What happened to the DBZ Wiki article?

Xyex · Post by **Xyex** » Wed Nov 14, 2007 1:03 am

So, the article has, again, been reverted. Apparently wasn't Sesshomaru as I'd thought but DBZROCKS who had done the reverts. And I would report this as vandalism if I thought anyone there actually cared but after my current debate with a Wiki admin on the article's talk page I've lost all faith in the higher ups of the site having any sort of sound judgement capabilities.

Post by **SaiyaJedi** » Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:15 am

Xyex wrote:So, the article has, again, been reverted. Apparently wasn't Sesshomaru as I'd thought but DBZROCKS who had done the reverts. And I would report this as vandalism if I thought anyone there actually cared but after my current debate with a Wiki admin on the article's talk page I've lost all faith in the higher ups of the site having any sort of sound judgement capabilities.

The two of them appear to be in league; they also seem to have a warped perspective of the intent of Wikipedia's guidelines. They may be following the letter, but certainly not the spirit in which they were written. (In Wiki parlance, this is known as "WikiLawyering".

It's my general philosophy that an article is better with good information and some "citation needed" tags than precious little information that's well-cited. Of course, the ideal is lots of good information that's well-substantiated, but it's no good to completely gut an article just because you're too lazy to check the facts yourself. A good WikiProject editor would know this, and try to fix the citations, rather than going around deleting content like a madman.

In closing, both "Sesshomaru" and "DBZROCKS" need to calm down and consider whether their edits are actually beneficial to the pages they're redacting.

]On an unrelated note, I can't get on the forum from my apartment for some reason, so I'm posting from work while the various teachers' committees hold their weekly meetings. Yay for an empty teachers' room?

Onikage725 · Post by **Onikage725** » Wed Nov 14, 2007 5:44 am

Xyex wrote:So, the article has, again, been reverted. Apparently wasn't Sesshomaru as I'd thought but DBZROCKS who had done the reverts. And I would report this as vandalism if I thought anyone there actually cared but after my current debate with a Wiki admin on the article's talk page I've lost all faith in the higher ups of the site having any sort of sound judgement capabilities.

The two of them and Ryu-chan seem to be a trio these days. What pisses me off is when this user "A Link to the Past" was trying to dub-ize the article to make it "easier to understand for the reader" *snicker*, and I told him that there were conflicting guidelines, and given the screwed nature of English DBZ that it was a good case for IAR, they had my back. And whn I told ALttP that conensus was against the proposal, they were all up on that.

But apparently, according to Sesshomaru's "there is no consensus, I am abiding by policy" comment, consensus only applies when it is in their favor...

Xyex, I support taking a more laid-back approach. Check out my last comment on the talk page. They appear to be winning the court of public opinion, which is bad for us. Sesshomaru in particular is being manipulative. He went to my talk page after I made legitimate edits, and pasted the standard sickeningly polite reprisal one gives a new user who screws up a page (urging me to keep my "experiments" in the sandbox). And when I told him to keep it off my talk page, he deleted it and called me incivil. And earlier a newer account (dunno if its a new editor) agreed with us and he blatantly accused him of being a meat or sockpuppet.

DemonKingPiccolo · Post by **DemonKingPiccolo** » Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:49 am

Onikage725 wrote:
Xyex wrote:So, the article has, again, been reverted. Apparently wasn't Sesshomaru as I'd thought but DBZROCKS who had done the reverts. And I would report this as vandalism if I thought anyone there actually cared but after my current debate with a Wiki admin on the article's talk page I've lost all faith in the higher ups of the site having any sort of sound judgement capabilities.
The two of them and Ryu-chan seem to be a trio these days. What pisses me off is when this user "A Link to the Past" was trying to dub-ize the article to make it "easier to understand for the reader"

Damn, that guy drove me up the f*ckin wall. "Dub- names because they are easier to understand for the reader". What a steamy pile of turd that was; to me, Freeza and Frieza are the same thing, the only thing weird is that they are spelled differently. I've always favored "Freeza" over "Frieza" anyway, it looks better.

For all of you that are unaware, we attempt to keep as close as we can to the original Japanese information as possible, meaning the stuff in the manga unless it is an anime series article (like Dragon Ball Z). We try to title the articles with the official name spellings in the English manga.

SaiyamanMS · Post by **SaiyamanMS** » Wed Nov 14, 2007 10:02 am

DemonKingPiccolo wrote:Freeza and Freeza are the same thing, the only thing weird is that they are spelled differently. I've always favored "Freeza" over "Freeza" anyway, it looks better.

... I love this forum's word filters.

Hero 004 · Post by **Hero 004** » Wed Nov 14, 2007 10:17 am

Onikage725 wrote:
Hero 004 wrote:
Also, in the "action figure" article some guy with a Zarbon fettish...
Oh dear God, I thought he was long gone...

Me too, he got banned from editing from what I gather, but he's not using the name "Zarrbon" this time; just a number. It's clearly him with the same reasonless arguments on why Zarbon of all things should be on the page.

Xyex · Post by **Xyex** » Wed Nov 14, 2007 5:14 pm

He went to my talk page after I made legitimate edits, and pasted the standard sickeningly polite reprisal one gives a new user who screws up a page (urging me to keep my "experiments" in the sandbox).

Yep, I got the same exact thing. And also, if you look at their talk pages as well as the one for "Sjones23" you get the distinct impression they think they own the entire DBZ section of Wiki. Here's what I mean:

Sesshomaru's Talk Page wrote:DBZ cruft war

Ugh sorry I took so long to respond. I have been swamped with reverting edits by other users. I have started a FAQ on the wikiproject page, just so we don't have to deal with this anymore. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 22:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

DBZ page, and others

Yes, Sesshomaru. I will keep an eye on the DB and DBGT pages as soon as possible. Greg Jones II 11:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Sjones23 Talk Page wrote:DBZ page, and others

Hey man, looks like we have a cruft war on our hands indeed. Can you help me keep an eye on DB and DBGT also? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:16, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

and

DBZROCKS Talk Page wrote:DBZ cruft war

Once more, they added original research to Dragon Ball Z. Think I'm at my 3rr limit, guess I'll back off until tomorrow, eh? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Very nice page you made (might give us some leverage), and thanks for the save earlier on DBZ. By the way, have fanboys added more cruft to the saga articles recently? Just say the word and I'll give you a hand. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:16, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Xyex (talk · contribs · page moves · block user · block log) poses a problem. He can add whatever junk he wants to the page, he'll get reverted eventually. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

So does it sound like they're trying to claim ownership to anyone else or is it just me? I don't think we'll get anywhere with the article until something can be done about at least Sesshomaru and DBZROCKS.

Carrie · Post by **Carrie** » Wed Nov 14, 2007 5:29 pm

This is why Wikipedia doesn't work with fandoms. These guys sound like the type who post spam on youtube for the 'lulz'. Not the "Repost this in 100 more videos in 10 seconds or no one will love you!" type, but the "I hate you, I hate the anime you like!" type.

Onikage725 · Post by **Onikage725** » Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:42 pm

It's ridiculous, and Sesshomaru has already been caught in a previous argument schemeing to get another user banned for disagreeing with him. Hell, the guy he was arguing with was my number one headache, but plotting for removal over a good faith based edititorial conflict is ridiculous.

EDIT: Xyex, I backed you up again, though I'll probably get yelled at. I wonder if we can request our own mediator. This SJP seems to be clearly on Sessh and Co.'s side.

From Talk Page

I personally feel that I can understand Xyex's frustration. Maybe people don't realize this, but the "corporate" speak (i.e. so-called polite chastising) can come off as condescending. In some cases hypocritical. One example is when I made an edit and was told to experiment in the sandbox. How is that assuming good faith? That's the standard bit of text often quoted to IP addresses who mess up articles out of ignorance or inexperience, not something one would use as part of an editorial disagreement. Another example, SJP, would be how you're coming off. This is an observation, not an attack, but what you just said to Xyex seems to be "if you don't change your tune, then you need to go away. Thanks! " But what is odd is that this has gone on both sides. One user was basically accused of being a sockpuppet simply for being new and disagreeing with the "blanket deletion" camp. I was told an edit I made was "ridiculous." We've been called "fanboys" who simply want "their cruft back" here and on various talk pages, despite stating numerous times that this isn't our intent and we just want to discuss which info is in question before deleting ALL of it and leaving only a selection of lists that go against format policy. One user has said in discussion elsewhere about this dispute that "Xyex poses a problem" and that his edits are "junk." At one point I was asked sarcastically if I'd read a previous discussion that the user knew I had read , as we had interacted in said discussion. We face sarcasm, derision, and dismissal here, on our talk pages, and behind our backs, and no one else seems to give a damn. Yet the minute we reciprocate, the incivility card drops real fast. Frankly, it is a little one-sided. Onikage725 01:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Xyex · Post by **Xyex** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:19 am

I don't think it's so much as being on their side as being too lazy to look into matters beyond seeing me calling them out on their trying run the article on their own. SJP's responded to you and I've responded to him but this still isn't getting us anywhere. If it wasn't November and I wasn't in the middle of doing NaNoWriMo I'd get the original article, add in all the sources, and then make that the new version now. But as it stands I wont be able to do that until at least December and it'd probably take a few days to get the sources and trim up the page.

veshira · Post by **veshira** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:28 pm

Gagagagah... good luck guys. I really wish I could help, but I don't understand wikipedia, and I don't have the time to learn. @_@; (Besides, my knowledge of DB is mostly Funimation dub/podcast-based.)

Onikage725 · Post by **Onikage725** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:11 pm

Apparently we aren't allowed to source the Daizenshuu (so says the council of 3) because it isn't in English. Even though Wikipedia rules say that while english sources are preferable, in their absence non-english sources are ok.

And we can't do anything... why? The damned DUB. Every single time I or anyone tries to talk to an admin, they see "Dragon ball," think of what they may know from Cartoon Network, snort in derision, and dismiss the whole issue.

Thanos6 · Post by **Thanos6** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:56 pm

Onikage725 wrote:Apparently we aren't allowed to source the Daizenshuu (so says the council of 3) because it isn't in English. Even though Wikipedia rules say that while english sources are preferable, in their absence non-english sources are ok.

Have you pointed this out to them? What do the morons say?

Xyex · Post by **Xyex** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 8:48 pm

Hopefully now that we've got 3 more people backing us SJP will realize that it is Sesshomaru and DBZROCKS that are the actual source of the problem here. But this is really getting absurd. Something tells me that even if we had Toriayama's own words, on his own site, in English, as sources for all the information Sesshomaru would still find some excuse to nix it all.

SonEric84 · Post by **SonEric84** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 9:01 pm

Xyex wrote:Hopefully now that we've got 3 more people backing us SJP will realize that it is Sesshomaru and DBZROCKS that are the actual source of the problem here. But this is really getting absurd. Something tells me that even if we had Toriayama's own words, on his own site, in English, as sources for all the information Sesshomaru would still find some excuse to nix it all.

Geez, they sound like the "phenomenols" of Wiki.

Contra Deus · Post by **Contra Deus** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 10:15 pm

This just goes to show that although wikipedia may be a convenient, easy-to-access source of information, it is also rife with corruption and disorder.

There are some users that will flame you and try to get you banned simply for correcting obvious gramatical or spelling errors in an article.

I'd much sooner go to Daizenshuu for DB information as opposed to wikipedia.

Remix · Post by **Remix** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 10:21 pm

Why doesn't Daizex just create a Dragonball Wiki themeselves?

There are plenty of these sort of things around the net. DC Comics wiki, Marvel wiki, Star Wars wiki, etc. Do that instead.

http://www.wikia.com/

Onikage725 · Post by **Onikage725** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 11:01 pm

Xyex wrote:Hopefully now that we've got 3 more people backing us SJP will realize that it is Sesshomaru and DBZROCKS that are the actual source of the problem here. But this is really getting absurd. Something tells me that even if we had Toriayama's own words, on his own site, in English, as sources for all the information Sesshomaru would still find some excuse to nix it all.

I doubt it will matter. The article on the manga has been shortened beyone this one, and that article actually had plenty of meat to it that should be easy to source. Now they want to merge the Z article with the DB anime article. I honestly think we're dealing with 12-16 year olds who are playing this whole thing by ear.

To paraphrase Lewis Black-

The great thing about Wikipedia is that anyone can edit.
And the worst thing about Wikipedia is that anyone can edit!

My talk page response on this proposed merger-

I can neither support nor oppose this in good faith until this sourcing matter reaches a compromise. Dragon Ball's parent manga article, the only one of the lot that seemed to be halfway where it should be, is now precisely one opening paragraph and a quote. DBZ and GT are all but non-existent. I'm Surprised Dragon Ball (anime) hasn't been reduced to the same, since its bulk is simply on the US release and edits (which DBZROCKS just recently cited as one of his major problems with this article). The only article with anything really left is the one on the whole franchise. But given that it is in need of more sources, and the actions of late have been to disregard citation needed tags and talk page discussion in favor of deletion, I imagine that too will soon disappear. So I ask you three, what does it matter merging any of the articles if none of them say anything worthwhile to begin with? 0 x 2 or 3 still = 0.

Thanos6 · Post by **Thanos6** » Thu Nov 15, 2007 11:23 pm

Wow, nice rant. I can actually hear that whole quote in Black's voice.

Xyex · Post by **Xyex** » Fri Nov 16, 2007 1:33 am

I doubt it will matter. The article on the manga has been shortened beyone this one, and that article actually had plenty of meat to it that should be easy to source. Now they want to merge the Z article with the DB anime article. I honestly think we're dealing with 12-16 year olds who are playing this whole thing by ear.

Agreed. And as I just said on the talk page I have no faith that the same thing will not occur in the subsequent merged article. Sesshomaru is claiming WP:BOLD but that requires WP:BRD which he completely ignored. I don't see why he just wont continue to do so and act as though he owns the entire Dragonball section of Wiki.