User talk:EternalFlare

Welcome![edit]

Hello, EternalFlare, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! RadioFan (talk) 16:31, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

EternalFlare, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]

Hi EternalFlare! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Nathan2055 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:15, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MUD articles cleanup[edit]

Hey. You're obviously working your way through MUD articles cleaning them up, which is a noble task. It looks a bit much like you're classifying everything that doesn't have a directly supporting third-party citation as WP:OR, though, which is basically too extreme. Verifiable doesn't mean verified; a lot of what you're cutting is perfectly verifiable through references to the subject's own web site, for example (an acceptable use of primary sources so long as no extraordinary claims are involved -- we wouldn't accept the NiMUD guy's claims that the concept of OLC is his intellectual property, for example). I would like to ask you to please be a bit more conservative in designating material as original research, basically. —chaos5023 (talk) 15:56, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged as WP:OR what sounded like a biased text written by the person who created the Mud or its fans, and didn't have sources. Self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs (as distinguished from newsblogs, above), Internet forum postings, and tweets, are largely not acceptable as sources (unless produced by an established expert). Please refer to Wikipedia:V#Self-published_sources.EternalFlare (talk) 00:18, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes, but the web sites of internet-delivered services are not personal web sites, and it's common sense that we may rely on the web site of LambdaMOO for information about its style of interaction as readily as we might rely on the web site of The Coca-Cola Company in the matter of how many factories they operate. —chaos5023 (talk) 01:34, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, of course, see the next section of WP:SPS from the one you quoted, WP:ABOUTSELF. —chaos5023 (talk) 15:03, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps instead of slashing material from well written articles you could research the muds concerned and add some citations. Hacking non-contentious, well written and accurate material out of wikipedia just to increase your edit count on the pretext of a tidy up is a pretty petty thing to do! DMcMPO11AAUK/Talk/Contribs 12:41, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It would probably also be a good idea to open a new section on the talk page of any article that you plan to edit as part of your campaign against MUDs and engage with the existing editors ofr those articles, or you're likely to find yourself in the middle of a whole bunch of edit wars. DMcMPO11AAUK/Talk/Contribs 12:52, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 08:32, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment on the Aetolia page. As far as I can tell, the page is now clean and good to go, but the other guy keeps arguing... what do I do? DaskalosQ (talk) 05:01, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what to do. Wikipedia:Copyright violations is too complicated and I don't understand how to proceed. I have listed the page on Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/MUD so hopefully someone will look into it. EternalFlare (talk) 05:03, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks. I removed all the direct copy\paste stuff, though the Aetolia producer is going to email WIKI to give them permission to lift stuff from Aetolia.com and IronRealms.com. We'll just have to wait and see.DaskalosQ (talk) 05:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 20:09, 29 January 2013 (UTC) Hey EternalFlare, was just wondering when the StickMUD page was going to be deleted, since it's now passed the 7 day grace period. --75.178.67.86 (talk) 14:31, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard[edit]

I've raised the issue at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Elio di Rupo. You are invited to give your side of the story there. Fram (talk) 20:48, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]