User talk:Asorel

From 1d4chan
Jump to: navigation, search

This page now exists.

Just wanted to say that you are bringing pride to the Emprah with your work on this wiki. Keep it up. -- (talk)

Why we shouldn't delete pages that might be "irrelevant" now[edit]

There's a whole bunch of flash-in-the-pan stuff that made enough of an impression to convince somebody to make a page about it here. (Ultimately, that's the only definition of "/tg/-related" that I think is sensible.) Maybe nobody talks about it anymore, but that's not a reason to erase it from history -- it's not like we're running out of space. --Not LongPoster Again (talk) 17:45, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

By that logic, anything that has ever been discussed on /tg/ since its creation has a right to be here, no matter how popular it really was, how lasting its impact had been, or if it even had anything to do with traditional games. Should we start enshrining every shitpost and forced meme that crawls out of /tg/ as well? It's not about space, it's about simple quality control- a thing that /tg/ itself has harshly criticised 1d4chan for its lack thereof.
In theory, anybody could sign up and make a page here despite having never set foot on /tg/ or played any of the games that /tg/ is all about. In fact, I distinctly recall one person I interacted here who told me he didn't even know what 4chan was, let alone /tg/. Is that the kind of person who you trust to determine if something should go on this wiki?--Newerfag (talk) 18:44, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

What you've been doing is trying to delete an article that actually is relevant to /tg/ on multiple levels. Is something just a meme that isn't based on any traditional games? We could probably get rid of it, or compress it into another article (like the meme page). Is something based off a game or directly related to a game and /tg/ in general? Leave it alone. It should be as simple as that. -- Triacom (talk) 20:56, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

One could, with some difficulty, argue that photographs of neckbeard's asses is /tg/-relevant. That being said, if this wiki recorded every little piece of drama that magic tournaments excreted, it would very quickly become tenfold more bloated than it already is. A teenager that enjoyed fifteen minutes of amateur video fame, on the other hand, has no relevance whatsoever, and does not warrant a place on the site. I'll grant it is possible for something not fully relevant to /tg/ to become relevant (The Elder Scrolls and Star Trek come to mind), this contrived waste of bytes isn't one of them..--Asorel (talk) 21:33, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
So can I make the BrĂ¼tal Legend page then? Because /tg/ spent a year talking about that's and it is a fun setting. --Thannak (talk) 01:15, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm hardly the deciding voice on these matters, but I would imagine so.--Asorel (talk) 04:19, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
You're making yourself the deciding voice, there's a middle ground and deleting pages should only become necessary if there is no other alternative, the Asscrack page IS relevant because that actually had backlash aside from being something humorous and related to /tg/, and I threw in a suggestion about what to do with the Rebecca Black page. I don't like her either (or that page), but unlike you I don't act as if my own likes and dislikes are exactly what the wiki should be. -- Triacom (talk) 07:28, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Personal taste does not dictate a wiki you do not own.[edit]

So for quite a while now you've been trying to delete pages that you don't like, on the grounds that you don't like them and argue this point against anyone who says they should be left alone. This isn't your own personal wiki, if there's an article you don't like, ask if it warrants deletion in the discussion page, don't just delete it. Keeping on what you're currently doing is a good way to get a temporary suspension since you act as if your own taste is the only thing that matters. -- Triacom (talk) 20:09, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

In every instance that a page has warranted deletion, I have provided multiple reasons justifying it, in no uncertain terms. If you cannot or will not parse information placed right in front of you, then I won't waste any more of my time responding to your inane, inarticulate protests.--Asorel (talk) 20:25, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
In every instance that you've tried to delete a page, you post your own subjective reasons, in no uncertain terms. If something is subjective to you and you don't even want to hear what other people think about it before deleting it then you are deleting it because you don't like it. -- Triacom (talk) 21:07, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Fine, I'll bite. How is "not informative" subjective? Furthermore, how is every subjective reason synonymous with "I don't like it?" Saying "This page fails to amuse because the reasoning behind the attempted humor is incredibly contrived, and is little more than a tautology" is undoubtedly subjective. However, subjective or no, it is a view held by many perusers of /tg/, and is more qualitative than stating distaste. Review the arguments made, thoroughly, before attempting to rebuke them.--Asorel (talk) 21:14, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Because it is informative about the material it's parodying. Even a page that just mentions that something (such as 40k's tubes) is everywhere is still informative about it. Also if you think a lot of other people also find a page unfunny, you should show your sources, otherwise you're agreeing with me that saying something isn't funny (which you gave as reason enough to delete something) is subjective. Lastly this is your talk page, it is not up to you to decide what does or does not go on here, especially when you try deleting everything except a compliment. -- Triacom (talk) 21:53, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Your impression of what does and does not belong on the wiki seems to be rather miscalibrated. Though it's wonderful you want to contribute, maybe you should consider restricting yourself to rewrites and additions. Further, blanking pages entirely when you want them to be deleted is not on; for spam shit, sure, but a page that is meant to be actual content, no matter how much you dislike the content, should not be blanked. If you think it should go, place the deletion template and comment on the talk page. This stuff is periodically reviewed and you don't have to take it into your own hands in the meantime. Additional notes: whining about "keeping autism off your talk page" and "nonsensical sperging" just makes you look like a massive tool. --Wikifag (talk) 09:32, 18 November 2015 (UTC)