UDWiki talk:Administration/Arbitration/Thekooks vs WanYao

Examples

Personally the only example you give that i feel is bordering on NPOV is no. 7. Want me to elaborate?--Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 20:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Sure...--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 01:23, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Because it was funny?-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 01:26, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Because if you removed the Dude comment and WTF, It would actually present a newsworthy article. Which is what could have been done. It should have been modified, not deleted. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

i agree, it did contain very valid information. but modification other than simple grammar/spelling corrections is impersonation. which i won't do. i have deleted POV posts, then rewtitten them NPOV. but i sign them as mine. sometimes giving credit to the people whose POV reports i used. but, see, it can be tricky... you have to be wary of impersonation. --WanYao 18:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

OK. Did you do that in this case? No. Is that grounds for the current case? Flimsy at best. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Let me worry about the case, I have a bit of a history with this kind of thing which is why, In part, I assume, they both wanted me involved.--Karek^maps?! 02:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Uhm, yeah... I don't mind chatting about stuff... but, let's leave the actual arbitration to the arbitrator please... but karek, we selected you solely based on the size of your banana. i mean, is that plantain in your pocket, or are just happy to vandal ban me?? ;P --WanYao 18:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Of course, I'm power mad!--Karek^maps?! 04:19, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I was just expressing an opinion. Let me clear this up . Not Arbitration.--Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Vandalsisms!!!!!--Karek^maps?! 20:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Just a quick word

The thing that pisses me off the most is not that my post got REMOVED by another user who has absolutely no AUTHORITY in any way, it is simply that we have let our wiki-news fall in to the hands of one man.

At the moment, WanYao decides what is acceptable, and what is not acceptable. In my opinion that is ridiculous.

If the news is not allowed to mention that there are many zeds in a revive point...then what is it allowed to mention? Revive point numbers indicate the amount of deaths in the area and to me, as a survivor(there are a lot of us you know), this tells me how many zombies are in the area.

Who cares if saying "There were 20 zeds in the RP today, one of them was a zombie spy, so always scan before reviving" is "pro-survivor tactics".

It is also a very useful piece of information for many people in the area. If a zombie player states "Today we ransacked a billion buildings and tomorrow we take the malls", I wouldn't care in the slightest. The news needs POV. Thats what makes it interesting, and readable. Removing posts because they may have a slight hint towards POV is utterly insane, especially when one man polices it.

My post that has been used for this arbitration case is, in my opinion (and obviously that of others), both NPOV and POV, but with enough factual information to make it news worthy. If we don't let people have a little bit of flavour, then we end up with news that looks like this.

March 1 - Theres zombies here. March 2 - Theres MOAR zombies here. March 3 - Zombies all gone for now. March 4 - Some zombies are back, wonder what they will do next?

We can all agree that that is as boring predicting how Finis will use his last few ap. We all know he's gonna jump, so give us some visuals and a good explanation so we all enjoy it more.

What we are failing to see is, if we take ourselves as seriously as Wikipedia do, then we will become just as boring and political/biased as they are. This will drive new users away from creating accounts, as well as older users who are sick of they're opinions being worth nothing.

So if we don't let a little flavour in to our posts, especially in news sections, we will end up with a whole lot of conflict, until users conform to providing completely factual information across all fronts. Wiki life will become stale and uneventful and then eventually end up having pages that tell us the exact width and breadth of Kevans penis. I mean it is UD relevant, but nobody really cares. (Sorry Kev).

Do we really need arbies between thekooks and WanYao? Or do we need arbies between WanYao and POV.

So lets make the place a little fun to be around. For the betterment of the wiki.--CyberRead240 10:28, 30 March 2008 (BST)

What you fail to appreciate is that I DO have the authority. But I am not special, and I don't consider myself such. Everyone has the exact same authority. I did what every wiki user CAN and SHOULD do: any wiki user can and should delete POV posts from the News.. MANY wiki-ers have done it before me... And still do... And until someone creates a REAL policy, will probably continue to do it... And, as far as I am concerned, I generally followed accepted protocols and procedures in doing so... But I did it vocally, I did it more than others over a certain period of time, and I did it to some people who got all pissy about it... And thus I am being singled out for attacks... Whatever, I'm not whining, I really don't care what you think of me... But if the community wants it to be a free-for-all... Propose a policy to ditch NPOV altogether... And if such be the will of the community... such be it. But don't whinge at me for doing the job that, as a regular wiki user, I have the authority to do... And which, as far as I'm concerned, ought to be done... and not merely by me. --WanYao 13:51, 30 March 2008 (BST)

You are being singled out for attacks because people are not educated. That is because there is no protocol on the wiki that is worth following for NPOV. You will continue to be singled out because you look a little pathetic constantly trolling suburb pages for things to edit. Some of what you have done is vandalism, impersonation. If my intention was to single you out I would have done so by now. My real intention, however, is to raise awareness of the current system, which is flawed. I do not know enough about NPOV, nor do I kiss enough ass of those in power for anything I do to be given seriousness. You need to understand that regardless of guidelines, if you follow people around, you will cop shit like this. Why don't you create a policy, and put it up for voting, rather than use to out of context wikipedia one? You do know so much about this, so I would only expect you to have the proper knowledge to create something worthwhile.--CyberRead240 05:53, 31 March 2008 (BST)