User talk:Wakapodus

May 2012
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Talk:Frozen Synapse. Please comment on the content and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you. Rushyo  Talk  15:49, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Please also be aware that per Conflict of Interest guidelines regarding single purpose accounts, if you continue your reversions to Frozen Synapse and opt in to an edit war rather than following consensus you may find yourself blocked. Wikipedia is not about winning. - Rushyo  Talk  16:18, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

--Wakapodus (talk) 16:41, 21 May 2012 (UTC) You might know wikipedia better than me but I know FS and it's community better than you.
 * Even if that were true, it's irrelevant. You are breaking pretty much every policy and guideline of this community. If you continue you will end up blocked, which helps nobody. Read WP:Expert editors for an indication as to why being a self-proclaimed expert is often not a good thing. - Rushyo  Talk  19:48, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

--Wakapodus (talk) 21:20, 21 May 2012 (UTC) It is fully relevant because it means that I know the hidden reasons behind the wiki war therefore I am able to judge fairly, you not. I am a FS expert and a self proclaimed one yes, there aren't a handful of people in the community who can boast the work I've accomplished and knowledge I've gathered.
 * Possibly. Whilst experts can make excellent contributors (I've been a daily #1 on Frozen Synapse a couple of times and I've been an indie games dev for over a decade) they risk many problems outlined in WP:Expert editors which forces them to uphold a certain standard of behaviour which might come naturally to those with less knowledge on the subject.
 * Hidden agendas are irrelevant. Everyone is subject to the same WP:Policies and Guidelines. The trouble is, they're playing by the !rules and you've broken more than anyone I've seen without being blocked, possibly because I've made the conscious decision not to report you for infringements thus far, since I note you're simply unfamiliar with how we do things.
 * I'm acutely aware that the IP which reverted you may well be related to one of the other involved parties - and one of the wonderful things about Wikipedia is that's just as obvious for others to see too. Your deeds and those of other editors are on display all the time and recorded permanently, so if they ultimately want to play silly games they will be held to account. There are many veteran editors who like nothing more than to get involved in a dispute with subversive people and foil their plans to game the system - (almost) the entire community is dedicated towards the goal of improving Wikipedia and as a whole we are expert at keeping chaff out. Wikipedia is not an anarchy, Wikipedia is not a democracy and Wikipedia is not a battleground. If people try to bring their battles here, they will find that mentality works against them. - Rushyo  Talk  22:07, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Frozen Synapse. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Rushyo   Talk  19:41, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

--Wakapodus (talk) 21:20, 21 May 2012 (UTC) Why do you accuse me ? I added the link and the only thing I've been doing afterwards is restoring it because there was a good reason for it to exist and no good reason for it not to exist. They started the wiki war, they disrupted, they made edits after knowing there was a disagreement, they brought excuses instead of serious arguments and didn't reply to my own arguments.
 * Quite simply, one more revert and you would have ended up blocked under the WP:Three revert rule. I wanted to give you the opportunity to avoid that, hence the above notice. To quote the above: Do not edit war even if you believe you are right. I've proposed a Request for Comment at Talk:Frozen Synapse. Could you consider it, please? - Rushyo  Talk  21:37, 21 May 2012 (UTC)