Hello there! We are conducting a survey to better understand the user experience in making a first edit. If you have ever made an edit on Gamepedia, please fill out the survey. Thank you!

User talk:Fojar38

From Wowpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to Wowpedia!

Hello, Fojar38, and welcome to Wowpedia, the Warcraft wiki! Thank you for your contributions, and we heartily encourage you to continue contributing!

Some links you may find useful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wowpedian! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) as this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, or need help, just ask on the relevant talk page, or visit the site forums. Again, welcome! --PcjWowpedia wiki manager (TDrop me a line!C207,729 contributions and counting) 02:21, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit wars and Lordaeron

Fojar38, it is clear that you have very distinct views of what both the Horde and the Alliance are and are not. That is fine. What is not fine is the constant tweaking that you do to make pages share your views, and subsequent edit wars that your stubborn tweaking causes. Such obvious bias on so many pages with no-to-little citations to back up your interpretations can not and will not be tolerated. I previously did not care about, but was aware of, your behavior on other websites. Noting your increasingly poor behavior, I must note that I want none of that here. Compromises were previously tried, but it was clear that thing only thing good enough for you is getting your way entirely. This is a warning. Contribute more than your narrow views, or contribute them in a better manner, or do not contribute at all.--SWM2448 04:15, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Where did this come from? Where have I been making such edits? Things like the Capital City, Ruins of Lordaeron, and Kingdom of Lordaeron pages I've only made edits to according to the discussions and agreements that have been made regarding it. Shortly after Edge of Night came out there was discussion on how to treat pages that made reference to Lordaeron the Kingdom and it was agreed that they should be treated as the nation existed before its fall, with the Forsaken being distinct from that as far as WoWpedia is concerned. I'm baffled as to what you're referring to here, considering I don't do that much editing at all. Fojar38 (talk) 14:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
I do not see how the Lordaeron discussions that are going on justify your recent edits. Do you mind showing me the consensus that was reached and how it relates to your edits? Also, you edits were reverted, so some doubt seems to exist about what you see as discussed and done.--SWM2448 23:45, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
http://www.wowpedia.org/Talk:Lordaeron_(kingdom) and http://www.wowpedia.org/index.php?title=Forum:Lordaeron_of_the_Forsaken both (the latter more than the former admittedly) concluded the discussion with the resolution that Lordaeron and the Forsaken nation are separate entities (the Forsaken referring to their borders as Lordaeron is irrelevent. Blizzard themselves have said that the Kingdom of Lordaeron ended with the death of Terenas as the ascendence of the Scourge. Arthas continued to reference his borders as "Lordaeron" as well despite that.) Besides that, the Lordaeron and Capital City articles have already been split from their current iterations several months ago and edits since then have been made accordingly.
In addition, none of my recent edits have been reverted. An edit that someone else made referencing the Ruins of Lordaeron as a Forsaken city was reverted by Gourra however, and a minor change to the page by myself was also reverted, although a compromise seems to have been reached in that regard. None of the edits that I've made for some time have been particularly controversial as far as I am aware. Historically, the Kingdom of Lordaeron ended with its destruction at the hands of the Scourge in Blizzard's own words and nobody has yet to seriously contest that notion, with one exception seeming to have changed his mind. My "recent edits" involve emphasizing the split between Capital City and the Ruins of Lordaeron, which it doesn't look like you have a problem with either. If you still have a problem with my edits even with the new information I supplied with this post, could you please be more specific? Fojar38 (talk) 01:06, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
I'd like to request a report for bias button. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 20:02, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
The Lordaeron article is not biased, as it is about a kingdom that no longer exists. Its story finished in Warcraft 3: Reign of Chaos and the article in question is a historical article. What the Forsaken or the Scourge or the Scarlets or whoever consider themselves to be is irrelevant, and doesn't suddenly make Lordaeron historically neutral any more than Stormwind is historically neutral because it was occupied by Orcs in the Second War. Furthermore, stop trying to bypass the discussion process. Fojar38 (talk) 20:04, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
You want it as a zone right? Well there you go. It's contested. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 20:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
The territory that comprised the contested areas is on the Lordaeron continent page, not the Lordaeron Kingdom page. The Lordaeron Kingdom page is about a defunct political entity. It cannot be contested.Fojar38 (talk) 20:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Well if you believe such that way. It is a faction page. and should be changed to such. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 20:14, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
It's fine as a faction page. The faction ceased to exist in Warcraft 3 when Terenas was killed, and for its entire existance had been Alliance. Blizzard has been very clear on this. Fojar38 (talk) 20:27, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
I don't want either of you to revert anything more until this can be resolved, or I will ban both of you for a few days.--SWM2448 21:04, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Im not going to get myself banned over your mistakes. Go to the Lordaeron talk page. I want this over for good. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 21:23, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Remember the Three revert rule, BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, and a bit of the Wikiquette guideline.--SWM2448 21:25, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Now then. Please, give me one good reason that my changes to Capital City are wrong. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 05:21, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
For the same reason that the changes to the Kingdom of Lordaeron page were wrong. Capital City, like the Kingdom of Lordaeron, is destroyed and defunct. The Capital City page is a historical page, much like the Southshore and Taurajo pages are now historical pages. "Capital City" no longer exists. You can put that infobox on the Ruins of Lordaeron page and I wouldn't have a problem with it, as the Ruins of Lordaeron are what has been explicitly referenced in lore to be controlled by the Forsaken, not Capital City. Fojar38 (talk) 05:31, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
I must agree with Fojar in this. Also I was warned (by Coobra maybe), that this is the article about pre-wow. For post-wow there is ruins of Lordaeron, where the infobox you created fits perfectly.--Mordecay (talk) 15:17, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello.

Might I ask you a question? Must you undo everything in favor of your favorite faction without giving any thought? Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 02:20, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I have a counter-question. Why must you waste my time posting loaded questions on my talk page? Fojar38 (talk) 03:28, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
I am not attacking you in any way. But you've been honestly a pest to me lately. We need to come to some kind of agreement unless you want us both banned. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 20:45, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
The way to open dialogue isn't by posting loaded questions on my talk page. If you want to come to an agreement perhaps you should consider the fact that every time we've butted heads over something I've ended up being right, and that for the most part I leave your edits alone. Fojar38 (talk) 20:47, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
I could care less about the past we've had. Im willing to forgive and forget... I uphold any decisions made... but you...Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 20:49, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
The fact that you're completely unwilling to compromise in any way, shape, or form unless a mod comes in and MAKES you compromise says to me that you aren't actually interested in making articles truthful nor are you willing to see things from the perspective of others or take into account precedent in your decisions. Fojar38 (talk) 20:52, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
I could say the same about you. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 20:53, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
So far, I've been correct about in every disagreement that we've had, from Khadgar to Lordaeron to the Church of the Holy Light. I don't compromise because I barely ever take issue with your edits unless there's something obviously wrong with them, and then you draw the process out over a matter of days until a mod comes in and tells you to cut it out. There isn't much room to compromise when you're talking about raw facts. Fojar38 (talk) 20:57, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
We will see then. Until then I want it listed as neutral, by you. Unless you give me specific evidence of Alliance control. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 20:59, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
A [15] Hero's Call: Redridge Mountains! has Varian Wrynn calling Redridge Alliance territory outright. There's your proof. Fojar38 (talk) 21:02, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Where? Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 21:04, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
"I have here a report from Watch Captain Parker of Redridge Mountains, one of our territories east of Elwynn Forest." From Varian Wrynn. It's Alliance territory. Fojar38 (talk) 21:06, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Not according to game mechanics. Which is what this should have been based on the WHOLE TIME. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 21:08, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Not only does that not invalidate the proof that I've provided, but again, gameplay mechanics are still on my side due to the fact that the Horde has no quests or other gameplay relevance in the region. Fojar38 (talk) 21:12, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

For the last time. Contested in game. Goodbye. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 21:17, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Final Conversation

All you've done since I met you is cause me trouble. You've proved not just to me but a pest to others. If I could have it my way you would be gone and some others agree. I however would like to give you another chance before I begin anything. You can thank me later. If you want to prove you worth then I recommend you make little to no edits involving the Alliance. It gives people the wrong idea. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 22:36, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you can't handle someone contesting your edits and telling you that you're wrong. But that doesn't change the facts here. Again, I have no problem with the vast majority of your edits. But you're so unwilling to admit any wrongdoing whenever you're taken to task over a bad edit that you made that you really don't leave me any choice other than taking a hardline stance. Fojar38 (talk) 22:38, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Neither of you are all bad, but you both have your flaws, and this needs to stop.--SWM2448 22:42, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
If he stays away from my work. I'll gladly avoid him. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 22:48, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
If your work isn't inaccurate, redundant, or pointless I'll have no reason to intervene. Fojar38 (talk) 01:07, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
I don't trust you. But by the looks of it there's no choice in my end. I forgive you and im hoping you will do the same. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 01:25, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Enough

You are both blocked from editing for three days. After this suspension, you will stop bickering or I will suspend you again for a longer period. To not be punished for MoneygruberTheGoblin's actions, discuss any further changes on talk pages upon your return, with citations, and actually wait for a consensus.--SWM2448 21:33, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested territories

I noticed that you added this note to a number of alliance low-level zones. I have two problems with the phrasing:

  • The note suggests that the motivation is "to allow for both factions to have the same number of PvP territories." As factions do not actually have the same number of PvP territories, I'm assuming this motivation is simply made up.
  • "Like Duskwood, Horde players will not be flagged upon entering Redridge Mountains." This sentence makes no sense to me -- on PvP realms, players of both factions would be flagged for PvP upon entering a Contested territory.

If these observations are correct, the note is a somewhat lousy explanation of PvP mechanics. In which case, it would probably be better to remove it from the articles in question and use the (new) |territory= parameter of {{Infobox zone}} to indicate the zone's PvP status instead. — foxlit (talk) 01:39, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

THANK YOU. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 01:50, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Redridge and Duskwood are unique though, in that although they're clearly Alliance territory, on PvP servers neither faction is autoflagged upon entering. However, calling them "sanctuaries" feels disingenuous. Fojar38 (talk) 02:15, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Calling them "sanctuaries" is not so much disingenuous as simply wrong -- PvP combat is certainly not disabled in those zones. "Neither faction is autoflagged upon entering" is also wrong -- both factions are flagged for PvP upon entering Redridge Mountains on PvP realms.
I think you're conflating the PvP classification of a zone in WoW with the lore concept of territory ownership or control. There's no reason to equate or contrast the two -- zone PvP status is a purely gameplay mechanic, implying nothing about who actually controls or owns the zone. Because of this, I don't think it is necessary to point out that a particular zone, despite its contested classification, is actually controlled by the Alliance/Horde as far as the story/lore is concerned. It would be better to incorporate the lore information into the article text without making incorrect statements about PvP mechanics. — foxlit (talk) 14:21, 4 April 2012 (UTC)