, ask yourselves...just how much has Ch'vyalthan affected your regular editing?
List of Lords Declarant
- I formally request that Ch'vyalthan be permanently banned from this wiki. Then I will mount his head on a spike right next to LovelyChrys--The Dragon Demands (talk) 22:48, January 22, 2013 (UTC)
- I agree, he should be banned, or at least blocked. Almost all of his edits are undone, he's wasting our time. I'll sign. Draevan13 (talk) 00:01, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
- After much consideration I have to agree. We are consuming much time in watching over.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 04:05, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
- Agreed. See below for my two cents. The Knight of the Flowers 13:55, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry, Ch'vyalthan, sometimes it just doesn't work out. If an employee is bad at their job they loose it. I guess wiki editing is much the same.--250px40px 19:28, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
- Agreed. See "Blocking" below.--QueenBuffy 23:46, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
- Late in the day, but I agree. I haven't been as active day-to-day as in the past recently, as other people have been doing a great job getting on with things. If I'd know about this, I'd have contributed sooner. What is more concerning is this pattern of behaviour recurring on the ASoIaF Wikia, which is going to have to be addressed there as well.--Werthead (talk) 19:35, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
My two cents
I think I'm correct in assuming that I'm one of the individuals to which the Dragon was referring when he said that other users have had their time wasted by Ch'vyalthan; as such, I feel I should to elaborate.
I have spent literally hours of my time attempting to help Ch'vyalthan - I'm only 22, but I'm pretty sure the crow's feet around my eyes are a direct result of this. The incident that sticks out most in my mind is the debacle with the sandbox. After Ch'vyalthan demonstrated (on several occasions) that he was incapable of properly completing a piece of work before submitting it (he would write a paragraph or two and put "to be continued" at the bottom before abandoning the page) I suggested that he should create a sandbox, and spending a decent amount of time completing, and perfecting a good single article before moving on to anything else. This was utterly naive of me. Naturally, he didn't know what a sandbox was, so I created it for him, and spent a decent amount talking him through what it was, how to use it etc (if you can believe it, he didn't know what "copy and paste" meant). Suffice to say, the sandbox went unused, and the recap of "A Golden Crown" was published, half-finished and generally half-arsed. When I asked him (in chat) why he had failed to use the sandbox he replied (untruthfully) that he had been using it to store notes (he later changed his story and said YouTube videos), and that he was just "practicing" to get the hang of it. I assume that, at this point in time he was unaware that every edit a user makes is stored in their contributions catalog, so no doubt he thought he was being very cunning. When I provided a link to the page history clearly showing that he had not made a single edit to the sandbox he responded in mock horror "where have all my notes gone!"
I have had little to do with Ch'vyalthan since that bare-faced attempt to waste my time and deceive me, but the extent to which he has continued to desecrate this wiki has not gone unnoticed. The hopelessly transparent attempt to increase his position on the leader board by screwing the character categories half-to-hell being the most recent, and obvious (see here). It wasn't incompetent, it was deliberate and utterly self-serving.
I strongly believe that banning should only be ever used as a last resort, but when dealing with a user who has, in three months demonstrated not only incompetence on a scale that not many of us have seen before, but is also either unwilling or unable to change, what other option are we left with? Ser Illyn, bring me his head! The Knight of the Flowers 13:56, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
Can I Answer Here
- Yes, answer here (under this subheading). Final decision on these things comes one week after the request was made.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 00:02, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
I Do Contribute All of my edits are not undone. I see things all the time that I have added. I do contribute. I'm adding quotations now. I have made mistakes, but I always correct anything I'm told to correct. Yesterday, I did Aggo and it said that he went East. I had just watched it and knew that he went southeast so I changed it. I made the mistake of putting all those mentioned in book sources characters into the " Image Needed" category, but, when I was told to get them out, I took out not only the ones I put in but the ones others put in. I am happy just to contribute, and I look for ways that I can.
I Did Not Stop Fixing Categories to do a Recap And it is absolutely untrue that I stopped fixing this to work on a recap. I went entirely through the whole Character category and checked absolutely everyone taking out every mentioned only character that I had put in the "Quote Needed" category and every character mentioned only in a book source out of the "Image Needed" category, before I ever went to the recap. I was asked if I had finished as I was editing other things so I went back to check the "Quote Needed" category and I found the Red Keep, House Reed, and two of the wolves in there. I never added these, I added all of mine from the characters list, but I removed them as they didn't belong.
I Never Edited Before I just came here when I did and tried editing when I found that I could without registering. I never edited before, not anything, and yes I made many mistakes. It took awhile before I learned how to do basic things. I'm still not perfect, but I have gotten much better. Just yesterday, I learned how to put a break in a quotation. I learned that by seeing how Dragon did it in Marya Seaworth's article. That is how I was able to do it today, when I put the quotation in for Marillion. The longer I keep at this, the better I will be.
Quotations Around Episodes I did not know about not using quotation marks around episodes. I copied what someone else did and thought it was correct. If you knew I was doing it wrong you should have just told me.
Adding Pictures and the "In the book" section I am not adding pictures very often anymore, as I was told not to. I only add them if they belong, like putting the picture of the direwolf seal on the letter into the House Stark article. I don't edit the "In the book" section. That Tyrion article that is being quoted was the very first thing I ever did. I do listen to criticism . And I never just copied "A Wiki of Ice and Fire". A long time back I used information from there in an article on Robar Royce, and Dragon told me not to, so I haven't. I go to the books. I reread them a lot. But eventually, I just stopped because everything I put in was just unecessary or a spoiler, and realizing I wasn't contributing, I just went to other sections that I could contribute to. I put in notes, quotations, and other times I just like to read through articles and put in correct punctuation. I went to wikipedia and read through the correct usage of commas, colons, and semicolons.
Night's Watch and Kingsroad I have not made a mistake when typing Night's Watch or Kingsroad in a very long time.
Deletion Tags I did remove the deletion tags. That was two months ago. The deletion tag said that you can add to the page and take off the deletion tags. But right after I was told that the deletion tags had to be taken off by an admin, I have never touched them again.
The Hamburglar's Birthday I have no idea what that even is. What are you referring to. I haven't taken off a day since I came here. I am on day 87 of getting the 100 day badge. No one has ever gotten that one. I have been here every day since registering.
All of these writing examples, except for the quotations around episodes, were from quite awhile ago. And I will not use the quotations again now that I know it's wrong. If I do something wrong, I'll correct it, but I have improved. I am learning. I really never did any editing before. It is something to be learned. Please give me another chance.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 01:42, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
- Dear lord...a simple google-search for "Hamburglar's Birthday" brings up that quote; it's a well-known joke from The Simpsons:  Mr. Burns is going over Homer's 10 year evaluation and is shocked: "Simpson! I've just reviewed your ten-year performance record, and it's appalling...In ten short years, you've caused seventeen meltdowns. One is too many!...You sold weapons-grade plutonium to the Iraqis -- with no markup!...And worst of all, you took the Hamburgler's birthday off last Monday *and* Wednesday. Which is it?!" -- Basically, after a string of pointing out massive legitimate failures that Homer made (causing numerous meltdowns, selling plutonium to rogue states), he concludes ironically that "worst of all", Homer took off work (i.e. for a religious holiday) but with the audacity to claim that it was due to something as frivolous as the "Hamgurglar's Birthday"....then the prestige-joke is that he goes on to say that Homer took off work for a (fictional) birthday twice in the same week. Basically I'm drawing sarcastic parallels with the depths to which your performance has sunk. I added it on the end as a joke. --- Just because I'm denying your ability as a wiki editor and demanding that you be thrown off of this wiki for the rest of your life...doesn't mean I can't do it with a sense of levity.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 02:10, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
I'm very sorry, I don't know the rules, but can I still edit while this is going on? I just tried to edit and it won't let me. It just keeps cycling the loading editor screen repeatedly. That was the samr thing that happened when I first joined and I could only edit in monobook. I went back and changed my settings to monobook and now it's letting me edit again. I want to keep editing is that allowed while this is up for discussion. I reedited War of Five Kings and now it won't even let me review with the history button. Is this normal?Ch'vyalthan (talk) 12:37, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, you can keep editing. And if you want an example of how to write proper prose read Wikipedia articles on Buffy the Vampire Slayer characters, for example. Or Wookiepedia.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 19:01, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll put those things into "Quote Needed" and then I'll start doing everything I have notes on. And I must finish that rewrite of the article. Still thinking about that mistake I was making, putting quotation marks around episode names. If I'm allowed to stay, I can go through every page on this wiki and correct this mistake. I saw in all over the place, so lots of other people have been doing it as well. I could fix that. I don't mind busywork, as long as I am contributing.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 19:16, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
Denying recorded actions
Ch'vyalthan went ahead and categorized three recurring characters as "minor" and refused having done so, even when article history shows him as the editor.
His answer on my talk page 
I didn't put Ygritte in minor characters, she was already there. I made her character supporting because of that. Talisa wasn't listed in either major or minor, but if Ygritte was minor having more screen time. I'll change them.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 05:45, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
I am consulting the list on every character. Ygritte was listed as minor and Talisa wasn't there at all. I agree with you that it was something neglected some where along the line, but we caught it now. That's good. I'll change it.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 05:48, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
Already "there"? Where? you created the "supporting role" category hours ago and dumped every ACTOR who is not on the opening credits there. I mean... Wilko Johnson and the actress who played the Zombie Wildling Girl in the same category.?--Gonzalo84 (talk) 06:12, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
Yes I made a mistake The problem was I didn't understand what you were asking me, I thought that everyone was either a major or a minor or a background character. I didn't know that recurring character was a distinct level, because you told me earlier that someone could be both a recurring character and a background character at the same time. I didn't know the supporting cast mostly went by the term recurring. I was adding people to both background and recurring categories earlier, as you said I should. The women in question weren't in the major character category, so I thought they were minor characters. I was mistaken about Ygritte, I honestly thought she was already there. I did her as well as the other two. But I did go back and fix the categories, putting in three levels now (extras not being in with actors). These now exist as sub-categories on the Actor category page. I still have to double check it. There are a few people I still can't classify.
I am contributing I have the spelling and grammar solved. I have made a lot of corrections. The Kit Harington page was titled putting two R's in his name and I have been editing articles to correct grammar spelling and punctuation. I have learned a lot. It took me a month editing here before I even learned to put in references, but yesterday I put in the part that creates a reference list into the episode "The Wolf and the Lion". I corrected a lot of facts that were wrong in many articles. And I added information, links to articles, and information website links to actor pages. My edits to articles now have proper grammar. My sentence structure has improved. I've been reading articles on this. I do searches on misspelled words like Barratheon, Mamoa, Danerys, Harrenhall, etc. and take them out. I took out a whole lot of three-eyed crow references the other day. And corrected the word "Catlyn". I've been hunting down quotes, ideally I'd like to find one for every article.
I do have a proposition Still, I don't know the rules of editing, and I make so many edits a day that people are worried about me, anyone who tried to monitor me would spend serious time doing it. Even if it is to find that I'm not misspelling words anymore. I do understand your concerns, but I still want to stay.
So I have been thinking about this, if you let me stay on this site editing I will limit my edits to 10 per day. Just 10. I have several articles I want to write and this would force me to focus on those. And 10 edits wouldn't take a long time for anyone to check if they wanted too. I would no longer be wasting people's time. I would be writing my articles or reading other people's articles for the most part. And I'll keep myself strictly to this limit until such a time as you decide that I've learned enough about editing to be allowed to edit freely. I'm patient; I'll wait. Just 10 edits to articles within each 24 hour period. Please think about it. I'll keep editing until someone tells me that this proposition is accepted. Then I'll cut it down to 10 right away. I really do want to stay, and I am dedicated, and I am still learning. Please consider it.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 12:56, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
- Don't beg. There would be more dignity.
- You've had three months to "learn wiki editing", you've been here since god-damned October. AND in that time you weren't just editing once a week, but making dozens if not hundreds of edits a day. NORMAL users would have gained at least some experience in that time.
- Case in point, did you "learn" how to write an "in the books" section? No, you officially declared that you were giving up on writing them. I can't name an aspect of wiki-editing you gradually got better at...you simply abandoned attempts to edit one form of editing, so you moved on to another. NOW, the only thing left to you was adding pages to categories...and you just screwed that up too. CAN YOU NAME SOMETHING YOU "LEARNED" AND GOT BETTER AT? -- No, we will make no special discompensation.
- Moreover, you screwed up this wiki so much between October and November that you need to be metaphorically crucified. In short, we need to make an example of you, as a warning to future editors not to behave as you have (and how you continue to behave). Can you get it through your head that your contributions weren't worthwhile? What "compels" you to keep trying to add information to this wiki, even when we've stated we have to rewrite it all? You're not helping, you're not "contributing" -- you are HURTING "Game of Thrones", not helping it.
- AGAIN, NO wiki-editors spend THREE MONTHS editing, much less editing as much as you did, and didn't "learn" --moreover, this was the OFF SEASON, when other regular users had AMPLE OPPORTUNITY to try to teach you -- you simply ignored us.
- And FOR THE Nth TIME, YOU ARE NOT BETTER AT SPELLING AND GRAMMAR. In my list of examples above, I have multiple examples FROM THE MONTH of JANUARY ALONE.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 14:42, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
Two new mistakes... I'm done with mercy or comprehension
- Character in actor category: 
- And the other way around: Actor in character status category: 
In your attempt to "contribute" you keep making sloppy, careless additions to the wiki. I'm beginning to think you are actually WikiAddicted (it happens) and to wait for next Tuesday is a waste of time.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 19:01, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
- I also think this must be a case of WikiAddiction (Internet addiction), or some form of severe autistic-spectrum personality disorder, which makes him unable to mentally process how other people think of him; that is, points when multiple contributors have begged him to stop making a specific kind of mistake and he doesn't, how he keeps sending glib apologies that he doesn't follow through on (the endless "progress reports" Gonzalo84 has complained of, which don't really chart any progress). Also his inability to learn how to do basic writing-comprehension tasks properly (odd writing style, inability to comprehend how we want the "in the books" section to look).
- HOWEVER, separate from whatever made him ignore our criticisms these past months, his reaction to the threat of banning -- going on a binge of editing minor spelling and categories, as if this will "redeem" him in our eyes -- leads me to think this is real addiction. As I explained on his Talk page, I've noticed that in the past three months, he's often binge-editing between midnight and dawn EST (we know he lives in Florida, in EST). See here. This is hardly the first time he's done this, but this week, even after the threat of banning was launched on Tuesday, his contributions page reveals that yesterday, he started editing at 10 AM Thursday and just continuously edited until 8 AM on Friday -- dear god, he's been awake for 22 hours straight, without time to sleep in the (at most) 15 minute intervals between edits. This is a driven person. He is compelled. Maybe he thinks he can "impress" us that he's "better" -- but part of his reaction is just that he needs to "tie up loose ends" on here...why? He's not "fixing" anything, we have to rewrite his recent edits anyway (the Categories debacle he started).
- Though in some ways, this shocking response, binge editing for 22 hours, seeming to think he can "impress" us --- note that he NEVER yells, never criticizes, not even me, and I'm the one who demanded he be banned in the harshest terms (that, and his inability to comprehend that we are not impressed with the binge editing he's been doing), is a symptom of either severe autism or psychopathy...more probably psychopathy, as an autistic-spectrum wouldn't be so determined to be as ingratiating as possible. For example, Ch'Vyalthan made a deeply ingratiating, sycophantic, blog post praising OPark77's one-year anniversary on the wiki:  -- this, in itself, might not sound "sycophantic"...until you realize that none of us really makes blog posts about that kind of thing; at most we might make a minor note of it while discussing another matter on another user's talk page. But more importantly...Ch'Vyalthan had joined this wiki only two weeks before posting that. Heck, OPark77 went on wiki-break a week before he made that blog post. He barely knew him. But he gravitates towards those he perceives as "in authority" and has a sycophantic need to be ingratiating. That's a classic symptom of Psychopathy.
- Moreover, I recall that when Ch'Vyalthan mentioned reading the book of essays, "Beyond the Wall", he cited that he greatly enjoyed the chapter devoted to explaining that Petyr Baelish is a Psychopath. I suspect the term has been applied to Ch'Vyalthan before, and he maintains a fascination with the concept (though he can never comprehend just how different he is). I, of course, also read this book, but the chapter I was impressed with was the one Werthead wrote (recognized the name), but more specifically because it dealt with problems we deal with all the time on here and in fandom; dealing with the "unreliability" of the historical record in Westros, based on oral tradition and half-myth).
- But you see the problem, Ch'Vyalthan, is that the 10 page article in "Beyond the Wall" didn't really have the time or space to explain the full range of symptoms of Psychopathy, other than that "they feel no remorse" and "have no genuine emotions or bonds" etc. The reality is quite fascinating, actually...and means that Psychopaths follow a rigid pattern of behavior; ultimately, very predictable. Do you know why you behave this way? Psychopaths have malfunctioning amygdala, the part of the mid-brain that regulates emotional responses. Now I say "emotional responses" but not "emotions"; they have shadow-emotions, but without a fully developed response-context...they're utterly impulsive. The best analogy might be an intellectually normal adult in technical matters, who has the emotional restraint of a toddler. Real-life, full-blown, dyed-in the-wool Psychopaths are actually really bad at long term planning. As the story goes, the jewel thief who just throws the jewels away. Littlefinger shows a bit too much long-term planning for that. Moreover, Littlefinger is fully aware that other people perceive of him as untrustworthy...he has to work around that, by going through a whole act with Ned Stark where he pretends that Ned "appealed to his good side" when he was systematically plotting to betray him.
- But the other major symptom of Psychopathy is lack of empathy; much as a very small toddler needs to be taught that they aren't the center of the universe, and other people have lives outside of them. Fullblown psychopaths never learn this, the structural defects in their brains make it impossible for them to feel empathy.
- "So what?" The psychopath says. That's a great strength, possessing no empathy or remorse. Actually, it leads to a massive flaw: without empathy, Psychopaths have a characteristic CRIPPLING Lack of Insight. How can a thing with no empathy hope to understand how others who DO have empathy perceive them? Clinical trials have shown repeatedly that Psychopaths truly have no comprehension of how ridiculous they sound.
- All of this ties into the "glib, superficial charm" characteristic of Psychopaths, which I've called "the charm offensive". I.e. honestly believing that enough shallow compliments, and enough shallow apologies, will be enough to dupe other people into trusting them. They don't realize that to normal people, this sounds like they're laying the lies on really heavy, or that normal people can notice that they aren't following through on their apologies. They don't know how sycophantic they sound to other people; without empathy, they lack Insight.
- The really fascinating part is how predictable, almost robotic this makes fullblown Psychopaths. You see, a Psychopath sees himself as the center of the universe -- and due to lack of insight, has difficulty understanding that other people don't agree. They can fake it, think other people are being intractable, but they think they're amazing, and can't see why other people don't share that opinion. Moreover, without "Insight" they think the charm offensive will work.
- A shocking feature of the glib, "charm offensive" is how real-life Psychopaths keep clinging to lies and shallow compliments or fake apologies....long after their guilt becomes painfully obvious. Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, the Green River Killer, Jerry Sandusky...a shocking feature is how even when faced with a mountain of evidence, they'd continue to plead their innocence. Now wouldn't a normal person in such a situation try to lie their way out of it? Yes, but not as predictably as the Psychopath. You see, where a normal person would eventually try to plea bargain, or denounce the accusers, so on and so forth, these Psychopaths came up with increasingly bizarre and implausible lies. Physically impossible excuses. Or "excuses" that deny reality. Gacy claimed that he never knew about the dozens of bodies in his crawlspace, and that they must have been planted; Jerry Sandusky started claiming that he didn't molest anyone, he just liked to engage in horseplay with 10 year olds in the shower. These are of course criminals and the worst element of it; your typical Psychopath is more like the "used care salesman" stereotype (I'm not accusing anyone of being a serial killer, heheh)
- But what makes me grin is how well Ch'Vyalthan fit the pattern; when LovelyChrys was banned she shouted, yelled, complained, then tried bargaining with admins. Loosely what a normal person would. Instead, Ch'Vyalthan has difficulty comprehending that we honestly think his editing has been terrible; he makes up glib lies or excuses, makes "progress reports" claiming things are better when they're not. He goes on 22 hour binges of editing minor spelling errors in the hopes that this will "impress" us, even as the majority of regular editors vote to have him banned and not one person has voted in his defense. He can't comprehend this. He also can't hold his interest on one subject for long (if he can't figure out "in the books" he just stops trying and moves on to something else). Ultimately, impulsivity and Lack of insight makes Psychopaths less than animals; not so much a "remorseless lizard", as a broken automaton follows a given set of rules; "make petty compliments", "act charming", "never admit self-fault", "gravitate to those in authority", etc. etc. Just as a broken wind-up automaton with basic rules like "walk forward" will walk into a wall over and over again for hours because they lost the line of programming that says "move around obstructions in your path". So predictable. These past few weeks Ch'Vyalthan has been obsessed with Game of Thrones, because it's in the news; but due to his impulsivity, next month he'll move on to something else entirely. Maybe Byzantine history, maybe paleontology, I don't know. But he won't be here, and we'll be rid of him.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 21:12, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
I have blocked Ch'vyalthan for 1 month due to inability to properly edit on this Wiki. User has had over 3 months to learn and after being told and taught, edits have continued to be wrong. Ch'vyalthan please practice elsewhere before attempting to return. You may want to start your own GoT Wiki so that you have free-reign to edit however you wish. Also, if Ch'vyalthan returns in a month and the errors continue, Ch'vyalthan will be blocked again indefinitely. --QueenBuffy 23:46, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you. I requested a permanent ban; is that still on the table? Werthead has yet to weigh in. I fear having this hanging over our heads for a month.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:50, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
- Oh sure. If we get more votes and we can ban indefinitely then. Majority rules. --QueenBuffy 02:27, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
- As far as I know, a decision hasn't been made. But just for the record I'll say I still support the permanent ban.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 20:11, February 3, 2013 (UTC)
The Seconding Coming of Ch'vyalthan
I don't mean to sound paranoid, but I'm pretty sure Ch'vyalthan is still editing from the IP address 18.104.22.168. Their edits so far are very similar, and contains the same clumsy grammar and sentence structure that Ch'vyalthan is known for. If he is indeed trying to circumvent his block an admin may want to put in a "check user" request.--250px40px 15:14, January 28, 2013 (UTC)
- Ugh, I thought that too on another IP Address. I will keep my eye open and start blocking. Thanks. BTW- anyone noticing obvious edits from Ch'v, please send me the IP Address to my talk page. --QueenBuffy 15:55, January 28, 2013 (UTC)
- I have been worried about this, and running anonymous IP edits through tracker sites to see where in the world they are; some of the suspicious looking ones are from foreign non-English speaking countries, so I give them the benefit of the doubt that this is why their edits look weird; of course, proxy-edits tend to be from overseas (odds are, a suspicious edit from Mongolia or Tuvalu on an English website is probably someone using an available proxy). Even so, it would be unfair to ban every edit from Germany or Israel, first world countries that are conceivably watching the TV series as well. The above IP address didn't look...specifically, like Ch'vyalthan.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 17:21, January 28, 2013 (UTC)