User talk:Cybergroover

Welcome!

Hello, Cybergroover, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Cailil ^talk 15:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism on Warhammer[edit]

Hi Cybergroover, thank you for contributing to the Warhammer article. I'm afraid I had to remove the section you added entitled criticism. What you added was unverified and unsourced. Wikipdia requires that all material (even that which is true) be referenced through reliable sources that can be verified. Material that is unsourced and material that is unverifiable will be considered original research and be removed. If you have a reliable source (forums, message boards etc don't count btw) for the information I removed please leave me a message here or on my talk page. Regards -Cailil ^talk 15:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response on my talk page Cybergroover and I hope you'll enjoy editting here at wikipedia. To answer your question about Warhammer there is a lot of unverifiable info on the page such as your example ("Most long term players feel that sixth was a more balanced edition of the game than previous incarnations") I'll be removing as much of that as I can. Sometimes editors have to make a judgement call about what info improves the encyclopedia and just needs a source (hence the "[citation needed]" tags), and info that is just unverifiable. Depending on the editor's inclination they might be a deletionist and just delete or an inclusionist and feel it better ask for a source. Personally I'm somewhere in between those categories but as somebody familiar with warhammer and the GW online community I've come across the criticisms that you posted and I know that the groups, forums and boards they come from aren't reliable sources so I can in good concience make the call that they are in wikipedia's terms unverifiable.

Another reason that I just removed the criticisms is becuase there has been (what is called on wikipedia) a povpush on Games Workshop articles to criticize the company and its products in a manner that is in a breach of wikipedia's policies on keeping neutral point of view in articles. I know that you added the criticism section to Warhammer in good faith so I'm in no way suggesting that you're involved in that povpush.

Your comments about gender roles in Japan are intersting and if you could find sources (other than anecdotal) for such info I think it would make a good addition to the Gender role article. If you have any other questions feel free to drop me a line. Regards -Cailil ^talk 14:02, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]