All posts by ShibaBrother

It seems that the issue was eventually resolved without involving the admins. Thanks for the discussion. It's just a shame that things had to get this far, even though the solution was quite simple.

It's just surreal in general, to be honest. Because as I pointed out above, the moderator seems to admit that there is an error in the text of the article that contradicts the official localization of the game in any language. But he still defends it even when other users try to correct the erroneous part without touching the other text. That is, for some reason the problem is precisely in this erroneous text as such. Otherwise, they could easily correct the erroneous part and say that yes, the source is good, but there is a mistake in this moment.

Thank you. So it's important to show why erroneous information is harmful? In this case, we're talking about the mixed up ending names and related achievements in Dark Souls 3. Given that the game doesn't have direct saves, I think this could confuse people and ruin their playthrough until the next "New Game". Which is especially painful when getting all the achievements in the game.

When I pointed out that this was a mistake, the user actually admitted it, acknowledging that guides can be wrong, either unintentionally or due to outdated information (this was a promotional guide from the PlayStation magazine that was distributed during the game's launch), but they defended this very erroneous information, contradicting what they had previously said.

But how do I explain why this requires intervention? I can't say "guys, this moderator is wrong, make him do what I want." Especially considering that this wiki is not in English.

I've been in similar situations about three times, one of which involved my opponent potentially working on getting a flag while both I and his (potential) main account were banned for edit wars. In all cases, I was told that while the staff does not support or condemn such actions, they have no control over them because I noticed it relatively late and they can't interfere with someone else's work on a project just because an admin behaved badly.

I can understand their decision in general (even though I am still shocked by such gross slander and manipulation from my opponent), but it does not save from similar situations in the future with me or other users who find themselves in some disputes in the middle of old wikis. For example, just a year or two ago I met a user who endlessly rewrote the same fragment of text in order to artificially achieve the required number of edits at a time when the original admin and I were absent from the project.

That was one of my reasons for bringing this up, given my opponent's behavior, but I don't have any interest in that wiki anymore. Not least because of the very negative experience I had with that user. I'm just curious about what other people think about other things in general. I was hoping to somehow influence the creation of rules that would avoid the abuse of adopting abandoned wikis to resolve personal content wars, but I simply don't know how common such situations are.