User talk:Flower of Pock-Lips

 Welcome to The Vault! Hello, Flower of Pock-Lips, and welcome to The Vault, the Fallout wiki! Thank you for your contributions, and we hope you'll stay with us and make many more.

Some links you may find useful:
 * Recent changes lets you see what other people are editing currently and where you can help. You can also check our community portal for things to do.
 * If you haven't already, create a user page about yourself. If you do, we'll be able to know you better as a member of our community.
 * If you are new to wikis, the help pages can help you learn how to edit and how use the wiki tools. For test edits, feel free to create a personal sandbox.
 * The Vault's policies and guidelines describe how we do things around here and can help you make even better contributions.

If you have questions, you can ask in our forums, join the live chat in our IRC channel or post a message on my talk page. We hope you enjoy editing here and look forward to working with you!

-- -bleep196- (Talk) 17:05, November 28, 2010

Speculation
We don't include speculation in articles, even reasonably well thought out speculation. Please do not re-add any of the material to the courier page. Thank you.--Gothemasticator 20:30, November 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * I have re-added the note, without the DLC or cut content speculation, as I feel that whatever it means, it's pretty vital to the Courier's character - especially considering how little we know of him/her, and removing it would be a mistake. As it is now, it is pure statement of fact, so I don't think removing it again could be justified. Additionally, I do think it's worth pointing out somewhere that so far, graffiti has been used to hint at future DLC, seeing as intentionally omitting a piece of information like that could be considered contrary to the wiki's goal as a comprehensive source of information about Fallout. --Flower of Pock-Lips 20:39, November 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * ...except for the bit about Highway 50, which I've removed. Also, what you posted in the other article about file and folder names containing phrases such as "dlc" and "honest hearts" - that's actual information and not speculation at all. Stick to entries like that and you'll do fine.--Gothemasticator 20:44, November 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * You really need to stick to stating facts. Don't add anything that needs to be phrased as is thought to be or seems to indicate or might mean that... Either something is or it isn't. Otherwise, it doesn't belong in the article.--Gothemasticator 18:31, November 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm assuming you're referring to this edit, in which case I would point out that my version was no more speculative than the previous version, just rewritten and with a lot of fluff removed. I just take exception to reverting the entire edit, when really all that needs to be done is removal of the offending sentence. --Flower of Pock-Lips 18:37, November 30, 2010 (UTC)

Your username
Just curious, but is your username based on the screenshots I posted in Forum:Stupid courier: exploring the low-intelligence player character? -- 12:01, December 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually it is :P I had been meaning to create an account for a while, and after seeing that I knew I had a username. Your pictures have inspired me to try a playthrough with a low intelligence character! --Flower of Pock-Lips 12:31, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
You're doing a lot of great work! Thanks! Especially for working on getting navboxes placed. That's a big help.--Gothemasticator 14:04, December 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! It's nice to know that it's appreciated :) --Flower of Pock-Lips 14:16, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

Benny
Why remove the playing card image?--Gothemasticator 15:24, December 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't think it was necessary because the quote from the card was at the top of the page, and the page for the card was linked from the infobox. Also its removal would make it consistent with all the pages of characters who feature on playing cards. It can be re-added if it's a problem? --Flower of Pock-Lips 16:18, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

I think a picture of the card in a gallery is entirely appropriate for all the card-npc pages. Mainly because it is not obvious that the link in the infobox will yield a picture of the card.--Gothemasticator 16:44, December 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree. Images of the cards should be in the gallery section. Ausir(talk) 14:14, January 20, 2011 (UTC)

A final plan for Esteban
Why did you move Retrieve the Corpse of Ranger Morales to A Final Plan for Esteban? -- 14:23, December 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * That's the name given for the quest in the game guide. --Flower of Pock-Lips 14:25, December 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * OK. Please, add that to the edit description when you move pages, that way we know when we're looking back in the history that it's not move vandalism. I figured there was some source for that name, which is why I asked. -- 14:27, December 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh and keep up the good work getting those official names for unmarked quests. I had to guess on Barton the Fink based on the GECK (which told me Geckoman was the name of the quest). -- 14:31, December 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I think most of the official names are now listed on the quests template, now it's just a matter of finding those quests that are already documented and moving them to their official names, and then adding the rest. A lot of the time the quests are encounters ("We Must Stop Meeting Like This" seems to be encounters with Victor, for example), and stuff might be documented on the location or character pages but not on any dedicated pages. --Flower of Pock-Lips 14:45, December 4, 2010 (UTC)

ED-E
ED-E was not part of Van Buren, because the Enclave Eyebots didn't even exist back then. Any eyebots in VB were the Floating Eyes, which were not affiliated with the Enclave. Ausir(talk) 14:45, December 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * That's what I thought, until I saw this: "You successfully repair the damaged eyebot.". As far as I'm aware, floating eyes were never even colloquially referred to as eyebots? Chances are that Fallout 3's eyebots are a recycled concept from VB. --Flower of Pock-Lips 17:58, December 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Also I am the one who originally listed all of the All Roads items and characters, I didn't change ED-E to the eyebot article until recently. Mr. House is quite the robotics expert, etc also so the fact there is a similar but not identical (due to removal of personalizations such as bumper stickers, etc and artistic license taken with the cover) eyebot on the cover doesn't mean it's ED-E. Mictlantecuhtli 18:28, December 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * I did respond ^, twice now. Yes I will keep reverting it as the eyebot cannot be identified as ED-E. Mictlantecuhtli 18:48, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah I see your reply now. We know it is ED-E because ED-E is the only Duraframe Eyebot in existence (as far as we know). Even if it were not, it would be the only Duraframe Eyebot outside of Adams AFB. The artistic license used throughout All Roads actually works in favour of the assertion that ED-E is shown on the cover, as it provides a more-than-reasonable explanation (along with the fact that ED-E is seen at a distance) as for why the bumper stickers etc. Also there is zero evidence for House building an eyebot that just so happens to be of identical design to one produced on the other side of the country, and if you're basing your case on that then I see no reason why the note cannot be re-added. The robot is clearly meant to be ED-E - we do not say that the engraved cigarette lighter does not appear in All Roads because it has not been confirmed to by the developers, because it is unique and obviously the same item as the one that appears in-game. I am genuinely at a loss to understanding your point of view here. --Flower of Pock-Lips 19:46, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * "ED-E is the only Duraframe Eyebot in existence" - Untrue, the BoS build an army of them in one ending according to various articles. There is no established timeline for the cover of the book, only it's contents. Furthermore REPCONN designed the original eyebots, Mr. House could probably build one if he wanted to and the eyebot page has all the All Roads info. Without the bumper stickers you simply cannot say for sure it's ED-E and not a recreation, etc. ED-E has never visited New Vegas without the Courier, so it seems itself a stretch it'd be seen on the cover alone in the city. Mictlantecuhtli 19:51, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * So you are suggesting that the cover of All Roads is set after New Vegas, depicting an ending where ED-E was taken for an upgrade? I shouldn't have to point out how patently ridiculous that is, why would the artist make that decision, considering that the entire graphic novel takes place before New Vegas? Especially considering Chris Avellone specifically mentioned that he did not want to show the Courier because he wanted everything about the player character to be down to the player - why would the cover depict the outcome of one possible choice of many? And maybe REPCONN did design the original eyebots, but we know for a fact that the Duraframe ones are of Enclave design. And I'm sure House could build his own if he desired, except it would be eerily coincidental were it an exact copy of an Enclave design conceived 3000 miles away, not to mention the fact that as far as we know, House never built any eyebots - ED-E remains the only functioning Duraframe (and indeed, regular) eyebot in the entire Mojave. Maybe Benny's actually the Alien Captain and the entire game is a hallucination above Mothership Zeta, but I'm not going to add it to his article because it's got no evidence whatsoever to back it. And how do you know ED-E has never visited New Vegas? ED-E is seen flying towards the New Vegas skyline in the E3 trailer, and the best route to Navarro from Adams AFB via Primm goes straight through Vegas. --Flower of Pock-Lips 20:16, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * ED-E is not the only eyebot in the wasteland, I don't know why you feel the need to champion this so much. The eyebot simply cannot be identified as ED-E, according to the cover the NCR combat armor looks goofy. Like something out of a Ralph Bakshi 1970's film (see Wizards), the prostitutes are chunky (not outright fat but a 1920's sex idol appeal), most of the dogs are puppies (not fully grown) and all the same breed, etc. There is little variation in the people and objects, the only thing which makes the eybot noteworthy is, like the reinforced metal armor, it only appears once (even the NCR combat armor appears multiple times). Just chill out, this is not important and you cannot say for sure what the artist intended (eyebot or ED-E), so in other words it belongs where it is. The eyebot page. Mictlantecuhtli 20:28, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Really? Can you name another functioning eyebot in the Mojave? And I fail to see what NCR combat armour and prostitutes have to do with ED-E. If you're arguing that the lack of fidelity in the art makes us unable to identify ED-E, then that actually works against you since it explains the lack of bumper stickers on the robot on the cover. I'm going to add the note back onto the article, revert if you want but if you're going to do so, be prepared to put forward a convincing argument. --Flower of Pock-Lips 20:37, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * They reflect the art style, the eyebot easily could've had bumper stickers but it doesn't. Without those personalizations you cannot say for sure it's ED-E. It's on the eyebot page, and that's fine for everyone except you. Mictlantecuhtli 20:43, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Of course it's ED-E. There is literally not a single other NPC that it could possibly be! There are no other eyebots in the Mojave, there are probably no other Duraframe eyebots in existence. How could it not be ED-E? --Flower of Pock-Lips 20:49, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't presume to know what the artist intended, it's already mentioned that without the bumper stickers ED-E has a very generic appearance. The artist could've seen artwork of ED-E and thought all eyebots looked like that, you simply don't know. You're basing your observation off a stylized rendition of an eyebot (duraframe or not). If I were an artist that wanted ED-E to be easily recognizeable I would've used the incarnation from the game trailers (bumper stickers and all). DeadlyKris has been asked to review this discussion, an admin should be involved since a compromise cannot be reached (it doesn't belong on both pages). Mictlantecuhtli 21:03, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * It's incredible that you have managed to tell me not to presume to know the intentions of the artist and in the same breath construct an elaborate scenario in which it the artist did not know what an eyebot looked like. This is not the first time you have constructed such a scenario - above you twisted the lore of the Fallout world to create a world where House had his own eyebots, and again when you said that the cover could depict Vegas after the end of the game, again completely without evidence. You have said that ED-E could be made instantly recognisable when merely sentences earlier you defeated your own argument by saying ED-E has a very generic appearance. It's clear you're just clutching at straws here. The fact of the matter is, the eyebot portrayed on the cover is most definitely a Duraframe eyebot, not only do we not know of any other Duraframe eyebot in existence, we do not know of any regular eyebot in the entire Mojave. Therefore, it is entirely reasonable to conclude that the robot portrayed on the cover is ED-E. --Flower of Pock-Lips 21:19, December 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * Just chiming in here, but the appearances section is for games, not the books that are part of or related to the games. --Kingclyde 03:32, December 7, 2010 (UTC)

The ED-E disagreement is now over
Enough, you two. Below are the only two relevant statements y'all have made. The rest is all smoke blowing.
 * ...there is a similar but not identical (due to removal of personalizations such as bumper stickers, etc and artistic license taken with the cover) eyebot on the cover doesn't mean it's ED-E. Mictlantecuhtli 18:28, December 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * ED-E is the only Duraframe Eyebot in existence (as far as we know).--Flower of Pock-Lips 19:46, December 6, 2010 (UTC)

What the two statements above amount to is this: While it is likely that the floating robot on the cover of the comic is ED-E, there is no way to prove it. Since the comic robot lacks ED-E's identifying marks, it's identity remains a mystery. '''Take it out of the Appearances section. Don't add a note about the unproven likelihood to any article page.''' And, both of you, please find a way to settle your differences amicably. Technically you both have been engaging in edit-warring and should by all rights be temporarily blocked. But you're both better editors than that. Next time you have a long drawn-out disagreement, keep it on your talk pages and refrain from back-and-forth edits on the article pages. Think of the end user, please.--Gothemasticator 05:40, December 10, 2010 (UTC)

DLC speculation
Please stop adding speculative content about DLCs to articles.--Gothemasticator 01:04, December 10, 2010 (UTC)

Cut content
Nice work on that. Thanks!--Gothemasticator 17:03, December 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem! To be honest this website did most of the hard work, I just put the information in a Vault-friendly format. --Flower of Pock-Lips 14:35, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Reverting?
Why are you reverting my edit for "Honest Hearts" the page is a stub. Gheart 21:20, January 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I had meant to revert the removal of the sections listing Joshua Graham as a character and New Canaan as a location. The two are mentioned on graffiti with the filename "nvgraffitihonesthearts" in a folder "nvdlcgraffiti". --Flower of Pock-Lips 21:22, January 7, 2011 (UTC)

Alright
Thank you for explaining, I just had never heard of them Gheart 23:57, January 7, 2011 (UTC)

DLC pages
I protected these pages because of vandalism that would occur. I understand that you want to post your stuff on the page, but as of now, we don't have conclusive evidence about what is going to occur in the DLC. Sure Dead Money suggests things, but we don't know how it's going to play it just yet. Once we have more information, say like a teaser trailer or articles about it, I'll (or another admin will) drop the protection on the pages. TrailerParkApe MkII 22:34, January 10, 2011 (UTC)

Huh?
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/File:Sierra_Madre_celebrities.jpg

Is it a photograph, a screencap from the console or a rip? http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/0/08/Personal_Sig_Image.gif Tagaziel (call!) 21:33, January 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * Screencap from a YouTube video. The HD videos can be quite useful for getting images for console-only content, and the video walkthroughs are useful for finding information that slipped your mind when writing articles. --Flower of Pock-Lips 23:13, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

Poseidon
While most of your extensive changes to the page are just fine, I question the removal of the "Sources" section. That's valuable info which is now missing from the page.--65.26.180.182 14:58, January 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * Whoops. Forgot to log in. The above is me.--Gothemasticator 14:59, January 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * I removed the section because the first link was dead, the third source had no link provided and so wasn't useful if somebody wanted to read further or fact-check, and the second link only contained a small amount of energy about Agricola and Prometheus coal, and it hardly felt like it was worth keeping the entire section for that one link which itself only provided a small amount of information. --Flower of Pock-Lips 15:08, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

Future DLC
Please stop adding sentences that begin with "It is assumed...," or "It is thought/believed that...," etc. State info only (e.g. The DLC shelf has space for five snowglobes.), and let the reader draw their own conclusions. Thanks.--Gothemasticator 15:05, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

Gannon image
The current image is fine. It accurately represents the character and how he looks. Don't replace it with one that obscures him. http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/0/08/Personal_Sig_Image.gif Tagaziel (call!) 21:53, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

House Security
Done and done. http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/0/08/Personal_Sig_Image.gif Tagaziel (call!) 13:57, January 16, 2011 (UTC)

Courier
Thanks for the help on those final unmarked quests! --Jspoelstra 14:13, January 16, 2011 (UTC)

Ulysses
The only reason why I took it off was because of its speculation. Until we know for sure that he is going to take place there, then it'll be there. At this moment we know nothing of what is going to take place in what specific DLC. Things to Come! is something for the player to use their imagination with and try and figure out what's going to happen in future DLC; it doesn't say something like "Ulysses will be featured in this DLC and this one too, and there is going to be a big battle that will result in the death of one courier and 27 super mutants." There is nothing that is solid and concrete. I mean if it said something like what I put in quotations, then it would be absolutely okay to put up there because then we would know exactly what's going to happen. TrailerParkApe MkII 01:14, January 18, 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry but I have to interject here.


 * His role as a courier is not confirm, only implied. Where as his role as a companion is confirmed by one of the game creators.
 * Again no solid evidence that he knew him, again only implied by the use of the word courier and references that fit the description of Ulysses.
 * Again no solid evidence that the person mentioned (as not mentioned by name) by Christine, is the same person.
 * Most if not all information about Ulysses is implied by various mechanics and cleverly worded scripts to give the player the impression that it is solid evidence. Granted it is almost 99% cert that it is him, but there is that 1% chance where the devs may just turn around and say, we have messed with them enough, lets put a twist in the story and make the courier mentioned end up being Caesar (he does wear the attire of Caesar's Legion after all). ☣Avatar☣ 01:45, January 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh I agree it was worded better in the context of the actual flow of the page and how it read. The issue is in the wording does come across more as presenting the information as facts. The current version, although lacks the flow, does a better job of linking the separate facts from various sources as a speculative connection to Ulysses. This does allow the reader to then form there own view, also prevents "I told you so" if the devs do decide to throw in a plot twist. ☣Avatar☣ 20:37, January 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Very nice write up indeed, and no, defiantly nothing wrong with the amount of references used. ☣Avatar☣ 20:03, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

Benny
The in-game picture should be the main one in the infobox, not the one from the comic. Ausir(talk) 14:08, January 20, 2011 (UTC)

Yes Man
Again, why did you remove the in-game image of Yes Man as a Securitron, leaving on the face? I'm sorry but such changes are not good. Now I'll have to look through a lot of your edits to see if any more are as questionable as these. Ausir(talk) 14:21, January 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * Same with Victor. Ausir(talk) 14:29, January 20, 2011 (UTC)

As for Benny, while he is prominent in both, the wiki's (and the Fallout franchise's in general) primary focus are the Fallout games, while comics, while within our scope, are of secondary interest, so if an in-game image exists, it should be the preferred one for the infobox. And even if the comic was of primary interest, you shouldn't have entirely removed the in-game picture from the page. As for Yes Man and Victor, while they might look just like any other Securitron, I don't think a reader should have to visit the Securitron page in order to see how they (and not just their faces) look like. An image of Yes Man in the mainframe should be added, but somewhere further down the page, as it can be considered a spoiler. Ausir(talk) 15:29, January 20, 2011 (UTC)

"Minor" Edits
Please stop checking the "minor" box when making edits. Your edits are not minor.--Gothemasticator 14:30, January 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, it's a habit from editing other wikis. --Flower of Pock-Lips 15:01, January 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks.--Gothemasticator 16:09, January 20, 2011 (UTC)

Hoover Dam
I reverted your edits to the article. You removed the disambiguation link. You removed the gallery. Neither should have been removed. In addition, the prose you added is full of fluff and color which do not belong. "Exuberantly," "It is said," - all such language does not belong.--Gothemasticator 15:27, January 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * Similarly, I have reverted your most recent edits to the New Vegas article. Prose in articles should be encyclopedic, not literary. Facts, bland as they may be, are what belong in articles. Keep the color, commentary, and opinion out.--Gothemasticator 15:30, January 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * The work you put in is not lost. It is easily recoverable in the article history. I didn't and don't have the time today to go through and make the necessary changes. If you want to change the articles, it is up to you to make the changes appropriately. If you are taking prose verbatim from a document, that needs to be noted in the text. Otherwise, the text remains open to constant revision.--Gothemasticator 19:22, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Vegas and Hoover
I have reverted your edits again. At issue is the prosy and unencyclopedic language you employ. For example, "It is said that the road to Hell is paved with good intentions," "Luckily for Dodge...," "But not this time," "Fortunately, it hasn't come to that." It is not acceptable to introduce such changes and then add a cleanup tag, hoping others will do the editing work for you.

In addition, you continue to mark edits as "minor," when they are anything but.

Please keep your language simple, factual, and unadorned - as befits an encyclopedia article.--Gothemasticator 16:51, January 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * Above I do in fact mention that when taking language from source material, that language needs to be taken word-for-word and noted as such in the article. See, for example, the Fallout Bible pages, in which large sections of text are quoted. If you are merely taking information from source material, it still needs to be worded simply and factually in your paraphrase. Again, outside of direct quotes, language such as I have excerpted above is not acceptible in articles.--Gothemasticator 02:23, January 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * Just butting my head in again, but all that information in regards to Van Buren should really be contained in this page Hoover Dam (Van Buren). Then maybe a quick paragraph outlining the basics of the VB background, contained within the VB tags and then linking out to the main article using main in the FNV page. ☣Avatar☣ 03:02, January 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * To be honest, in those cases the VB information is not consisting of a large portion of the pages information (Joshua Graham is probably verging on the edge). In those cases it is perfectly find to include it in the page. But in the case of Hoover Dam, the VB info was amounting to the majority of the pages content and ended up littering the whole page with tags. In such cases where there is that much information, then it really is worthy of its own page. But that does not mean that there should be no information in regards to VB, as suggested a single paragraph and linking out to it, so a reader can choice whether to read more if they so wish is probably the best option. ☣Avatar☣ 20:21, January 24, 2011 (UTC)

Unmarked quests
Ok, you're right. I've been busy too much with unmarked quests lately I think. Jspoelstra 14:04, January 26, 2011 (UTC)

Ciphers
Hmmmm, I am very dubious of that actual page and actually being a challenge, since it triggers anyway (according to the page) in the ending slides. Dosnt sound like much of a challenge, do you have dead money to be able to confirm if it is true challenge/achievement or just some users own unmarked challenge. On a side not, the page is not really upcoming content, as the majority apart from half a line is all based on known content. ☣Avatar☣ 19:37, February 1, 2011 (UTC)


 * The issue as I see it, is that the majority of the pages content is VB. Now to a uninformed reader with that tag added, it could be misconstrued that VB is actually upcoming content. That tag should only really be used on pages where the majority of the content is relating to upcoming, but that's just my view on it. If you fell it is right, then by all means add it, personally I would add a note section referancing the link to the challenge and it being upcoming content. ☣Avatar☣ 19:51, February 1, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well the problem is that the majority of the content is already based of documentation (granted it isn't canon), but none the less it doesn't need to be confirmed. If it does appear, then like hoover dam, it will most likely be moved to a (Van Buren) name-space to preserve the integrity. Otherwise anons will start stripping out information that contradicts. Maybe what is required is a in page tag (sourcebox) that identifies upcoming content within a article, just like the cut content tags etc. ☣Avatar☣

Example:

Courier
I see no real problem. The capital c Courier is easily distinguished from courier as an occupation. Maybe you should substitute lowercase courier for messenger? http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/0/08/Personal_Sig_Image.gif Tagaziel (call!) 20:35, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Bottle caps
Just to let you know I am reverting that whole edit, don't worry it is only temporarily as the info is needed as per the project tag at the top of the page The Vault:Item page overhaul project. Once all the game page have been done then it will be reverted back. ☣Avatar☣ 18:54, February 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * On a side not, if you see in a page, dont delete it. This is because another page is transcluding that section into its own page. For example bottle cap was being transcluded into the currency page, under the bottle cap section. ☣Avatar☣ 21:06, February 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Item overview pages are not supposed to have images at the top, the images are to be next to the variants, as one single image cant really cover the whole topic. The perfect example is Laser rifle and Submachine gun. If you read The Vault:Item page overhaul project it explains most of it and has the layout guide lines. The only addition to the layout guidelines for overview pages that hasnt really been updated, is placing a single limited size image next to each variant. ☣Avatar☣ 19:31, February 3, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well that's a problem, because firstly that is user artwork, which is something we don't include in pages. Secondly that image is way of the mark. Check the Sunset Sarsaparilla bottle cap against the image you posted. The actual in-game bottle cap is all red with gold logo and not the other way around, and the logo is completely different. But in any case the current layout doesn't call for a single image on the overview page, if you wish to have the layout guidelines changed then it needs to be brought up in the forums so the whole community can decide, much as I have done with the creature layout guide that is presently being worked out. ☣Avatar☣ 19:48, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

Honest Hearts
Why did you remove the graffiti pic from the infobox?--Gothemasticator 16:22, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * The pic is germane, since it shows the source the article is using. Yes, it should be moved back.
 * Another topic - Were you the one who added the "Behind the scenes" section to the New Canaan page? If you were, what is your source for the films and books being the inspiration for the setting?--Gothemasticator 16:27, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * Regarding the Chairmen infobox image, please do not substitute images from the comic in any infobox, unless the article is about the comic. In-game pics, concept art pics, and even playing card pics from the games themselves are preferable to images from the comic. Our articles are primarily about the games, not the comic, as Ausir explained to you several messages above.--Gothemasticator 16:35, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

New Canaan
If your info for the inspiration is sourced, then please reference the source.--Gothemasticator 17:16, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

Comic pics
If an article is about game content, a pic from the comic should not be used in the infobox. I can't make it any clearer than that.--Gothemasticator 17:16, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I already specifically told you not to use images from the comic in the infobox (but leave them in the article) in game topics. Ausir(talk) 20:39, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

New Canaan
You've reverted the edit without providing source info. I'm removing it until you provide linked sources.--Gothemasticator 19:12, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

Fallout 4
"Likely" is not info, it is speculation. Do not readd those edits.--Gothemasticator 19:12, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

Warning
You are verging on behavior characterizable as "edit warring." If you continue to make changes you have been warned about without continuing to take part in discussion, you will be blocked.--Gothemasticator 19:12, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * The New Canaan edit needs to be sourced in the article.
 * Remove the word "likely" from any edits to the Fallout 4 info. Do keep info that is confirmed. Do not include info that we don't know. "TBA" is just fine until such information comes out.
 * --Gothemasticator 20:41, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

That's all speculation except the obvious ratings and genres. Tezzla Cannon 14:18, February 5, 2011 (UTC)

Sourcing
The "Behind the scenes" entry needs a footnote reference quoting the relevent text from the design article. We can't expect readers to follow a "See also" link and read the entire article and then realize it is also the source for the "Behind the scenes" section. Source and reference the entry properly, and it can stay. Until then, it appears as unsourced speculation and will get tampered with.--Gothemasticator 14:46, February 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * Because most "Behind the scenes" sections list allusions, there is no source. The player is expected to make the connection themselves. It's fun. Your edit, on the contrary, is stating factually the sources for inspiration for the developers. The info is not just out there for the player to find; it is stated by the devs in a document. Therefore, it needs to be sourced with a footnote reference. Yes, this is unlike the rest of the article - for which the Van Buren tags suffice.--Gothemasticator 17:56, February 5, 2011 (UTC)

Fancy-Schmancy Event Box Changes
Just wanna letcha know, your fancy things aren't working on Monobook. :P Nitty Tok. 16:04, February 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, they're still not quite working as I want them to be. I'll have another look tomorrow. --Flower of Pock-Lips 18:00, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Fallout 4
It's speculation. Tezzla Cannon 19:12, February 15, 2011 (UTC) Actually yes. I do know what it means, and yes, it is speculation. Bethesda could develop it or publish it. What they do is unconfirmed. I have read the article. If you had read the article you would have noticed that. You're the one who looks like a fool, not me. Tezzla Cannon 21:45, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

All of that revision is speculation. Also, nowhere did it say that Bethesda would make it. Tezzla Cannon 15:35, February 16, 2011 (UTC)

That was 2008. Things have changed since then. Tezzla Cannon 16:28, February 16, 2011 (UTC)

Interplay. Obsidian. Skyrim.

Also, it is speculation. You've been told by 3 admins already that all your edits on the page are speculation. Tezzla Cannon 17:18, February 16, 2011 (UTC)

Nope. One admin and two bureaucrats. Also, it is unknown if they are developing or publishing. Tezzla Cannon 18:09, February 16, 2011 (UTC)

Or they could be developing it. Noone knows. Tezzla Cannon 18:30, February 16, 2011 (UTC)

Also: Gothemasticator, TrailerParkApe, Porter21. Tezzla Cannon 18:35, February 16, 2011 (UTC)

No ZeniMax published it. Tezzla Cannon 18:45, February 16, 2011 (UTC)


 * Guys take it to the talk page for Fallout 4, where it can be properly discussed amongst all. ☣Avatar☣ 23:06, February 16, 2011 (UTC)

Timeline
Why would you remove this text from the beginning of the article?:
 * Much of the following text comes from the timeline in Fallout Bible 0, written by Chris Avellone, which in turn comes from the original Fallout timeline created by Brian Freyermuth and Scott Campbell. Some post-Fallout 1 information was laid out by Rob Hertenstein, and some dates were added by Chris Avellone himself. Additionally, this timeline includes all dates mentioned in Fallout, Fallout 2, Fallout 3, and Fallout: New Vegas holodisks, in the dialogues, and in old design documents published in the Fallout Bible, as well as Van Buren design documents.

Please put it back.--Gothemasticator 17:28, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed. This removal is totally unacceptable. I'm also reverting some of your edits to the Harold article. In the future, discuss extensive revisions of major articles like that on their talk page or in the forum first. Consider this another warning. Ausir(talk) 21:07, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * I decided to revert all of your edits to the Timeline article. Some of the changes were probably good, but there's too many bad additions/removals to sift through - e.g. adding dates information from the Jericho design document (and without sourcing it properly!), even though, unlike the New Canaan document, it was made completely inconsistent with canon by the mentions of New Canaan still existing in Fallout: New Vegas. Ausir(talk) 15:01, February 18, 2011 (UTC)

Drafts
Could you create drafts for article revisions in your user space (e.g. User:Flower of Pock-Lips/Timeline) rather than in the main article namespace please? Thanks. -- Porter21 (talk) 14:26, February 20, 2011 (UTC)

drafts
The <-- characters that Porter added and you deleted keep your subpages from being categorized as main articles. It'd be good to put them back in and to add them like he did in any further draft pages you create.--Gothemasticator 15:09, February 20, 2011 (UTC)

Gender
So, how did you decide the Chosen One is canonically male?--Gothemasticator 01:14, February 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * And I've just removed that sentence from the endings page. It was added by some guy recently, and not after discussion. It is my current understanding that the Bishop Child is intimated to be possibly the Chosen One's son. It is not clear to me that it is made at all certain. Please revert your gender-related changes to the Chosen One and Vault Dweller pages.--Gothemasticator 01:56, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

Great War
The image you added to Great War has nothing to do with it. It's the Megaton nuke from Fallout 3. Ausir(talk) 21:01, February 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not in the intro. It was originally released by Bethesda as a promotional screenshot before the game's release and was labeled as being the Megaton nuke. Ausir(talk) 00:07, February 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * They did use a nuke in the intro, but not this particular image. Ausir(talk) 00:13, February 24, 2011 (UTC)

Redlinks
I took your advice of making redlinks actual articles, so I created the Sierra Madre Gala Event. Just thought you would like to know. Kastera 01:50, February 24, 2011 (UTC)

South Vegas Ruins
Because if you walk around the wall for New Vegas, you will find that the ruins lay outside of New Vegas. They are the ruins of Las Vegas, much as the rest of the outlying area is. User Avatar talk.png 01:51, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

snowglobes
On the snow globe page it is listed that if JANE is killed you are unable to sell snowglobes in your invintory but some players my not know that if MR HOUSE is killed that Jane disapears. Sorry if Im be a pain.

Snowglobes
Because it is a overview page and not a item page, technically each Snowglobe should its own item page that follows the item layout guide. If you want a example of how it should be, see: Vault Boy bobblehead and Bobblehead - Strength etc. User Avatar talk.png 02:59, February 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * The difference is that bottle caps is a cross game overview. Where as snowglobes (and bobbleheads for that matter) are game overview pages, no different to weapons and such. If snowglobes are introduced into another game, then yes, it would then need to be changed to fit a cross game overview like bottlecaps. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 12:00, February 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * As I said, refer to the Vault Boy bobblehead for a layout guide to a single game overview page on such a subject matter (or any other overview page). You used the cross game template which is not required nor needed, and the overview page should provide a overview of the subject matter including the table information (which is what the reader wants). This is no different than any of the other item overview pages e.g. Fallout: New Vegas ammunition, Fallout: New Vegas armor and clothing etc. or even not item overview pages e.g Fallout: New Vegas perks, Fallout: New Vegas traits etc. Granted the individual images may not be required and can probably be removed. But to make this simple, a overview page should give a overview of information that affects all the items and a list of the items with basic information. Seriously I have no idea why you have a objection to providing information in such a manner to the general readership and changing something that is perfectly good. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 20:32, February 28, 2011 (UTC)

Mormon edit!
You put to much unesscery information on the page about the Church of latter day saints this is totaly unaceptable you removed all refrences to fallout mormonism due to fallouts divergence Some of the real mormon facts might not be canon. user:kaminoman


 * I have to agree, what is the relevance and need of none Fallout related and pre-divergence information. Again this Wiki is about Fallout and not its real world counter-parts. If anything a simple single sentence and link to the wikipedia page should be located under behind the scenes, to prevent confusion of mixing real world and Fallout world information.


 * This has nothing to do with Factions or beliefs, this is to do with Fallout related information. As you said, there is perfectly workable explanation on Wikipedia, so why do we also need it in a Fallout Wiki. The only information we need to include is Fallout related e.g. the post-divergence section, and any dissimilarity in the pre-divergence. Example would be the Enclave, which is a divergence of the pre-war USA goverment, but we do not list the information about the US government except for it dissimilarity between it and the real world counter part and that after the divergence. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 23:16, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

I've reverted your edits to the Mormon page. Only information relevent to the game is necessary. There is no call to replicate wikipedia. That's what links are for.--Gothemasticator 02:45, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * When you make several large-scale edits to a page, most of which are not acceptable, I will continue to revert the whole batch and explain what went wrong. It is up to you either discuss such large-scale changes first, or to do the detailed editing after the revert. I am not going to spend my time nitpicking through such edits.--Gothemasticator 21:49, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * I spend the effort, because you are a pretty good editor. But, given your propensity for making large-scale changes to lore-centric important articles, you could use some coaching about how to better approach such work. It is better for the wiki and for you if you redo your own work in light of such coaching, rather than continue to make large-scale changes that others need to check and revise. Being bold is a two-way street, as well.--Gothemasticator 00:19, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Remove the 911 video!
Like i said in my latest user page edit, the part where the people died wasn't funny. The rest of it was. Tezzla Cannon 21:38, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

I'm also really not bothered what people think about me about the vandalism highlights or my opinion in the console debate. Tezzla Cannon 21:39, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Because it screwed up the US economy, the US government itself, and that the rest of the innocent world who did nothing wrong but get attacked from America anyway get payback. Tezzla Cannon 21:41, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

I did in my post above, and i explained it quite clearly. Tezzla Cannon 21:52, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * This won't be an issue anymore, Flower. I'm sorry for not getting this done sooner. Nitty Tok. 22:06, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * The above was what made me ban him. I think it's terrible that kids that young can just blow off lives as being collateral damage or "payback".
 * Anyway, thanks for just plain getting back to me. I'm awful angry and somebody else needs to run the Vault at this point. :) Nitty Tok. 23:16, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Mojave Wasteland

 * → moved to Forum:Do the DLC's take place within the Mojave Wasteland?

Necropolis
I guess this is my first official introduction to you, Flower (for short) ;)

Now to my question: why did you revert my edit on Bakersfield in which I replaced File:Bakersfield.jpg with Fo1 Intro Bakersfield.jpg, one of much better quality and resolution]]? -- Ghouly89 (Talk) 02:21, March 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Excuse the discrepancy, the edit was made to Necropolis ;) -- Ghouly89 (Talk) 02:23, March 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * My goal in creating this image was to use the JPEG uber-compression distortion to, persay, smear the pixelation around. Though I love the artistic style of Fallout's 8-bit graphics, I feel everyone else on the wiki who is used to 1080i high-res renders doesn't carry the same appreciation. ;)


 * Now, my main problem with your image is the fact that taking screen captures directly from the game results in the 640x 480 dimensions. This, in my opinion, does not look good considering the actual movie file frames are 432x320 pixels. Thus, the game stretches the frame in a 3:2 ratio, which results in odd pixelation. This is something I can alter to my own ends, as I have all the source frames (which, all-in-all, amounts to somewhere around 30,000 images) from each and every cinematic movie. For my uploaded image, the ratio in size from the original frame is 2:1, which results in better quality.


 * Now, if you want me to upload the original frame with dimensions of 432x320 in a loss-less format like PNG, I would be willing to do this as well. :) -- Ghouly89 (Talk) 02:40, March 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Is this an acceptable image for your taste? ;) -- Ghouly89 (Talk) 03:08, March 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Good to know :) I'll be uploading a batch of improved renders with the same quality as the Bakersfield render now that I have a shortcut to doing so. -- Ghouly89 (Talk) 19:28, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

"Merge unopposed"
Your "merge" of Harold was "unopposed" only because I did not notice it. I still am not very fond of your rewrite and I have reverted it wholesale again. Do not put "merge" (actually rewrite) notices to your draft pages on articles. This is not what merge template is for. Ausir(talk) 05:21, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, sorry for that, it was probably more harsh than it should have been. I was just going to do my own, a bit less radical rewrite of the Harold article, although some of it based on your version. Still, it'll keep more of the original article than your rewrite. I was too busy lately, though, but I'll get to it soon. Ausir(talk) 00:38, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Couple of edits
The quote is based on behind the scenes information, so no it should not be the main quote for a page when others are available, especially in-universe quotes. Quotes based on behind the scenes info should be avoided if at all possible. As for the other one, I went off what your edit reason, now that you have explained it better I understand and fully agree. User Avatar talk.png 16:54, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Timeline again
Once again I noticed that you added dates that were left out for a reason. Sierra Depot GNN transcript is not a reliable source (it contradicts lots of stuff from the rest of the timeline) and dates from it generally should not be added. Ausir(talk) 08:39, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * And I already specifically told you not to add information from Van Buren that contradicts New Vegas (and even mentioned Caesar as an example), yet you did add the 2238 date for Caeasar. I'm really tempted to revert the whole damn thing wholesale again. Ausir(talk) 08:51, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Ending format
Hello Flower of Pock-Lips.

The ending model is also used in the Dean Domino, and I think is better, yours have only text and not a title that describes directly what action the player do for the ending. And please don't change mass true information about Elijah without write in the talk page. And also, keep the real Elijah head in the first image.

Good evening and see soon on The Vault. Itachou [~talk~] 20:43, March 10, 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree that my English is not the best there is, the problem is that, for example, your change on the Elijah page first, delete the part of Elijah felt the Brotherhood of Steel based on an in-game text says by Veronica.


 * Also, you remove the action is happening when the player enters the Sierra Madre until the arrival in the Sierra Madre Vault, explain me why? It's the same for the Dean Domino page. These information are true, I've checked myself, I know Fallout since 96 and I'm a huge fan of the universe, I'm not a kind of person to leave or write bad information.


 * Since you are a born English I guess you just correct the spelling, not to delete stupidly (just because is grammatically poor) something that some people, myself included, for example, is set to search for a moment and transcribe properly (with an English certainly not perfect but overall agreeable). For unencyclopedic, is your point of view, this is not mine.


 * I'll be clear, if I ever see you again delete true information (so you don't check before, this was the case for those I have cited), I banish you temporarily, like any vandalism. Don't take it personally, but to seek information, build and transcribe more or less correctly in English take me time (parce que comme vous l'avez vu je suis français, et donc quelques subtilités peuvent m'échapper vous m'voyez) and see all my time is delete in 5 seconds by someone gives me a pain in the ass.


 * I have nothing against you, and if you delete something that is not true that you check before it's all good. Well, nice day and goodbye. Itachou [~talk~] 12:57, March 11, 2011 (UTC)

Temporary ban
I warned you, you delete some real information of Elijah page, here are the proof of the veracity of informations:


 * The Brotherhood was doomed and save them:
 * A chance for him (and by extension the brotherhood) to begin again:
 * Find "one of the greatest treasures of the Old World":
 * He encounter Ulysses, but he didn't know him and what happened after:
 * Analysing The Cloud in the bunker before enter in the Sierra Madre itself:

I will temporarily ban you for 3 days for " removing content from pages ". If recurrence, it will be for one week, and if after you have not yet understood, the ban will be permanent.

Thank you to respect the rules and people here, is not a brothel. Good evening. Itachou [~talk~] 18:14, March 11, 2011 (UTC)


 * The problem is that I use the words actually spoken by the characters, which reinforces even more the text. You? You destroy all that by putting your own words. Here is Wikia not Wikipedia, we are not an encyclopedia formatted in one style of writing. Each Wiki have different style of editing that is not necessarily the same everywhere.


 * Again, your formatted version is sometimes not necessary and occasionally removes bits of text that should be kept, such as "Find one of the greatest treasures of the Old World". Tagaziel has a Certificate of Proficency in English, so if the text was poorly written or there was something changed, I think he would have done from the beginning.


 * In addition, I banished you because you have not answered my last message and that you edit the page without answering, this is a sign of disrespect, even more against an admin. Otherwise, if you want to try to remove me from my position as admin made. I'm an administrator for over 1 years now and I'm a great connoisseur of the Fallout universe. I think I don't fail in my duty to this Wiki.


 * The warning is still in rigor, if you change with the same way a page without reply, the ban will be one week. Good evening. Itachou [~talk~] 21:26, March 15, 2011 (UTC)


 * And stop removing the damn source of the quote. I don't care what you think, imply or assume the source is, having it leaves no doubt or miss-assumption by other readers where the quote comes from. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 22:23, March 15, 2011 (UTC)

Joshua Graham

 * → moved to Talk:Joshua Graham

Lonesome Road
Reverted your edit. Avellone's twitter is not really conclusive, let's keep it as the page for the add-on for now, and we'll see what the actual names of the locations are when it comes out. Ausir(talk) 18:53, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

Highwayman
The vehicle is a nod to the old game. Speculating that it is the same car and that the Chosen One himself drove it there is just that - speculation.--Gothemasticator 02:06, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

Biblical quotes
You've been warned to make clear the in-game source for biblical quotes. Blocked for another month for failure to follow clear direction from admins.--Gothemasticator 12:33, May 7, 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually, all I was doing was adding back a quote which was changed, as GhostAvatar pointed out, to one that had absolutely no relevance whatsoever to Fallout. My intention wasn't to "add" any quote, but to restore one that had sat there undisturbed through many revisions of the article. I noted this (as well as the quote's source) in my edit summary, so it's not like you don't know yourself that the quote is from the design document.
 * I find it disappointing that once again, rather than add attribution for the quote yourself, and despite knowing where it came from and its relevance, you chose to remove it, ironically restoring a quote that had no relevance (or source) in the process and leaving the page with no quote at all. You've done things like this before, but justified them by saying "It is better for the wiki and for [me] if [I] redo [my] own work" rather than have you fix any perceived problems yourself, but this is a bit difficult in this particular case since I have been blocked for a month.
 * Now, given your own admission above on this page that I am a "good editor", and my work on some of the Dead Money pages, will the wiki be better or worse off without me in the coming month, with all the new pages coming in from Honest Hearts? That is what you should be taking into consideration with your block, not whether or not you agree with GhostAvatar's bizarre attempt at removing all trace of the Bible from the Fallout world in order to prevent me from using Bible quotes that are deliberately referenced by developers in the design of elements from a DLC all about a branch of Christianity. --Flower of Pock-Lips 12:21, May 8, 2011 (UTC)


 * 1) I corrected the Bible page with the correct information. I also removed the irrelevant info that pertains to The Lone Wanderer's birth date, as that belongs to (and already is in) The Lone Wanderer's page. This isn't wiping out the information, it is giving a unopinionated facts as they are, no matter how you try skew the information, there is no know complete copy of the Bible, it is only seen thus far in remnants of verse.
 * 2) I would have wiped both quotations regardless of who put them there, as they where not properly attributed and therefore not complying with the vault policy, so you cant use that as a defence for your actions after being warned already about adding such quotes (even if restoring ones previously removed or changed). And attributing your source in the revision comments is not sufficient either, which you have also been told and warned about.
 * 3) Length of revisions and/or time on page means nothing if it is non-factual, by your logic if any kind of vandalism last for a period of time and/or revisions on a page, then it should stay. Sorry, but that is complete drivel.
 * 4) Telling someone to fix your mistakes/errors isn't going to hold weight either, it isn't are job to correct things for you. We are not here to hold your hand on every edit, you have been given ample opportunity and direction to resolve this yourself. Which means you have either made a choice to ignore it or are incapable of following such direction.
 * 5) Having recommendation of good edits does not absolve you of bad edits either, by your logic a Doctor should be able to get away with murder for all the lives they have saved, that is just poppycock.
 * 6) Holding your potential efforts on upcoming DLC content for ransom/bribe, that's kinda perfective really and has no relevance to this topic, I think we might just be able to manage without your help.
 * 7) In summary, if Gothemasticator hadn't of banned you, I would of. The ban stays and the next infraction on this matter will result in a permaban.
 * User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 21:23, May 8, 2011 (UTC)


 * The page never said previously said that there was any surviving copy of the Bible - but you inserted a sentence specifically about how there isn't any known copy in order to reinforce the viewpoint that you put forward on the Joshua Graham talk page - your motivation for that edit is so transparent I can barely believe that you thought you would get away with it.
 * It seems you are missing my point re: attribution. I do think attribution is necessary, but didn't think that me restoring a quote that was previously removed without explanation by an editor with a history of dubious edits would be construed as "adding" a quote, and would result in my ban. Anyway, my point is that wiping a quote because it has no attribution is ridiculous because you know its source, it would be far simpler and less destructive for the wiki for you to simply add attribution yourself. Now you've made the point that it's not your job to "hold my hand", and that I should be the one to add attribution - but that's a little difficult right now on account of me being blocked.
 * Your doctor analogy is deeply flawed. A doctor's job is to save lives, and to murder someone is inexcusable. We are talking about editing a wiki here. Again, I think you missed my point - I was merely demonstrating that I am not a troll or vandal, that I have the wiki's interests at heart, and that I feel that certain sysops on this site are acting in bad faith. On a similar note, I'm not holding anyone to ransom - I'm sure the wiki will do just fine without me. What I'm asking is for you to consider whether I have a net positive or negative influence on this wiki, and to take that into account when considering block lengths. Your threat of a permaban is a clear demonstration of your irrational contempt for me, when a ban of that length was not awarded to even Tezzla Cannon for refusing to remove that 9/11 video - and that was a user who, well, was Tezzla Cannon. You are overstepping your authority here, and if you can't deal with other editors without letting your feelings get in the way, then I would question the wisdom of granting you admin powers. --Flower of Pock-Lips 22:32, May 8, 2011 (UTC)


 * You may want to go back and recheck the edit I made, partically this part I removed in bold "James introduces his child to the quote and the Bible". Which implies there was a complete physical copy of the Bible present at this event, this fact was neither accurate nor concise in its previous revision and was edited as such to prevent further confusion. As for my motives, they are a lot clearer than you think, but not what you think, that is your own mind putting a twist on things to justify your own stance. I was not aware of the page or its content until you brought it to my attention, so thanks for that, if you know of any more misleading content please bring it to my attention and I will deal with it accordingly. But that is still irrelevant to the topic.
 * What I do find funny is the fact, that what you criticise Gothemasticator of doing (ie: removing one quote and replacing it with another of equally dubious nature, by undoing a edit and not actually fixing it), you do yourself and expect to be held unaccountable for such actions. It is this arrogance that you are right and be damn to all others, with such things as telling me not to remove quotes during the discussion, but you carry on adding them to pages, that will get you no where fast.
 * As for not being able to correct your mistake in the last edit, as said previously you have had ample opportunity in the past that has lead to this point, at no instance have you shown any improvement even when given a second opportunity by Ausir with your ban removal. And my doctor analogy is not flawed, a contributor should add value to the wiki, not disregard direction and throw out the policy when it best suits them. And representing information in a misleading light (or flavour as you like to put it) is doing that as such, and can be considered as devaluing the sites content and therefore vandalism. The fact that you have shown no capability or willingness to improve over this course of events, gives no weight to your future contribution being any different.
 * As for the length of the next ban, that is not irrational as you would like to perceive it. As said and reasoned above, you have shown no improvement on this subject. And if you re-read what I said, that judgement is for future infractions on this matter. Other infractions will be dealt with accordingly and appropriate measures taken depending on the infractions in question.
 * And finally with Tezzla, he was given a reprieve such as you have had already from Ausir, you are now way beyond the same point as that incident currently is. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 23:40, May 8, 2011 (UTC)


 * The edit you have specified in your comment (re: the Bible page), I do not have problems with. My problem is with the fact that you also added "No complete edition of the book is known to have survives in the wastelands" - unnecessary, as I said above, because its only purpose is to suggest that every single copy of the Bible was somehow destroyed. As for bringing things to your attention, M1911 pistol, Old World Blues and Lobotomite (Old World Blues) (at the time I opened this tab, but Ausir seems to have sorted that now) are all a mess right now. Gotta say, making all my edits through you as a proxy isn't a productive way for either of us to spend our time.
 * I think the best way of addressing my perceived arrogance would be to say that it is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. All of your interactions with me have been closed minded and on the basis that you and you alone are correct - your failure to acknowledge your error in the face of nigh-on incontrovertible proof in the Joshua Graham discussion is evidence of this, you would rather fabricate a ridiculous situation where the entire Bible is passed down via oral tradition than accept a far more likely one where a copy simply survived. It is this closed-mindedness, I think, which has been a major factor in things reaching this point.
 * You seriously don't see the difference between being a doctor and editing a wiki? The two situations aren't comparable because when you are a doctor, you are dealing with ethics, and you are trusted with human lives. I don't see whatsoever how adding flavour quotes to articles is representing information in a misleading light, it's more than a stretch to say that they count as vandalism, which according to the first online definition I could find is "willful wanton and malicious destruction of the property of others". What is detrimental to the wiki is first your insistence that you are in the right, followed with your reverting and banning of anyone who disagrees with you. You say I have shown no willingness or capability to improve, and yet a new quote sits on the Joshua Graham page, with attribution, as a result of discussion. Attempts to further improve the quote by me were met with your statement that you were bored of the discussion, and threats of a ban if I attempted to add any more quotes to pages. When I tried to add a quote to a page, you (fairly) challenged me to demonstrate how it was relevant to the Fallout universe. I did so, and you moved the goalposts again, removing it and saying it was a cultural reference because the Bible is not part of the Fallout universe (when I proved you wrong on this you would later say that this is not a point relevant to the issue, and then edited the Bible page to reflect your viewpoint), and that it belonged in the "behind the scenes" section (although you did not do this, once again removing information wholesale rather than improving the way that it is presented). The only reason the quote was added to the New Canaan page without attribution is because I thought that it was not unreasonable to simply restore what had been removed with no explanation (and I would have gladly added attribution if asked). Now how is any of that failure or unwillingness to improve? Because to me, if anyone seems like they are being stubborn and unreasonable, it's you.
 * One final point, about the permaban. The "reprieve" (as you put it) granted to me by Ausir is not comparable to that of Tezzla Cannon - Ausir believed that the ban length was too long for Tezzla, and so it was shortened from one year to one month. That is because Ausir seems to believe, as most who have experience editing wikis do, that no editor should ever be permanently excluded from being able to make a contribution to a wiki - which is exactly what you are threatening to do to me. On wikis I have previously edited, permabans were not even handed out to people who had no objective other than to troll and vandalise articles, let alone users have shown a willingness to actually contribute to the wiki - as I have. --Flower of Pock-Lips 23:10, May 9, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well I guess that settles that, then. Now can you unblock me now this whole silly argument is concluded? --Flower of Pock-Lips 17:01, May 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * Nope, cus it isn't about whether the bible exists, that was your whole premise. You was blocked for adding flavour quotes and not probably attributing them, and for adding your own style of interpretation instead of giving the direct text. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 17:28, May 14, 2011 (UTC)

I didn't block you because of the question concerning the bible's existence in the Fallout world. I blocked you because you repeatedly entered quotes without attributing them in-game. Just because the bible exists in-game does not give reason enough to quote it whenever it seems to you to fit. A hypothetical example of a fitting and properly attributed biblical quote would be: "|The Burned Man quoting the book of Jeremiah in Honest Hearts>" You can quote characters from the game, in-game notes and other texts, and even design documents - all of which need to be correctly attributed right there where the quote appears on the article page. But you cannot quote a book just because the book exists in the gameworld. I hope this clarifies things for you. The block stands.--Gothemasticator 20:37, May 14, 2011 (UTC)