Talk:Horse

Forgefather's ongoing war against knowledge

Forgefather, would you mind providing some good reasons as to why you feel the horse section should have its history part gutted out and replaced with nothing? How exactly is more information on a horse, which are in nearly all tabletop games in some way, shape or form, a bad thing exactly? You claim that this wiki isn't wikipedia, and it isn't, not to mention it isn't trying to be either, because simply having information does not make a wiki a wikipedia copy, and there's no reason to delete information that somebody might find interesting since, as mentioned before, you can find a version of a horse in nearly every fictional setting. -- Triacom (talk) 21:26, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

As I have mentioned on the Communism talk page, he holds the belief (which I personally share albeit not quite as virulently) that the history part detracts from the /tg/ relevance that should take center stage from the article. Surely you can at least attempt to make a compromise in which the history sections are refined to a single, four-paragraph section. As of this edit, I am rewriting the article to show how such a refinement can take place. --Newerfag (talk) 22:38, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Ooh, "war against knowledge." That's good! Inflammatory, yet succint! Newerfag paraphrased my points quite thoroughly, so I see no need to add any further rebuttal.--The Forgefather (talk)