Talk:Cabal Online/Archives2008/October

Editing

I have been playing CABAL Online and I'm interested in helping to clean up this article. Is there anything I can help out with? Thanks. Gneral (talk) 13:58, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

edits to the article

I made some changes to this article over these few days. The following are some of the more major changes I made:

• 'you' into 3rd person pronous (e.g. the player etc.) This is in accordance to wikipedia's video games/Article guidelines.
• Removed some text in the character section, as it is too detailed. (e.g. "the easiest class to play...")
• repositioned and rewrote the text about weapon and armor.

There's still some aspects of the game which are not covered, like guilds and honour points. If you feel that you can help out in editing this article, please feel free to do so. Gneral (talk) 15:24, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

... Wait, what?

It says the result of the deletion discussion was delete, so why wasn't it deleted? Did I miss something? J. B. Dix (talk) 05:22, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

According to the archieved discussion, Cabal Online was deleted during October 2007 as it was still in closed beta and there was little content to write about it. Now that it has already been released, I guess it has been restored. Gneral (talk) 12:24, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Cabalwiki.com

One of the issues about this article is that it contains strategy guide material. Instead of copying all of such info to a gaming wiki, can I just use the existing information on cabalwiki.com and delete the offending info here? It seems to be a wikipedia for Cabal Online, and seems to be quite reliable too.

And can someone help me to cleanup this page too? No offence, but it looks like I'm the only one doing the work around here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gneral (talk • contribs) 15:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

To the person who keeps disagreeing with the statement about stacking buffs,

Note that the article is NOT the place for you to use profanity, nor is it the place for you to disapprove any statements written there. If you wish to argue about any statement, please question it over here; DO NOT edit the article just to air your opinions. Note: Wikipedia isn't a forum; it is an encycopedia; do you think that: "F*CK SH!T, IT DOESN'T EVEN STACK AT LVL 140 ..|.." is suitable in an encycopedia article?

2. If you feel that it really dosen't stack and that the statement is worng, at least provide some proof or evidence to support your claim, unlike what you've written in the article... Gneral (talk) 13:37, 30 October 2008 (UTC)