User talk:©TriMoon™

From: Cs california
Is it really necessary to have a separate page for gameplay? I don't see what is the big deal about merging the gameplay page into the main page since it contain really less information. I am open to recover the page. But I suggest that the gameplay be kept on the main page for Parabellum or at least a brief entry which links to the detail page--Cs california 03:01, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
 * My main issue i wrote you about, was about your mutilation of the layout of the navigationbox i made, and your edits with blank summary comments of what you did or why.
 * Im ok with the gameplay text being inside the main article like you now proposed here.
 * --©TriMoon™ 18:37, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
 * Nav template box was just taking out the link to the gameplay which was just two lines see here http://gaming.gamepedia.com/index.php?title=Parabellum%2FNav&diff=152764&oldid=152746 I will also post problems I see on the talk page from now on--Cs california 19:46, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
 * See my comment on your talkpage. Besides that, thank you for willing to post issues on the talkpages from now on. --©TriMoon™ 10:17, September 11, 2009 (UTC)

From: Adan Aileron
I understand you seem somewhat frustrated by edits to Parabellum-related articles by Cs california and myself. However, there are a few things you may need to know.

First off, articles belong to the wiki, not to any one user. To create an article and then demand that no one else edit it is a rather rude gesture in its own right.

My own edits to the article fell under two categories:
 * 1) Serious issues that needed immediate attention. Failure to deal with the copied text immediately could have led to Acony filing a DMCA notice against the article, which would have legally compelled Wiki to delete the article and force it to be rewritten from scratch.
 * 2) relatively minor changes that I had good-faith reasons to believe were non-controversial.

Second, Wiki Gaming is not intended for, nor does it wish to be, a mouthpiece for advertisers to "get their message out" or whatever. There is a place for ad copy, but it isn't at Wiki Gaming.

Even if the page content were licenseable under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike license, it would still be unusable here due to the fact that it violates our content/style/POV guidelines (and my edits previous to that was for the purpose of cleaning up the article to meet the standards of our content guidelines and the standards set by the other articles in this wiki). The guideline says "acceptable under rare circumstances", however this isn't one of them.

However, if you now wish to move to another wiki, you are certainly free to create one on Wiki. I just checked and parabellum.gamepedia.com seems to be available. Just be aware that submitting text you do not have permission to post is both a violation of copyright and of Wiki's terms of use.

At any rate, I will post the article's remaining issues (as I see them) to its talk page at some point and see where things go from there. - Adan Aileron (talk) 15:01, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
 * "To create an article and then demand that no one else edit it is a rather rude gesture in its own right."
 * If an open invite to edit pieces and a specific request to only edit sections instead of the main article, (hidden at the top of the main article), falls into that category for you, then yes sure im rude like that.
 * "Second, Wiki Gaming is not intended for...."
 * I assume that when you, wrongly, accuse me of being "a mouthpiece for advertisers" you don't like articles covering games at all? Because every article about "some game" can be seen as a mouthpiece to advertise for that game...
 * The rest of your comment is just as absurd, with exception to the &copy;-issue, so i wont comment on them further.
 * Just try to be less of an elephant when you walk across articles made by humble ants...
 * --©TriMoon™ 18:37, September 10, 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, the text "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here." can be found on the bottom of every edit page, so it's not like you weren't warned. :P
 * Re: second point. I don't see how your response follows logically since I would maintain that a balanced article written from a neutral viewpoint does not constitute advertisement, and, while "being a mouthpiece for advertisers" might not have been your intent, I would ask you this: what is text taken directly from a promotional website and copied here, if not an attempt at promoting the game here?
 * With regard to the style/content guidelines which, as far as I can tell, you consider "absurd". The bottom line here is that these are the community-approved consensus regarding how articles are to look and how their contents are to be presented. While anyone may suggest changes to the guidelines, it's not permitted to unilaterally ignore them to the extent that you appear to have.
 * As an administrator on this site, it is my duty to ensure that these guidelines are followed. What you think of them is unimportant so long as their standards are met. Yours is one of a very few complaints I have received regarding my edits here.
 * As for your parting words: my edits are not quite as indiscriminate and the "ant" in question is not quite as humble as you would have it. :) - Adan Aileron (talk) 18:43, September 11, 2009 (UTC)