Welcome to the Order, Italay90!
Welcome to the Assassin's Creed Wiki!
We hope you enjoy your stay, and we look forward to working with you!
|Have you something to say?|
We seek unity, stability and order.
|We wish you safety and peace on your future endeavors.|
What's wrong with the edit is that you did turned it into one big paragraph, did not source any of the information at all, and called Connor 'Connor Kenway' when that is not his name. -- Master Sima Yi Clogs 19:23, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
It's very easy to seperate paragraphs through this button called an "enter" button. The name may easily be changed? Instead of blindly removing edits why don't you EDIT, and improve, them ? Italay90 (talk) 19:45, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
- Stop your snarky attitude. It won't get you anywhere.
- Secondly, the information you've put down has not been credited to a source, so it cannot stay. That, and the fact that Black Flag hasn't been released yet so you can't make assumptions. Slate Vesper (talk) 19:51, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
- "Snarky" attitude or no, don't go around removing other people's work, instead improve? OH MY GOD WTF STOP FFS. THERES NOTHING WRONG WITH IT, JUST EDIT WRONG PARTS OUT FFS! Italay90 (talk) 19:53, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
I do go around removing other people's work when it does not meet our article standard. Instead of telling an admin to go make edits, read our rules and policies. I'm cutting you slack by not giving you a warning for your attitude. Next time you add information, SOURCE it. -- Master Sima Yi Clogs 19:55, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
- Next time don't blindlessly remove, some of that did not need sources, and rather than removing it then source it? If you have the time to remove, you have the time to improve. Italay90 (talk) 19:57, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
Everything needs sources, and I do not 'blindlessly' remove anything, I deleted it with good reason that I just explained to you. And I have changed my mind, you are now banned. Your pseudo-witty attitude has now resulted in your 6-month long absence from the Wiki. Next time you are on Wikia, don't tell admins and moderators to edit - when they've made a lot more edits than you. And especially not when it is you who refuses to follow the Wiki's rules and policies. And also not with the attitude you flaunt around. -- Master Sima Yi Clogs 19:59, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
- Isn't there this one rule called "anyone can edit"? I made a mistake, but you can't just ban people because you dislike them, it's wrong, it's your choice but it sickens me if you do. Italay90 (talk) 20:01, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
- You weren't banned because we didn't like you. If we did, you would never have had this long conversation chain on your talk page where we explicitly tried to tell you what you could have done to improve.
I don't ban anyone because I dislike them. I banned you because you are being completely disrespectful, rude, and offensive to others, not just me. Also because you insist on undoing reverted edits made by admins and experienced editors, when it is in conflict with rules and policies. Good day. -- Master Sima Yi Clogs 20:04, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
Your the one whose putting yourself above me and banning me, and no I didn't KNOW I was doing anything wrong? Also try to be mannerily and practice what you preach. I'm sorry, but just because I undid my edit because I believed I didn't do anything wrong, makes me banned, even though anyone may edit this wiki, you believe my undoing is banniable, when I was trying to help the wiki and get discredited. Oh, so admins and experienced editors are better than those who haven't been on the wiki long...? Italay90 (talk) 20:08, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
I am not putting myself above anyone, I do my duty as an admin and bureaucrat to ban those who are breaking the rules - your attitude towards other members is reason enough to warrant a ban. You undid your edit after I told you what you did wrong, and after others told you as well. You kept on reverting. 'Anyone may edit this wiki' does not grant one immunity to do whatever they wish. Trying to help the Wiki is no good when you do not adhere to rules and policies and basically force others to clean up after you. And no, admins and experienced editors are no better than others, which is the entire point I have been making during my tenure as bureaucrat - they do, however, know more about rules and policies than new editors who do not follow them at all.
I do not see any problem with my attitude towards you, but feel free to keep on complaining if you do. This is the last input I will give on this discussion, however. -- Master Sima Yi Clogs 20:13, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
Okay, if you do read this I'd just like to say you never did explain the fact that I needed sourcing until later, even though I removed the area in question, I the edit got reverted again, and I got blocked, thankz for your time anyway and sorry for being such a dick lol, bye Italay90 (talk) 20:16, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
- I am aware you won't be needing this information for at least six months, but I would like to point out that it is the user's responsibility to read the site's policies before making edits. The welcome message you were left upon joining quite clearly states "Please remember to read our wiki policies to avoid gaining any unnecessary attention", which includes our Sourcing policy. Also, I feel I should point out that it isn't Sima's job to tidy up after you; since "it's very easy to seperate [sic] paragraphs through this button called an "enter" button", I see no reason why you could not have simply done that at the time of your edit, rather than moan about the removal of unsourced, poorly formatted text.