User talk:Warcaptain

Please make sure to Sign your name!!!

This is required in Wikipedia's Markup Guidelines.

Welcome

Hello Warcaptain, and welcome to Wikipedia! Here are some recommended guidelines to help you get involved. Please feel free to contact me if you need help with anything. Best of luck and happy editing! Alphachimp ^talk 00:25, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects
Getting your info out there
Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Policy Library

Getting help
New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions
Getting along
Wikipedians Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Conflict resolution
Getting technical
Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Comment on my User Talk

I would agree that there is a good bit of edit warring going on at GraalOnline. I would suggest bringing the case before the mediation cabal. I would caution that, although it is good to include criticism of articles, it is generally a bad idea to put things in that are not notable. It's also a bad idea to engage in edit or wheel warring. I've restored my welcome message. It is considered back practice to remove messages from your talk page. feel free to get back with me with any further questions. Alphachimp ^talk 21:01, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes thanks, I meant no disrespect or unappreciation towards you. I saved it in a text file so I could use it if needed. I will contact the mediation cabal now. Thanks so much. --Warcaptain 21:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, it's no problem. A lot of people don't realize that they should not remove messages. Coincidentally, whenever your page gets really full (if you stay on Wikipedia, which I hope you do!), you can archive it. By the way, you don't have to copy the message. Just use {{subst:welcomeg}} ~~~~. Regards, Alphachimp ^talk 21:14, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, I hope this issue can be resolved quickly. The actions that are being taken by the Administration of the game are horrible and the Wikipedia is the only place that Graalians are allowed to alert the 'world' about it. They are now banning people in-game for changing the article, and for having anything on their personal websites about my forums (UGCC) --Warcaptain 21:19, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have been warned 3 times to not make personal attacks and you continue to restore the same content, also like is saying mediation cabal you have removed warning from your User talk page, this is not allowed and will be reported.

in the GraalOnline article you not written one line that was not advertising for your UGCC forum. Before asking mediation make something for the article and not just vandalizing it. Graal unixmad 02:00, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Attacks

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Again personal attack against Stephane Portha, last warning Graal unixmad 23:06, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please write these things in my Talk page, not on my main page. That is not where users would write to me at. Also, I have not made personal attacks against you. What is on those pages are criticism of the way you manage your game. Also if you want to review Wikipedia policy, check out their policy on personal attacks Off-Wiki. You banning players for what they say here is very much against their policy Wikipedia Policy --Warcaptain 01:32, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors.You have restored again the criticism section, this was your last warning i am reporting you to administrator. Graal unixmad 02:04, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have already reported your actions to an administrator. What is in the Criticism section is not personal attacks, it is criticism of your managment of the game and the way you treat your customers. There is a big difference, if you feel you are being violated feel free to report me -Warcaptain 02:09, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR Violation

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. Alphachimp ^talk 02:24, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop reverting now. It doesn't matter if you are right or wrong. Alphachimp ^talk 02:24, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, I revert the page to remove vandalism done by other members. Thanks for informing me, what actions does Wikipedia prefer I take to remove vandalism? PS: Make sure you tell this to User:Stefan Knorr and User:Graal unixmad--Warcaptain 02:32, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation

I am willing to be an informal mediator in the case between Di4gram/Warcaptain and Bingolice/Graal unixmad in relation to the GraalOnline article. If you wish for this case to be mediated, please signify your intent by visiting this page. Killfest2 ^(Talk) 03:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you refuse informal mediation, this conflict could result in penalties for both sides, for disruption. Please take part in informal mediation. Killfest2 ^(Talk) 03:51, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would love to! <3 --Warcaptain 03:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation comment response

Requesting sources is very different from completely removing content because you do not feel it is fair. I agree that it may be a more valid arguement if there were sources, and I would be happy to find them. Sources are hard to come by on Graal as it is against the rules on the game to say anything negative against the game or its staff. Linking to the UGCC was my effort to offer alternative views and support the criticism. Proper citation would be good, I agree, but the point was never brought up or dealt with in the correct manner. --Warcaptain 04:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll admit the method of simply removing a bunch of content and not giving a reason is a poor way of handling things here. But try to see it from their point of view - this section of the article is slamming several aspects of their site and backing up that criticism with absolutely nothing. The editor(s) which added that criticism can say "a bunch of people say" and "many believe" and "frequent criticism is lodged" all they want - but without evidence, it has no business being in there. For all I know, those are all complete lies. If you and seven - or even seventy - of your friends all have the same complaints, that still does not make it a verifiable fact. I'll often add {{fact}} tags to articles that sound like they're just making stuff up - but when that stuff is slamming someone or something, I'll usually just remove it and state why in the edit summary. Regardless, I'm within my rights to remove it with an edit summary such as this edit. It's not wrong to do that and it certainly isn't vandalism! WP:V says so. —Wknight94 (talk) 05:03, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]