Please stop vandal edits or you will banned Please stop, your source does not say it —Unsigned comment by 107.152.44.132 (talk • contribs)
Warning
|
|
User warning: Three-Revert Rule.
You have come close to violating, or have already violated, the Three-Revert Rule. If you continue to edit-war, an administrator will block you from editing. Please reconsider your approach, and pay attention to the advice others provide. |
- Additionally, I have checked page 70 of Darth Plagueis and there is no info about Sienar there. Fan26 (Talk) 01:10, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for helping to stop vandal —Unsigned comment by 107.152.44.132 (talk • contribs)
- Perhaps there is a difference between paperback and hardcover pagination. It's in Chapter 6 anyway. Sienar is not yet CEO by the time Plagueis has the Subtext Mining people killed and goes to Naboo. Sienar is explicitly called "president and chief designer" in the sections referring to the bloat eel banquet (set around 90something BBY). By cross-referencing the pages I added in the references to my edit, you can see that Narro Sienar becomes CEO between 65 and 52 BBY. It is right there in the text. User 107.152.44.132 insists on the information being incorrect and doesn't seem to have checked the sources I provided.GoGo112233 (talk) 01:21, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Difference between Page 70 and 189 is definitely more than a "paperback and hardcover pagination." Please provide actual source next time instead of edit warring —Unsigned comment by 107.152.44.132 (talk • contribs)
- It's on page 70 of the hardcover. I added that to my edit. This IS the actual source that Narro Sienar was not CEO of the company in 65 BBY. If you can't see it, that is not my problem. Open the hardcover and look at the bottom part of the page. Page 189 establishes that Sienar was "managed to retain his position as chief designer". Again, I am entirely correct and you are free to check and see that I am correct. GoGo112233 (talk) 01:30, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- I don't have to read an entire novel just to prove you are incorrect. Please provide correct pages next time. Thanks —Unsigned comment by 107.152.44.132 (talk • contribs)
- You don't have to read the entire novel, you just have to read the pages I provided, which are correct. Every single reference I added I checked with correct page numbers in the hardcover edition. GoGo112233 (talk) 01:45, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- I don't have to read an entire novel just to prove you are incorrect. Please provide correct pages next time. Thanks —Unsigned comment by 107.152.44.132 (talk • contribs)
- It's on page 70 of the hardcover. I added that to my edit. This IS the actual source that Narro Sienar was not CEO of the company in 65 BBY. If you can't see it, that is not my problem. Open the hardcover and look at the bottom part of the page. Page 189 establishes that Sienar was "managed to retain his position as chief designer". Again, I am entirely correct and you are free to check and see that I am correct. GoGo112233 (talk) 01:30, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Difference between Page 70 and 189 is definitely more than a "paperback and hardcover pagination." Please provide actual source next time instead of edit warring —Unsigned comment by 107.152.44.132 (talk • contribs)
- Hi, just for future reference, it's best to note the chapter number in your edit summary because people own lots of various editions. Neither of you should be blaming each other of anything, and both of you would do well to look at our civility policy. If there's an editing dispute, rather than continuing to edit war from either side, you should avoid violating the three-revert-rule and leave a message on the talk page, or on the administrator's noticeboard, as a bit of patience goes a long way. This goes to both of you—rudeness is not what we tolerate here, regardless of who's right in a dispute, so to 107.152.44.132, the snark isn't appreciated. Regards, —spookywillowwtalk 01:38, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- I did leave a message on this user's talk page, informing him that he is engaged in maintaining incorrect information on this site. I checked that the information is correct, and he kept adding back the incorrect information. At which point I told him so in his talk page and was ignored. The chapter numbers are 6 and 15, but I assumed that with page numbers everyone could see I am correct more easily. I will do chapters next time. GoGo112233 (talk) 01:45, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for promising to showing the correct source next time. Good night —Unsigned comment by 107.152.44.132 (talk • contribs)
- You can check the book on GoogleBooks with the pages I provided and see for yourself they were correct the first time. I can show you how: go to "search inside this book". GoGo112233 (talk) 01:50, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- There is no shame in giving the wrong source by mistake and I'm sorry if I was rude. But again, ty for promising to do better in the future —Unsigned comment by 107.152.44.132 (talk • contribs)
- Every source I provided was correct. Again, go to GoogleBooks, find "Darth Plagueis", and search for "Narro". You will see pages 70, 93 and 185, EXACTLY as in the edit you reverted multiple times, leading to the correct information becoming excluded from the page. Or you can stay here and give me passive-agressive lip on this talk page to excuse your insistence that incorrect information stays up on Wookieepedia, suit yourself amigo. GoGo112233 (talk) 01:59, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- There is the mention on page 70, but there is also the one on 189, I somewhat assumed GoGo originally meant to say that instead Lewisr (talk) 02:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- You are correct about 189, but 185 explicitly states he had become CEO, therefore establishing a timeline of when he became CEO (between 65 and 54-52 BBY). That is why I added it as a source, it's when he's talking to the Order of the Canted Circle Grand Mage.GoGo112233 (talk) 02:03, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not your "amigo" and please keep this discussion civil. All I'm trying to say there's nothing wrong in doing something incorrectly by mistake like the one Lewisr said. And ty for being more careful about it in the future. I apologize if I offended you before, and have a good night —Unsigned comment by 207.244.89.161 (talk • contribs)
- "Pls stop vandal!!!111" and manically reverting entirely correct double checked on my part edits without checking that they are correct, leading to the page being locked, is civil behavior? Suit yourself, I guess. No offence taken on my part in any case. Good night amigo (it means friend). GoGo112233 (talk) 02:14, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- "Manically reverting" an edit with the wrong source is vandalism (please see the definition on the policy page) and the other people also removed your edit for the same reason, not just me. —Unsigned comment by 207.244.89.161 (talk • contribs)
- Every source for everything I added in the article is correct. If you can't check for yourself whether the edits are correct (which is understandable and fair), you are to let someone else check them instead of going into "PLZSTOPVANDAL" mode on information which is correct. Your behavior only ensures that incorrect information stays up on this site. The way to correctly deal with the situation is by checking to see if the edits are correct before reverting them, which you did not do. Had you done so, you would have seen that everything I added is from the sources I listed, down to the page, and you would not have reverted my edits. You are entirely in the wrong and responsible for correct information being excluded from the article on Narro Sienar for some reason I cannot even fathom. GoGo112233 (talk) 02:26, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- This is largely going nowhere at this point and not really helping anyone, so I think it's better to drop it Lewisr (talk) 02:28, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Again, everyone is free to check all the sources I added to the article and see that I added only correct information to the article. That is the topic here. Whether it's going somewhere or not is directly tied to people looking up the information and checking which version of the article reflects the sources. GoGo112233 (talk) 02:34, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- This is largely going nowhere at this point and not really helping anyone, so I think it's better to drop it Lewisr (talk) 02:28, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Please stop insulting. If your information was correct then it wouldn't be removed by others as well. End of story. Out of respect for Lewisr, I won't respond any further —Unsigned comment by 207.244.89.161 (talk • contribs)
- Read the book. There is information on Narro Sienar in the book that you took out of Wookieepedia. Whether others consented to that information being taken out of Wookieepedia is not relevant to whether the information in the book is there or not. Regardless of whether Wookieepedia wants to reflect that information on its own page, the information is in the book. I hope you see that there is no causal relation between the information being in the book and users on Wookieepedia assuming it to be correct or incorrect i.e. the information will not cease being in the book if Wookieepedia users exclude it from the article. If Wookieepedia doesn't want to reflect the correct information, then that is Wookeepedia's prerogative I guess. I thought differently, hence I added the correct information. For my trouble, I was dragged into an inconsequential spat. GoGo112233 (talk) 02:44, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, just give us a bit. We have a few editors looking into it, it just takes a bit, and patience is appreciated. Site practice is to keep the page in the state it was in prior to any additions being made in the case of a dispute of any kind; once we come up with an answer we'll be able to sort it. The only reason the page was protected was to stop unnecessary edit-warring clogging Special:RecentChanges without people being able to take the time to investigate properly.—spookywillowwtalk 02:48, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Fair enough, and understandable as a practice. I was here replying to User 107.152.44.132, hoping to convince him that he took out information I double checked to be correct from the article. If any editors need any clarification on the changes I made, I can provide them. GoGo112233 (talk) 02:55, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Every source for everything I added in the article is correct. If you can't check for yourself whether the edits are correct (which is understandable and fair), you are to let someone else check them instead of going into "PLZSTOPVANDAL" mode on information which is correct. Your behavior only ensures that incorrect information stays up on this site. The way to correctly deal with the situation is by checking to see if the edits are correct before reverting them, which you did not do. Had you done so, you would have seen that everything I added is from the sources I listed, down to the page, and you would not have reverted my edits. You are entirely in the wrong and responsible for correct information being excluded from the article on Narro Sienar for some reason I cannot even fathom. GoGo112233 (talk) 02:26, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not your "amigo" and please keep this discussion civil. All I'm trying to say there's nothing wrong in doing something incorrectly by mistake like the one Lewisr said. And ty for being more careful about it in the future. I apologize if I offended you before, and have a good night —Unsigned comment by 207.244.89.161 (talk • contribs)
- You are correct about 189, but 185 explicitly states he had become CEO, therefore establishing a timeline of when he became CEO (between 65 and 54-52 BBY). That is why I added it as a source, it's when he's talking to the Order of the Canted Circle Grand Mage.GoGo112233 (talk) 02:03, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- There is no shame in giving the wrong source by mistake and I'm sorry if I was rude. But again, ty for promising to do better in the future —Unsigned comment by 107.152.44.132 (talk • contribs)
- You can check the book on GoogleBooks with the pages I provided and see for yourself they were correct the first time. I can show you how: go to "search inside this book". GoGo112233 (talk) 01:50, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for promising to showing the correct source next time. Good night —Unsigned comment by 107.152.44.132 (talk • contribs)
- I did leave a message on this user's talk page, informing him that he is engaged in maintaining incorrect information on this site. I checked that the information is correct, and he kept adding back the incorrect information. At which point I told him so in his talk page and was ignored. The chapter numbers are 6 and 15, but I assumed that with page numbers everyone could see I am correct more easily. I will do chapters next time. GoGo112233 (talk) 01:45, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Snarking wasn't my intent when I said I can't be expected to check an entire novel, but I apoligize if it was rude. Thank you for stepping-in and removing those speculations —Unsigned comment by 107.152.44.132 (talk • contribs)
Restored edit
Heya, so just wanted to let you know I added the majority of the content back in this edit. Just a note for the future that if someone ever reverts in the future, as annoying as it may be (totally understand), just leave the page as it is and drop a message here or on our Discord server and someone will step in as a third party and handle it. Just from an administration standpoint—we always lock the page pre-revision, so it was not in any way endorsing the removal of the content, despite the claims above. Sorry you got dragged into all that; if you continue editing in the future, just escalate the issue to the admins' attention and it'll save you the trouble of replying to others and going through such in the future.
The one small thing that we do generally not add is vague-ish birth dates; 'marriageable' age is a bit ambiguous in Star Wars due to a wide variety of cultural practices, but pretty much everything else was added back.—spookywillowwtalk 03:25, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know. If I edit another page and I catch the attention of a careless and insistent reverter, I will take the issue to someone next time instead of reverting. I was just reading Plagueis, saw the error on the Tenebrous page and then noticed the Narro Sienar article was missing a lot of information. (There's still some info missing from New Essential Guide to Characters but I don't know where I have put that one to be honest, so I can't check.) I did look at the site's rules but understandably missed all sorts of nuances. As for the birthdate, I did not know. It is literally impossible for the guy to have been born any later than 125 BBY even if he had his daughter at 15 and married her off at 15, looking at the text of Plagueis, but I do understand how dates are best left out of a site where speculation can easily become set in stone (as for example on Tulak Hord's dates, which I noticed recently had been scrubbed of any more precise 5000-something speculative dates, 100% the right call in my opinion). GoGo112233 (talk) 03:37, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Totally understandable, thanks for being reasonable about the situation and hope to see you around more. It's pretty complex so feel free to ask any of the admins for help as listed here, along with most other relevant info about how to reach someone. And you're correct—that's why we leave dates out, because SW creators tend to copy our mistakes and make them canon, but then they aren't actually correct (sometimes), so we try to minimize that where we can.—spookywillowwtalk 03:43, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Appreciate the orientation, the site can seem byzantine and bewildering at first glance. The greatest struggle I guess is keeping it cool when someone shows up with a completely belligerent attitude, which I failed at. But now I know how it is best handled. GoGo112233 (talk) 03:58, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Totally understandable, thanks for being reasonable about the situation and hope to see you around more. It's pretty complex so feel free to ask any of the admins for help as listed here, along with most other relevant info about how to reach someone. And you're correct—that's why we leave dates out, because SW creators tend to copy our mistakes and make them canon, but then they aren't actually correct (sometimes), so we try to minimize that where we can.—spookywillowwtalk 03:43, 10 February 2024 (UTC)