User talk:UbeMarsh


 * Note: If you leave me a message here, I'll answer it here.

Angry Video Game Nerd
Hi there. You will go back to all of the pages that you removed the links from the Angry Video Game Nerd and will you put them back. Failure to do so in the next 12 hours will be an alert to the moderators for vandalizing pages because of your PPOV. Duhman0009 13:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * No, I won't. In case you're interested in my reasons:
 * The Angry Video Game Nerd, Angry Video Game Nerd, angry video game nerd
 * The Angry Nintendo Nerd, Angry Nintendo Nerd, angry nintendo nerd
 * Six out of six articles have been protected to prevent creation. The most famous reason for deleting these articles was "not notable".
 * Furthermore External links might by a good start for you, especially Links normally to be avoided.
 * I don't vandalize articles because of my PPOV, I just follow Wikipedia's guidelines. FUD does not work here. --UbeMarsh 13:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh and it's a coincidence that you just happen to look at games on Wikipedia that have been reviewed by the AVGN? That's bull, admit it, you just hate the Nerd.


 * Also, a review, from the most popular to the most unknown website remains a personal opinion. No one's personal opinion is of greater importance than another. What the Nerd does and say at the same time that he reviews the games does not matter. There's no such thing as a gamer review degree or diploma, no one, not even the staff at GameSpot went to special schools to review games, everyone one of these people are gamers stating their personal opinion. It's not like putting news from of an unreleased game from a fan website, these games are out, someone reviewed them and didn't like them.


 * I didn't start putting links to the Nerd's review, some were already there, I'm just adding the ones that are missing. Also, considering that the AVGN's reviews are some of the most watched videos on YouTube and GameTrailers, hard to argue with the question if they should be placed on Wikipedia.


 * Finally, although I don't agree with Wikipedia's bullying policy on what should have an article or not, the fact that the attempts to have a AVGN Wiki page failed is irrelevant to this.


 * So, you will you revert them or should I? Duhman0009 14:11, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Would you please read my previous comment again? I told you why I have edited these pages, I just don't care whether you set the links or not. I don't care for your weasel words as long as there are valid guidelines such as WP:N and WP:EL. My actions are backed by official guidelines, I don't see why I should revert myself. --UbeMarsh 14:27, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * How about you reading my reply again? I'm not talking about an AVGN article, I'm talking about AVGN links in other pages. Duhman0009 14:29, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * These guidelines are also valid for external links. --UbeMarsh 14:35, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Just read the WP:EL page, kindly tell me which rules would state that links to the AVGN should not be placed? Duhman0009 14:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Among others: 2, 7, Rich media. --UbeMarsh 15:02, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * This is more fun: http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=1976052
 * Anything else? Duhman0009 15:32, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Please keep on topic or leave. You've interrupted me already for about two hours, in which I could have improved even more articles. This is an encyclopedia, not a random funny website. --UbeMarsh 15:36, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * This is very well on topic. Admit it, you got nothing and now you're looking for a way out. Duhman0009 15:39, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Where is this on topic? Reliable sources are still missing. For the last time, I have removed some content from some articles by following the guidelines of Wikipedia. This is not vandalism, I don't have to admit anything, and I don't have to explain it any further. --UbeMarsh 15:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * A source is something you use to reveal news or inside info. A review is a personal opinion on something that is existent and available to the mass market and it is something that the mass would agree with (in general). If something is good, odds are it will get a good review, if something is bad, it will get a bad review. Also, note that reviews posted on GameTrailers are generally accepted. Duhman0009 16:02, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Avoid weasel words, the Angry Video Game Nerd is "[a site] that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research.".
 * Don't forget: WP:N is still valid for external links to reviews. --UbeMarsh 16:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Weasel words, that's cute, but not applicable here. The AVGN will mostly state facts about games, things that you can see with your own two eyes, hence why he wouldn't talk about things that he wouldn't be able to show in his video reviews. As for the WP:N, no where in the page does it talk about external links, that why theres the WP:EL and we already covered that. Duhman0009 16:25, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Just for the record, I agree with your removal of the links, UbeMarsh, as I can see others do as well. Their inclusion goes against policy. Duhman0009, threatening and confrontational language is completely unnecessary. Mgiganteus1 03:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)