User talk:The Great Unwashed

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Re:Tyranids

Ha! I had reverted it in the first place, and then reverted back because I wasn't sure if it really was vandalism. Honestly, I don't know anything about these games, so for me it's entirely possible that Tyranids carry spoons and atlases. Thanks for letting me know. ... discospinster talk 13:18, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Future of WP:40k

Hello. As a member of WP:40K I ask you to share your thoughts and opinions on a matter that I feel will shape the future of the project. Thanks. --Falcorian (talk) 06:52, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Civility

With reference to this edit summary, please remember to always be civil in your actions on Wikipedia, and don't bite the newbies. Wikipedia is a community, and such comments as this don't help us build an encyclopedia. Thanks --Pak21 08:50, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Your rebuke is noted, but I'm afraid I don't agree - nor do I consider it too much to ask that people a) read the article they are editing first to see if the information is there, and b) know how to spell the information that they are attempting to repeat. If it's uncivil to be blunt, then consider me uncivil. I'm hardly going to say "Thanks for your enthusiasm, but unfortunately we're looking for someone who can spell" or "Gee nice try but I had to revert it because it was useless and wrong". It's all a bit molly-coddly-pointless when six words make it plain, and are the real reason it was reverted without any window-dressing to make it all palatable. Besides, comments like that DO help us build an encyclopaedia, because they keep it pertinent and readable. Contributions like the one I reverted, do not. The Great Unwashed 03:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
There is no problem with reverting the contribution: it didn't help the encyclopedia, I think everyone would agree. However, an edit summary along the lines of "reverted badly spelt contribution" would have accomplished the same effect, while still being civil and hopefully encouraging the editor to come back later. Wikipedia needs editors to build and grow, and those who encounter incivility (including overly blunt comments) aren't likely to come back and contribute in the future. I think this is slightly a matter of assuming good faith: one badly spelt contribution doesn't mean an editor isn't going to make positive contribute to the encyclopedia in the future, so they should be encouraged, not scared off. Hope this makes some sense --Pak21 09:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: TF2 edits

Thanks! It's always good to have some support in these style edits, considering they are mostly very unpopular with the anomalous masses. Regarding barnstars, take a look over at Wikipedia:Barnstars and the corresponding links in the awards table on the right of that page. -- Sabre 10:16, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Opinion on TF2 edit

I want your opinion regarding an edit I'm considering making. I'm thinking about adding a brief one-sentence summary of each of the maps if I can find proper references for it. Would you regard the following as guide material? It simply lays out an overview of the design of the map with no plans for further elaboration, but considering my fairly tyrannical come down on other edits under WP:NOT#GUIDE I want a second opinion before I go ahead on it:

  • 2Fort, a capture the flag map. The teams attempt to infiltrate the enemy control room and steal an intelligence briefcase.
  • Dustbowl, a control point map. BLU attacks a RED compound with a missile launch pad, progressively moving up to the main control facility.
  • Granary, a control point map. Both teams try to take over the other's granary, housing a number of missiles.
  • Gravel Pit, a control point map. BLU attacks a RED quarry containing a laser cannon.
  • Hydro, a territorial control map. Each team battles over facility with a dam and a satellite dish before attacking the enemy's main control room.
  • Well, a control point map. The teams assault each other's warehouses to capture a missile launch pad.

-- Sabre (talk) 11:54, 22 November 2007 (UTC)