Thread:Wazzirving/@comment-61371-20120303161509/@comment-61371-20120310013823

"Age of X does not have a number. It was numbered on this site, by fans, as "To Remain Numbered". "

It HAS been numbered. Officially. The softcover reprint of Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A-Z Vol 1 3, Chamber's "Update Appendix" entry states "Starsmore was later drawn into a reality warp (Reality-11326/"Age of X") generated by one of Legion (David Haller)'s multiple personalities. When reality was restored, Starsmore reverted to his former mutant powers and bodily damage." Not only clarifying the reality number but also that what we saw was a reality warp, NOT an illusion (as I've said).

And "TRN" stands for "temporary reality number", which we use to designate realities that haven't been given an official number yet. Basically a clear placeholder until a real number is designated.

"I don't think that is exactly the SOP of our site, but if that is how you want it operated, then I understand. "

That IS the standard operating procedure for this site. Always has been. There have been exceptions, sure, but those are rare, and usually either not caught or allowed to stand because it was short-term. Or for characters who were making a LOT of appearances, but whose identities weren't entirely clear or were completely speculative (Red Hulk, Red She-Hulk). And even THOSE I fought, but ultimately gave in because they were drawing out the reveal for an insanely long time (I believe it was about two years before Red Hulk's identity was revealed, while he made appearances left and right) and teasing every other person as being him.

"You first had me under the impression that the reason you changed it was because you didn't think it was "discussed" then went from useless point A to at lest G. "

It WASN'T discussed (as Ed, the person you "discussed" it with agreed. And I STILL don't see where Loki got involved). And your inability to understand that point is what caused my shifts, as I attempted to let you have your say instead of following my instinct and just deleting the page and making the changes myself (the main Rachel page was reverted because it was the main page and should have been unchanged until a decision was reached). I shifted from point to point because I was attempting to get one through to you so you'd understand my main point: Assumption should not be the reasoning for a page's existence.

"Just tell me the rules, or how you feel the wikia should be ran during your term as an admin, and I'll agree. "

My term is never ending, and it's run on one simple principle: Never assume and any time a big change is needed (a move, a deletion, etc.), the chance should be made for discussion, and any discussion should not only be SPECIFICALLY about the change (I, for instance, wouldn't make a new Colossus page based on my having mentioned it here because it wasn't actually discussed, it was merely mentioned in passing as part of a separate, but related, discussion), but also laid out in a clear and definite manner, not just mentioned while discussing another matter. And the opening for this clear, specified discussion should last more than a week, unless the deletion is due to a duplicate, nonsense, or vandalized page having been made.