Author Topic: Wheel of Fortune Home Game Page (Wikipedia) (Read 7373 times)

Steve Gavazzi · « **Reply #15 on:** September 14, 2006, 11:19:56 PM »

And I would like to thank Chad1m for completely counter-productively removing Dave's comment from that page. I don't give a damn about it violating Wikipedia policies; it was dumb.

dzinkin · « **Reply #16 on:** September 14, 2006, 11:37:32 PM »

[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'131579\' date=\'Sep 14 2006, 11:19 PM\']
And I would like to thank Chad1m for completely counter-productively removing Dave's comment from that page. I don't give a damn about it violating Wikipedia policies; it was dumb.
[/quote]
Indeed. Considering that he was the one who nominated the article for deletion, you'd think he'd have wanted assistance in the form of agreement from the guy who coined "Tomarkenite" in the first place.

Next time I'll wear a Mel or Shandi mask before I post.

clemon79 · « **Reply #17 on:** September 14, 2006, 11:38:25 PM »

[quote name=\'dzinkin\' post=\'131587\' date=\'Sep 14 2006, 08:37 PM\']
Indeed. Considering that he was the one who nominated the article for deletion, you'd think he'd have wanted assistance in the form of agreement from the guy who coined "Tomarkenite" in the first place.

Next time I'll wear a Mel or Shandi mask before I post.
[/quote]
I see your comment in the Discussion section, where it belongs. What am I missing?

Steve Gavazzi · « **Reply #18 on:** September 14, 2006, 11:40:35 PM »

Just check the actual article's edit history. You'll see it.

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #19 on:** September 14, 2006, 11:42:22 PM »

I'd love to hear Chad's reasoning for keeping the article around.

clemon79 · « **Reply #20 on:** September 14, 2006, 11:46:03 PM »

[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'131589\' date=\'Sep 14 2006, 08:40 PM\']
Just check the actual article's edit history. You'll see it.
[/quote]
Okay, but Chad isn't wrong, in all honesty.

He might not have realized it, but what David did was effectively vandalizing the article, right? The proper place to make that statement was in the comments, and while I've certainly criticized Wiki in the past, it seems the proper thing to do is to leave the old (and disputed) article in place (and by David altering the current one, didn't that also negate Chad's request to strike?) and see if the system works.

clemon79 · « **Reply #21 on:** September 14, 2006, 11:48:27 PM »

[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'131590\' date=\'Sep 14 2006, 08:42 PM\']
I'd love to hear Chad's reasoning for keeping the article around.
[/quote]
Huh?
HE'S the one who wants it gone, and you people editing it (yeah, you too) are hindering that from happening. Are you interested in working within the system or not?

dzinkin · « **Reply #22 on:** September 15, 2006, 12:12:11 AM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'131593\' date=\'Sep 14 2006, 11:48 PM\']
[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'131590\' date=\'Sep 14 2006, 08:42 PM\']
I'd love to hear Chad's reasoning for keeping the article around.
[/quote]
Huh?
HE originally moved that it be removed, YOU seconded him, and none of that would have changed if David (again, for well-meaning reasons) didn't edit the article.
[/quote]
Actually (EDIT: as you've since noted), Mark seconded it by replacing the article with a note to that effect. I see only a note that it should be edited if it is to be kept, not that editing it necessarily will keep it.

Quote

Are you interested in working within the system or not?

If there were a system there, I would be. When a Wikipedia admin can -- in violation of everything that Wikipedia claims to stand for -- enthusiastically back a "sockpuppetry" allegation that he knows is false, and completely ignore the actual evidence, there's no system, period.

I admit to making a mistake, but only in getting involved at all. I should have learned from the earlier mess that Wikipedia isn't worth my time. Let it go to hell (oh, wait, it's already there).

Bob Zager · « **Reply #23 on:** September 15, 2006, 11:41:50 AM »

I noticed the Wikipedia entry doesn't mention Pressman's "The Simpsons," edition of WOF.

Also, Pressman released the "Original" edition, as well as their second editon (2005), and "Simpsons" editions in collectible tin boxes.

chad1m · « **Reply #24 on:** September 15, 2006, 03:27:49 PM »

Okay, here's what I did, to avoid any confusion:

I've attempted to nominate the Wheel HG page for a merge within the main Wheel of Fortune page. It's truly where it belong, not a seperation.

For the Tomarkenite page, I did indeed nominate it for deletion as well as remove David's comment from the page. It was inadvertant vandalism, as I would assume he put it on the main page on accident rather than the talk page. Everything is in its proper place now and everything restored to the way I had intended it to be. Things are good now, and I'm just trying to work for the good of the game show representation of Wikipedia.

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #25 on:** September 15, 2006, 03:29:48 PM »

[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'131690\' date=\'Sep 15 2006, 02:27 PM\']
Everything is in its proper place now and everything restored to the way I had intended it to be. Things are good now, and I'm just trying to work for the good of the game show representation of Wikipedia.
[/quote]
I still don't see your point.
Won't the article still be deleted if the original author doesn't make changes? If so, why even bother leaving it up?

chad1m · « **Reply #26 on:** September 15, 2006, 03:31:07 PM »

Because normal users (aka non-administrators) cannot delete pages. It's assumed that the author won't make changes, and even if they do, the article is still a POS and I'll leave the deletion notice up or re-nominate it for deletion.

clemon79 · « **Reply #27 on:** September 15, 2006, 04:11:51 PM »

[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'131690\' date=\'Sep 15 2006, 12:27 PM\']
Everything is in its proper place now and everything restored to the way I had intended it to be. Things are good now, and I'm just trying to work for the good of the game show representation of Wikipedia.
[/quote]
And this is the correct way to do it, I think. There are two ways to do something like this: one is to go through the proper channels and follow the process, and the other is to vandalize the article and get into revision wars over it. If I wanted the respect of the Wiki admins, I know which one I would choose.

(Plus, it has the added advantage, if it DOESN'T work, you being able to go to the Wiki people and saying "Hey, I TRIED doing it your way, and it did no good.")

Good on ya for at least trying to play within the rules, Chad. I dunno that it'll work, but at least you're making a game effort.

chad1m · « **Reply #28 on:** September 23, 2006, 12:52:24 AM »

Thanks, Chris. I appreciate it that. Good news, I got Tomarkenite deleted. Now if I can figure a good way to merge home game articles.

dzinkin · « **Reply #29 on:** September 24, 2006, 01:43:14 AM »

[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'132431\' date=\'Sep 23 2006, 12:52 AM\']
Good news, I got Tomarkenite deleted.
[/quote]
Well done, sir! Thanks much.

Memo to anyone who feels compelled to write a Wikipedia entry on "Tomarkenite," "ZHIFOS," "Moronionaire," "GWPIMITFUBWF," "Winner's Circle of Death," "The $10,000 Wedgie," or any other term created by, allegedly created by, or strongly associated with me: please don't.