Talk:Borgia tower

This is the discussion page for Borgia tower. Here, you may discuss improving the article. To discuss the subject itself, use the Forums.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.	Be polite Assume good faith Do not insult other people

Where the hell did all this information come from? As fair as I can tell, all we saw of the Borgia Towers were that a single tower bearing the Borgia shield was blown up by Ezio. It says nothing about their being more than one, what purpose they play in-game (if they're in the final build at all) or anything like that. --Jasca Ducato _{Council Chamber} ^{Assassination record} 12:33, August 19, 2010 (UTC) In anouther video the player goes into the map menu and you see muiltple borgia towers that says needs to be destroyed.DanMan7308 12:56, August 19, 2010 (UTC) DanMan7308

Actually in one video you can see there are multiple towers on the map.[1]. I did read that Ezio is suppose to find these towers, kill the leader and then destroy it. -- Altaïr 14:56, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

Now you see, if people actually sourced the damn information, like they're suppose to, we wouldn't have these misunderstandings. So I suggest this article gets sourced, otherwise I'll be removing the information. --Jasca Ducato _{Council Chamber} ^{Assassination record} 14:32, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

Jasca, there's no need to make these threats. I think you're a very good contributor, but I often see attitude like this, which is really not necessary. If it's not properly sourced, and it comes out of nowhere then yeah we'll have to remove it. But there are better ways to handle this. You act like you're an admin or a member of the Istruttorium, while you were asked to join, but you're not. So please don't act like you are. If there is no source, then the best thing to do is to find one. And only comment that the information has to be removed because no source can be found at all. But there are, so next time act a little more respectful. I'm sure you want the same respect back. We're trying to improve the wiki here, so discouraging other contributors is not a good idea. -- Altaïr 16:50, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

I'm not making threats. The simple fact of the matter is, when information is added to an article it has to be sourced. The policy, which I do believe you voted to support, clearly says as such. It is not my responsibility to source every single article on this wiki, especially when I am not adding every single piece of information. Respect or me apparently acting like an admin has nothing to do with it, it's a simple matter of source or delete. That is all. --Jasca Ducato _{Council Chamber} ^{Assassination record} 15:47, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

I do agree with your policy. But I think a little patience wouldn't be a bad thing here, after all, the Brotherhood article itself lacks sources. But we know that almost, if not everything is correct in the article. But these sources will be added if we find the best ones. For now we mainly relay on videos we see, while we can later add the game itself as a source mostly when it comes out. Cause the game is probably the most reliable source you can find, instead of these videos. So I'm asking that you shouldn't threat to delete this information unless there is no source at all, but you saw a source yourself, so you knew that a part of the article was correct about the Borgia Towers. The article just needed another source that there were more than just 1 tower and what part it has in the gameplay. -- Altaïr 18:02, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

I am being patient, I asked for a source, and it was given to me, I simply asked that the people who added the information to the article then add the source as well, it's not much to ask. You mention the Brotherhood article, how exactly do we know most, if not all the information is correct? People are adding information to that article, and not saying where it came from, so how do we know it's not just made up? I don't like removing information which is probably correct, the focus of my attention to this wiki is making the articles presentable and having a set standard across the board, but if informaton is added to an article without a source, there is no way to tell if it's true or not.

Now, if somebody truely doesn't know how to reference something, but added the source in their edit summary, I would gladly insert it in the article, likewise if they asked me to on my talk page; but it's not my responsibility to find the source myself. Finally, what I know to be true, and what the average reader knows to be true is different. Just because someone gave me a source on this talkpage, which proved the content of the article correct does not mean every reader will look at the talk page to find the source, which is why it needs to be in the article. --Jasca Ducato _{Council Chamber} ^{Assassination record} 16:23, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

True what you say about the average reader. And I didn't say that it was your responsibility to find sources, but we can give other contributors at least a chance to find sources and if there aren't any then we'll just say that we either mark the article as not sourced or in worst case scenarios we'll delete it. Altaïr 18:42, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

So, basically, we're agreed? I have already taken the time to create a template for unsourced articles (or those lacking) here, which can easily be put on our articles. --Jasca Ducato _{Council Chamber} ^{Assassination record} 16:45, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah I think that's certainly a better approach how to handle these articles, rather than immediately deleting them. Good work on that btw. Altaïr 18:48, August 19, 2010 (UTC)