User talk:Therpgfanatic

RFC
Your RFC is in the wrong place. You placed it at Talk:WikiProject Video games which means that it is now the talk page of an non existent article in the article space of WP. I would normally move it, but having read the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games, I'm not sure if you want a wider audience to add to the comments there or if you want a new discussion started at somewhere like WP:V - X201 (talk) 12:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

February 2011
This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at History of role-playing video games, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You already knew this was a contentious issue and you were in the extreme minority as this was discussed at WT:VG. 陣  内 Jinnai 17:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure that since you are personally involved in this dispute that you're not supposed to be threatening to block me. --Therpgfanatic (talk) 21:00, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * He did not threaten to block you, he warned you that you may be blocked from editing if you continue your actions. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 23:53, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * You can rephrase as it as you like; fact of the matter is he told me this was my "only warning". He made his intentions quite clear and he is someone directly involved in the dispute. --Therpgfanatic (talk) 23:58, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested
Formal mediation of the dispute relating to Role-playing video game has been requested. As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. The process of mediation is voluntary and focuses exclusively on the content issues over which there is disagreement. For an explanation of what formal mediation is, see Mediation Committee/Policy. Please now review the request page and the guide to formal mediation, and then, in the "party agreement" section, indicate whether you agree to participate. Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page.

Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 19:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

You are right, but there is no other alternative
I don't anyone reads anything on a talk page that stretches out a discussion that long, so I'll post here too so you notice. Regular newspapers are more likely to review books whose companies buy ads, giving them more coverage than others. Its like that with everything. Its a horrible and idiotic system we use in Wikipedia, where we rely on the opinions of others, provided they are published somewhere, to determine what is notable. Of course all game magazines and review sites are bias, and even television shows. If someone has a crap game but their company buys ads, the worse score they are allowed to get is a 3 out of 5. But they are the only ones giving any coverage at all, so if we ignore them, then we won't meet the ridiculous Wikipedia guidelines for inclusion, and every single video game article will be deleted. There are books that are on the bestsellers list, that don't get reviewed, while far less popular books do. The best selling novels thus aren't notable enough to have a Wikipedia article, and get deleted, while the least popular ones do get articles. The founder of Wikipedia himself stated he supported this system when I asked him on his talk page. Is just a crazy system.  D r e a m Focus  01:50, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected
The request for mediation concerning Role-playing video game, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. An explanation of why it has not been possible for this dispute to proceed to formal mediation is provided at the mediation request page (which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time). Questions relating to the rejection of this dispute can be directed to the Committee chairperson or e-mailed to the mediation mailing list. For more information on other available steps in the dispute resolution process, see Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, AGK  [&bull; ] 14:31, 14 February 2011 (UTC) (Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)