User talk:Oldag07

Hi, welcome to Mass Effect Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Earth page.

Be sure to check out our Style Guide and Community Guidelines to help you get started, and please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Lancer1289 (Talk) 21:48, February 4, 2011

Major Changes to Articles
Note that when a major changed is planned for an article, especially one that runs counter to current formatting, it needs to be discussed before it is implemented. Lancer1289 21:22, March 16, 2012 (UTC)

Spelling Policy
Note that this wiki does have a Spelling Policy. Edits that switch UK spelling to US spelling, or vice versa, are not permitted. Both types of spelling are permitted here. Lancer1289 (talk) 19:33, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Massive Edits
Please before adding anything else, please do check to make sure they are appropriate. Currently nothing you have added meets the standards for anything nor is there any precedent for adding weapons or other things like that to species articles. I am currently debating whether or not to remove them because of redundancy and MoS issues. I'm not even sure I follow the logic here because the species doesn't make the weapons, corporations do. Therefore, I am going to need some explanations here as to the logic you are using here. Lancer1289 (talk) 19:21, February 2, 2013 (UTC)

Please
When making large changes, creating templates, or doing anything with large scale changes, please stop just doing it. Anything you have recently created will be deleted. Templates are not to be created without discussion and please SANDBOX ideas to present them. This is something you have been having a lot of issues with to say the least. We have a procedure here, ask, get feedback, then do. Not in any other order. This is your third message about this and you have yet to acknowledge any of them, which is becoming frustrating to say the least. Lancer1289 (talk) 00:01, February 5, 2013 (UTC)

And you wonder why so few people edit this wiki. Chill out man. Oldag07 (talk) 00:16, February 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * And you aren't following procedure, despite the fact you have been told about this three times. Large scale edits require discussion, and you have had repeated problems with that. We have an entire forum for this purpose. We like change and improvement, we just ask that people do it in a manner that gets input, feedback, and possibly other ideas before making large scale changes as that has always resulted in problems. I fail to see how this is asking too much or why this is such a bad thing. Lancer1289 (talk) 01:34, February 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * ^ Sounds like a serious case of S.U.T.A. syndrome. FrostGiant (talk) 02:02, February 5, 2013 (UTC)

I really hate taking the way I am about to, but the fact of the matter is, you need people like me. People who are passionate about ME, who know how to edit a wiki. I have created pages such as this the Dr. Seuss bibliography which is not something easy to make. I also have had a significant number of edits 1 2 on pages that have far more hits a day 3 4 then this wiki does in a week. I know you changed this policy since I started editing on this page, but take it from the policy book from most successful wiki, Wikipedia, WP:BOLD and this article on it, "BOLD, revert, discuss, cycle".

 Being bold is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia. No editor is more welcome to make a positive contribution than you are. When in doubt, edit! Similarly, if you used the article's talk page because you were unsure, and it has had no response for a few days, go ahead and make your edit. Sometimes other editors are busy, or nobody is watching the article. An edit will either help get the attention of interested editors, or you will simply improve the article — either one is good. 

Lancer, your obstructionism is blocking out good edits. Admittedly the template edits today were reckless. I apologize about that. But with everything else, I stand 100% behind them. I know what a sandbox is, and in the situations I am in right now, it does not make sense. No one reads them. (see this). This wikipedia policy should probably be heeded please do not bite the newcomers especially this section Ignorantia juris may excuse. Yes, it is too much to ask me to read though a 16 page MoS (web pages, far more actual pages). Yes, this page is hostile toward casual editors. I might seem arrogant in this particular response. I might be annoying. But what I am doing is good for the wiki. What I am doing, is needed. And unless you ban me, I will continue to edit the way I am. (with the exception of the templates. that was a bit reckless) Oldag07 (talk) 02:52, February 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * And you do not seem to get it. We do like people making changes, but do make large scale changes without discussing it first is not a good idea, and it is not how things are done. What is so hard to understand about this? What about it do you not get? There is a reason we have a forum for things like this. There is a reason we ask people to propose large scale changes FIRST. To get feedback, listen to others, and to fully flesh it out BEFORE you do anything. Yet you do not seem to grasp this concept. Why I do not know because you have been told repeatedly about it. What is so hard about opening a forum page, proposing an idea, getting feedback, and then working to get things done?
 * Your entire response is arrogant because you show contempt for how things are done, and how things have worked so smoothly in the past. There is a reason we have a whole dedicated forum, to ensure the free flow of ideas, and that attention is properly given. You do not, or cannot grasp this concept for whatever reason. Did it ever occur to you that people will not like what you like? From your persistent ignoring of things, I guess not. The forum is there, why not just open a page. The only reason I can come up with is that you just cannot be bothered because you will do what you want, with no regard for what actually goes on here.
 * What you linked me to is nothing more or less than an insult with what you just said because you want me to do something that you are completely unwilling to even attempt to do. You want me to be nice, yet you keep ignoring, and blatantly disregarding our policies and the way articles are organized. You said it yourself. You have to be willing to meet someone else half way as contrary to your beliefs, it is not a one way street. I am more than willing to work on a project with someone else, but that person has to be equally willing to listen. Something you have a persistent problem with.
 * Now will it kill you to open a forum? From everything you keep doing and saying, it will. Yet you will get more feedback, more ideas, and perhaps even a different way of going about something. You cannot keep disregarding our policies and the way things are done here because you feel like it. I could care less what you do elsewhere, the fact you keep wanting to do your own thing, regardless of how things are done here, shows that you just do not care about this wiki because you are unwilling, or unable, to do things the proper way.
 * And what you just did on the Assault Rifle page told me everything I need to know about you. You are arrogant, contemptious of authority, and if you do not get what you want, then you will throw a tantrum. There is a procedure, and you refuse to follow it. Why I do not know... Lancer1289 (talk) 03:44, February 5, 2013 (UTC)

I can't hear you through all your bs. Oldag07 (talk) 03:45, February 5, 2013 (UTC) Be bold!!!!Oldag07 (talk) 03:45, February 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * And something else, if this is how every editor on Wikipedia behaves, then the rumors about it were true. They are all arrogant and if they do not like something, they will do anything to stop it or force it through. You are painting a clear picture of how things work there. Force it and if you keep doing it, it will eventually work. That is not how things work here. How anyone can edit Wikipedia while you edit there is beyond me because if this is how you treat people there, then how can anyone stand you. Lancer1289 (talk) 04:01, February 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * No. Honestly, I only treat you this way because to put it nicely, you act worse. Oldag07 (talk) 04:26, February 5, 2013 (UTC)

Edit Warring
That is it. You are now officially breaking site policy by edit warring. You have been told at least twice where the proper place for what you want to do is, yet you flat out refuse to follow any site policy. Why I do not know, but from everything you are doing, it tells me that you are arrogant and cannot take any sort of rejection of your ideas. People are not going to like what you do, and that "system" is honestly horrible and needs a lot of work. I know this may be news, but the mainspace is not your personal sandbox. There are plenty of places where you can test, get feedback, and perhaps even other ideas on how to do something.

In all honestly, the way you have been acting over this issue is like a child. You do not care at all for what anyone else thinks and that is just arrogant. So either grow up and follow site policy, or action will be taken. It is not that hard. Lancer1289 (talk) 03:48, February 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * "Arrogant", says the one who's been adding walls of text to another person's page. FrostGiant (talk) 03:51, February 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * If you have nothing to contribute to this conversation and only wish to inflame, then don't comment. It is obvious that you are biased in this matter.--Legionwrex (talk) 03:53, February 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd appreciate not having my opinions assumed. Thank you. FrostGiant (talk) 03:55, February 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not an assumption, it's a fact. Any non-biased person would be able to clearly tell the Olag07 is in the wrong here and Lancer is 100% justified.--Legionwrex (talk) 03:57, February 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * It just seems like your admin is making a lot of fuss over something relatively minor. Also, saying "it's a fact" sounds incredibly high-horsed; additionally, you've made a grammatical mistake in your last post. Have a wonderful day. FrostGiant (talk) 04:01, February 5, 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not something relatively minor, it's a template and a big deal, but instead of telling you how it's a big deal, I want you to tell me how it's something minor. Additionally, I find it funny how you say I'm on a high horse yet I'm not the one pointing out small accidental grammar errors in an attempted "take that!".--Legionwrex (talk) 04:05, February 5, 2013 (UTC)

I thought about it for a while. I guess I am used to the Wikipedia way of doing things, and I guess I need to do things your way. Legionwrex, I am sorry you got dragged in this. I don't mind admins trying to make me do what I need to do. I am willing to learn the culture of this page, and do things the MEWiki way. But I refuse to work with Lancer. I know what he is doing is well intentioned, but as you can tell, I will not listen to him. There is way too much bad blood between us. If you want to be the mediator, I don't mind if you do, though I would prefer Commdor to do so. If you have some sort of strange loyalty to Lancer, and want to ban me so be it. You are losing someone with a lot of ME knowledge, and extensive wiki experience. It is your loss. I will not edit until Saturday. Hopefully everyone will cool down by then. Oldag07 (talk) 04:13, February 5, 2013 (UTC)


 * the way this wiki works is annoyingly slow at times but that's just how it is. users like trandra who were responsible for making MP pages presentable bit by bit had to take their work to the projects forum for feedback if it involves significantly altering the way content is presented. no exceptions. talkpages are no substitute either - the projects forum was created specifically for the type of thing you were pushing.


 * sure the people voting there are oftentimes reduced to just proposer and admins but at least there's procedure. people can't complain they don't like some implemented design because it was voted upon, the results are open for view, and if they don't like the design they can make their alterations (in some page other than mainspace) and then let the rest decide which they prefer best.


 * and it won't really hurt to wait a week unless you're dying of aids. we may even hold an e-funeral in your honor afterwards. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 04:30, February 5, 2013 (UTC)


 * Fair enough Temporary editor, although, as an admin, you might want to propose making it easier to find the forum. Considering the fact that there are far more wikipedia editors then ME editors, the burden is on you to differentiate between the policies.


 * This is not a good way to tell someone they aren't following policy: "Note that when a major changed is planned for an article, especially one that runs counter to current formatting, it needs to be discussed before it is implemented. (Lancer)",  I didn't know where the forum was, or how to actually discuss it. I put a lot of hard work into it and now I am offended.  You tell me to look at your policies, and you have 16 pages of it.  Why would I read that?


 * This is something out of the wikipedia playbook that might help you. It could be worded, We appreciate you recent edits. However, major changes on our pages must be discussed at (I still have no clue where your forum is). We willput your edits up after we vote on the changes.. Oldag07 (talk) 05:12, February 5, 2013 (UTC)

(Lancer, I prefer that you don't respond to this) Oldag07 (talk) 05:12, February 5, 2013 (UTC)