User talk:Edpurdom
Welcome/ Recent Edits
[edit]While I appreciate that your recent edits to Turning Point: Fall of Liberty and Never on These Shores were in good faith, I have already explained on the talk page of Turning Point that the two are simply not related in the first place. The other problem is that you fail to provide a source for your speculation, and so even if it were somehow true that the developers of the game used the book as an inspiration, it could not be added to the articles per policy. Unless you can provide a reliable and verifiable source, please do not readd the statements. In case you are unfamiliar with Wikipedia, I provide you with the following:
|
Response
[edit]Firstly, you have confirmed to me in your speech that you are new to Wikipedia, as otherwise you would know that I am simply maintaining the article as outlined in the policies. Secondly, the message on the article talk page would have been better suited on my talk page, since article TPs are for the benfit of the article, not discussions between users. Thirdly, yes, I do own the game, like it, and keep up the article about it, but my removal of your statements saying the book and game are related is justified by policy; I don't do it because of some kind of bias.
Also, if you have read the book, then good for you, you've done something I haven't (but I plan to buy the book eventually and read it myself, I am a fan of alternate history fiction). However, I ask how you can deceive yourself into thinking the book and game are related. I may have only read the synopsis on the website, but even that is enough to confirm that they are two separate entities, not based off one another. If they were, then the game's developers would have had to say so, otherwise it's plagiarism. No where have I read anything where the developers have explicitly stated that the game Turning Point: Fall of Liberty is based on Never on These Shores; if you can find acceptable proof (as defined in WP policy), then do so, prove that I am wrong, and readd the statements. It's that simple.
If you can't find proof, then you can't add the statements.
By the way, since you take your time in responding and I have little else to do at the moment, what do connections between the book and game have to do with people's perceptions? As far as I can see, if the they were connected then it wouldn't be harmful to either. Since the game did so badly among reviewers, it might actually hurt the reputation of the book rather than vice-versa. When it comes to editing on WP, I can like or dislike as many things as I want, but I have to remain neutral in my edits because whatever is on the article is what the public sees. WP can't allow an uncited and incorrect piece of info to be left in an article for any length of time, it must hold itself to high standards for people to trust it as reliable. -- Comandante {Talk} 20:53, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
- I'll assume for now that you intended nothing serious in altering my comments here, but just so you know, you're not supposed to be doing that either. I moved your comments from the game talk page and the comment above onto my own, but it looks like the issue is settled since you haven't responded. In any case, hopefully you have learned from your mistake and will become better acquainted with editing WP. -- Comandante {Talk} 00:34, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
- You clearly do not wish to heed common sense. I've broken down the facts and policies as far as I can, and yet you ignore them and leave me accusatorial responses. At least you haven't gone so far as to cause an edit war, which would be near-unforgivable here. In any case, you overlook that I have done nothing wrong. If you have a problem with my edits, then go ahead and report me, I have nothing to fear. Otherwise, please stop trying to provoke me; incivility will only end up turning against you. -- Comandante {Talk} 19:32, 14 April 2008 (UTC)