Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Xino

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Would adding the discussion on Talk:Sonic the Hedgehog (2006 game) be worth it? Because User:BlazeHedgehog [1] and I [2] tried to resolve a dispute there, too (he kept removing a tidbit on "breakdance fighting", as sourced by a magazine scan, instead screaming "WAIT FOR E3" at us). This [3] was his response. Lengthy, somewhat difficult to read, very heated (to the point he uses "f*king [sic]" a few times). This isn't the first time I've had conflict with him, although I can't remember where the exact incident before was for any further evidence. --Shadow Hog 13:02, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• Certainly - I'd have added it myself, but since I had no experience with that particular dispute I wasn't sure if I'd get the details correct. If I have time tomorrow, I'll add further evidence from the UT2007 and Unreal Championship 2 disputes, too. RandyWang 13:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

It is definitely worth it to add the above mentioned discussion. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 15:28, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you think it is also worth adding the personal attack he made on this very RfC? I'm not sure if it's really necessary.. =\ RandyWang 23:00, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Xino's Response (...and my reply)

Xino, I (clearly) have some issues with your response. To run through them:

1. Re: Reversions "back to normal": When you revert dozens of edits per week without necessity, and call every one of them "back to normal", then something is wrong - unless you're responding to vandalism, very few edits should ever be a reversion "back to normal". As such, it's insulting to have so many of my edits reverted "back to normal" - and I'm sure that I'm not the only editor that feels this way.
2. Re: Erroneous edits: I never said that all your edits were erroneous. I was pointing out that you have, on more than just a few occasions, inserted false, misleading, unverifiable or plagiarised information, a fact for which I provided a substantial amount of evidence.
   1. Re: Reversion of changes to your edits (particularly those involving erroneous information): On a number of occasions, most notably during the Unreal Championship 2: The Liandri Conflict edit war. The links provided in Point 4 are the evidence I presented for this point.
3. Re: Playing the Game as a qualification: Xino, I'd like to turn the question you just asked me, back on you. What's point in trying to contribute to an article by acting as if you know it all? People that have never played the game are still capable of noticing copyvios, incorrect grammar and spelling, blatantly false information and contradictions within the article - those aren't things you need to have studied the game extensively for.
4. Re: Bannination. Xino, I'm not interested in your being banned - if I were, I'd have happily taken this to ArbCom. As it is, I simply wanted to make you aware that your conduct is not appreciated by other users of Wikipedia, and that you've acted poorly in recent months. Rather than attempt to have you banned, I'd simply like you to:

• Learn to take edits more graciously,
• Accept consensus,
• Stop acting in a way that implies ownership of the articles you edit
• And, most importantly, be civil to other editors.

If you would at least be civil to other users, I'd be content. That's a reasonable enough request, isn't it?

RandyWang 13:00, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

this is pointless, you are just complaining like a little child.

Re: Reversions "back to normal": When you revert dozens of edits per week without necessity, and call every one of them "back to normal", then something is wrong - unless you're responding to vandalism, very few edits should ever be a reversion "back to normal". As such, it's insulting to have so many of my edits reverted "back to normal" - and I'm sure that I'm not the only editor that feels this way.This clearly shows an example you have a grudge against my edits, possible a big problem. No one ever complained about me reverting editors edit's back to normal. Because if there was any complaint I would have stoped it! The reason why I normally says back to normal, is because I can't be bother to open up 3 pages and copying and pasting that editors name. Another reason why you got a big problem about my edits is that, since you are complaining about the revert back to normal, there is a "diff" and a "his" for you to look at! There you can see what sort of edits I did on that article, if I really put the article back to normal. And how is that insulting!? Like I said, you are the one with a problem! not me

Re: Erroneous edits: I never said that all your edits were erroneous. I was pointing out that you have, on more than just a few occasions, inserted false, misleading, unverifiable or plagiarised information, a fact for which I provided a substantial amount of evidence. Yes, I have made quite some edits where they have been reverted...want me to tell you the story?

When I came to Wiki, the first article I edited was Unreal Tournament 2003. I added some notes on the weapon sections, and mistakenly deleted some sections, I didn't know how to do it back. So I clicked on save, within mins, it had been reverted.

Now from this example, can you use it to tell what sort of an editor is, is the editor a vandal or good editor? I will say that is a good editor, because even deleting some sections from that article and adding some notes to the other sections (weapon section), you can tell that is good. Because if it was a vandaler, he would probaly leave the deleted section and even post some annoying comment! Yes I have beaten some editor in the past, and some wiki members told me not to, that they might be new and dunno what they are doing. This is me leaving some dissing method on the edit summary!

Now for the errorous edits I made. I do make some edit which are not false! but they are point wasting that is why they get reverted. For an example, me ading some note for Mortal Kombat: Deadly Alliance, saying the font used for the credit is Tempus San. Me and some other guy talk about it a lil bit, but told me, that isn't a big deal. Who wants to know if the credit fonts is tempus sSan:/

And the error edit I did was 2: Need for Speed: Most Wanted. I copied and pasted the notes from OXM.co.uk. Someone found out and turned the article into a copy right edit, it was on a copy right edit for about a month! Then the second mistake I made was for Unreal Championship and Unreal Tournament 2007. Yes I know we are not suppose to copy all exact note, but copy some of them down and state the source. For UC2, I copied all text from the website, but I did stated the source at the External Links. But you came in, just because you didn't approve with what I did, doesn't mean you can be jumping into conclusion. Saying the text was not about the game but for adversting. How are you sure? You havn't played the game yet. Again, I corrected my edit, by shortening the text and moving the source to the right place. But still you choose to disagree, and remove it saying we are not suppose to have it. When other articles clearly got copied text from variuos website!

And for the rest of my edits, they are all true!

People that have never played the game are still capable of noticing copyvios, incorrect grammar and spelling, blatantly false information and contradictions within the article - those aren't things you need to have studied the game extensively for.That is the exact point I am saying. If you havn't played the game, or dunno nothing about it. The only thing you are good at is correctin grammar, errors, false links and ect. From Unreal Championship 2 article, I was the only person adding information to the article. Did anybody helped me? NO! Because they havn't played the game, others saw me editing it, and the only thing they can do is correct spelling errors and grammar. The people who did those things know who I am talking about:P And I thank them, because they didn't get in my way!

• Learn to take edits more graciously,In wat way!? Like I said before, don't get in my way, I know what I am doing!

• Accept consensusSorry mate, I am the one to be giving orders here. And they are the one to consensus to me! It even says in my profile! I have given consensus to some article and it works out! A new method where non wiki members didn't take notice of. I even tried proving this way to you, but still threw it back at my face. Saying there is the edit summary. For an example I was giving consensus over the Sonic NeXt Gen article (TALK PAGE). Telling Blaze that it isn't breakdancing. I gave all my points proving it isn't a break dancing. But still refused! Even saying wait for E3, it won't kill!

• Stop acting in a way that implies ownership of the articles you editYou kept on saying I act as if I own articles. I am telling you, I DON'T! I used to do it before, with the Lindbergh article, check the talk page. But I don't anymore, I dont know where you got the idea from, but state your reasons why!

• And, most importantly, be civil to other editors.Sorry mate, the way people treat me, is the way I treat them back.

Ban the cunt.HappyVR 20:45, 5 May 2006 (UTC) As anyone ever seen me used anyof this words: That is unfortunate. By the way, here is a list of words you are allowed to use on wikipedia: Shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, tits, ass, asshole, assmunch, asshat, and any variation thereof of the word "ass". --Golbez 18:26, 5 May 2006 (UTC)NO! The only words people see me use are @ss, f*k & sh*t. No other! Be civil. Dude, you're kind of a jerk. The brilliance of Wikipedia is we can add and change stuff as we learn of it. It's not going to kill you to add this and leave it there until we know for certain. Like I said, lighten up - don't be so freakin' up-tight about everything. BlazeHedgehog 20:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC) And here is what I said Dude, you're kind of a jerk Oh I am the jerk...don't worry, keep your words coming, I can take em all and anytime!. But when I start using mine, they start saying, be loyal to other wiki, be civil, blah blah blah, shut da hell up!And that is exaclty what they do to me!

The link you provided in the reason page were just a waste. I just ingored them. You said I was attacking some wiki members, giving links that doesn't even seem like attacking. By the way, you forgot to add the link where I was using the word owning, which seems like an insult to you:/

I will say it once more, this is pointless.

• Golbez: Have you played Shenmue game? You acted as if the Timex company got nothing to do with the game, SEGA just put their name on it. And did I prove you wrong!?

I also submit this for evidence: [17]. My feeling is, Xino is a very young chap who just doesn't understand how these things work. Though, the more chances we give him to mature, the more he seems to dive deeper into immaturity.I don't understand how things work!?

• waka: Is that the way to stop a fight!? You see two people fighting, you don't jump into conclusion or try telling the other what to do. You are suppose to ask "what is going on here" or "tell me what happen". Not you coming in telling me to calm down, when you didn't know the story. That is why I told you to mind your own business. Because that isn't the way to stop a fight!

And Randy giving out the link to me insulting you in the Talk Page. Did you find that offensive? Cuz I mainly did the same to the user Shenme. Asking him if his name was suppose to be Shenmue.

• Katefan0: !?

• Shadow Hog: another wiki member with a problem! The incident came in the Shadow the Hedghog video game, where in the talk page. I got the pic and some info. I told everyone that I got the official box art pic and lets get to work. The idiot told me, that my attitude was wrong. I was so surpised! I even though he was jealous because I got the picture. Even at his talk page other editor got some problem with him. And uses the same American cheap excuse "poor grammar".

• HappyVR: !?

• RandyWang: And as for you...you still don't get it do you? I have try telling you countless times! But you don't listen...now you see what happen, it lead you to create a RfC.

Again, I will tell you the problem you have and the annoyance I find in you:

You come in an article, you don't know much about it, but spot mistakes and error. Yes you do a good job correcting the mistakes. But the reason is, changing varulable facts to wrong! This can be found in Unreal Championship 2 article. I even tried using my method, but still don't listen.

You don't understand that, people who experince in this sort of article are the only people who are capable of adding information! EXAMPLE

Devil May Cry article, is a stub article. No wiki member knows nothing about it. Someone who knows about the game can provide information. But yes, he/she will make a mistake. But that is your job! Your job to correct it. That is what I knew in Unreal Championship 2 article, I add information, and other wiki can correct my mistakes. [4] The people who helped with the grammar and mistake when I was the only one working with the article.

Yes, even though wiki members doesn't know about the game, they can still provide information via source links. But still the article will still be a stub Have you ever seen me edit an article I feel I don't experince in? If you check my profile, scroll to the Contribution List. You will see the edits I made, and all of them I do experince on! If I don't know about this certain article, I will be reverted!

That is the problem about you. This can be notified in the Shenmue Article, ApeXtreme article and Unreal Championship 2 article. You came in the Shenmue ariticle, acting asif you were sure about the Timex thing. And what happened at the end? ApeXtreme, I didn't know what you were trying to prove there, but you were going on about the cancellation date and release date. Unreal Championship 2 article, changing fact edit, adn saying you are correcting grammar:/

I can even list out my problems I have with you wiki members. First

• You are all too hot headed! One edit, you say calm down, do this do that, the WIKI RULES:

That is why I am trying to change things here. You all act as if this is a job...

• SOURCES! Every edit someone makes you think it is a fanmade, opionion or fake! And I managed to prove you all wrong!

This can be found with the edit I did at the MK: DEADLY ALLAINCE. where that guy is telling me to give source that it is the actual font. And Randy telling me to provide link to the Shenmue Timex. Which is just complety stupid!

• Enough with the wiki rules! CHILL OUT!
• Go on about people's grammar. Trust me...in 2005 I have seen same sentence used "your grammar is poor" Even used to other editors.

The problem is Randy, you spend so much time trying to prove me to a false and trying to prove me wrong. Sorry son, I got work to do, editing to do and reverting to do. You can keep up the researching on my edits, cuz it doesn't concern me anymore! I wasted maybe one hour typing this

>x<ino 14:50, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I think that Xino's above response is a pretty typical example of his general attitude towards Wikipedia. He's not interested in collaboration, he refuses to treat other editors with anything but contempt, and he's convinced that he knows more about the subjects he contributes to than anybody else, making him always right. I'm in agreement that Xino is probably very young; his attitude and the way he seems to take edits as personal attacks suggest that he's not had much adult social experience. Xino, if I may provide a minor insight into the "civil conduct" that RandyWang suggested above: the more civil you are, the more likely we are to actually listen to what you have to say. As it is, your posts are extremely juvenile. If you really want to convince people that your ideas or information is correct, I think the your only real option is to treat them with respect. Otherwise we just stop listening to you. --waka 15:19, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

This is what I mean! Did you even read all text I typed!? He's not interested in collaboration,Like I said, I if like I am wasting my time here. Forget this damn talk page on request..a waste of my life...not time, LIFE! I got business and other things to do, than listening to idiots online.

>x<ino 15:30, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Xino left this message on my talk page, indicating that he's not at all interested in changing his ways. So, what do we do? RandyWang 22:52, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

• Personally, I'd like to wait a bit until we can tell if he was serious. If he actually mends his ways (if only a little), I'm happy to count this RfC as successful - otherwise, I'd consider submitting this to the Mediation Committee. RandyWang 01:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Thus far, given a little dispute between him and Blaze yesterday, he's not mended his ways at all. RfM it is, then? --Shadow Hog 13:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes. I'll do it tonight when I get home, unless you want to do it before then. RandyWang (^raves/_rants) 21:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I've posted an RFM. Please see your talk page. RandyWang (^raves/_rants) 10:16, 16 May 2006 (UTC)