User talk:Mindedif - Revision history

Soranin: /* Helping out with the wiki */

2026-05-20T12:23:49Z

Helping out with the wiki

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:23, 20 May 2026
Line 20:		Line 20:
	So this is about your side-note in your post. As I said, it's really nice to have a newcomer ^_^ because my goodness, you can't believe how much more hands we need around here. :(		So this is about your side-note in your post. As I said, it's really nice to have a newcomer ^_^ because my goodness, you can't believe how much more hands we need around here. :(

	I understand if you feel nervous about editing. Actually, we haven't mentioned this in this wiki, but if you go over to Wookieepedia or Wikipedia, there's a policy called [[w:c:Wookieepedia:Be bold in updating pages\|Be Bold]] which actively encourages editors to be confident about their edits. It's much more efficient that way so everyone provides as much input as possible. Of course, there's always the possibility of editors being too arrogant or aggressive, but that would be more of an issue of failing to compromise or be courteous. As long as you know when to take a step back and negotiate when someone disagrees, then it's perfectly fine to be bold.		I understand if you feel nervous about editing. Actually, we haven't mentioned this in this wiki, but if you go over to Wookieepedia or Wikipedia, there's a policy called [w:c:Wookieepedia:Be bold in updating pages\|Be Bold] which actively encourages editors to be confident about their edits. It's much more efficient that way so everyone provides as much input as possible. Of course, there's always the possibility of editors being too arrogant or aggressive, but that would be more of an issue of failing to compromise or be courteous. As long as you know when to take a step back and negotiate when someone disagrees, then it's perfectly fine to be bold.

	But anyways, I understand if you don't feel the confidence for that just yet, and that's okay! Take your time and edit at your comfort level. I myself sometimes am afraid I'm too intimidating about my corrections of other people's edits.		But anyways, I understand if you don't feel the confidence for that just yet, and that's okay! Take your time and edit at your comfort level. I myself sometimes am afraid I'm too intimidating about my corrections of other people's edits.

Soranin: /* Citing to Wikipedia */

2026-05-18T12:56:19Z

Citing to Wikipedia

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:56, 18 May 2026
Line 7:		Line 7:
	Anyways I'm glad that you understood my reasoning for my proposal because I felt like I wasn't sure I was coming across clearly. You're totally right about the fact that citing first and foremost is about explaining and showing honestly where you got information, not whether it's reliable or not, which comes second. While ideally we should always strive to use the most reliable of sources, absent that, we should use the best we can even if it is not a decent source at all. Citing to even unreliable sources, if that is where we really took the information from, allows readers to verify and gauge the reliability of your information in turn. So I'm really glad you understand this. (I'm just going to go ahead and repeat this part in the forum for the others actually xD).		Anyways I'm glad that you understood my reasoning for my proposal because I felt like I wasn't sure I was coming across clearly. You're totally right about the fact that citing first and foremost is about explaining and showing honestly where you got information, not whether it's reliable or not, which comes second. While ideally we should always strive to use the most reliable of sources, absent that, we should use the best we can even if it is not a decent source at all. Citing to even unreliable sources, if that is where we really took the information from, allows readers to verify and gauge the reliability of your information in turn. So I'm really glad you understand this. (I'm just going to go ahead and repeat this part in the forum for the others actually xD).

	My only concern is that I wanted to double-check if you understand the context behind why the others might not be in support of my proposal since you're new here. You see, technically, the default policy for any franchise wiki (like ''Star Wars'' for example), is that every information we take ''has'' to be from the official franchise source. We are not allowed to take any outside information whatsoever. This is part of a policy called Attribution. Our wiki doesn't explain our policies too well, so see [[w:c:starwars:Wookieepedia:Attribution\|Wookieepedia's Attribution policy]] for the same thing, only in ''Star Wars'' instead. Just substitute Lucasfilms, Ltd. with Ubisoft and you have the same policy here.		My only concern is that I wanted to double-check if you understand the context behind why the others might not be in support of my proposal since you're new here. You see, technically, the default policy for any franchise wiki (like ''Star Wars'' for example), is that every information we take ''has'' to be from the official franchise source. We are not allowed to take any outside information whatsoever. This is part of a policy called Attribution. Our wiki doesn't explain our policies too well, so see [w:c:starwars:Wookieepedia:Attribution\|Wookieepedia's Attribution policy]] for the same thing, only in ''Star Wars'' instead. Just substitute Lucasfilms, Ltd. with Ubisoft and you have the same policy here.

	Because for various reasons explained in my forum post, even the admins of this site are making exceptions to this policy. Personally, I think that is fine, but it's an un-codified thing. They want to allow exceptions to the Attribution policy, and yet not clarify to readers they're making these exceptions -_- because they feel like they're violating the Attribution policy if they do. What they fail to understand is that, ''saying'' you're taking information from outside sources isn't violating the purpose of the policy; it's ''taking'' information from outside sources that's violating the policy. It seems they think that if they take information from outside sources without admitting it to readers, they're not going against the spirit of the policy. At that point, though, they should just modify it. (I'll just go ahead and repeat this in the forum for the others also xD.) [[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> 13:48, July 26, 2017 (UTC)		Because for various reasons explained in my forum post, even the admins of this site are making exceptions to this policy. Personally, I think that is fine, but it's an un-codified thing. They want to allow exceptions to the Attribution policy, and yet not clarify to readers they're making these exceptions -_- because they feel like they're violating the Attribution policy if they do. What they fail to understand is that, ''saying'' you're taking information from outside sources isn't violating the purpose of the policy; it's ''taking'' information from outside sources that's violating the policy. It seems they think that if they take information from outside sources without admitting it to readers, they're not going against the spirit of the policy. At that point, though, they should just modify it. (I'll just go ahead and repeat this in the forum for the others also xD.) [[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> 13:48, July 26, 2017 (UTC)

imported>Sol Pacificus at 23:15, 28 July 2017

2017-07-28T23:15:35Z

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 : My offer to double and tripple check the info still stands though, if not for the real world facts (if it's decided not to use real worl info at all), then for the AC info as I might have part of AC franchise someone else doesn't. And I might actualy try to add some needed pictures to the site ^.^ [[User:Mindedif|Mindedif]] ([[User talk:Mindedif|talk]]) 14:48, July 26, 2017 (UTC)
 == Helping out with the wiki ==
@@ Line 28: / Line 29: @@
 : So yeah, send me that list and if you need anything you think I might be able to do, just shout out to me and I'll see what I can do [[User:Mindedif|Mindedif]] ([[User talk:Mindedif|talk]]) 15:17, July 26, 2017 (UTC)

imported>Mindedif: /* Helping out with the wiki */

2017-07-26T15:17:44Z

Helping out with the wiki

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:17, 26 July 2017
Line 17:		Line 17:
	== Helping out with the wiki ==		== Helping out with the wiki ==

	So this is about your side-note in your post. As I said, it's really nice to have a newcomer ^_^ because my goodness, you can't believe how much more hands we need around here. :(		So this is about your side-note in your post. As I said, it's really nice to have a newcomer ^_^ because my goodness, you can't believe how much more hands we need around here. :(

	I understand if you feel nervous about editing. Actually, we haven't mentioned this in this wiki, but if you go over to Wookieepedia or Wikipedia, there's a policy called [[w:c:Wookieepedia:Be bold in updating pages\|Be Bold]] which actively encourages editors to be confident about their edits. It's much more efficient that way so everyone provides as much input as possible. Of course, there's always the possibility of editors being too arrogant or aggressive, but that would be more of an issue of failing to compromise or be courteous. As long as you know when to take a step back and negotiate when someone disagrees, then it's perfectly fine to be bold.		I understand if you feel nervous about editing. Actually, we haven't mentioned this in this wiki, but if you go over to Wookieepedia or Wikipedia, there's a policy called [[w:c:Wookieepedia:Be bold in updating pages\|Be Bold]] which actively encourages editors to be confident about their edits. It's much more efficient that way so everyone provides as much input as possible. Of course, there's always the possibility of editors being too arrogant or aggressive, but that would be more of an issue of failing to compromise or be courteous. As long as you know when to take a step back and negotiate when someone disagrees, then it's perfectly fine to be bold.
Line 24:		Line 24:

	If you want to help out more with policy and, as you suggested, verifying sources rather than editing, I would actually very much welcome it. Usually the former is more of an administrative affair, but since the admins are mostly all absent, we could use some help in that area. If you'd like, I could give you a list of all the issues we have with policies, and you can lend your thoughts on them or even help carry out some needed changes. Or if you just want to focus solely on verifying information from cases where editors are taking from external sources, that's fine too. [[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> 14:07, July 26, 2017 (UTC)		If you want to help out more with policy and, as you suggested, verifying sources rather than editing, I would actually very much welcome it. Usually the former is more of an administrative affair, but since the admins are mostly all absent, we could use some help in that area. If you'd like, I could give you a list of all the issues we have with policies, and you can lend your thoughts on them or even help carry out some needed changes. Or if you just want to focus solely on verifying information from cases where editors are taking from external sources, that's fine too. [[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> 14:07, July 26, 2017 (UTC)

			: I'm usually just not sure what exactly to do with, for example a page that ''is a stub'' or ''is in desperate need of revamp'' :D

			: So yeah, send me that list and if you need anything you think I might be able to do, just shout out to me and I'll see what I can do [[User:Mindedif\|Mindedif]] ([[User talk:Mindedif\|talk]]) 15:17, July 26, 2017 (UTC)

imported>Mindedif: /* Citing to Wikipedia */

2017-07-26T15:05:57Z

Citing to Wikipedia

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:05, 26 July 2017
Line 13:		Line 13:
	: Gotcha ;) I guess I missed (or maybe just disregarded) the part where we shouldn't use any outside information whatsoever. Mainly because I personaly see AC like only a ''slightly'' ''alternative'' version of the real world, where historical events we know of happened, but slightly differently than we think they did. That's the brilliance of the whole AC concept for me. (''Star Wars'' has like what, some of the same laws of physics and human(oid)s as we do? :D They can do anything they want and nobody complains.) And I think the AC developers and especialy the writers operate like that too, I mean just by listening to them saying how much historical research of actual, real history they do for every instalment of the franchise what else are we to think, right? Thus me, not seeing reason not to use real world info. Thanks for clarifing that for me ;)		: Gotcha ;) I guess I missed (or maybe just disregarded) the part where we shouldn't use any outside information whatsoever. Mainly because I personaly see AC like only a ''slightly'' ''alternative'' version of the real world, where historical events we know of happened, but slightly differently than we think they did. That's the brilliance of the whole AC concept for me. (''Star Wars'' has like what, some of the same laws of physics and human(oid)s as we do? :D They can do anything they want and nobody complains.) And I think the AC developers and especialy the writers operate like that too, I mean just by listening to them saying how much historical research of actual, real history they do for every instalment of the franchise what else are we to think, right? Thus me, not seeing reason not to use real world info. Thanks for clarifing that for me ;)

	: My offer to double and tripple check the info still stands though, if not for the real world facts (if it's decided not to use real worl info at all), then for the AC info as I might have part of AC franchise someone else doesn't. And I might actualy try to add some needed pictures to the site ^.^		: My offer to double and tripple check the info still stands though, if not for the real world facts (if it's decided not to use real worl info at all), then for the AC info as I might have part of AC franchise someone else doesn't. And I might actualy try to add some needed pictures to the site ^.^ [[User:Mindedif\|Mindedif]] ([[User talk:Mindedif\|talk]]) 14:48, July 26, 2017 (UTC)

	: [[User:Mindedif\|Mindedif]] ([[User talk:Mindedif\|talk]]) 14:48, July 26, 2017 (UTC)

	== Helping out with the wiki ==		== Helping out with the wiki ==

imported>Mindedif: /* Citing to Wikipedia */

2017-07-26T14:49:28Z

Citing to Wikipedia

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:49, 26 July 2017
Line 15:		Line 15:
	: My offer to double and tripple check the info still stands though, if not for the real world facts (if it's decided not to use real worl info at all), then for the AC info as I might have part of AC franchise someone else doesn't. And I might actualy try to add some needed pictures to the site ^.^		: My offer to double and tripple check the info still stands though, if not for the real world facts (if it's decided not to use real worl info at all), then for the AC info as I might have part of AC franchise someone else doesn't. And I might actualy try to add some needed pictures to the site ^.^

	: [[User:Mindedif\|Mindedif]] ([[User talk:Mindedif\|talk]]) 14:48, July 26, 2017 (UTC)~~Mindedif~~		: [[User:Mindedif\|Mindedif]] ([[User talk:Mindedif\|talk]]) 14:48, July 26, 2017 (UTC)

	== Helping out with the wiki ==		== Helping out with the wiki ==

imported>Mindedif: /* Citing to Wikipedia */

2017-07-26T14:48:53Z

Citing to Wikipedia

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:48, 26 July 2017
Line 10:		Line 10:

	Because for various reasons explained in my forum post, even the admins of this site are making exceptions to this policy. Personally, I think that is fine, but it's an un-codified thing. They want to allow exceptions to the Attribution policy, and yet not clarify to readers they're making these exceptions -_- because they feel like they're violating the Attribution policy if they do. What they fail to understand is that, ''saying'' you're taking information from outside sources isn't violating the purpose of the policy; it's ''taking'' information from outside sources that's violating the policy. It seems they think that if they take information from outside sources without admitting it to readers, they're not going against the spirit of the policy. At that point, though, they should just modify it. (I'll just go ahead and repeat this in the forum for the others also xD.) [[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> 13:48, July 26, 2017 (UTC)		Because for various reasons explained in my forum post, even the admins of this site are making exceptions to this policy. Personally, I think that is fine, but it's an un-codified thing. They want to allow exceptions to the Attribution policy, and yet not clarify to readers they're making these exceptions -_- because they feel like they're violating the Attribution policy if they do. What they fail to understand is that, ''saying'' you're taking information from outside sources isn't violating the purpose of the policy; it's ''taking'' information from outside sources that's violating the policy. It seems they think that if they take information from outside sources without admitting it to readers, they're not going against the spirit of the policy. At that point, though, they should just modify it. (I'll just go ahead and repeat this in the forum for the others also xD.) [[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> 13:48, July 26, 2017 (UTC)

			: Gotcha ;) I guess I missed (or maybe just disregarded) the part where we shouldn't use any outside information whatsoever. Mainly because I personaly see AC like only a ''slightly'' ''alternative'' version of the real world, where historical events we know of happened, but slightly differently than we think they did. That's the brilliance of the whole AC concept for me. (''Star Wars'' has like what, some of the same laws of physics and human(oid)s as we do? :D They can do anything they want and nobody complains.) And I think the AC developers and especialy the writers operate like that too, I mean just by listening to them saying how much historical research of actual, real history they do for every instalment of the franchise what else are we to think, right? Thus me, not seeing reason not to use real world info. Thanks for clarifing that for me ;)

			: My offer to double and tripple check the info still stands though, if not for the real world facts (if it's decided not to use real worl info at all), then for the AC info as I might have part of AC franchise someone else doesn't. And I might actualy try to add some needed pictures to the site ^.^

			: [[User:Mindedif\|Mindedif]] ([[User talk:Mindedif\|talk]]) 14:48, July 26, 2017 (UTC)Mindedif

	== Helping out with the wiki ==		== Helping out with the wiki ==

imported>Sol Pacificus: /* Helping out with the wiki */ new section

2017-07-26T14:07:32Z

Helping out with the wiki: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:07, 26 July 2017
Line 10:		Line 10:

	Because for various reasons explained in my forum post, even the admins of this site are making exceptions to this policy. Personally, I think that is fine, but it's an un-codified thing. They want to allow exceptions to the Attribution policy, and yet not clarify to readers they're making these exceptions -_- because they feel like they're violating the Attribution policy if they do. What they fail to understand is that, ''saying'' you're taking information from outside sources isn't violating the purpose of the policy; it's ''taking'' information from outside sources that's violating the policy. It seems they think that if they take information from outside sources without admitting it to readers, they're not going against the spirit of the policy. At that point, though, they should just modify it. (I'll just go ahead and repeat this in the forum for the others also xD.) [[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> 13:48, July 26, 2017 (UTC)		Because for various reasons explained in my forum post, even the admins of this site are making exceptions to this policy. Personally, I think that is fine, but it's an un-codified thing. They want to allow exceptions to the Attribution policy, and yet not clarify to readers they're making these exceptions -_- because they feel like they're violating the Attribution policy if they do. What they fail to understand is that, ''saying'' you're taking information from outside sources isn't violating the purpose of the policy; it's ''taking'' information from outside sources that's violating the policy. It seems they think that if they take information from outside sources without admitting it to readers, they're not going against the spirit of the policy. At that point, though, they should just modify it. (I'll just go ahead and repeat this in the forum for the others also xD.) [[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> 13:48, July 26, 2017 (UTC)

			== Helping out with the wiki ==

			So this is about your side-note in your post. As I said, it's really nice to have a newcomer ^_^ because my goodness, you can't believe how much more hands we need around here. :(

			I understand if you feel nervous about editing. Actually, we haven't mentioned this in this wiki, but if you go over to Wookieepedia or Wikipedia, there's a policy called [[w:c:Wookieepedia:Be bold in updating pages\|Be Bold]] which actively encourages editors to be confident about their edits. It's much more efficient that way so everyone provides as much input as possible. Of course, there's always the possibility of editors being too arrogant or aggressive, but that would be more of an issue of failing to compromise or be courteous. As long as you know when to take a step back and negotiate when someone disagrees, then it's perfectly fine to be bold.

			But anyways, I understand if you don't feel the confidence for that just yet, and that's okay! Take your time and edit at your comfort level. I myself sometimes am afraid I'm too intimidating about my corrections of other people's edits.

			If you want to help out more with policy and, as you suggested, verifying sources rather than editing, I would actually very much welcome it. Usually the former is more of an administrative affair, but since the admins are mostly all absent, we could use some help in that area. If you'd like, I could give you a list of all the issues we have with policies, and you can lend your thoughts on them or even help carry out some needed changes. Or if you just want to focus solely on verifying information from cases where editors are taking from external sources, that's fine too. [[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> 14:07, July 26, 2017 (UTC)

imported>Sol Pacificus: Created page with "{{Welcome}} Feel free to contact me on my talk page if you need anything. ~~~~ ==Citing to Wikipedia== Hey Mindedif, I just wanted to welcome you to this community and also t..."

2017-07-26T13:48:17Z

Created page with "{{Welcome}} Feel free to contact me on my talk page if you need anything. ~~~~ ==Citing to Wikipedia== Hey Mindedif, I just wanted to welcome you to this community and also t..."

Páàjì titun

{{Welcome}}
Feel free to contact me on my talk page if you need anything. [[User:Sol Pacificus|'''Sol Pacificus''']][[User talk:Sol Pacificus|(Cyfiero)]] 13:48, July 26, 2017 (UTC)

==Citing to Wikipedia==
Hey Mindedif, I just wanted to welcome you to this community and also thank you for replying to my forum post. Our wiki has suffered from a loss in manpower lately, with most people—even the administrators—on long hiatuses, so we could definitely need and would appreciate some new editors such as yourself. :)

Anyways I'm glad that you understood my reasoning for my proposal because I felt like I wasn't sure I was coming across clearly. You're totally right about the fact that citing first and foremost is about explaining and showing honestly where you got information, not whether it's reliable or not, which comes second. While ideally we should always strive to use the most reliable of sources, absent that, we should use the best we can even if it is not a decent source at all. Citing to even unreliable sources, if that is where we really took the information from, allows readers to verify and gauge the reliability of your information in turn. So I'm really glad you understand this. (I'm just going to go ahead and repeat this part in the forum for the others actually xD).

My only concern is that I wanted to double-check if you understand the context behind why the others might not be in support of my proposal since you're new here. You see, technically, the default policy for any franchise wiki (like ''Star Wars'' for example), is that every information we take ''has'' to be from the official franchise source. We are not allowed to take any outside information whatsoever. This is part of a policy called Attribution. Our wiki doesn't explain our policies too well, so see [[w:c:starwars:Wookieepedia:Attribution|Wookieepedia's Attribution policy]] for the same thing, only in ''Star Wars'' instead. Just substitute Lucasfilms, Ltd. with Ubisoft and you have the same policy here.

Because for various reasons explained in my forum post, even the admins of this site are making exceptions to this policy. Personally, I think that is fine, but it's an un-codified thing. They want to allow exceptions to the Attribution policy, and yet not clarify to readers they're making these exceptions -_- because they feel like they're violating the Attribution policy if they do. What they fail to understand is that, ''saying'' you're taking information from outside sources isn't violating the purpose of the policy; it's ''taking'' information from outside sources that's violating the policy. It seems they think that if they take information from outside sources without admitting it to readers, they're not going against the spirit of the policy. At that point, though, they should just modify it. (I'll just go ahead and repeat this in the forum for the others also xD.) [[User:Sol Pacificus|'''Sol Pacificus''']][[User talk:Sol Pacificus|(Cyfiero)]] 13:48, July 26, 2017 (UTC)