Jump to content

User talk:Soetermans

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Apple20674 (talk | contribs) at 20:54, 26 June 2023 (→Valorant: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Marvel Snap

Hello! I'm very new to Wikipedia and just today saw the edit history for Marvel Snap. I'd love to discuss why I think a list of characters is a valuable feature for the page. Marvel Snap has a large focus on collecting cards/characters, having a list of cards(with links to their lore as mentioned by another user) would be a very valuable feature for many visitors to learn about the characters in the game. Maybe adding the character list as a smaller category within the gameplay section, with a sentence discussing that major part of the game. I'd argue that the collection aspect of the game is nearly as important as the "match gameplay" which is already described there. I'm very passionate about Marvel Snap but I of course respect Wikipedia's rules and manuals, however I'd argue since the collection aspect of the game is central to its gameplay, a list of collectible characters is a reasonable addition. I'd love to discuss further if you'd like. Drewfusmcge7 (talk) 00:55, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drewfusmcge7, welcome to Wikipedia. It's great that you want to improve the article of Marvel Snap, but a long list of characters doesn't add anything substantial. I've pointed to WP:GAMEGUIDE, since Wikipedia isn't one. Even more so, Wikipedia is written for a general audience, not for people familiar with Marvel Snap. To get an encyclopedic understanding of the subject, we do not need to list the cards/characters. Take the character Debrii for instance: listing and linking to the character does not make me understand Marvel Snap any better or how Yondu is different. It would be WP:GAMETRIVIA to list their in-game functions, statistics, attacks, weaknesses, etc. What can be added is an example of how certain characters work, in the gameplay section. That's a better option, that helps with understanding the game from a general encyclopedic point.
But if you like to help Wikipedia, in its current state, Marvel Snap can be expanded upon. There's very little on its development and even less on its reception, when the reception table shows all these reviews. That's what makes it notable in the first place, that's what Wikipedia articles are for. Not gameguide material, but you know, boring, un-sexy information on development and reception. Hope this helps. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 08:52, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the welcome and the thoughtful reply. I will think about ways I can improve the page outside the character list. Drewfusmcge7 (talk) 19:52, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Hi Soetermans. After reviewing your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Please keep the following things in mind while using rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle or RedWarn.
  • Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback should never be used to edit war.
  • If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
  • Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Katietalk 16:51, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi KrakatoaKatie, thanks again for granting me powers beyond belief. I of course understand the difference between vandalism and a good faith edit, but what about the middle ground? For example, I've been reverting gameguide material on Marvel Super War (see history). Earlier today, Mykz 2.0, a newly created account, added an even more detailed gameguide section, which I reverted. Benefit of the doubt in that case and undo instead of rollback? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:13, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Overwerk (January 21)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AngusWOOF was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Please indicate which criteria the person meets in WP:MUSICBIO.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:43, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Soetermans!

Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! [[User:AngusWOOF

AngusW🐶🐶F]] (bark • sniff) 16:43, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"new editors like yourself", AngusWOOF, moi? I feel like a nineteen year old again! soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
oh, heh, that teahouse templating again! AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:07, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry about it. I made this draft more than five years ago and was in my sandbox all that time. I just stumbled upon it again. I figured, maybe it's notable. I've AfD'ed it, time to get rid of it. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:35, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Welcoming unregistered users with kindness and helping to grow the community while also fostering positive civil debate Eamesheard (talk) 07:52, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pedro Pascal name change

Hello! I figured I would message you instead of edit-warring on the Wikipedia page of Pedro Pascal. I looked at Chilean naming customs, and they ARE the same as Spanish naming customs, the same as what virtually every country in Spanish-speaking Latin America uses. This is what the Wiki says:

Instead of primer apellido (first surname) and segundo apellido (second surname), legally, the following expressions are used: apellido paterno (paternal surname) and apellido materno (maternal surname). Both surnames are equally important and having two surnames is obligation for any person in birth registrations, the use of them are mandatory for any official document.

The only difference I can see is the terms that are used to describe paternal and maternal surnames. The naming system itself is still Spanish naming customs. However I've seen other websites that say apellido paterno and "apellido materno" when describing the naming customs of ALL Spanish-speaking countries, so I don't see why his page needs to say he has a "Chilean" name as opposed to a "Spanish" name (I'm not referring to the actual origins of his surnames here).

To clarify, I'm not Spanish but instead of Portuguese (Brazilian) origins and we use a naming system very similar to Spanish naming customs. As far as I know, most to all of the former Portuguese colonies use the same naming customs that Portugal has. FrozenIcicle (talk) 15:52, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FrozenIcicle! Thanks for reaching out and starting a discussion. I have to be honest: I'm not familiar with Spanish naming customs or those of Latin America. Since there is such a thing as Chilean name, I'd figure there must be some difference. Maybe you can start a discussion at Talk: Pedro Pascal? Perhaps it's a good idea to check with WP:CHILE (or even WP:SPAIN? I'm afraid I'm very busy with real life and can't say I can be actively involved. Thanks, and happy editing. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 18:18, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Off Menu talkpage

Hey again! How do we go about archiving or auto-archiving the Off Menu talkpage? I can't spend so much of my time answering the same people asking the same questions all over again. Suppose it's a relief that IP editors don't know they could go into the history tab and restore the menus! Anyway, I'm getting to the point that we need to draw this to a close. Any ideas? doktorb wordsdeeds 07:28, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Doktorbuk, I've added an archived discussion template. Hope that helps! soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 08:48, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Atomic Heart Source Removal

Im sorry about that i wanted to delete the text about the game having stealth elements (when it only has the option of taking out enemies with a QTE) and i thought that if i delete the text i should delete the source so it doesn't lead to information that isn't present anymore. Again, i apologize and will explain my edits more often. Starman2377 (talk) 15:01, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Free fire (video game) edit reverted

Hi, i added free fire game maps in the article but you reverted my edits. why? Metmoney (talk) 08:01, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Metmoney, as I pointed out in my edit summary, Wikipedia is not a WP:GAMEGUIDE. A list with descriptions of in-game maps is inappropriate content. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:20, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Granny (video game), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bear trap.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Gamingmaster83 has been reported at ANEW

Hi, I've made a report of this user at ANEW for their disruptive behaviour, please see this link. Thanks. AP 499D25 (talk) 07:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message and taking the time to report them. I'm not sure if they understand what they did wrong, but in the meantime they did restore the hidden comment at least. Thanks, and happy editing. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 07:41, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Atomic Heart

Why do you revert all my edits? What does 'Russian links' even mean? Is it prohibited to be a Russian developer or to be Russian investor with ties to Kremlin? Don't you agree, that these 2 statements are not the same? And this should be explained in preambula. Orange-kun (talk) 08:30, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can find the answers to your questions by reading the actual article beyond the lead. See Atomic Heart (video game)#Controversy. Stop adding unnecessary or ambiguous words to the lead. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 08:33, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What can be more ambiguous than Russian links? Lead shouldn't be ambiguous, please change it to reflect the facts. And they aren't 'unnecessary'--Orange-kun (talk) 08:43, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The lead is the summation of the article. I've pointed you to the relevant section. I'll break down your edits. Currently, the Atomic Heart (video game)#Controversy reads:

Atomic Heart developer Mundfish has been accused of harvesting data of users based in Russia and providing it to Russia's security services. The developer has denied the allegations.[1][2][3] While Mundfish itself has no direct ties to Russian president Putin, its publisher and some of its investors are.[4]

The game has become subject of controversy due in part of its anticipated release date, which nearly coincided with the first year anniversary of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and Defender of the Fatherland Day. Critics had questioned the timing of the release of a game featuring Soviet and Russian military themes. Mundfish claimed that the company is neutral in world affairs and "do not comment on politics or religion" and the studio is "is undeniably a pro-peace organization against violence against people".[1][2][3] The Ukrainian Ministry of Digital Transformation criticised the statement for its vagueness, saying "the developers of the game did not come out with a public statement condemning the Putin regime and the Russian invasion of Ukraine."[5]

Independent of this criticism, the game's music composer Mick Gordon released a statement condemning the war and donating his fee from the project to the Red Cross Ukraine Crisis appeal.[1][6]

  • With these edits, you changed 'Russian links' to 'Vladimir Putin'. That's not what the section says: Mundfish is accused of harvesting data and the publisher has ties to the Putin regim, not to Vladimir Putin directly.
  • With this edit, you changed the wording to ambiguous and you're casting doubt. "Despite the fact" is editorialising on your part. Atomic Heart was released in February 2023, of course it got more attention then and that's part of the controversy, with a Russian-developed first-person shooter game with Soviet influences. And that a game has been in development for a long time doesn't somehow mean there aren't any ties to the Putin regime. Maybe you don't agree, but that's what the sources say (see references).
  • With your latest edit, you unnecessarily added the {{clarify}} template. It looks like you're trying to cast doubt on the supposed Russian links, but the sentence reads "It has been the subject of controversy over its alleged Russian links, following the country's ongoing invasion of Ukraine", so "Russian links" is directly followed by the invasion of Ukraine. There's very little room for doubt or misinterpretation there. I hope this helps. I see on your talk page that you speak (and I assume, also read) Russian. The article of Atomic Heart can be expanded upon, if you can find the Russian-language sources, please expand the article. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 09:00, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b c Nightingale, Ed (February 17, 2023). "Questions remain over Atomic Heart developer's Russian origins". Eurogamer. Archived from the original on March 5, 2023. Retrieved 22 February 2023.
  2. ^ a b Gerblick, Jordan (January 27, 2023). "Atomic Heart developer denies claims that it's harvesting data for Russian authorities". GamesRadar+. Archived from the original on March 4, 2023. Retrieved 22 February 2023.
  3. ^ a b Wolens, Joshua (February 17, 2023). "Why are people arguing about Atomic Heart?". PC Gamer. Archived from the original on March 4, 2023. Retrieved 22 February 2023.
  4. ^ Avery, Elise (2023-02-24). "Explaining the Atomic Heart Controversy & How It Connects to Russia's War in Ukraine". The Escapist. Archived from the original on March 3, 2023. Retrieved 2023-03-02.
  5. ^ Cite error: The named reference auto was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  6. ^ Jiang, Sisi (15 February 2023). "Doom Composer Donates His Atomic Heart Fee To Ukraine After Russia Controversy". Kotaku. Archived from the original on February 17, 2023. Retrieved 17 February 2023.

Tiny Tina's Wonderlands

I made additions to the "Writer(s)" section of the Tiny Tina's Wonderlands page to properly credit the other writers on the project. Source: I was the Lead Side Mission writer for the game.

Additional support for my edit:

This is a video capture of the Credits from Tiny Tina's Wonderlands, the start time should be at 6:40 if I created the link properly, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMudjJKaRPU&t=400s

Please undo your undo of my update. These people (yes, including myself), deserve to be credited.

(I also apologize if I did this post incorrectly, it's my first time using a Talk page.)

ConnorThomasCleary (talk) 15:01, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ConnorThomasCleary, welcome to Wikipedia. I believe you're referring to this edit. You changed the 'writer(s)' field from Sam Winkler to Sam Winkler, Connor Thomas Cleary, Dante Silva, Lin Joyce, Sam Maggs, Joel McDonald and Danny Homan. Please see Template: Infobox video game#Full syntax:
1. If a single person is credited as "scenario director" or "scenario writer", list that person; synonyms for this position include "lead writer";
2. If there is a person credited as "scenario concept writer" or "[original] concept", also list that person here;
3. List no more than three people in this field.
Sam Winkler is credited as lead writer, I'm afraid you and your coworkers are to be omitted from the infobox. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 15:25, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Putting aside the fact that those specific terms are essentially irrelevant to how most game writing teams work, or how game writer titles work, because I'm not about to start that fight.
So if I understand this, and you, correctly, I should be able to at least put the three largest writing contributors? Which would be Sam Winkler, Connor Thomas Cleary, and Dante Silva. ConnorThomasCleary (talk) 14:10, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, no. No. 1 of the field description says "If a single person is credited as "scenario director" or "scenario writer", list that person; synonyms for this position include "lead writer", bold my emphasis. Sam Winkler has been credited as lead writer. No. 2 says "If there is a person credited as "scenario concept writer" or "[original] concept", also list that person here" and No. 3 says "List no more than three people in this field". You and your direct coworkers were not credited as "scenario concept writer" or "[original] concept", but as senior writers. No. 1 says list "scenario director", "scenario writer" or "lead writer", No. 2 says we can mention "scenario concept writer" or "[original] concept", No. 3 says keep it to three people. Nowhere does it say we can add two other writers besides the person credited as lead writer. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 14:21, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But I'm telling you, those literally are not titles in the Video Game Industry. I have been in AAA game development for 5 years and I've never seen those titles before reading the Wikipedia description you're referring to. I was the Lead Side Mission Writer on the project, I managed a team and wrote most of the side missions myself, I deserve to be credited on Wikipedia. At this point it really just feels like you're being a stickler for the purpose of being a stickler. Those titles you mention, all except "Lead Writer", are basically gibberish. The thing says you can list up to 3 writers in that space. So let me do that. ConnorThomasCleary (talk) 15:49, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you think you "deserve to be credited"? You weren't the lead writer, right? As it stands those are the guidelines and the guideline doesn't say we can randomly add two more people so we're not about to. Feel free to start a discussion on WikiProject Video Games though. Also, I failed to mention, you have a clear conflict of interest. You shouldn't edit the article at all, since you worked on it. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 16:15, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To answer your question: Because I wrote nearly half of the game's content myself, plus managed and edited other writers' work on another large chunk of the content. Plus consistently consulted on the rest of the game, the main campaign. (There is significantly more side mission content than main campaign content.) And I was the official "Lead Side Mission Writer" during production. I had no control over how we were titled in the credits, and credits in video games are simply not consistent across the industry.
As for the conflict of interest, I think there's obviously a big difference between adding provable facts to the infobox, and trying to add something subjective to the main article.
But fine, I guess I have no choice but to start a discussion over there. Because the current infobox guidelines have almost no relevance to how a AAA game is either written or credited. ConnorThomasCleary (talk) 11:58, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and the infobox video game page also says "The popular names of the video game writers (*Plural). The names can wikilinked. The writers should be listed in the order of their contribution..." ConnorThomasCleary (talk) 12:06, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Aaron Liu

Hello, Soetermans. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2023 March 30.
Message added 20:07, 5 April 2023 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Aaron Liu (talk) 20:07, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aaron Liu, very kind of you to keep me posted. It's been a very long day today, I'll try to see the latest comments in the discussion tomorrow. Thanks, and happy editing! soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 21:01, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, in 2 days the discussion will be relisted for the second time, would you kindly reply sometime? Aaron Liu (talk) 13:24, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Aaron, sorry for the late reply. I couldn't find the time earlier, but I've replied just now. Thanks, and happy editing. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:37, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nexon Controversy

I am seeking outside help for this Nexon Controversy since this is biggest gaming controversy in a little while. I thought you treated me unfair and disregarded my contributions and the expressed desire of 4 other editors who want a controversy section. I feel you should step back from the Nexon page and allow others to edit it to bring it current. Thank you for your cooperation. Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Netherleash (talk) 13:57, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Netherleash, please put new discussions below older ones. I'll try to reply when I have the time, though this looks like a WP:BOOMERANG situation. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 14:07, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orc

Many thanks for helping tidy up this article. Do you think anything more needs to be done? Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:02, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chiswick Chap, you're welcome. Likewise, you did great work. I just went over the article once more. I'm not convinced File:Tolkien's Moral Geography of Middle-Earth.svg about Tolkien's "moral geography" is needed: it's not referenced in the article. Thoughts? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 19:36, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Magoun and his "moral geography" are discussed and cited in the text, so if you think the image off-topic, the text is also. Certainly there is quite a bit of overlap with Tolkien and race which could be reduced if anyone is feeling strong! Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:56, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Chiswick Chap, sorry if I wasn't clear. The bit says

John Magoun, writing in the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia, states that Middle-earth has a "fully expressed moral geography". Any moral bias towards a north-western geography, however, was directly denied by Tolkien in a letter to Charlotte and Denis Plimmer, who had recently interviewed him in 1967: Auden has asserted that for me 'the North is a sacred direction'. That is not true. The North-west of Europe, where I (and most of my ancestors) have lived, has my affection, as a man's home should. I love its atmosphere, and know more of its histories and languages than I do of other parts; but it is not 'sacred', nor does it exhaust my affections. I do have, for instance, a particular fondness for the Latin language, and among its descendants for Spanish. That it is untrue for my story, a mere reading of the synopses should show. The North was the seat of the fortresses of the Devil [ie. Morgoth].

Orcs aren't mentioned in that part, and to me it feels WP:OR / WP:SYNTH to suggest that orcs have a place in Tolkien's "moral geography" – it could be that the source hasn't been utilised properly and there is something there about orcs, but as the text currently I don't think it's needed. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:49, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think the material is unnecessary here, even wandering off-topic, and as I said if we remove the graphic half we also have to remove the textual half. Please feel free to go ahead and do that. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:41, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PS: We're now getting a massive growth in the Games section. I've suggested we hive it off to Orc in games (should that be Orcs in games?) as it's unbalancing the article, again. I think it's properly sourced or I'd simply advocate cutting it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:57, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Chiswick Chap, thanks for keeping me posted. My family and I are going on holiday for the coming week, I might not be able to properly go over the article. I'm not sure a split is warranted, making an "x element in x type of media" seems Fandom/TVtropes material, but perhaps it's substantial enough. Maybe check with WP:VG, it's a very active WikiProject. Have a good weekend and happy editing! soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 08:54, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All your base are belong to us

The edit I made definitely belongs on the all your base are belong to us page. The page is about a niche meme that has been used a handful of times by nerds in various films, shows, media and real life, which is even mentioned in the article. Yet, you believe it’s not valuable to include an example of one of those references. One which nerds that would take the time to look up the meme would actually be interested in, ironic.

You mentioned that only edits should only be added if they’ve received independent coverage. That is not the prerequisite for adding information to wikipedia.

Also you might want to edit your pre-drafted letter you send to people that make edits you don’t like. It’s condescending and makes you seem like a mod; you’re not… but don’t worry, I thought it was fun. Zoroastryan (talk) 06:40, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zoroastryan, thanks for starting a discussion. You've been a registered editor since September 2022 and with this talk page comment you've got five edits to your name. I'm going to assume you're still fairly new to Wikipedia and its guidelines.
What you did is considered original research: you noticed the bit on Futurama, found a clip on YouTube and decided to add it. But that's not how Wikipedia works: we need independent coverage, by a reliable source on the topic. That we can add.
About the bit in question, Wikipedia is not intended for "nerds that would take the time to look up the meme". Wikipedia is written for a large audience and for a general reader, not people remotely familiar or even interested in memes, be they nerds or not. The internet is a big place, I'm confident there is some dedicated website out there that lists all the examples of that particular meme. Without substantial coverage by independent reliable sources, Wikipedia is not the place for that kind of thing.
Like I said, you seem to be new to this thing, a giveaway is we use the word administrator, or admin for short, not moderator or mod like on a forum. I am not pretending to be an admin at all, I issued you a warning for disruptive editing. In a very short time you added the same thing three times. It should've become clear to you already know that it isn't suitable.
You are more than welcome to help Wikipedia become a better place! Perhaps check out the guidelines? If you have any questions, feel free to ask here. Thanks, and happy editing. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 06:54, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You’re on a roll with your assumptions. I’ve been editing without an account for a long time, but no worries, you assume this is my first rodeo, ok let’s do it.
Wikipedia is written for a large audience, but that doesn’t dictate how individual pages are written. And you certainly aren’t the arbiter of truth in terms of what is or isn’t appropriate so stop speaking as if you speak for wikipedia.
If a page about a meme which has only appeared in a handful of instances in media and only a handful of people would recognize had a list of where the meme was used, that would be fantastic and absolutely appropriate for wikipedia. That’s what I’m contributing towards.
Thank you for informing me that wikipedia uses the word admin rather than mod. Congratulations you spend all your time on wikipedia. I honestly don’t care about the name wiki uses internally to describe mod/admin, whatever. I mean it’s this level of pedantry that I appreciate, it’s something special. Point is, you aren’t that, but you definitely write like you are. To me that means you’re trying to spook people you think are new editors into stopping. It’s disingenuous and sad, but that’s what makes it funny to me. Anyway, let’s see how this pans out. Zoroastryan (talk) 15:41, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply. Please check out the guidelines and remember not to add primary sources. Have a good weekend! soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 16:00, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Resident Evil 4: Remake Lily Gao hypocrisy

I wrote a section in a neutral way, I used reliable sources literally citing them and leaving also the old ones, you said it needs just to be sourced and I followed your indication, I stated a fact mentioned at the beginning of every Resident Evil article on Wikipedia, and you threatened to block me and using also the word "bullshit". What do you want? 151.18.171.87 (talk) 14:07, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep the discussion in one place. I've said my piece several times now. Soetermans ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 14:09, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that using words like "bullshit" as you did on that editor is not only personal attack but breaches WP:Civil, this is a serious behavioral issue! Unfortunately next few days are gonna be busy for me but i am noticing history of such uncivil behavior. Dilbaggg (talk) 05:56, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you're going to start giving unasked advice, at least take the time to know the situation. An anonymous user that's insisting we add actual weasel words to an article (remember, weasel words?) soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 06:32, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023

Information icon Please refrain from accusing editors of disruptive editing just because you do not agree with their edit. on Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas I reverted an edit that removed contents without any consensus. You chose to personally attack me (read WP:NPA ) because you appear to have a collusion with that editor. If anything that editor needs to seek Wp:RfC to remove contents just based on personal views.I notice this behavior on GTA articles where a group of editors including you and him appear to act like owners and remove WP:RS contents just based on personal views. Unfortunatley I have a real life and will be busy but i will try to fix it when i am free and next time you Harress me with FALSE WARN OF DISRUPTIVE EDITING, taked the matter to WP:ANI as I don't seem to be the only victim of you Uncivil ayttack! Dilbaggg (talk) 05:50, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AGAIN you harass me on talk page with falsew warn of disruptivbe ediyting, yopu are the one disruptively editing by removing sourced content without consensus! Also if someone removes your message from talk page you have 0 right to add them back: [1] . I DARE you to go to WP:AIV they will recommend you to WP:ANI anyway cause I have not vandalized the article rather you like a buraucat want to show ownership of the article and remove contributions of editors you don't like. The dice is rolled then, go to AIV or wherever you want but don't vandalize my talk page again, 24 hour limit WP:3RR is over and I will add that content unless a proper consensus is reached and its your job to seek WP:RfC as you remove established contents, just two editors challengging one is insufficinet. Best wishes.! Dilbaggg (talk) 09:42, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Btw I see you are a veteran editor since 2006, I always respect senior editors, is it too much to ask to seek a consensus and solve the matter WP:Civilly? And yes the casino and mansion did play an important role in the plot and is supported by WP:RS of the game, so why remove it just because you favor a different editor instead of giving your own valid reason? I even complied with the 700n word limits and removed unnessary references to Ke3n Rosenberg as Madd Dog's mansion plays a more crucial role in the plot than him. But anyway I no the rules so please do not undo my talk page again, see [2] best if we can seek WP:DR from a neutral party. I am again not allowed to edit the article for the rule but please prove that the3 mansion is not part of the plot, it is supported by WP:RS meets WP:Notable and is WP:V. Good day. Dilbaggg (talk) 09:58, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, Dilbaggg, WP:DROPTHESTICK. You are blocked because of your edit warring. If you still WP:DIDNTHEARTHAT... Competence is required, you know. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 11:27, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@soetermans I admit I was guilty of WP:EW as I did not fully understand WP:3RR, maybe I didn't understand it before cause I didn't come accross any other project like Grand Theft Auto which is dominated by a few oligarchs acting like they WP:OWN the articles and dismiss any ediots they don't think go on the plots even tho those are Wp:V and WP:RS and WP:Notable purely based on the oligarchs' presonal view and you appear to be the master oligarch. The OG writer of the article User talk:RadicalBender apparently left all the way back in 2007 due to such behavior.

Also Lilian [3] seems linked to you based on their editing of your talk page and removing your war. Anyway while IO admit and regret my guilt of WP:EW I did not vandalize the article like you falsely claimed on my talk page, and false warn qand Uncivil edits like yours are not welcome and maybe it is you who needs Competence is required, who are you to tell me I need it, no admins or anyone did, so why do you think your personal effect here should be accepted, as you said "I am not worth it", who are you to decide it? [4] This is personal attack and do not do that again. Also when the user you talk to removes your talk page messages you can't add them back, I was told that myself by an admin. Like if you remove this I won't be able to add back either, that also counts as disruiptive editing which must stop as well as false accusation of vandalism, the admins cheeckd and I admit my guilt of WP:EW but next time you falsely accuse me of W:Vandal I suggest you go to WP:ANI and see what happens.

Anyway bottomline I see at the moment GTA articles are dominated by oligarchs making the articles poorly structured and barely legible to our readers. We must keep readers interest in mind, you guys give Wikipedia a bad rep of being unreliable. I have brought it to attention, if you are gonna use selective inclusion to the plot and just remove edits by anyone not on your team (whatever you say, the mansion and casino ownership in SA are highly NOTABLE), then I think the entire3 Plot sections should be removed based on improper citation and selective additions and ownership issues of yours. I unfortunately have a busy life and don't have the time for it at the moment but I have pointed out the issues with GTA artiocles maybe others will review and someday fix this oligarchic behavior. I won't bother with GTA articlesm dominated by oligarchic and possibly linked editors for the forseable future and whatever your ne3xt message maybe i will not reply unless its about something new, but last thing I urge you not to falsely accuse people of vandalism juist because edits do not fit your personal views (most important), not to be uncivil and not to undo talk pages which you don't have the right to I linked it before. Good day and wish you luck in future endeavors but hopefully the GTA articles will be saved from you someday. Best wishes. Peace. Goodbye. Dilbaggg (talk) 04:22, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is wonderful you've expanded your vocabulary with a new word, Dilbaggg. I think we need a follow-up discussion about your attitude and I've notified people involved. Let's talk there. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 05:35, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article minor.

Hello soetermans, I was just wondering, what article was it? WacoBell (talk) 22:53, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WacoBell! Well, you've got 29 edits to your account, most of those you marked as minor I wouldn't consider to be a minor edit. Take for instance this edit, you changed the wording a bit. That is fine, of course. But a minor edit is only the teeny tiniest of edits. If you have any questions, feel free to ask! soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:33, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RICK THE DOOR TECHNICIAN IS IMPORTANT

WHY Willythecat21! (talk) 19:34, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hay Day edit reverts

Hello! First Note: Im relatively new to wikipedia, sorry if I messed anything up. But I would find it pretty interesting to know why my edits on the hay day page has been reverted. The first one was intended to generally improve the grammar of the page / make it more understandable.

The second one just went into detail a little more, however, I wouldn't see it as a guide. I just explained the core areas of gameplay more. Was it too much for the section?

Anyways,I don't get what the first one did wrong. The second one can be argued about with its length, but the removal of the first edit seems kinda unneccesary from my Point of View.

Anyways, sorry If I messed up. PferdesalamiMann (talk) 19:53, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PferdesalamiMann, welcome to Wikipedia. I'm afraid it's a moot point, the gameplay section has been unsourced. Please see WP:GAMEGUIDE why it's not suitable material for Wikipedia. Or WP:VG/MOS what does make a good video game article. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:26, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Warhammer: Age of Sigmar

Hello! I'm new to Wikipedia, so I beg of you to understand that even if I do not know all of the rules and customs, I am doing this out of good will and not malice. I choose to revert the changes made by you on May 2nd, because I believe that the information was necessary to understanding the universe more, than the information left. In other similar pages, such as the Warhammer Fantasy, Warhammer 40k, and Middle-Earth STB, they have comparable information to the information provided in Warhammer AOS within their pages (WH40k & ME STB) or in sister pages (WHF) with a small list to show the offerings in the game. If those pages provide equal, or even greater information than it would be reasonable to assume that the same level of information is also allowed.

I believe that the information provided on the other Warhammer and Middle-Earth STB pages do not violate the rules of Wikipedia, but if you believe otherwise then, you may do with that information as you wish.

I believe that this conflict may be simply resolved through simply creating another page for the Age of Sigmar information and providing a list of the worlds and factions available on the page with no blurb, moving the information removed to another (that is) new page.

Thank you very much, for both your time and patience. -Dragonair23 Dragonair23 (talk) 23:04, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I ask that you answer my query about this discussion. I feel as if both the Warhammer Age of Sigmar and the Middle-Earth Strategy Battle Game pages have had substantial decreases in quality, so I must ask how these changes fit within the Wikipedia guidelines? The majority of sections do not constitute as a game guide on either page. I ask for a response with haste, if you cannot give a reason right now, then I ask that you respond with something other than silence.
I wish you the best wishes, -Dragonair23 Dragonair23 (talk) 12:50, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dragonair23, please slow down. As you can see on the top of my talk page, "This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries". Wikipedia is a volunteer-based project and I've got other things to worry about than some article you recently stumbled upon.
You registered your account on May 20 and besides editing my talk page made four edits to articles. Are you familiar at all with Wikipedia guidelines? You seem to know how reverting worked, have you edited before anonymously through an IP address or under a different account? It's odd that your first actions here are reinstating massive texts of inappropriate material.
On Age of Sigmar, you reinstated 27,000+ characters, on Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game even more, more than 34,000. Wikipedia is not a WP:GAMEGUIDE and does not mirror works of fiction (WP:NOTPLOT). An encyclopedic article should provide information relevant to the general reader, not for people remotely familiar with the subject, let alone fans or insiders. A bit like:

Maggotkin of Nurgle: The servants of the god of Plague, Entropy, and Disease, Nurgle. As a god of plague, Nurgle is a horrifically bloated and rotted entity that resides within mansion at the centre of a twisted "garden", where he creates every disease in existence. Nurglite mortals (known as Rotbringers) generally revere Nurgle out of hunger power of desperation, often turning to him to avoid starvation or death from plague. Nurglite daemons are decayed, shambling creatures that maintain the Garden in Nurgle's stead. Nurgle's realm of choice was the fertile realm of Ghyran, wherein he sought to capture Alarielle for his own. The realm was nearly overwhelmed by the Rotbringers, before the intervention of the forces of Order pushing them back.

Is completely unnecessary, written from in-universe point-of-view and inappropriate. If people want to know the ins and outs of a particular intellectual property, like Warhammer, they can look that up on any dedicated fansite. Not Wikipedia. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 13:36, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting data in Mortal Kombat

over the past few days I've seen you and another person delete pertinent information on the Mortal Kombat wiki that another user and I have tried to restore. References to the game being released in 1992 in arcades, when Mortal Monday takes place, and the name of an actor have been deleted several times, with no reasons given. Please explain or a grievance will be filed. Thank you. Danger (talk) 16:50, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey IceWelder, can you take this one by any chance? I'm dead tired and have no energy. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:22, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Square Enix games attribution

Referencing your edit summaries on games Sleeping Dogs and Thief; while you probably have found out by now, see List of Square Enix Europe games. Would appreciate your thoughts on what to do with the list. Regards IgelRM (talk) 11:22, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Diablo IV / Judaic mythology character comparison

Hello Soetermans. I see you have reverted my edit drawing attention to the derivation of the name of a hybrid race in the game Diablo IV from that of the biblical Nephilim (= ‘giants’ or ‘Watchers’). What’s with the snarky comment re. comparisons? I was just about to add another one, featuring the link ‘Lilith’ re. the demoness of Judaic mythology, when I noticed your reversion and thought I’d better not until I'd fathomed your reasoning. Would background information re. mythologically-inspired characters in a game not enrich the experience of the players of that game and also be of interest to other readers of Wikipedia? Flobbadob (talk) 22:15, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Flobbadob, if it came across as snarky it wasn't meant to be. It's just unnecessary and it's not what we do in articles, to point to comparisons with other articles. Video games are loaded with barrowed elements, from history, science, religion, you name it. We don't willy-nilly link to articles that take inspiration from those subjects. Besides, like you said in your edit summary, "Link ‘Nephilim’ re. probable inspiration for naming of game characters", if it's probable it's as much as guessing. It borders on original research or is at best WP:SYNTH. And even if you can find a source, it shouldn't be put in the setting section of Diablo IV, but a better place would be Diablo (series)#Development describing the development of the lore of the Diablo series. Hope this helps. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 05:38, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Soetermans
Thanks for the explanation. To tell you the truth, it was only the edit of an idle moment, born of having seen a poster advertising Diablo IV on the London Underground: I liked the artwork and wondered whom the striking image of the horned she-devil or sorceress was meant to represent. I’m not a gamer and that was the first edit that I’ve tried to make on a game-related page. Re. ‘Lilith’ and a variant spelling of ‘Nephilim’ - hardly guesswork, despite my charitable use of ‘probable’ - pretty obvious sources of inspiration. What it seems to me to boil down to is that gamers don’t welcome the drawing of attention to their un-acknowledged borrowings and that the complicated Wikipedia guidelines on the bugbear of Original Research can be invoked to justify what a rather clannish ‘we’ do or don’t do - as in ‘WE don't willy-nilly link to articles that take inspiration from those subjects. I beg to differ re. ‘unnecessary’, but I shall agree to disagree and refrain from troubling you with any more ‘unnecessary’ edits. Flobbadob (talk) 10:54, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Swae Lee is more of a singer than a rapper, yet you revert it back to rapper first.

Soetermans, if you look at Artistry down below, is says on an Interview on YouTube that he's more of a singer than a rapper so why did you revert my edits for no reason. 2601:196:4A01:D770:4C61:3F01:AA83:93EF (talk) 16:37, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're edit warring. A YouTube video of an interview with the subject is not a proper source regardless. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:37, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How is an Interview video on YouTube (depending what it is) is not a proper source? It is. It's your opinion though. But seriously, why do you think it's not a proper source? When in general, it is. 2601:196:4A01:D770:66E:9721:74BD:EC3B (talk) 20:25, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because we need sources, coverage independent of a subject. Let's say Swae Lee says he's, I dunno, the greatest blues guitarist ever in a YouTube video. We won't just change the article because of that, because we don't go on what a subject, Swae Lee in this case, thinks of themselves, but what independent, reliable sources think of him. Also note that the article has been edit protected because of edit warring, you can use the talk page (Talk: Swae Lee) to discuss the article and suggest changes. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:38, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted edits on Sweet Home Alabama and Tom Morello

It appears you reverted my edits to Sweet Home Alabama and Tom Morello. Look at Lynyrd Skynyrd and RATM. It says ithey're a rock band. Consensus says it's a rock band. I agree that they're southern rock and rap metal respectively, but if the main article calls it a particular genre, I call it that genre. Key of G Minor (talk) 17:47, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Key of G Minor,
Thanks for reaching out and starting a discussion. I must confess, I didn't assume good faith when I saw that you're a newly established account that started changing genres. My immediate thought was "that's a WP:GENREWARRIOR". I should've known better and should have taken the time to double check your edits. Sorry for impatient reaction!
And welcome to Wikipedia! Don't let my rudeness scare you, it's a great place and community. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 18:42, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet Home Alabama

(talk page stalker) Concerning this exchange, Key of G Minor is correct. Lynyrd Skynyrd are listed as a Rock band, so any page referring to the band, it's listed as Rock. - FlightTime (open channel) 17:53, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sir The Wikipedia user Capitals00 is continuously editing wrong information on pages especially releted to 'Hindu Monarchs' and releted to them by adding hate words and unsourced statements as he now doing on the page of 'Mughal - Maratha wars' where he didn't provided any single source and blanked most of the page including Result of it.when i undid his revision by asking him sources then instead of providing sources he undid my revision and stored his edit without providing any single resource!This is somehow close to Dictatership as his edits are more than 5000 so now he misusing his powers by deleting others history perticularaly 'Hindu Community' for his relegious agenda. So kindly look at this and take immediate action on him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aryan330 (talk • contribs) 09:45, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Valorant

Goedeavond, Soetermans,
My edit updated the Valorant Esports section and also brought the English up to standard.
(I am an active editor on Liquipedia, a wiki for esports, and the Valorant page is out of date by 6 months, as well as not being consistent)
I do not understand why my edit has been undone and I do not wish to provoke an edit war My edit was in good faith and preserved the existing information.
Thanks, Apple 20674

Apple20674 (talk) 20:26, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Apple20674,
For next time, when discussing an article, it's best to use its talk page, but since you've started the discussion here we might as well continue.
I am not sure how you brought "the English up to standard", you undid my edit and removed the better source needed tag (we try not to use primary sources), put the unnecessary subsections back in, undid my merging of the controversy section, the bit about skins... And what you actually did contribute was unsourced. A wiki for esports might have different standards than Wikipedia, but please don't unnecessarily undo another's edits. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:47, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey I'm really sorry, I think there's been a bug as I switched between visual and wikitext. I checked my edit and realised as you said that I undid some of your edits.This was not intentional, I only intended to change the eSports subsection.
By bringing up the English, I meant certain mis-usages such as tournament series instead of circuit etc.
Sorry for the misunderstanding, I will change my edit tomorrow morning, not undoing your edits.
I also agree that new sources are needed.
Thanks and sorry again. Apple20674 (talk) 20:54, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Soetermans&oldid=1162071817"