Talk:Nadeshot/Archive 1

Archive 1

Early Improvements

I have made several grammar edits as well as tidied up the structure. I have added some uncited references at the bottom and it would be useful if someone could cite these in relevant places. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrkingpenguin (talk • contribs) 20:16, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

I have improved and added to some facts on the black ops 1 season, I have also created a new topic for the black ops 1 season and will now improve the mw2 season howeverlittle knowledge i do know a bit to add. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beast01998 (talk • contribs) 20:38, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi dude theres another MW2 event that I'm going to add i found it searching for results, also check your twitter need to say what we're going to do.. Also put them in bold as it shows stages of career. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beast01998 (talk • contribs) 21:20, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi dude, also I think I know how to upload the picture however it will have to be in 4 days time because you have to have 10 edits and four days passed i've done 4 edits but not 10 days but I seen you joined in 2012 so could you do it you'll need to get a picture and then press button next to l;ink in edit tools when next to image then you'll have to save it and then go and upload the pciture by saving and then clicking on it and saying upload then upload the correct file! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beast01998 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

I have added a significant amount regarding new tabs. Also, I have cited the most important things, but the article is stil not finished and needs more inline citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrkingpenguin (talk • contribs) 16:47, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

The Controversy page is biased in favor of Haag, please rewrite. I removed rivalry as it adds nothing, and never barred im from tournaments or championships. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CoDRRuS (talk • contribs) 21:25, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Mass blanking

Discuss here the mass blanking of the article for whatever reason. Ging287 (talk) 21:39, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 'Rivalry section'

Generally, although I first disagreed with the anon IP editor at first. As I see it and as I read it, it is incredibly poorly sourced (only one source, and it never even mentions the 'rivalry'. I've seen addendums by anonymous IP editors, but since the majority of it is so poorly sourced, I can't confirm nor deny it. If there are no sources to be found, WP:DUE comes into concern as well as WP:V. There are no reliable sources, and I challenge it as the statusquo on this article. I propose that it be deleted. Ging287 (talk) 21:59, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

@Mrkingpenguin, Ethoxi, Two kinds of pork, LuK3, Jim1138, CoDRRuS, and Beast01998:, would you mind participating in this discussion? I see it as quite important. Ging287 (talk) 22:35, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, basically it is a fact. There's not sources but it's just knowledge that king penguin is showing. Do not delete it until further comments but I do not believe it should be currently delete, it could be potentially re-written but not deleted. Beast01998 (talk) 15:48, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Rivalry section and vandalism

I have repaired the section (which had previously been the subject of vandalism), reducing the content and increasing the inline citations. There needs to be further sources added. It appears to have been a contentious issue among factions concerned with the subject of the page. I have neutralized what was required. I propose that it this folio is acceptable to the standards required. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrkingpenguin (talk • contribs) 22:31, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

The main source of the rivalry section is a single source which mentions no rivalry at all. It seems to be ripe with original research. Also note that unreliably sourced content on BLP should be removed without discussion. Ging287 (talk) 22:34, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I propose narrowing the section down to the last paragraph. The subject of which is the only one which can really be said to be sourced well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrkingpenguin (talk • contribs) 22:36, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Could you put the paragraph in italics here (along with the sources) so I can better figure out what you're proposing to keep? Ging287 (talk) 22:39, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

--CoDRRuS (talk) 22:43, 8 April 2014 (UTC)Should be removed entirely IMO, and the controvery section is lacking. There is one sourceless mentin against NaDe, even though I included this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvcaMwLPTqU Though not peer reviewed (lol) it is still a source/evidence.

Haag and Patrick Price (colloquially known by his gaming handle: 'ACHES') have had one of the longest-running rivalries in modern eSports. Their most recent tournament meeting was in the Winners Bracket Final of the Call of Duty World Championships (Team complexity versus Team Optic Gaming), where Haag and Price performed exceptionally; Price and his team narrowly triumphed winning 3-2.

Haag's rivalry with Quebec native, Raymond Lussier (also colloquially known by his gaming handle: 'Rambo'). Their most recent tournament meeting was in the Loser's Bracket Final of the Call of Duty World Championships (Team Enyus vs. Team Optic Gaming), where both players performed well, however Lussier and his team triumphed overall, winning the best of 5 series 3-1. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrkingpenguin (talk • contribs) 22:41, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

References

(edit conflict × 2) I would have to agree with Mrkingpenguin. The "Rivalry" section relies heavily on three citations. Two of those citations can be considered unreliable. I say we remove the whole section and re-write the information that is based on reliable sources to another section (or subsection). (By the way, here is the old revision before the vandalism). -- LuK3 (Talk) 22:43, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I think that's a reasonable revision. However, as I said before, there doesn't seem to be any reliable sources A wikia is not a valid source. http://www.redbull.com/us/en/esports/stories/1331642598476/optic-takes-third-place-at-call-of-duty-championship Report redbull is a valid source for the win, but doesn't document the rivalry. WP:BLPSOURCES states that poorly sourced mentions on living people should be removed immediately. Unless there is a reliable source documenting the rivalry, it should be removed. Ging287 (talk) 22:46, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Luke, I suggest we keep only the record of results. Other rivalries on sports pages ( [1] ) mention solely the record of results. And the most recent meeting is sourced well by the red bull article. I propose keeping my revised edit. --Mrkingpenguin (talk) 22:49, 8 April 2014 (UTC)mkp

I would be perfectly content with that. Anybody disagree? Ging287 (talk) 22:50, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I would further propose locking the page after the changes have been made. It has seen much vandalism of recent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrkingpenguin (talk • contribs) 22:52, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

You're free to post a request at requests for page protection. However, note that TheMesquito already put in a request for full page protection due to the recent content dispute with the IP editor. So I'm not sure if they'll grant the request. Ging287 (talk) 22:55, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

@Mrkingpenguin:, what's your burden of proof for including the rivalry section? The bit about the winning score is the only reliably sourced thing there. To claim they're long standing rivals, spouting a wikia link and another wikia link doesn't meet the standard for WP:BLPSOURCES Ging287 (talk) 23:02, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Seriously guys, this is edit warring, stop. Reach a consensus here, remove the section if that is decided. All that is happening now is edit warring and is disruptive. TheMesquito (talk) 23:37, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

The majority of people who continue to remove the text are people who have not edited the talk page as of yet. Ging287 (talk) 23:39, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikis are not reliable sources per WP:RS so until better sources can be found, this section should be removed per BLP, it's a simple as that.--ukexpat (talk) 00:33, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

I agree, wiki cites should be avoided WP:SELFPUBLISH especially for BLP. Jim1138 (talk) 00:48, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

So is there a consensus to remove the content? Ging287 (talk) 02:43, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi guys, this is Ricoh06, basically when it was originally made and I posted it to reddit it got a lot of trolls, who vandalised it and a Wikipedia moderator made it a protected article but I was chatting to him about it was far from finished so he lifted spit and didn't appear to put another protected article on it. However if we need I can contact him about only letting certain users to make changes to the pages the thing is even with semi protected articles your going to need a higher rated wiki rank basically to change it so it's not an option for most people who have a knowledge of him so it's not the best option unless a moderator can make a whitelist where either one of whitelist guys can request to have someone added... Beast01998 (talk) 15:48, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles are not owned by anyone. No one can exclusively take ownership or them. That being said, articles are only protected at Requests for page protection and only in the cases of persistent vandalism/edit warring and content dispute. Ging287 (talk) 15:53, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm going to apply for semi protection so that anyine who's account is older than 4 days and has made 10 edits can edit the page which allows for us to update the page like i did for cod champs and regionals for pal owns and also for people like king penguin to continue improving the written quality of the article... It means that trolls will have to be serious to get their way.. Beast01998 (talk) 15:59, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Pages are not protected pre-emptively, so it would be declined. Ging287 (talk) 16:05, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes you have to apply for a page protection unless a moderator decides to protect the page. But if you go to page protection information it says you can request and then if you lick the you make a post using a code with all the information in and then they will review it... However at the end of the day this has happened both times after it has been posted to reddit so I don't think it can be posted to the reddit without some haters coming and changing things. Beast01998 (talk) 16:10, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

The article has been placed on a list which is pending for protection, I have requested for semi-protection on a permanent basis where accounts older than 10 days and have 10 edits will be able to edit the page. This should cut down on the number of IP trolls while maintaining our accessibility to edit the article for the better. Beast01998 (talk) 16:18, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Refining and citing, response to validity threat

Additional sources have been added and grammar and syntax errors corrected. The problem of latent vandalism still persists. The fact that the subject is a winner of an X-Games gold medal has been cited and certainly warrants the existence of this page.

Mrkingpenguin (talk) 22:10, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Further Citations have been added and improved, image also added to infobox.

--Mrkingpenguin (talk) 18:22, 28 June 2014 (UTC)Mrkingpenguin

Date of birth

Is his date of birth in a source somewhere? It's not in the New York Times article cited currently. —C.Fred (talk) 20:06, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Vandalism issues and further refining

Although this page has improved dramatically in terms of appropriate prose, citing work, and neutrality, there still remains a vandalism problem. The log shows numerous instances of mass deletions or the addition of malicious content. Ways to combat this have been discussed, but I think a ban on semi-protection IP editing would be the best way to go.

Mrkingpenguin (talk) 17:40, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

I think the issue is the exhaustive biography that is merely justified for a young esports player, this article requires some skimming --Chewbakadog (talk) 11:46, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Semi protection

Seeing as nearly every day somebody is vandalizing the page, this page should probably get semi-protected.--Prisencolinensinainciusol (talk) 21:56, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 April 2015

Optic Nadeshot was a very good gamer even at a young age he was helping his team out almost always dropping nukes and winning. 204.10.219.40 (talk) 16:57, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 17:19, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 May 2015

It is requested that the grammatically mistaken "an" be replaced with "a" preceding the mentioning of the MLG XGames gold medal victory. The original statement in the heading paragraph of the article currently reads as: "Haag is [AN] Major League Gaming (MLG) X Games 2014 gold medalist and 2011 Call of Duty XP World Champion, winning Best e-sports player at The Game Awards 2014." Capitalized and bracketed is the grammatical error (Haag is AN Major League Gaming... as opposed to Haag is A Major League Gaming). I'm sure my formatting is awful but I tried my best to comply with your guidelines whose efficiency I applaud. Cjaybo (talk) 04:52, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Done Stickee (talk) 05:11, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Career winnings

It says his career winnings are 1 million but the graph shows his top prize was 100k and the others combiner are no where near 900k — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.196.84.66 (talk) 04:01, 26 June 2015‎ (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2016

Please put at the top of the article "Matthew Haag and Jenna Ezrik are in the 'Friend Zone' thank you! OpTc NaDeSHoT (talk) 19:22, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Not done: Would need sources but it's not really notable anyway EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 19:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2016

Fauzanhotelsix (talk) 13:59, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 15:18, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Jenna and NADESHOT are dating

The are soooo dating Uravgconsumer (talk) 03:49, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2017

Nadeshot is not longer apart of the Redbull team and has now partnered with GFuel. Jeter87456 (talk) 01:59, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 09:12, 16 January 2017 (UTC)