User talk:Spyspotter/Archive α: Difference between revisions

About your editing of the Appendix:Metagame terminology article. Now, my involvement with this mess of an article has mainly consisted of cleaning up, but I do see a few issues with your revisions, and their edit summaries. [http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/w/index.php?title=Appendix:Metagame_terminology&diff=1918228&oldid=1878036 This revision] removes the "Goodstuff" section, with the explanation ''"removed foolish term. FYI, this is more commonly called a "powerhouse"."'' What matters here is whether this term is used among players, not whether it is "foolish". Your FYI-note is off the mark, as "powerhouse" is a general term used to describe any number of things considered strong, not at all a substitute for what the "goodstuff" term is meant to cover, as specified in its section entry (otherwise, try google.com). It may be foolish, I don't use it myself, but the only reason that would justify its removal is that the term did not at one point achieve notable usage in the fandom (which may be the case). This was apparently not your rationale for removing it, so I'm restoring it. [http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/w/index.php?title=Appendix:Metagame_terminology&diff=1923533&oldid=1918228 Your second revision] (''"Removed foolish/outdated/unused terms. Seriously, half this stuff isn't used in the metagame, and I know what's going on there. I will add more and remove more later."'') shows a lacking understanding of the purpose of the article; the article does not attempt to collect today's hottest strategy lingo, rather it provides explanations of terms that at one point or another in the history of the metagame saw notable usage among players. Again, "foolish" doesn't enter into it and "outdated" I just explained. "Unused" is a legitimate reason for removal, if it considers that the term may have been used significantly at an earlier time. Currently, most of the information you removed has been restored by users Turtwig-A and SnorlaxMonster, but I'll restore the rest, except for the "Atmacune" section, which I'm not going to defend, so you can remove any of these anew if you have a legitimate complaint. In [http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/w/index.php?title=Appendix:Metagame_terminology&diff=1923536&oldid=1923534 your third revision] you undo the changes of another user, which were similar to my intended changes, providing the explanation ''"I'm a top-level player, so I could be wrong about this. However, if you see anything that should be put back in, do it individually instead of undoing this entire edit. Some of these are just plain goofy."'' You are wrong about most of these, mistaking the purpose of the article, so it should rather be you who remove entries individually. Again, "goofy", like "foolish", is not relevant. If the fandom uses goofy/foolish terms, an article listing the terms used within the fandom will include goofy/foolish terms. Making an out-of-place statement praising yourself as "a top-level player" (like most metagame players believe themselves to be) also does little more than question/insult the hard work of others, and clearly backfires when it is apparent from your editing that you have not been one for huge parts of the history of the metagame, dismissing terms that have been very central as "foolish/outdated/unused". I'd prefer it if you do not make a face-saving retaliation after reading this, as I'm merely informing you of your mistakes, on a topic that isn't really a matter of opinion (article's subject matter). [[User:Yvnr|Yvnr]] ([[User talk:Yvnr|talk]]) 06:17, 22 June 2013 (UTC)