[Milawe]

This has been my experience in the current AfD discussion. Citations have been removed or discredited if there was no link. One editor says that the burden falls upon us to produce it. When one of the citations finally came back online, it was stated to be too insignificant. While it may be true that Wikipedia accepts citations from books, newpapers, websites, etc. it hasn't been true in this case.

Nizevyn was banned for being a sockpuppet. When it was discovered he couldn't really possibly be a sockpuppet, he was reduced to being a meatpuppet.

A request was also put in to ban Theblog for being a sockpuppet. He managed to fight it off somehow. I'd contact him and ask him how, but since I'm banned for being a sock/meat/spaghetti puppet, I can't really contact him.

I was banned for sockpuppeting, meatpuppeting, and posting in collusion. Pick one. I'm not sure which one they finally settled on. Requests for unbanning were met with hostility, aggression, and outright insults.

That would kind of make it so that any magazine or online forum dedicated to gaming unreliable. The people who are involved in gaming love games. They publish things about games. They review the games they play. Wouldn't that translate to movies as well then? If you get written up by someone who is a movie fan, would that mean that it's unreliable? Movies, comic books, video games... there's more volume in what people write about these but as a whole genre, not individuals.

Citations are removed, not the entire entry. Problem is that if you remove all the citations, then you can rock the entry for notability. And... what if your citations are in mostly digital format? If they're removed and the link breaks, what do you do then? I always assumed that's why Wikipedia has the notability clause written the way it does, so things do not have to keep proving its notability over and over. Otherwise, when something is no longer popular or doesn't have a ton of money behind it, does it just disappear?

Here's the problem. While it may not be a cabal, you only need a few editors and administrators teaming up against a casual editor for the casual editor(s) to be bullied out of existence. When you have no idea who to turn to for help against that group and have no idea how big the group even is, you're done. You have no recourse. If you read the following link that I'm posting, you will see that many of the things that happened to him are mirrors of what happened during the Threshold AfD discussion, so while you may not be a part of the "cabal", they do form and rally.




Sorry, I was being sarcastic there. I did get unidentified as a sockpuppet and moved to the meatpuppet category instead. Maybe they've never heard of two people in the same household caring about the same thing before. (That was sarcasm again!)

The point is that there are multiple sources for these already. They're just being discredited as notability sources.

Anyway, please don't take offense to the somewhat flippant tone of this post. I'm only trying to make light of it since I don't really think there's anything else I CAN do about it. So, I'm wallowing in it until I get over it.