User talk:KhalienBB

June 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but we regretfully cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. -- Comandante    { Talk }  20:54, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles. Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. If you have issue with my reverts of your edits, please inform me on my talk page and we can discuss this. -- Comandante    { Talk }  21:01, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: ABOMB Glitch
Your argument has valid points, but you have to keep in mind that whatever you add has to comply with WP policies and guidelines. Firstly, the content regarding the glitch which you added to Fallout 3 is right out:
 * The game isn't out yet, so there is no way to confirm if the glitch was removed or still present. Therefore, the info is speculation and does not belong.
 * The section was not sourced, so even if it wasn't speculation its inclusion could be contested and removed per policy.

Concerning the content added to Oblivion, the main problem isn't speculation but rather sourcing. As an admin I referred to about this issue put it, the info is "by its own admission, not worth of inclusion: To date there is not known to be a single mention of the glitch in any mainstream professional publication, on any media." Forum chat and fansite gossip isn't accepted by WP. You need reliable sources from game sites/publications like IGN, Gamestop, Eurogamer, Xbox Magazine, and the like that refer to the glitch. Self-published work (forum comments, blogs, etc.) can't be used as sources because anyone can say whatever they want in them. If, however, Bethesda releases some kind of press article about the glitch or addresses it in an interview, then that would be an acceptable source. As is, all you have are forum threads and research done by users of ambiguous reliability and trustworthiness, so the info can't be used per policy.

Again, I can understand your reasoning behind wanting to include the glitch info in the Oblivion article, but unfortunately it isn't up to WP standards. If it is fact, then it must have dependable sources to back it up, and currently the definition of a good source here does not include the everyday gamer. That is a common misconception of WP: it is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, but an encyclopedia doesn't contain info on anything. Thanks for taking the time to post your message. If you have any further concerns, I can direct you here: WT:WPVG. -- Comandante    { Talk }  00:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm afraid that what you suggest is a little out of my purview. My editing on WP usually focuses on maintaining a few articles about subjects I'm interested in, sort of a hobby for me; I have rarely, if at all, participated in any meaningful discussion on policy and know only a couple other editors. All I can do at this point, since your idea warrants more serious and thorough discussion, is direct you to WT:WPVG where you can bring the idea up there. Hopefully the Project editors there will prove to be of more assistance than myself on this matter and can decide if your info can be made an exception. -- Comandante    { Talk }  17:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)