Actions

Talk

Difference between revisions of "Sonic 1: WTF LAME"

From Sonic Retro

(Page unprotected)
(Page unprotected)
Line 17: Line 17:
 
==Page unprotected==
 
==Page unprotected==
 
I unprotected the page last night. However, if I see any deliberate vandalism, the user who committed said vandalism will be suspended for 24 hours. ---[[User:GerbilSoft|GerbilSoft]] 14:49, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 
I unprotected the page last night. However, if I see any deliberate vandalism, the user who committed said vandalism will be suspended for 24 hours. ---[[User:GerbilSoft|GerbilSoft]] 14:49, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 +
:If that hack isn't notable, then how would this be notable on a wiki seeking legitimacy?--[[User:MathUser|MathUser]] 21:07, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:07, 14 August 2014

So are we allowing hacks that insult specific people now? I don't think a informational wiki is a place for a hack like this. It belongs on Sonic News Network or something. Hell, the joke is lost as the text scrolls to fast to read anyway. If this is allowed then will we allow people to post insults in peoples user pages?--MathUser 11:10, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Really, we all know the only reason you're bitching about this hack is because I was involved with it. I think we would all appreciate it if you quit this idiotic display of hating your fellow Retro members (and administrators) simply because they do stuff you don't like. ---GerbilSoft 22:10, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
I don't think we should be creating pages to insult people. It don't have a place on a informational wiki. You might say it's ok cause it's true but that could be abused by people adding "faggot" into homosexual or bisexual member pages. Or sexist people could go into womens profiles and add bitch, dike etc.--MathUser 22:22, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

The hack's valid, the page stays. End of discussion. GW agrees with me, for what it's worth. Overlord 00:39, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

If the hack were directed at staff I bet that'd be another story. ScarredSun would never let a page of SS fails exist on the wiki.--MathUser 02:24, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
We get it, you hate my work. Stop throwing a tantrum and vandalizing the wiki. ---GerbilSoft 02:37, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
If you read my posts you'll notice I never mentioned hating your work. Also, if you are developing a series of insult hacks why shouldn't there be a category for it? Granted it takes you 3-4 years to release a new one but it will fill up eventually if they are allowed.--MathUser 03:06, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
MathUser, please leave the page as is. The discussion is over. --Guess Who 03:11, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
He is not developing a series of insult hacks. This was made specifically in response to Wetflame being banned (which happened... two years ago? three?), because many of his posts were just huge walls of text that either said nothing or propelled his narcissism. The staff wholeheartedly agreed with the thing at the time. There is no issue here; there is no plan to make a hack that attacks you, there is no plan to make a hack that attacks that one other news site, there is no plan at all. We're done here. - Andlabs 03:12, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Well, I gotta say one thing. The article shouldn't have a protected template and the stub template at the same time. The protected template states you cannot edit the page while the stub template asks you to edit it and even has a link to the edit page which will just lead to the source. If GerbilSoft insists on having a stub template on his page he should create a new template which don't reference editing the page. Obviously I can't cause I can't edit the page to put the template there anyway.--MathUser 03:42, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Page unprotected

I unprotected the page last night. However, if I see any deliberate vandalism, the user who committed said vandalism will be suspended for 24 hours. ---GerbilSoft 14:49, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

If that hack isn't notable, then how would this be notable on a wiki seeking legitimacy?--MathUser 21:07, 14 August 2014 (UTC)