I have a little problem with the Season 29 episodes template.
You see, The Serfsons is the Season 29 premiere and the second episode is Springfield Splendor. However, in a Season 28 article that has the Season 28 episodes template, when I click on "Season 29", it takes me to the Springfield Splendor page and NOT The Serfsons.
What Season 28 article did this take place? If it happened in article, chances are something is wrong in the article itself and not the template. I'm looking at both templates right now and I don't see any issues with them. However, I do notice on the Season 29 template its Navbox and not Non article like the other templates are. Let me switch it and see what happens.
So I was searching up the user "Lamarwithwalker", and I found out that it is a third account created by "Brokenarrow2", Brandon Walker's first account. His first account, Brokenarrow2, was made on August 27th, 2016, and hasn't been active since January 28th, 2017. His second account, Lamar31atwalker, was made on May 2nd, and hasn't been active since May 4th. The third account was made on August 27th, and has been active since. It turns out that Brandon Walker's third account is actually not a vandal (most sockpuppets are vandals), like his second account. However, I do get annoyed by his category spamming (i.e. adding "Article stubs" and "Maintenance" to articles that aren't even stubs and incomplete/empty galleries, respectively) and other annoying shenenigans, like his message wall spams on his Brokenarrow2 account.
That comes up to a confusing question: If there are three accounts made by the same user that are both not vandalizing (Brokenarrow2 spams the message walls, tho), then should I block both the "Lamarwithwalker" account and the "Lamar31atwalker" account?
I'm confused, because according to your policy on multiple accounts, it says that having multiple accounts is unacceptable, and Simpsons Wiki won't block a user if one had forgotten its password or anything similar, but if a user is a vandal and creates another account, the user and the other account will be blocked, with the new one infinitely.
Also, if a user had forgotten its password, that user can create a new account, but it must notify an admin first. If they accept, they'll either block the user's old account infinitely and add on the old user page that the user has a new account, or delete the old account.
But, if a user is a vandal and creates another account, it will be blocked as well as the other account being blocked infinitely. Even if a user does not vandalize using it, the potential to do so is there.
In conclusion, Brandon Walker's second and third accounts, Lamar31atwalker and Lamarwithwalker, are both good users and minor vandals (category spamming, changing main links to redirect links on appearances pages, etc), but his first account, Brokenarrow2, is a message wall spammer, so I'm not sure if I should block both Lamarwithwalker and Lamar31atwalker or not.
Block both accounts, since its becoming an issue. As for the policy, its been in place before I came into the picture. A lot of it was to deter members who are now at WikiSimpsons from spamming and attempting to destroy the moral of this site, as well as advertise their site, which is against Wikia's policies. So not much had changed in terms of modifing existing policies, which could come off as confusing to circumstances as you just described.
New problem with JustinBoy135 here. Remember when one of his older accounts, JustinBoy159, asked WAY too many questions to Al Jean on Twitter about upcoming episodes/seasons (mostly who's going to work on the episode before the airdate), and when you told him to stop on May 14th, 2015, he said "Okay bro, if you say so"?
Well, two years, four and a half months, and 22 days later, JustinBoy decided to do it AGAIN, but on his JustinBoy135 account! I have no idea why he decided to ask Al Jean way too many questions about the upcoming episodes/seasons on Twitter again, but he only learned that lesson for two years, four and a half months, and 22 days. Now, since October 6th, 2017, he decided to not learn his lesson. Even though he is spamming questions to Al Jean EVERY DAY, Al Jean obviously answers JustinBoy's questions without showing any signs of being fed up with JustinBoy's shenanigans.
Also, every time he gets one of his questions answered, JustinBoy135 IMMEDIATELEY adds the info to the episode and crew member's page while putting in an edit summary that seems to be repetitive (i.e. Guys, according to Al Jean on Twitter, (insert crew member name here) will be the (director/writer/producer) for (insert upcoming episode here)! It's true!) with the "Guys" and the "It's true" and the GAHOLY GLAVIN! (Professor Frink reference lol) Even Wikisimpsons' blog is reporting about new crew members for upcoming episodes THANKS to JustinBoy's riduculous questions!
This has come to the conclusion that I'm not sure if we are going to keep JustinBoy135 on here anymore, since he has spammed questions to Al Jean again recently after a two year hiatus. Whether or not JustinBoy135's annoying Twitter questions counts as vandalism, we still need to find out if JustinBoy deserves to not edit here anymore. Him resuming on asking excessive questions about upcoming episodes/seasons to Al Jean on Twitter has now gone off the charts.
Jliby30 (Simpsons Wikia admin since August 9th, 2017)
JustinBoy has been a thorn in my side for a while and if I were Al Jean, I'd be tired of answering spam questions from him too. Sorry for the late reply, I had personal issues that were going to effect my life to handle before the wiki, so I haven't been too active. I don't want JustinBoy on this site anymore, because his spamming is becoming a liability for us and I'm sick of seeing his shit elsewhere. Members on NoHomer have commented on that dude bothering Al Jean and they're right. Granted it gives us information yes, but there is a right and wrong way to do things and that is the wrong way.
Just got a message from Pinkachu about this wikia not using discussions yet, and that she should enable this feature on here. Would you accept this? Douglasrampazo and I already accepted, so this should be a good idea.
Hello! I dropped by to see if you had any concerns regarding Discussions, including any reason you feel we shouldn't go ahead and enable it. Please let me know! We have the approval of two of the three recently active admins but I would like your approval as well if possible. I noticed you have not edited for the past few weeks so if we don't hear from you over the weekend, we will most likely enable Discussions early next week. Thanks!
I've noticed that on the character page only a few characters exist I think it might be a bug since on some characters pages the character category is added on them but does not show on the actual character category page