Talk:Hall of Ex-Nations

FAC vote archived on 03:17, 14 February 2006 (GMT) due to 0/5/0 vote with nominator voting against. → Ceo \ squawk 03:17, 14 February 2006 (GMT) Ya know, the hall being what is is, most of the entries are blatantly biased, and tend to overinflate some minor trolls whom people have had nasty experiences with.

On the other hand, it's technically quoting the people who wrote these entries.

In this context, does the neutral stance policy apply?

--Quintucket 02:36, 19 Oct 2004 (GMT)

value of NPOV in Ex-Nations?

Goober got most of these from a Forum topic. If he puts in a link, it's a quoted source, not NPOV, at least not as I see it. I've posted several pieces with my personal style showing in spades. I don't think we're trying to be as dry as Wikipedia - we don't have to be all things to all people. It's important to archive the bad with the good when it comes to making NationStates memories.

Besides, they're not around to argue, are they?  :p → Frisbeeteria Θtalk 02:51, 19 Oct 2004 (GMT)

"I don't think we're trying to be as dry as Wikipedia - we don't have to be all things to all people." <--- Oh goodie so it's okay then that the article I'm witing on Marathon while dry is more than a little caustic then. >:}

I think that I may try to tone down some of the overstatements of importance in some cases and at some point if nobody minds though.

--Quintucket 02:59, 19 Oct 2004 (GMT)

Communist Mississippi

I've protected the page because of edit warring involving CM's player going nuts whenever somebody tries to change his version of his entry. As noted by myself in an edit summary, this page is for names and brief reasons for DEAT; more lengthy discussion of the nation should go to that nation's page. Therefore, irregardless of the merits of the case I feel that this is out of line. I'll review the actual merits of the case tomorrow. --Goobergunch|? 23:16, 13 Mar 2005 (GMT)

I already made it clear what compromise I'd accept, I posted it here, but it was edited away...

Fabusism2005 11:54 pm, March 13th, 2005 in the year of our Lord.

Here, I can accept it being edited to this.

Communist Mississippi/DecisiveAction/VoteEarly. Deleted in early March for reasons which are controversial and still in dispute. If you wish to learn more and decide for yourself, the relevant links are all centralized at this link. http://s7.invisionfree.com/LOEL/index.php?showtopic=51

Fabusism2005 1:09 am, March 14th, 2005 in the year of our Lord.

I think maybe it needs to still be associated with linking, eg: 'Deleted in early March for reasons concerning linking which are [...]'. And also, a few differences in the second sentence; maybe: "The decision has been challenged by the player in question, largely on his forum, here." As in its current form it does not really seem encylcopaedic to me. Rechze • (talk) 07:51, 14 Mar 2005 (GMT)

Given that NSwiki chronicles NationStates activity, not Invisionfree boards, I don't really think a single player's extremely POV viewpoint on his own website constitutes "an acceptable compromise" for the encyclopedia-of-record of NationStates. Also, since the poster states that he will violate NSwiki policy as often as it takes ( SERIOUSLY, THE TRUTH WILL PREVAIL IF THIS NEEDS TO BE EDITED BACK TO THE TRUTH 1,000 TIMES A DAY, GIVE IT UP!) to keep his POV viewpoint as the sole presented opinion, I see no reason to incorporate any portion of these into the wiki. Threats and bluster should be denied, not rewarded. → Fris Θtalk 12:53, 14 Mar 2005 (GMT)

Duly noted; my stance on this issue is now rather ambivalent. But if anything the link would probably only really be appropriate in an external links section on the main article, with a short description of what it is or without. Rechze • (talk) 14:00, 14 Mar 2005 (GMT)

I won't tolerate folks using the article on deletion as a way to poke jabs at me, "Moderates ACTED DECISIVELY" (an obvious play on my old name "Decisive Action" and I won't tolerate that), nor will I tolerate them slanting things their way. I've stated what a fair compromise would be. It can either be accepted or we can keep arguing until somebody thinks of something better. Period.

Fabusism2005 9:06 pm, March 15th, 2005 in the year of our Lord.

This wiki doesn't freaking work by "my way or the highway". Every other entry on this page is just a quick, occasionally witty summary of the reason for deletion. We're not going to be pointing people at links and say "Here's a big chunk of text, decide for yourself." See, I don't think of your entry as any different than any other entry on this page, and I'm highly disinclined to support making your entry on this page special. If people want more information, that's what the link to the nation article is for.--Goobergunch|? 02:27, 16 Mar 2005 (GMT)

I'm not going to tolerate somebody using the entry to 1) jab at me and 2) get an opion out against me. Either it will be truly objective or it will never cease to be edited to something totally I agree with. I can give some ground on it, but I'm not going to let my enemies beat me at everything. Not going to happen.

Fabusism2005 11:36 pm, March 15th, 2005 in the year of our Lord.

Here's a thought, quit treating him like he's something special (as the Hall shows, plenty of players have been deleted), and simply leave his entry as "Deleted for inappropriate links and content"? To do anything more would be to elevate him to the level of truly notorious players, like Textpeople, Sheol, Marathon, the National Stalinist Griefer or Eire Shamrock.

Hell, he's not even the level of C*nt Dickula... Hack 02:43, 18 Mar 2005 (GMT)

I wasn't deleted for inappropriate content and links, I was a victim of mod bias. I won't tolerate subjectiveness, particularly when it results in lies. Post the links to the relevant LOEL forum thread, and let the people decide for themselves!

Fabusism2005 2:02 am, March 18th, 2005 in the year of our Lord.

So, we are to ignore the combined opinion of everyone else that has posted here as "biased", and edit in as our sole source a single link to the viewpoint of a single user that is equally clearly "biased"? I don't think so.

I have pretty much stayed out of this discussion because of my unique status as sysop on NSwiki and also Moderator on NS. I was not present for the discussions on Communist Mississippi or Decisive Action, but I was present (or logged) for all IRC discussions concerning the deletion of VoteEarly. As a Forum Mod, I do not often contribute to the decisions of Game Mods, and I only made casual comments in this particular case. I am therefore the closest thing to a disinterested witness that is fully aware of the entire process.

In my role as NS Mod, I must state for the record that Hack's version is a much more accurate rendition than Fabusism2005's. The actual deletion was based on "inappropriate links and content". This is documented, identified, and verifiable. The accusation of mod bias is perceptual, unverifiable, and possibly libelous (slanderous? always get those two mixed up).

In my role as NSwiki sysop, I will state for the record that threats and bluster will not convince me to make any changes, whether I was part of the process or not. Had this been a roleplaying dispute that I had zero participation in, my answer would be identical. If this page is unprotected and an edit war by Fabusism2005 enuses, my suggestion will be a NSwiki blockage of account and/or IP address, just like for any other vandal. Continued shouting of "I will not tolerate this" will not alter that.

Furthermore, if Fabusism2005's only contribution to this talk page is to repeat over and over the same argument and bluster, I don't even see a need to wait for the edit war. It's obvious there is not going to be any movement here, and I don't see why this page should be held hostage by one angry member. I'm ready to block as soon as consensus (and that doesn't mean unanimous consent, Fabusism2005) is reached. → Fris Θtalk 18:55, 18 Mar 2005 (GMT)

Ummm, I just noticed some where it says the link could not be seen because of the [url]words[/url] tags, but with Mozilla Firefox, and I thought other browsers too, if you hover the cursor over the " words " in such a thing you'll see the link identified in the bottom bar of the browser, on most browsers, therefore putting it in plain site on your display. Just a technical matter I kind of noticed in passing. So yeah, you could actually see the link if you put your cursor over it, you didn't even need to click it that I know of -Komokom who still can't work out how to sign shit correct like.

-Sewards Folly- / Daily Bagel / The Ghosts of WWI / WMWWWW...

It should be noted that these are all the same person.

--65.185.33.55 05:05, 5 October 2005 (GMT)

List modifications

You may have noticed that some sections of the list have nation names in bold. That is because I am trying to make the list easier to read and easier to distinguish between nation names and its reasons for deletion. I am also trying to make the reasons for deletion a bit more clearer. The sections already under a new format are:

• Numerical or other non letter beginning
• Q
• X
• Z

--Constantina 19:48, 20 January 2006 (GMT)

But why are you making it less humorous? This page was lifted from an NS thread of the same name that was no longer being updated, and I've always been willing to look the other way for strict policy enforcement on this page. Enough of NS history is already gone; we don't need the humor of the past replaced with the po-faced seriousness of the present era. Also, that'll make people think it's official. --Goobergunch|? 12:30, 21 January 2006 (GMT)

Maybe I could reverse all those edits, but keep the bit where the entries have bold nation names? --Constantina 12:47, 21 January 2006 (GMT)

First of there is no need to change to to deleted for... there is already something saying they were deleted: the title of this article!! --swilatia 20:36, 17 March 2006 (GMT)

Guffingford Deletion Bonanza

On second thought, I gave the whole thing its own page. Just to keep the list as tidy as Switzerland. The Mystery Man 18:12, 15 March 2006 (GMT)

Eranmane\Poloz\Kekeria

Are my updates on Eranmane, Poloz, and Kekeria OK? ~ Eranmane

October3

Deleted for massive amounts of repeated spam, obscenity, trolling, offensive pictures, and just about every other offense in the book, IIRC. Hence my "victim of the global Mod Conspiracy" tagline. *shrug* Czardas 01:21, 20 June 2007 (GMT)

thought it was just an unfair deletion claim, I changed it to the real reason now John 02:37, 20 June 2007 (GMT)