Guild Wars Wiki talk:Arbitration committee/2008-06-27-User:Brains12

Copied from Guild Wars Wiki:Arbitration committee/Requests

1. The existence of separate pages for the different location of Hff. Each location has a different method and build and each should have an different page. The information is under Fast faction farming discusion page. Azwildbill 03:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

   From Guild Wars Wiki:Arbitration policy: "The arbitration committee is the final arbiter of user conduct on this wiki". How is this a user conduct issue? -- Gordon Ecker 08:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

2. A personal attack from a sysop there. Fast faction farming Azwildbill 03:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

   Are you sure you know what you're requesting here? The situation doesn't seem to be out of control, and I think you'd be better off holding a more open discussion with the others involved. You seem to be taking a very combative stance towards those you speak with, and I think if you tried to work with instead of against the other editors you've been having conflicts with, the situation might resolve itself. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 07:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

   Blunt/rude...what ever you want to call it. I feel this, this and this are a valid reason for this arb com. Dominator Matrix 08:01, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

   "Please consider posting on this page only as a very last measure. If you have a problem with any user, try contacting them directly and solving any differences through discussion. If that doesn't work, try Requests for comment to bring the issue to the attention of the community, so other editors can help out and mediate. Please do not be hasty about requesting arbitration if other alternatives are still available."

   Are you sure this is the case? (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 08:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

   If you feel a discussion and a GWW:RFC is better then reviewing the issue, then go ahead. Dominator Matrix 08:32, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

   My question was not with regards to what I felt, but rather what you believe: do you think that this matter is beyond where it could be resolved via discussion with the individual(s) in question? (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 08:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

   No, since discussing it could resolve it. Yes, due to the fact that this involves a sysop. Plus, I feel that discussing it will still bring us to a Arb Com. Dominator Matrix 08:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

   Could you link to the exact edit containing the alleged personal attack? -- Gordon Ecker 08:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

   I think Talk:Fast faction farming#gods talk is the source of the issue.--Fighterdoken 09:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) You are correct. And this is the edit [1] Dominator Matrix 09:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Arbitration.. why exactly? As Aiiane said, it's the last resort after the rest has failed. A discussion was not opened on my talk page asking me why/what/how; another sysop wasn't contacted to review my edits; I wasn't even informed that I had done some terrible wrong. This situation is certainly not in need of an arbitration case. I wouldn't even say it needs sysop review. I appreciate people discussing with me, especially if it's to sort out an issue such as the FFF information. What I don't appreciate is being discriminated on for my being a sysop, going around various talk pages saying the official wiki is hacking and sacking information about faction farming (even on the faction farming talk page) and ignoring requests to remove/improve edits that shouldn't be there -- we don't link to guild or personal websites, we don't add in information regarding one specific thing on every related page when 1. there is already a link taking you to a specialised page (i.e. the faction farming page) and 2. when there is already relevant information on the relevant pages.

Regardless -- this is a content issue, and so it's not for the arbitration committee. If you think I'm personally attacking you, I apologise -- however, as I said, I appreciate discussing with me first. -- Brains12 \ talk 14:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

1st I would like to see that disgusting message that was placed on my talk page removed. I noticed that its timeline is just about the time this thread started getting busy. hmmm This need to be investigated as to whom wrote that if he is an employee he needs to be fired. This message on empowers me to continue.

"That's the wonder of a wiki - you find one page, follow a link, find yourself with other links and you find out more" Hff is a broken link. I fight for its existence. I see on these pages why this this should not be. No one has suggested a way for this to happen. Its simple a user puts in hff in the search box and goes to where a one line reference "This variant is refered to as HFFF (Hero Fast Faction Farming)" Hff deserve more that that. That website i was trying to link is only a guild by name there is no active member in it other than me maintaining 700k of faction. No where on that web site is any recruiting its a reference site for the 5000+ views of my youtube hff and fff movies.

I asked two serious question in the "Ask a wiki question" and got rebuttal both times this whole thing might have been avoided if got the straight answer. I have been treated less than professional on several occasions. I'm sure that if I had made that comment to you I would have be banned. You are a sysop you have a higher standard to maintain. This is not meant to destroy your life or job just to make you think.

So how are we going to resolve the hff link issue?Azwildbill 15:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the trolling and personal attacks on your talk page, but note that they were from both sides. As to the FFF issue, HFFF redirects to Fast faction farming, the basis for all types of fast faction farming. The only difference between normal human FFF and hero FFF is that you take and control heroes. Nevertheless, this doesn't belong on this page, it belongs on Talk:Fast faction farming, so that discussion should continue there. -- Brains12 \ talk 16:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) First of all, this is not the place to discuss anything about this. Read what the Arbitration commitee is about and then think about if it was correct to even post something here.

Your two serious questions on HELP:WIKI was the one, entitled with "lol" and, where you addressed someone unknown for something nobody else knows about it; you didn't provide a link nor you were saying what you were talking about. The other question was about the word trolling, which doesn't belong to Ask a wiki question and not on this wiki at all. Ask google or wikipedia if you want to know something about a word, we are not a encyclopedia.

For your "Hfff" page, it is definitely appropriate to redirect that to Fast faction farming because it is exactly that, just with heroes instead of real players. The edits you did on that page were very unclean and not really thought-out. See our Builds policy for an information how we keep information about builds.

Also note that it is not important who owns a page, or what guild it is; also it is not important that you are the only member and are 1337 enough to keep 700k faction. We simply do not link to external pages except sometimes for reference. poke | talk 16:09, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I think its safe to say that this case resolved itself. Dominator Matrix 06:19, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

1. This is a content issue, nothing that ArbCom deals with. 2. Whilew it's not untrue that Brains comment was directed towards a person rather than the issue, thus making it a mild NPA vio, I completely fail to see how this warrants an ArbCom case. There's plenty of other things to do. Simply reminding him not to do it is perfectly adequate. Backsword 04:10, 29 June 2008 (UTC)