User talk:关云 - Revision history

https://assassinscreedwiki.accesstheanimus.com/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=User_talk%3A%E5%85%B3%E4%BA%91 User talk:关云 - Revision history 2026-06-15T03:38:49Z Revision history for this page on the wiki MediaWiki 1.42.3 https://assassinscreedwiki.accesstheanimus.com/index.php?title=User_talk:%E5%85%B3%E4%BA%91&diff=734394&oldid=prev imported>Sol Pacificus at 21:07, 26 June 2024 2024-06-26T21:07:42Z

<p></p> <table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface"> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <tr class="diff-title" lang="en-GB"> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 23:07, 26 June 2024</td> </tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l15">Line 15:</td> <td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 15:</td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:So I got in touch with Master Sima Yi regarding this, and he informed me that the interview he had with Jeffrey Yohalem came after Loomer's podcast which can be found on YouTube. Because of this, it isn't in the actual video and cannot be cited. Well, technically speaking, personal interviews off-camera can be cited, but to keep things uncontroversial, it's probably best we don't do that. Given this, he has already removed the reference to Mao being a Templar on the page, and I have followed suit on the pages [[China]] and [[Shanghai Rite of the Templar Order]].</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:So I got in touch with Master Sima Yi regarding this, and he informed me that the interview he had with Jeffrey Yohalem came after Loomer's podcast which can be found on YouTube. Because of this, it isn't in the actual video and cannot be cited. Well, technically speaking, personal interviews off-camera can be cited, but to keep things uncontroversial, it's probably best we don't do that. Given this, he has already removed the reference to Mao being a Templar on the page, and I have followed suit on the pages [[China]] and [[Shanghai Rite of the Templar Order]].</div></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:On a site-note, think some of the information you added to the <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">[</del>Chinese Civil War<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">] </del>goes too much detail into things we only know from real-world history, and we try to minimize details like that, so I will have to review that article.</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:On a site-note, think some of the information you added to the Chinese Civil War goes too much detail into things we only know from real-world history, and we try to minimize details like that, so I will have to review that article.</div></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:Let me know if you have any other questions or concerns! [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 18:36, June 17, 2020 (UTC)</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:Let me know if you have any other questions or concerns! [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 18:36, June 17, 2020 (UTC)</div></td></tr> </table>

imported>Sol Pacificus https://assassinscreedwiki.accesstheanimus.com/index.php?title=User_talk:%E5%85%B3%E4%BA%91&diff=734393&oldid=prev imported>Soranin: /* Mao Zedong being a Templar */ 2024-06-26T20:18:08Z

<p><span dir="auto"><span class="autocomment">Mao Zedong being a Templar</span></span></p> <table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface"> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <tr class="diff-title" lang="en-GB"> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 22:18, 26 June 2024</td> </tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l15">Line 15:</td> <td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 15:</td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:So I got in touch with Master Sima Yi regarding this, and he informed me that the interview he had with Jeffrey Yohalem came after Loomer's podcast which can be found on YouTube. Because of this, it isn't in the actual video and cannot be cited. Well, technically speaking, personal interviews off-camera can be cited, but to keep things uncontroversial, it's probably best we don't do that. Given this, he has already removed the reference to Mao being a Templar on the page, and I have followed suit on the pages [[China]] and [[Shanghai Rite of the Templar Order]].</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:So I got in touch with Master Sima Yi regarding this, and he informed me that the interview he had with Jeffrey Yohalem came after Loomer's podcast which can be found on YouTube. Because of this, it isn't in the actual video and cannot be cited. Well, technically speaking, personal interviews off-camera can be cited, but to keep things uncontroversial, it's probably best we don't do that. Given this, he has already removed the reference to Mao being a Templar on the page, and I have followed suit on the pages [[China]] and [[Shanghai Rite of the Templar Order]].</div></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:On a site-note, think some of the information you added to the <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">[</del>[Chinese Civil War<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">]</del>] goes too much detail into things we only know from real-world history, and we try to minimize details like that, so I will have to review that article.</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:On a site-note, think some of the information you added to the [Chinese Civil War] goes too much detail into things we only know from real-world history, and we try to minimize details like that, so I will have to review that article.</div></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:Let me know if you have any other questions or concerns! [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 18:36, June 17, 2020 (UTC)</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:Let me know if you have any other questions or concerns! [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 18:36, June 17, 2020 (UTC)</div></td></tr> </table>

imported>Soranin https://assassinscreedwiki.accesstheanimus.com/index.php?title=User_talk:%E5%85%B3%E4%BA%91&diff=734392&oldid=prev imported>DarkFeather: /* Unacceptable Behavior */ new section 2020-11-29T07:55:37Z

<p><span dir="auto"><span class="autocomment">Unacceptable Behavior: </span> new section</span></p> <table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface"> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <tr class="diff-title" lang="en-GB"> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 09:55, 29 November 2020</td> </tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l200">Line 200:</td> <td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 200:</td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::When I re-read your messages twice then three and four times, I feel even more offended. Because you did not attack just me or my team. Your very last comments were heinous transgressions against the humanity of all victims of the PRC regime, past and present. To allege that I do not understand China where our views differ because I can actually recognize and empathize with these victims, knowing many personally, is an implicit and odious assault against them. In this way, you are hurting the feelings of Chinese people. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 07:04, 29 November 2020 (UTC)</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::When I re-read your messages twice then three and four times, I feel even more offended. Because you did not attack just me or my team. Your very last comments were heinous transgressions against the humanity of all victims of the PRC regime, past and present. To allege that I do not understand China where our views differ because I can actually recognize and empathize with these victims, knowing many personally, is an implicit and odious assault against them. In this way, you are hurting the feelings of Chinese people. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 07:04, 29 November 2020 (UTC)</div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">== Unacceptable Behavior ==</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">{{Template:Warn3}} </ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">We do take into account your feedback on reliable sourcing, but there is a certain level of respect and decorum necessary to free speech and open discussion that isn't present in your recent treatment of our editors. I am issuing you a 3-month ban for violations of sections 1, 3, 4, and 7 of [[Assassin%27s_Creed_Wiki:Community_guidelines|our community guidelines]]. </ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">* 1. 'Behave normally' -- have respect for others, even when you disagree, and confine your arguments to the points at hand. This is a basic requirement for open dialog. </ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">* 3. No real-world politics. No political party shall shape decisions made by this Wiki, as we represent the international community as a whole. </ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">* 4. Keep your responses in English for transparency. Attempting to mask personal attacks on a user in another language is not going to work. </ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">* 7. Ignorance of the rules is not a defense for violation -- we will not hear appeals based on ignorance of the above rules.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">We do not tolerate ad-hominem attacks, and real-world politics will not dictate how this particular Wiki archives content from Ubisoft. Please take this time to become familiar with our guidelines and evaluate how we arrived here.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">[[User:DarkFeather|<font color="#FFF">DarkFeather</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:DarkFeather|<font color="#AAA">Raven's Nest</font>]]</sup><sub>[[User:DarkFeather/Sandbox|<font color="#F00">Raven's Hunt</font>]]</sub> 07:55, 29 November 2020 (UTC)</ins></div></td></tr> </table>

imported>DarkFeather https://assassinscreedwiki.accesstheanimus.com/index.php?title=User_talk:%E5%85%B3%E4%BA%91&diff=734391&oldid=prev imported>Sol Pacificus: /* BtS of "Mao Zedong" on the Chinese Wiki */ 2020-11-29T07:44:35Z

<p><span dir="auto"><span class="autocomment">BtS of "Mao Zedong" on the Chinese Wiki</span></span></p> <table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface"> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <tr class="diff-title" lang="en-GB"> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 09:44, 29 November 2020</td> </tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l196">Line 196:</td> <td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 196:</td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::Behind the scenes/trivia sections are for sharing noteworthy and significant information about the development of the subject or clarifying confusion and inconsistencies over lore. Whether or not this is appropriate in the "behind the scenes" section of an article depends on how significant the information is in alleviating confusion and weighing it against our discomfort at sharing information that cannot be verified. For example, I myself have questioned if it would be useful to inform our readers that Yohalem, the writer behind the glyphs, had given us an answer many years ago clarifying what he meant. We specifically decided against even mentioning this to our BtS section because we respected your perspective that the interview being unverifiable makes it hard to accept as even noteworthy information while even our former head administrator, Master Sima Yi, thinks exactly the same as you on this matter.</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::Behind the scenes/trivia sections are for sharing noteworthy and significant information about the development of the subject or clarifying confusion and inconsistencies over lore. Whether or not this is appropriate in the "behind the scenes" section of an article depends on how significant the information is in alleviating confusion and weighing it against our discomfort at sharing information that cannot be verified. For example, I myself have questioned if it would be useful to inform our readers that Yohalem, the writer behind the glyphs, had given us an answer many years ago clarifying what he meant. We specifically decided against even mentioning this to our BtS section because we respected your perspective that the interview being unverifiable makes it hard to accept as even noteworthy information while even our former head administrator, Master Sima Yi, thinks exactly the same as you on this matter.</div></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></del></div></td><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-added"></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::How is it fair then, that when we have expressly decided against mentioning this even in our BtS section at all, per your wishes which we had agreed to not reluctantly but wholeheartedly, you have instead done so in the Chinese Wiki version of the article? You argue about proper sourcing and yet the other bullet points in that page also include your speculation and personal opinion about why Mao Zedong is appropriate as an Assassin, which explicitly violates Wikipedia standards against original research and speculation, and furthermore consists of no citations to speak of. You do not see our BtS section providing our own theories on this matter. You allude to the interview with Jeffrey Yohalem, yet deliberately obscure details of it, and also again, do not provide citations for the dispute. So, this is actually somewhat akin to the issue I mentioned above where users would include information drawn from Wikipedia then refuse to cite it because they are aware it is an unreliable source. Their prerogative is to either not bring up the information at all or if they bring it up, then be clear about it and cite the source which they fear is unreliable to be honest about their source! In this case, if you have decided to allude to the error that was made, it is your responsibility to be clear and transparent about the details involved ''and'' cite the sources of that error which you do not believe. If you refuse to do so, then it is your duty to remove the account entirely.</del></div></td><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-added"></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></del></div></td><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-added"></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::I hope that after reading this, you can somehow at last recognize who is being unfair to whom here, who is being disrespectful to whom. From the beginning, we respected your wishes and acted promptly to remove an edit. I repeat for one last time that we did not argue against you, we even cooperated with you immediately because we agreed with you. I even thanked you for bringing the problem to my attention. Your response, instead of demonstrating gratitude, was to memorialize your frustration over this matter in the corresponding article on the article, as a jab against us, a flagrant, unprovoked display of hostility without due consideration for relations between our wikis.</del></div></td><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-added"></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></del></div></td><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-added"></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::I will let you know that members of our staff were in favor of introducing a mention of the interview with Jeffrey Yohalem in our behind the scenes section in response to your addition to the corresponding section in the Chinese Wiki. It would only be fair. However, Master Sima Yi, who has agreed with you from the start, has been insistent about his discomfort at mentioning the interview at all.</del></div></td><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-added"></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></del></div></td><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-added"></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::Whereas we removed content at your request because we recognized that it did not abide by wiki standards, you responded to a professional request that you return the favor with the grossest attacks on not just me but our entire team, doubling down on your violations. This is an echo of the same toxicity you showed when I asked for a civil exchange about our perspectives on Mao Zedong and Chinese politics, where you expect every one else to respect your sensitive feelings about the PRC, yet cannot respect the feelings of others about the PRC, especially not their actual victims. This is, in turn, an echo of the PRC's consistently abrasive foreign policies of crying "hurt feelings" and "violating of their sovereignty" while never respecting the sensitive feelings and sovereignty of other countries and peoples, nor even millions of their own—if they truly consider Hong Kongers, Taiwanese, Uighurs, and all the Han who perished under their state terrorism Chinese.</del></div></td><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-added"></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::Finally, it is horrifically revolting and arrogant for you to constantly flaunt your own political convictions as though you speak for all 1.4 billion Chinese people under PRC rule, as though a diverse country with that many people can possibly be a monolith, as though there have never been other Chinese people apart from you and me who have views different from us. Why should I believe you over my own lived experiences, or the lived experiences of my friends and my family or my grandparents? </div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::Finally, it is horrifically revolting and arrogant for you to constantly flaunt your own political convictions as though you speak for all 1.4 billion Chinese people under PRC rule, as though a diverse country with that many people can possibly be a monolith, as though there have never been other Chinese people apart from you and me who have views different from us. Why should I believe you over my own lived experiences, or the lived experiences of my friends and my family or my grandparents? </div></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">From your response and from your previous outbursts as well, I have genuinely become concerned for your mental health. In spite of my lengthy remonstrations here here, I want to wish you well—no, I do wish you well because I feel sorry for what sort of trauma or social conditioning could elicit such impulsive, irrational tantrums. But when </del>I re-read your messages twice then three and four times, I feel even more offended. Because you did not attack just me or my team. Your very last comments were heinous transgressions against the humanity of all victims of the PRC regime, past and present. To allege that I do not understand China where our views differ because I can actually recognize and empathize with these victims, knowing many personally, is an implicit and odious assault against them. In this way, you are hurting the feelings of Chinese people. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 07:04, 29 November 2020 (UTC)</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">When </ins>I re-read your messages twice then three and four times, I feel even more offended. Because you did not attack just me or my team. Your very last comments were heinous transgressions against the humanity of all victims of the PRC regime, past and present. To allege that I do not understand China where our views differ because I can actually recognize and empathize with these victims, knowing many personally, is an implicit and odious assault against them. In this way, you are hurting the feelings of Chinese people. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 07:04, 29 November 2020 (UTC)</div></td></tr> </table>

imported>Sol Pacificus https://assassinscreedwiki.accesstheanimus.com/index.php?title=User_talk:%E5%85%B3%E4%BA%91&diff=734390&oldid=prev imported>Sol Pacificus: /* BtS of "Mao Zedong" on the Chinese Wiki */ 2020-11-29T07:06:44Z

<p><span dir="auto"><span class="autocomment">BtS of "Mao Zedong" on the Chinese Wiki</span></span></p> <table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface"> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <tr class="diff-title" lang="en-GB"> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 09:06, 29 November 2020</td> </tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l199">Line 199:</td> <td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 199:</td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::How is it fair then, that when we have expressly decided against mentioning this even in our BtS section at all, per your wishes which we had agreed to not reluctantly but wholeheartedly, you have instead done so in the Chinese Wiki version of the article? You argue about proper sourcing and yet the other bullet points in that page also include your speculation and personal opinion about why Mao Zedong is appropriate as an Assassin, which explicitly violates Wikipedia standards against original research and speculation, and furthermore consists of no citations to speak of. You do not see our BtS section providing our own theories on this matter. You allude to the interview with Jeffrey Yohalem, yet deliberately obscure details of it, and also again, do not provide citations for the dispute. So, this is actually somewhat akin to the issue I mentioned above where users would include information drawn from Wikipedia then refuse to cite it because they are aware it is an unreliable source. Their prerogative is to either not bring up the information at all or if they bring it up, then be clear about it and cite the source which they fear is unreliable to be honest about their source! In this case, if you have decided to allude to the error that was made, it is your responsibility to be clear and transparent about the details involved ''and'' cite the sources of that error which you do not believe. If you refuse to do so, then it is your duty to remove the account entirely.</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::How is it fair then, that when we have expressly decided against mentioning this even in our BtS section at all, per your wishes which we had agreed to not reluctantly but wholeheartedly, you have instead done so in the Chinese Wiki version of the article? You argue about proper sourcing and yet the other bullet points in that page also include your speculation and personal opinion about why Mao Zedong is appropriate as an Assassin, which explicitly violates Wikipedia standards against original research and speculation, and furthermore consists of no citations to speak of. You do not see our BtS section providing our own theories on this matter. You allude to the interview with Jeffrey Yohalem, yet deliberately obscure details of it, and also again, do not provide citations for the dispute. So, this is actually somewhat akin to the issue I mentioned above where users would include information drawn from Wikipedia then refuse to cite it because they are aware it is an unreliable source. Their prerogative is to either not bring up the information at all or if they bring it up, then be clear about it and cite the source which they fear is unreliable to be honest about their source! In this case, if you have decided to allude to the error that was made, it is your responsibility to be clear and transparent about the details involved ''and'' cite the sources of that error which you do not believe. If you refuse to do so, then it is your duty to remove the account entirely.</div></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::I hope that after reading this, you can somehow at last recognize who is being unfair to whom here, who is being disrespectful to whom. From the beginning, we respected your wishes and acted promptly to remove an edit. <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">'''</del>I repeat for one last time that we did not argue against you, we even cooperated with you immediately because we agreed with you. I even thanked you for bringing the problem to my attention. Your response, instead of demonstrating gratitude, was to memorialize your frustration over this matter in the corresponding article on the article, as a jab against us, a flagrant, unprovoked display of hostility without due consideration for relations between our wikis.<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">'''</del></div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::I hope that after reading this, you can somehow at last recognize who is being unfair to whom here, who is being disrespectful to whom. From the beginning, we respected your wishes and acted promptly to remove an edit. I repeat for one last time that we did not argue against you, we even cooperated with you immediately because we agreed with you. I even thanked you for bringing the problem to my attention. Your response, instead of demonstrating gratitude, was to memorialize your frustration over this matter in the corresponding article on the article, as a jab against us, a flagrant, unprovoked display of hostility without due consideration for relations between our wikis.</div></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::I will let you know that members of our staff were in favor of introducing a mention of the interview with Jeffrey Yohalem in our behind the scenes section in response to your addition to the corresponding section in the Chinese Wiki. It would only be fair. However, Master Sima Yi, who has agreed with you from the start, has been insistent about his discomfort at mentioning the interview at all.</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::I will let you know that members of our staff were in favor of introducing a mention of the interview with Jeffrey Yohalem in our behind the scenes section in response to your addition to the corresponding section in the Chinese Wiki. It would only be fair. However, Master Sima Yi, who has agreed with you from the start, has been insistent about his discomfort at mentioning the interview at all.</div></td></tr> </table>

imported>Sol Pacificus https://assassinscreedwiki.accesstheanimus.com/index.php?title=User_talk:%E5%85%B3%E4%BA%91&diff=734389&oldid=prev imported>Sol Pacificus: /* BtS of "Mao Zedong" on the Chinese Wiki */ 2020-11-29T07:04:42Z

<p><span dir="auto"><span class="autocomment">BtS of "Mao Zedong" on the Chinese Wiki</span></span></p> <table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface"> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <tr class="diff-title" lang="en-GB"> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 09:04, 29 November 2020</td> </tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l165">Line 165:</td> <td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 165:</td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:記住，從來沒有什麼事情只要有人說它確實發生過就能證明它真的發生過。並且，既然您都可以不相信中國近現代的歷史記載，不相信我可以找到出處的辯解，那我為什麼要相信您和 Master Sima Yi 再三強調的不便公開的採訪？特別還是世界觀設定這種創作者與記錄者應該認真對待的事情上？你們是覺得我有病，還是太寬容了？[[User:关云|关云]] ([[User talk:关云|talk]]) 19:57, 27 November 2020 (UTC)</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:記住，從來沒有什麼事情只要有人說它確實發生過就能證明它真的發生過。並且，既然您都可以不相信中國近現代的歷史記載，不相信我可以找到出處的辯解，那我為什麼要相信您和 Master Sima Yi 再三強調的不便公開的採訪？特別還是世界觀設定這種創作者與記錄者應該認真對待的事情上？你們是覺得我有病，還是太寬容了？[[User:关云|关云]] ([[User talk:关云|talk]]) 19:57, 27 November 2020 (UTC)</div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::"''Since you can't prove its existence, how can you prove it's reliable? A citable resource can be unreliable, then how can a uncitable resource be reliable? You doubt my professionalism, now it's my turn to doubt yours. If you just decide to define an off-record interview as a reliable resource, then show me how can it be reliable please, you professional editors.''"</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::First of all, allow me to get this out of the way that I have clearly been constantly saying that the off-record interview is ''not'' a reliable source, so your entire response is predicated on a miscomprehension.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::The reason why I constantly converse with you in English not Chinese, even in regards to the past political discussion is for the sake of transparency. When I previously asked you to share your perspective on how Mao could be an Assassin, this was an intellectual exchange that many of the other editors on our team, who cannot read Chinese, were also interested in and had told me they were closely watching. In the same vein, this latest matter was of grave concern to the other staff as well; we held community discussions regarding it. We are approaching this as a community, and it would not do for them to not be able to read our correspondence on this matter.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::Guan Yun, I think it is a given that you are not showing the same degree of respect, consideration, and patience that I have rigorously shown you. When this matter was brought up to me, we had members on our staff who fervently saw your edit as a display of petty spite, not a good faith contribution to your wiki's article. These included editors who steadfastly agreed with you and me to remove all mention of Mao Zedong as a Templar and even disapproved of a behind the scenes mention in ''our own'' article regarding that conversation. For you to go behind our back in turn after we acknowledged and respected your own discomfort with us even so much as mentioning it in our behind the scenes section is deeply hypocritical.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::I could have immediately leapt back onto your talk page to accuse you of maliciously trying to discredit another wiki out of an insecure grudge over a resolved issue, but I refrained from doing so. Instead, I left room in my heart for the possibility that this was a careless if tactless addition to a previous edit, of which the consequence and message you had not anticipated. Because of this, notice that in sending this request to you, I opened with questioning its necessity, expressing our own feelings and thoughts on the matter openly and honestly without attacking your person or background. The most I did was to mention that we have editors who ''suspect'' you of bad faith, which is the truth—they do ''suspect'' this—but I stopped short of being so presumptuous as to say that these suspicions are true, only that these suspicions exist, for it is important for us to be transparent about this. This is what it means to show etiquette and consideration for others. Please compare your response to my message to mine.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::If you for whatever reason think that that addition to the article was truly ''necessary'', and that you did not write it out of spite, you could have simply explained your reasoning to us without launching into such a rant with so many baseless accusations and charges on my background. I hope my response here is déjà vu because it is the same pattern from our previous discussion.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::We do not deny that the dispute happened, but it is false for you to say that we "repeat[ed] and emphasi[zed] it was an off-record interview" and that "Chinese Wiki editors disagreed with [my] opinion and statement". From the very beginning, when you brought the matter forth to us, we investigated the source of the edit on your behalf and only shared with you what we found was the source behind the erroneous edit, before we promptly agreed to remove it. You only have to scroll up to the talk of your talk page to review our exchange. We were in agreement with you the entire time that the edit should not have remained—only undoing it initially while the investigation was pending—so your mischaracterization of this as though we emphatically defended an erroneous edit after we promptly helped address your concern is gravely belligerent and comes across as unprovoked malice.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::As it is, it is entirely unprofessional to document wiki and editorial disputes on mainspace pages. This is not a practice on Wikipedia, on any encyclopedia, or in professional journalism because it would normally create a distraction from the actual content readers came to the article for. (It might be noteworthy to mention what the writer of those ''Assassin's Creed II'' glyphs clarified about his intent and message, but it would not be noteworthy to mention that several editors debated about it.) For you to break from this consistency on this particular affair, as though to cement it, engrave it upon stone, rather than allowing everyone to move on like with any other editorial discussion, there must be a reason you made this exception. I repeat that that reason, our wiki by and large suspects, is petty, emotionally-driven spite, not a desire to help your audience. I need to emphasize that your extreme, hostile tantrum only serves to prove rather than dispel this suspicion.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:::As an aside, I would like to clarify several other points. Interpretation of diction is subjective and can and will be disputed even among native speakers of the same language, so your allegation that I am not a native Chinese speaker was beyond exceptionally rude. 'Chat' or 'conversation', either one works and does not alter the point—I did not say that 談話 means ''only'' 'chat' like this is a 1:1 translation with English—because the point remains that your diction was vague and deliberately omitted notable details. If you felt it was so necessary to transparently document why the error was made, the account you rendered fails to do this. In any case, this was but one small example.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:::Regarding what amounts to a citable source, this misunderstanding between us stems from a common misconception of what a source is, conflating the word with 'verifiable sources' and 'reliable sources'. We often say that a source should be citable, verifiable, and reliable, which is certainly true, but I have noticed that this leads to a flawed practice among such editors of including information but ''not'' citing it because their source does not fulfill this criteria, then arguing that it is because their source—almost always Wikipedia—is not authoritative. This is wrong because the fact that their source was not authoritative or reliable doesn't change the reality of their source of information. </ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:::A source, by definition, is where an individual got their information, regardless of how reliable or verifiable it is. A principle of sourcing is transparency, so that others can judge and critique whether the information given is convincing or reliable. So in the aformentioned example with Wikipedia, what these users should do instead is ''not'' included information whose source they were uncomfortable with citing, or maintained that information but ''cited'' to the unreliable source, so that others can know that the source is not strong and judge the information may be unreliable.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:::When I say that an off-record interview is citable but not unreliable, this is all I mean. I am not calling it credible in the slightest, and that seems to be your misunderstanding because I also recognize that an off-record interview is not verifiable either. From my perspective, any source is ''citable'' because citing to a source is just the mere practice of being honest and transparent of where you obtained that information, so that others can judge the credibility of both the source and the editor. But that we can cite a source doesn't mean that others can ''verify'' if it is a factual or truthful source. It may be that the editor lied about the source they cited to, which I understand is your concern about the off-record interview. This is a fair concern. At the same time, even if the source is ''verifiable'', like if one were to cite to Wikipedia, a site anyone can access to verify if the cited information actually exists on there, it may not be ''reliable''. Very often, every one of us acquires information from hearsay, our social media feed, and/or a random article. The things we hear or articles we read may not all be accurate; it may even be fake news, but if we are asked to provide the ''source'' of our information, and that source happens to be just what we heard from a friend, then we are essentially ''citing'' our friend as the source, even if we cannot prove that we had that conversation with the friend or that the friend's word is reliable.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:::Sources that may be off-record are not all useless and insignificant. For example, if an eyewitness to a murder was not able to take footage of the murder, that eyewitness's account can still be ''cited'' and taken into account in the case files. That the eyewitness's experience is citable does not mean that it necessarily can be verified or that it is necessarily reliable because they could be lying, but it is still a source and part of investigative work is weighing the reliability of the sources we are given. We do not throw out a source just because it happens to be anecdotal; we investigate its reliability because they could still prove to be significant if they happen to be honest.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:::Back in college, I was allowed to cite lectures I attended for my papers. These lectures could not be recorded because that violates laws on intellectual property, but they were accepted because even if it cannot be verified if those lectures actually taught what I cite it as teaching, that does not change the reality that if I happen to include information provided to me in a lecture by a certified professor, that that ''is'' my source. It is for others to judge if my paper is credible because I included in the mix a few sources which could not be verified. Indeed, relying on lectures for a paper does not make a strong paper—I used them sparingly as supplementary sources—but if I happened to be drawing from something that I learned, I have to be honest about where I learned that from even if I cannot prove that is how I learned it. That again, is what sourcing really means.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::When I have said before that an off-record interview is citable, you misunderstand that I am arguing against you that it should have been included in the main content even though I expressly cooperated with you in removing all references to Mao being a Templar puppet from our page. It appears that when you use the word ''citable'', your meaning is ''an appropriate source that can be used for the wiki'' which is different from the literal way I am using the word (whether something ''can physically'' be cited or not). An off-record interview is citable only because it is a source, and any source becomes cited when someone refers to it as the source for their information. The interview with Jeffrey Yohalem is citable in this literal sense of the word, but it is not ''verifiable'', so we have always agreed with you that it is not appropriate for the main content of the wiki.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::Behind the scenes/trivia sections are for sharing noteworthy and significant information about the development of the subject or clarifying confusion and inconsistencies over lore. Whether or not this is appropriate in the "behind the scenes" section of an article depends on how significant the information is in alleviating confusion and weighing it against our discomfort at sharing information that cannot be verified. For example, I myself have questioned if it would be useful to inform our readers that Yohalem, the writer behind the glyphs, had given us an answer many years ago clarifying what he meant. We specifically decided against even mentioning this to our BtS section because we respected your perspective that the interview being unverifiable makes it hard to accept as even noteworthy information while even our former head administrator, Master Sima Yi, thinks exactly the same as you on this matter.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::How is it fair then, that when we have expressly decided against mentioning this even in our BtS section at all, per your wishes which we had agreed to not reluctantly but wholeheartedly, you have instead done so in the Chinese Wiki version of the article? You argue about proper sourcing and yet the other bullet points in that page also include your speculation and personal opinion about why Mao Zedong is appropriate as an Assassin, which explicitly violates Wikipedia standards against original research and speculation, and furthermore consists of no citations to speak of. You do not see our BtS section providing our own theories on this matter. You allude to the interview with Jeffrey Yohalem, yet deliberately obscure details of it, and also again, do not provide citations for the dispute. So, this is actually somewhat akin to the issue I mentioned above where users would include information drawn from Wikipedia then refuse to cite it because they are aware it is an unreliable source. Their prerogative is to either not bring up the information at all or if they bring it up, then be clear about it and cite the source which they fear is unreliable to be honest about their source! In this case, if you have decided to allude to the error that was made, it is your responsibility to be clear and transparent about the details involved ''and'' cite the sources of that error which you do not believe. If you refuse to do so, then it is your duty to remove the account entirely.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::I hope that after reading this, you can somehow at last recognize who is being unfair to whom here, who is being disrespectful to whom. From the beginning, we respected your wishes and acted promptly to remove an edit. '''I repeat for one last time that we did not argue against you, we even cooperated with you immediately because we agreed with you. I even thanked you for bringing the problem to my attention. Your response, instead of demonstrating gratitude, was to memorialize your frustration over this matter in the corresponding article on the article, as a jab against us, a flagrant, unprovoked display of hostility without due consideration for relations between our wikis.'''</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::I will let you know that members of our staff were in favor of introducing a mention of the interview with Jeffrey Yohalem in our behind the scenes section in response to your addition to the corresponding section in the Chinese Wiki. It would only be fair. However, Master Sima Yi, who has agreed with you from the start, has been insistent about his discomfort at mentioning the interview at all.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::Whereas we removed content at your request because we recognized that it did not abide by wiki standards, you responded to a professional request that you return the favor with the grossest attacks on not just me but our entire team, doubling down on your violations. This is an echo of the same toxicity you showed when I asked for a civil exchange about our perspectives on Mao Zedong and Chinese politics, where you expect every one else to respect your sensitive feelings about the PRC, yet cannot respect the feelings of others about the PRC, especially not their actual victims. This is, in turn, an echo of the PRC's consistently abrasive foreign policies of crying "hurt feelings" and "violating of their sovereignty" while never respecting the sensitive feelings and sovereignty of other countries and peoples, nor even millions of their own—if they truly consider Hong Kongers, Taiwanese, Uighurs, and all the Han who perished under their state terrorism Chinese.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::Finally, it is horrifically revolting and arrogant for you to constantly flaunt your own political convictions as though you speak for all 1.4 billion Chinese people under PRC rule, as though a diverse country with that many people can possibly be a monolith, as though there have never been other Chinese people apart from you and me who have views different from us. Why should I believe you over my own lived experiences, or the lived experiences of my friends and my family or my grandparents? </ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::From your response and from your previous outbursts as well, I have genuinely become concerned for your mental health. In spite of my lengthy remonstrations here here, I want to wish you well—no, I do wish you well because I feel sorry for what sort of trauma or social conditioning could elicit such impulsive, irrational tantrums. But when I re-read your messages twice then three and four times, I feel even more offended. Because you did not attack just me or my team. Your very last comments were heinous transgressions against the humanity of all victims of the PRC regime, past and present. To allege that I do not understand China where our views differ because I can actually recognize and empathize with these victims, knowing many personally, is an implicit and odious assault against them. In this way, you are hurting the feelings of Chinese people. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 07:04, 29 November 2020 (UTC)</ins></div></td></tr> </table>

imported>Sol Pacificus https://assassinscreedwiki.accesstheanimus.com/index.php?title=User_talk:%E5%85%B3%E4%BA%91&diff=734388&oldid=prev imported>关云: /* BtS of "Mao Zedong" on the Chinese Wiki */ 2020-11-27T19:57:18Z

<p><span dir="auto"><span class="autocomment">BtS of "Mao Zedong" on the Chinese Wiki</span></span></p> <table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface"> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <tr class="diff-title" lang="en-GB"> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 21:57, 27 November 2020</td> </tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l153">Line 153:</td> <td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 153:</td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>As a result, we would like to request that you remove that trivia point from your wiki for the sake of professionalism. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 17:04, 27 November 2020 (UTC)</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>As a result, we would like to request that you remove that trivia point from your wiki for the sake of professionalism. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 17:04, 27 November 2020 (UTC)</div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:First of all, I recommend you to learn Chinese by yourself or use DeepL instead of Google translation. I can tell at least your understanding of my words is one of the worst among you English wiki editors. Take the phrase "谈话" as an example, it means more than merely chats. You just don't know it includes the meaning of interview. What are you doing? Questioning a Chinese native speaker if he speaks Chinese correctly? I just hope you have not tried to comprehend the words translated by google. Google translation sucks.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:You had repeated the phrase "off-record" for many times, I really doubt if you really know what a reference should be. Since it is uncitable, how can you prove its existence? Since you can't prove its existence, how can you prove it's reliable? A citable resource can be unreliable, then how can a uncitable resource be reliable? You doubt my professionalism, now it's my turn to doubt yours. If you just decide to define an off-record interview as a reliable resource, then show me how can it be reliable please, you professional editors.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:And I remember I left that part to "Behind the scenes" section instead of "Trivia" (in which you editors used to record details and facts of the real world by repeating "in real history", "in fact" for thousands of times). So I had already said it's something outside the AC Universe. You English Wiki editors did consider Mao as a Templar, you English Wiki editors did never provide with any reference while repeating and emphasizing it was an off-record interview and we Chinese Wiki editors did disagree with your opinion and statement. And the whole dispute is about whether Mao was a Templar or not. Why can't I record it in the story behind the scenes? You created the confusion for most Chinese AC fans, now I clarify it, then I will be a unprofessional editor in bad faith? You caused a issue on the historical figure leading to our dispute, now you request I to delete the record of our dispute. Don't you think it is ridiculous? Are you really show any respect to Chinese Wiki editors or AC fans?</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:As a conclusion, your request will be denied. And don't remember to figure out Ubisoft never spell ''Theodford'' in the way it should be, using the ''pennyweight'' at a time when it hadn't appeared. Cling to it, enjoy it. I believe you will create a '''complete correct''' Wiki loyal to Ubisoft in good faith. </ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:最後，要我說，Sol Pacificus，您之前自稱是香港人，那麼何苦要用英語和我對話？無論政治立場如何，如果您在與中國人對話時下意識使用了英語，您真的會是一個能夠流利使用中文的人嗎？該不會說，您覺得自己連中文都不會，還能了解中國人和中國文化吧？不會吧不會吧？您是不是對中國對外文化傳播的現況給予了太高的估計，覺得已經到了不需要學會中文就可以了解中國文化與現況的地步？還是覺得用中文很不尊重其他英語用戶？不會真的有英語用戶閒得無聊到我這麼個不起眼小人物的討論頁來旁觀我們的爭論吧？（再者中國人和中國人對話用中文不是天經地義嗎？難道用法語？）說句難聽點的話，不懂中國就不要插手做中國相關的內容，不然只會讓您看起來是個文盲，而不會是一個很懂中國的專業人士。（畢竟連台灣正體和港澳繁體把AC稱呼為刺客教條都不知道，硬生生給王朝這部漫畫捏造出一個官方從來沒有公佈過的繁體中文名出來，真的很'''專業'''。）這次的回復只讓我明白一件事，您之前還怪我在您的說法上添油加醋進行反駁，現在看來您幾位也不相上下，我只是陳述事實，就可以被稱為有偏向性與錯誤思想，那可真是了不得，幾位想必只要會中文，一定能在文革中順風順水。</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:記住，從來沒有什麼事情只要有人說它確實發生過就能證明它真的發生過。並且，既然您都可以不相信中國近現代的歷史記載，不相信我可以找到出處的辯解，那我為什麼要相信您和 Master Sima Yi 再三強調的不便公開的採訪？特別還是世界觀設定這種創作者與記錄者應該認真對待的事情上？你們是覺得我有病，還是太寬容了？[[User:关云|关云]] ([[User talk:关云|talk]]) 19:57, 27 November 2020 (UTC)</ins></div></td></tr> </table>

imported>关云 https://assassinscreedwiki.accesstheanimus.com/index.php?title=User_talk:%E5%85%B3%E4%BA%91&diff=734387&oldid=prev imported>Sol Pacificus: /* BtS of "Mao Zedong" on the Chinese Wiki */ 2020-11-27T17:06:17Z

<p><span dir="auto"><span class="autocomment">BtS of "Mao Zedong" on the Chinese Wiki</span></span></p> <table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface"> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <tr class="diff-title" lang="en-GB"> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 19:06, 27 November 2020</td> </tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l148">Line 148:</td> <td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 148:</td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Additionally to this, we take issue with the subtle leaning of the way this was written, especially with that last sentence, part of which has even been bolded: 「另一方面，這一說法據英文維基編輯表示來自於一場沒有文字記錄也沒有錄像更沒有對外公開的談話，最後因為無法找到可以引用的可靠來源加以證實，已經刪除」. Now, it has not escaped my notice that the statement is ''technically, factually correct for the most part'' because I can recognize that you did not write that we 「找不到來源」('could not find a source'), which would have been wrong. Instead, you wrote 「無法找到'''可以引用'''的'''可靠'''來源」('no way of finding a '''citable''', '''reliable''' source), which is indeed more appropriate. We agreed with you on our end that an off-record interview is not a reliable source although based on academic standards, interviews are technically citable. Citable and reliable are two different things, as a citable source can entirely be unreliable. Whether or not the interview is citable or not is a question I will leave behind, as that is not the issue we have with that statement.</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Additionally to this, we take issue with the subtle leaning of the way this was written, especially with that last sentence, part of which has even been bolded: 「另一方面，這一說法據英文維基編輯表示來自於一場沒有文字記錄也沒有錄像更沒有對外公開的談話，最後因為無法找到可以引用的可靠來源加以證實，已經刪除」. Now, it has not escaped my notice that the statement is ''technically, factually correct for the most part'' because I can recognize that you did not write that we 「找不到來源」('could not find a source'), which would have been wrong. Instead, you wrote 「無法找到'''可以引用'''的'''可靠'''來源」('no way of finding a '''citable''', '''reliable''' source), which is indeed more appropriate. We agreed with you on our end that an off-record interview is not a reliable source although based on academic standards, interviews are technically citable. Citable and reliable are two different things, as a citable source can entirely be unreliable. Whether or not the interview is citable or not is a question I will leave behind, as that is not the issue we have with that statement.</div></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Rather, even though I recognize that the statement you wrote on this matter is ''technically true for the most part'', the underlying diction (i.e. word choice), the presentation of this account, and conscious omission of exact details tells a particular narrative and paints that dispute in a misleading light. For instance, you called it 「談話」 rather than 「訪問」, implying it was a mere chat rather than an interview and also did not mention what parties were involved, i.e. our head administrator with [[Jeffrey Yohalem]] who wrote the glyphs. Hence, it comes across as one-sided to us, used to present the impression that we carelessly and disingenuously added unverified information rather than disagreement on our end about whether an off-record interview with the primary source can be submitted as evidence. The distinction here may be subtle, but it is significant in terms of rendering a neutral and objective account of the matter.</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Rather, even though I recognize that the statement you wrote on this matter is ''technically true for the most part'', the underlying diction (i.e. word choice), the presentation of this account, and conscious omission of exact details tells a particular narrative and paints that dispute in a misleading light. For instance, you called it 「談話」 rather than 「訪問」, implying it was a mere chat rather than an interview and also did not mention what parties were involved, i.e. our <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">former </ins>head administrator with [[Jeffrey Yohalem]] who wrote the glyphs. Hence, it comes across as one-sided to us, used to present the impression that we carelessly and disingenuously added unverified information rather than disagreement on our end about whether an off-record interview with the primary source can be submitted as evidence. The distinction here may be subtle, but it is significant in terms of rendering a neutral and objective account of the matter.</div></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>We maintain that we do not disagree with you that the interview is unreliable due to being off-record. Even Master Sima Yi, who conducted that interview, has insisted that it not be mentioned ever again. However, our editors all suspect that your inclusion of this dispute on the Mao Zedong page is in bad faith. The wording and tone aside, we simply believe strongly that wiki activities are not noteworthy trivia points unless it is absolutely necessary to clarify confusion in lore. But even if there is such a necessity, the focus of the trivia point you wrote is not on the confusion of Mao Zedong's affiliation but on your dispute with our wiki.</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>We maintain that we do not disagree with you that the interview is unreliable due to being off-record. Even Master Sima Yi, who conducted that interview, has insisted that it not be mentioned ever again. However, our editors all suspect that your inclusion of this dispute on the Mao Zedong page is in bad faith. The wording and tone aside, we simply believe strongly that wiki activities are not noteworthy trivia points unless it is absolutely necessary to clarify confusion in lore. But even if there is such a necessity, the focus of the trivia point you wrote is not on the confusion of Mao Zedong's affiliation but on your dispute with our wiki.</div></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>As a result, we would like to request that you remove that trivia point from your wiki for the sake of professionalism. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 17:04, 27 November 2020 (UTC)</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>As a result, we would like to request that you remove that trivia point from your wiki for the sake of professionalism. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 17:04, 27 November 2020 (UTC)</div></td></tr> </table>

imported>Sol Pacificus https://assassinscreedwiki.accesstheanimus.com/index.php?title=User_talk:%E5%85%B3%E4%BA%91&diff=734386&oldid=prev imported>Sol Pacificus: /* BtS of "Mao Zedong" on the Chinese Wiki */ new section 2020-11-27T17:04:56Z

<p><span dir="auto"><span class="autocomment">BtS of "Mao Zedong" on the Chinese Wiki: </span> new section</span></p> <table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface"> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <tr class="diff-title" lang="en-GB"> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 19:04, 27 November 2020</td> </tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l139">Line 139:</td> <td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 139:</td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:And after all, nothing is real, everything is permitted.[[User:关云|关云]] ([[User talk:关云|talk]]) 09:38, August 3, 2020 (UTC)</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:And after all, nothing is real, everything is permitted.[[User:关云|关云]] ([[User talk:关云|talk]]) 09:38, August 3, 2020 (UTC)</div></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::No worries. I was just double-checking. I know not to take it as meaning anything now. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 01:02, August 4, 2020 (UTC)</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::No worries. I was just double-checking. I know not to take it as meaning anything now. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 01:02, August 4, 2020 (UTC)</div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">== BtS of "Mao Zedong" on the Chinese Wiki ==</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">Hello again Guan Yun, it was brought to my attention a few months back that you edited the〈幕後故事〉 section of the Chinese Wiki's version of "[https://assassinscreed.fandom.com/zh/wiki/%E6%AF%9B%E6%B3%BD%E4%B8%9C Mao Zedong]" to describe the dispute over whether Mao Zedong was a Templar puppet or not. Specifically this bullet point:</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"><blockquote>英文維基中原本表示他是「聖殿騎士的傀儡」，但這個說法沒有引用任何信息來源加以支持。一方面，英文維基對於「傀儡（puppet）」一詞的定義十分寬泛，並不能說明他知道聖殿騎士組織的存在，更不意味着他受到了聖殿騎士的操縱或是與聖殿騎士間存在合作關係。另一方面，這一說法據英文維基編輯表示來自於一場沒有文字記錄也沒有錄像更沒有對外公開的談話，最後因為無法找到可以引用的可靠來源加以證實，已經刪除。</blockquote></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">The editors on our end were displeased with this addition. While I can understand that it may be important to clarify whether or not Mao Zedong is a Templar in the lore, we question whether it is necessary to document for posterity an editing dispute within the wiki as this is not common practice in our articles. I think it is only needed if you are really still worried that fans could still mistake Mao Zedong for a Templar even when he is no longer described as such in either of our articles, but we don't believe that that would be the case.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">Additionally to this, we take issue with the subtle leaning of the way this was written, especially with that last sentence, part of which has even been bolded: 「另一方面，這一說法據英文維基編輯表示來自於一場沒有文字記錄也沒有錄像更沒有對外公開的談話，最後因為無法找到可以引用的可靠來源加以證實，已經刪除」. Now, it has not escaped my notice that the statement is ''technically, factually correct for the most part'' because I can recognize that you did not write that we 「找不到來源」('could not find a source'), which would have been wrong. Instead, you wrote 「無法找到'''可以引用'''的'''可靠'''來源」('no way of finding a '''citable''', '''reliable''' source), which is indeed more appropriate. We agreed with you on our end that an off-record interview is not a reliable source although based on academic standards, interviews are technically citable. Citable and reliable are two different things, as a citable source can entirely be unreliable. Whether or not the interview is citable or not is a question I will leave behind, as that is not the issue we have with that statement.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">Rather, even though I recognize that the statement you wrote on this matter is ''technically true for the most part'', the underlying diction (i.e. word choice), the presentation of this account, and conscious omission of exact details tells a particular narrative and paints that dispute in a misleading light. For instance, you called it 「談話」 rather than 「訪問」, implying it was a mere chat rather than an interview and also did not mention what parties were involved, i.e. our head administrator with [[Jeffrey Yohalem]] who wrote the glyphs. Hence, it comes across as one-sided to us, used to present the impression that we carelessly and disingenuously added unverified information rather than disagreement on our end about whether an off-record interview with the primary source can be submitted as evidence. The distinction here may be subtle, but it is significant in terms of rendering a neutral and objective account of the matter.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">We maintain that we do not disagree with you that the interview is unreliable due to being off-record. Even Master Sima Yi, who conducted that interview, has insisted that it not be mentioned ever again. However, our editors all suspect that your inclusion of this dispute on the Mao Zedong page is in bad faith. The wording and tone aside, we simply believe strongly that wiki activities are not noteworthy trivia points unless it is absolutely necessary to clarify confusion in lore. But even if there is such a necessity, the focus of the trivia point you wrote is not on the confusion of Mao Zedong's affiliation but on your dispute with our wiki.</ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">As a result, we would like to request that you remove that trivia point from your wiki for the sake of professionalism. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 17:04, 27 November 2020 (UTC)</ins></div></td></tr> </table>

imported>Sol Pacificus https://assassinscreedwiki.accesstheanimus.com/index.php?title=User_talk:%E5%85%B3%E4%BA%91&diff=734385&oldid=prev imported>Sol Pacificus: /* Templar symbol on Chinese wiki */ 2020-08-04T01:02:54Z

<p><span dir="auto"><span class="autocomment">Templar symbol on Chinese wiki</span></span></p> <table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface"> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <col class="diff-marker" /> <col class="diff-content" /> <tr class="diff-title" lang="en-GB"> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td> <td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 03:02, 4 August 2020</td> </tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l138">Line 138:</td> <td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 138:</td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:By the way, I (and my fellow editors) have no access to change the icon.</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:By the way, I (and my fellow editors) have no access to change the icon.</div></td></tr> <tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:And after all, nothing is real, everything is permitted.[[User:关云|关云]] ([[User talk:关云|talk]]) 09:38, August 3, 2020 (UTC)</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:And after all, nothing is real, everything is permitted.[[User:关云|关云]] ([[User talk:关云|talk]]) 09:38, August 3, 2020 (UTC)</div></td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::No worries. I was just double-checking. I know not to take it as meaning anything now. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 01:02, August 4, 2020 (UTC)</ins></div></td></tr> </table>

imported>Sol Pacificus