Always remember, only the most loudest and obnoxious person wins an argument. Thats why i use bold >_>
And I thought debates were about points and good counterpoints... Not who can shout louder or longer... Apperantly I am horridly wrong; and with my frame of mind it will look like Im living under a rock
Debates between two intelligent people revolve around good ideas, facts amd knowledge. They can sometimes get nasty, but they can still be good debates. That wikipedia deletion article revolves around the fact that people who have NO life other than wikipedia always have to be right. Just like the sun revolves about the earth.........(no, that's NOT a typo.) Frankly, the majority of the wikipedia epenis idiots don't actually know what they are talking about. Its one thing to write an article based on, say, research you have done for school (as in, serious research, not your english 100 paper that you were forced to write) or what you do for a living. Writing an article on what you saw on the history channel does not count. My question is - porn stars get wikipedia pages (yeah, I know. Its pretty bad) so why can't mods? I'm willing to bet there are PLENTY of other mods that are on wikipedia... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_of_Existence
Wow, just wow. You should check PoE's second (...) deletion discussion. I quote the original reasons for deletion: And then this reply which pretty much sums it up. Wikipedia's a hoot. You should scroll through the list of HL2 mods and check their discussions. All the mods that have their own page survived a deletion at some point.
Dystopia (computer game) As was agreed in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Half-Life_2_DeathMatch_Pro debate, individual mods for video games are not inherently notable and do not deserve Wikipedia articles, no matter how colorful and well written. Dystopia is another HL2 Mod article and on this same principle, I move it for deletion as non-notable matter. GestaltG 182, 7 January 2006 (UTC) This is a quote from the Dystopia delete page, you can find it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dystopia_(computer_game) As a matter of fact, the second attempt to delete it was by wicketthewok: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipe...ion/Dystopia_(computer_game)_(2nd_nomination)
Brownhaired girl is being an underhand bitch. She has intentionally reverted (deleted) a whole load of information from the Cleaned up section of the wiki. why? because one section of the change made her comment later on look wrong, where she said "it's not meant to be developers doing it for themselves". instead of including a comment, she DELETED all of the changes, and then had the guts to tell me that I had been warned for "editing comments, which may make further comments look out of context" DESPITE THE "FEEL FREE TO EDIT" NOTES AT THE TOP AND BOTTOM OF THE SECTION. and despite the fact that that section is meant to wrap up the debate and show all aspects of it. Isn't that a little more important than whether your comments lower down are in context?. she is clearly now hiding behind wikipedia to maim and destroy this thread, using any powers granted her by wikipedia. it's true, she has all rights to ban me for changing a post, delete all my posts, and then just delete the Empires article. but it is abuse of her power.
I suggest saving the article before and after any changes are made so you can go back and put it in then
You shouldn't edit comments, they do make things discussed look wrong and make them seem better then they are. Just leave it alone.
but the point is that it ISN'T a comment. it's an open section for EVERYONE to edit, that is to be updated as the debate continues, as new information is available. and it says that above and below the section.
Just great, why the hell am I even still going to that page. Any time I write something, BrownHairedBitch twists things her own way. So first I didn't contribute therefore I'm a meatpuppet. Oh wait, I must have contributed under a sockpuppet since it would make the article grounds for deletion that original authors shouldn't have written it. Whatever way fits her fucking agenda is the way things must be.
Check out this wickethewok dudes page and he says this. Then go to the Bruce Dickinson article and read the very first thing on the page. mmm... crediblity *EDIT* sweet my list of lists of songs is in the discussion
Krenzo: don't worry about the artical, you have better things to worry about than these admins. Edit: admins replaces another word now.
Oh, hell. They locked it. Well, I WAS going to post... but it appears I came too late to point out the obvious.
I just pray that an admin who will review this will go "What the hell were they thinking nominating this..."
Brownhaired girl has threatened to ban me from editing if i continue to update the tidied section. what i can instead do is re-post it every time a major change is needed. repetative, yes, but not illigal. and then new players will definatly see the true arguement, and the folly of this AfD request.
