User talk:Flowstone

Hello Flowstone, could you discuss your deletions on discord before making them. --KUHMUH17 (talk) 16:38, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't see a reason to join a discord before removing spurious, incorrect, or irrelevant information from a public wiki. This is a community resource, and there's no point to a wiki that can't be edited without passing it by the committee first. At that point it's just a database of what your headcanons are.

Then THAT is exactly the reason why you must discuss things up with the other editors before arbitrarily deciding to "cleanse" the wiki by yourself. Nikitazero (talk) 22:48, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

It takes a group discussion to figure out things like "A character from Spain calling someone Abuelo means her grandfather" and "a character with soft, weak muscles that need external support to stand up doesn't have the disease that makes it hard to sit down"? Or that a completely contextless quote from Christian religious material does not belong on the page of a character who is not Christian, does not live in a world where Christianity exists, and does not in any way say the quote or anything like it, is appropriate? It is, at best, wildly misleading as to what Logos is doing in that scene, and frankly comes off more like someone decided to free-word-association evangelize. Is that really what you on the mod team have decided absolutely MUST stay?

But sure, since it matters so much to you to have the Gospel of John on an anime Banshee man's magic CG: I've made what appears to be the first post on his Talk page to see why exactly that matters so much to the mod staff of a resource for English speaking fanbase of Arknights.

I had enough of your hypocrisy and apparent ignorance to the fact that we went into great lengths to research the subjects, even delving into sources only available in CN such as Terra: A Journey among others. This is your last warning; if you refuse to cooperate with other editors, I will see to it that you will be punished for your transgressions, so you'd better join the wiki's Discord server ASAP and we can continue there. Nikitazero (talk) 00:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

What hypocrisy? Googling what color an Eastern indigo is? Looking up what spastic displagia's symptoms are? Did Terra: A Journey tell you that even though Iberia is an enormous reference to Spain, the word 'abuelo' doesn't mean Grandfather there? And I'm cooperating just fine. I've commented, and it frankly seems like I'm using the Talk pages - aka a wiki's handy built in tool for making sure discussions stay where everyone can see them so no one has to go to a different platform entirely - more than you all are. We can talk there, page by page, so there's a public record, or nothing. But I'm not joining a private discord to hear why it's so vital that you make incorrect Assassin's Creed references.

Ah, you made your point. It's true that most of the editors are keeping their discussions on the Discord server and hardly use the Talk pages to do so, mostly because the conversation can happen in real-time. So we are clearly at fault for keeping the thought process to ourselves. I'll encourage the editors and staffs to use the Talk page more often next time. And you clearly mistaking something: Your edits on Indigo and Weedy's related pages are justified, and we thank you for clearing things up. Nikitazero (talk) 00:50, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I just want to add my two cents here. Making changes for accuracy is completely fine. We rely on editors to help with this sort of thing. However, if you're going to make edits, please don't come out the gate swinging. I read the editor's comment on the Indigo change and it's just hostile right from the start. We're people too. There's no malice in these pages and things that are incorrect are not inherently introduced with malice either. If you're going to edit, please be professional about it. Instead of "Indigo's tail is light blue and grey. An Eastern indigo's tail is iridescent black. It is completely factually incorrect to say she has an Eastern indigo's tail." which makes it sound like incorrect info was intentionally placed with bad intentions, just edit with the message "Updated Indigo's tail information to be more accurate". Again, we're people too. Have respect for others and respect will come back to you. We're all trying to make this wiki as factual as possible for the benefit of Arknights players. Let's keep to that. (Guildmarm (talk) 01:15, 16 April 2024 (UTC))

I left that comment after a previous edit, with the exact same information, was reverted. I 'came out of the gate swinging' quite a few hours after basic, factual corrections had been reverted back to being incorrect, apparently because the admins and mods did not bother to verify whether the information they were changing things back to was in fact correct. Even if I had done as you said, that comment would not have contained the actual information that changed. Other contributions I made with clear, factual explanations for the changes were also reverted. Furthermore, I did not blame anyone nor imply malice. I simply said - correctly - that the information was wrong. I did not do as the head admin here did early and go all-caps "READ THE FREAKING FILES" in the notes over a minor discrepancy.

Can you blame the admins for that happening? When some new account of only 2 days old comes in and starts mass editing and changing things it looks like vandalism. Regardless of whether it's factual or not. When someone makes edits we want to trust the validity of what's being changed but when you come back at a reversion with animosity as I mentioned above, it's going to be met similarly. (Guildmarm (talk) 01:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC))

Your idea of wiki vandalism is fixing typos, correcting canon information, and changing what birds characters are? (Irene's bird's beak looks nothing like a storm petrel's, btw) And I should think that checking whether or not something is factual should be the absolute first step before you decide whether or not someone is vandalizing a wiki. And I have brought in significantly less animosity than your own head admin, who was not two hours ago yelling about how I'd be punished for my transgressions.

You have made 50 changes since your account's creation. all of which have been today, April the 15th. 21 changes of which were in the span of only an hour, the majority of which were just large chunks of deleted text. Can you reasonably say, honestly and truthfully, you want us as staff to fact check all those changes while someone is actively making edits en masse, before heading off potential vandalism? Meet me half way here, I'm trying to be reasonable and come to an understanding. I'm not excusing Niki's behavior but come on. Try seeing it from our perspective. (Guildmarm (talk) 01:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC))

No, I absolutely expect you as mods to verify whether or not someone is adding truthful statements. I expect you to look at the text I deleted and use your judgment to see if it's something that belonged on the page to begin with or if it was a trite pop culture reference, a completely unfounded reach, or outright incorrect. That is your job as mods. No one is going to die if you take your time to see what someone is actually doing and assess if it improves the page or not. Moderation tools exist besides reverting edits and threatening to ban someone, and it is not my problem if you are several years into running a wiki and don't know them.

Alright, it's clear to me that there's no cooperation here and that you aren't capable of being reasonable or amicable in this situation. Have a good day. (Guildmarm (talk) 02:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC))