Forum:Thoughts on Ashbear160

Forums: Village pump → Thoughts on Ashbear160
(This topic is archived. Please do not edit this page!)

What are everyone's thoughts on Ashbear160? If you have any questions, refer to his contributions, his talk page, or simply discuss it here.

Also, please review some points of our disruptive editing policy:

• their edits are largely confined to talk-pages, such disruption may not directly harm an article, but it often prevents other editors from reaching consensus on how to improve an article

• Does not engage in consensus building:
  • repeatedly disregards other editors' questions or requests for explanations concerning edits or objections to edits;
  • repeatedly disregards other editors' explanations for their edits.
• Rejects community input: resists moderation and/or requests for comment, continuing to edit in pursuit of a certain point despite an opposing consensus from impartial editors.

Does anyone have a problem with him? Does anyone have any compliments for him? Also, I can not stress enough that this is not about him, this is about his contributions and edits to the wiki, be they good or bad.--SWM2448 20:50, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I've been asking for opinions... and i explained myself when asked, and i don't disregard other's opinions, if i did disregard other opinions, things would've been a lot messier.--Ashbear160 (talk) 20:58, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

If this is about the organization page, we were talking i made my point, the page is too big for a single list and i personally think it should be divided, and proposed various solutions i'm waiting for your answer.--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:01, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I believe this is more than about the organization page. It's about overall contributions throughout the wiki. And it's not that you ask questions, questions are often a good thing, it shows interest, but sometimes you'll ask questions about something that involves mass edits, and then perform said changes without waiting for a response.. sometimes a minute after you ask what people would think of the change you're looking to do. Don't get me wrong, it's good to be bold and not "ask for permission" to do things, certain things however should be discussed... before they are done. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 22:15, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok then, good thing i set up that discussion in the forums(still haven't got an answer), It's just that most of the times i won't get an answer unless i do a edit first, and if it's disagreed the edit can always be reverted.--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:26, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I have a problem that Ashbear160 are doing WoW-related edits even though he doesn't play WoW, have an obsession with certain articles and subjects and doing widespread edits related to them, makes edits and requests that are non-essential to the improvements of the wiki, and in general being an annoyance. I don't want to compare him to a certain troublesome previous (now perma-banned) editor, but this is the last straw. --g0urra[T҂C] 14:21, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

I asked for opinion, and said i was going to try to do this...--Ashbear160 (talk) 14:31, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

You can edit this wiki and not play WoW, but your edits often require information from the game. Having to rely on second-hand information is bad.--SWM2448 03:12, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

My problem is that, as Gourra said, he is obsessed with certain articles - I mean icons. I think there is far too much icons in this wiki - like icons for chaos orcs, or unique icons for different skin of same model, most of it suggested by Ashbear. That's all. I would respond sooner, but -don't get me wrong- when I saw name of this forum, I just laughed too hard.Neutralion (talk) 19:03, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

And i accepted all of your valid arguments and moved on, some i didn't because i still think they aren't valid (ex: there are red orcs serving the horde in the dark portal but they are not the heavily mutated version represented in the icons for fel orcs, so we needed icons for that case, and the icons for the two different icons "of souls" creatures are requested because someone did the same for erudax, and i conceded on your argument of morogrim, i though he was different but he was not.)--Ashbear160 (talk) 20:32, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, all I know is, your constant requests for icons (some of which make no sense) have gotten our lead icon maker at the point of not even wanting to make icons anymore... and I myself have stopped looking at the requested icon section. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 20:39, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

I would try to make them myself, and i did but you rejected it based on quality, can you at least tell me how did you make it look good so i can stop requesting and start making some?--Ashbear160 (talk) 20:50, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

As I've said before... I'd prefer the icon making kept to a few users, ones that won't make icons for every Tom, Dick and Harry in the game. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 20:54, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

I think I can at least justify most if not all Icon requests, pick one requested icon that you think i can't justify why it's on the list(note: i'm removing firedancer and captured flame because the first i saw in a preview in the firelands which was eventually replaced with druids, and the captured flame because flame sprites are not canon now...), i also wouldn't do it for every tom dick and harry, but just those that are on the list since vanilla to wotlk, because i don't have cata installed--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:03, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Very well, this can be picked up on the appropriate page (Next time wait till I point them out, rather than jumping straight into it... ) Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 21:23, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

On December 7 2010, I marked Ashbear160‎ as a "suspect" on the Violations page for "Edit wars on Horde bias, Alliance bias, Humanoid, and others." The edit wars may have stopped as he claimed (I am not sure), but he did not improve. On January 21, 2011 I blocked Ashbear160 for three days for being "In violation of the Wowpedia:Disruptive editing policy." The reasoning for the ban went right over his head. I have come to dislike him greatly, and I am too biased at this point to add much to the discussion, but I honestly believe him to be incapable of improvement. Good faith is always present, but I doubt that I can disagree with a person that much and be wrong in all instances. He has several flaws (some big, some small, all persistent), and he has not made any effort to fix them. He just digs his heels in and makes excuses.--SWM2448 21:18, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I can't help but agree with most of what's been said so far. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 00:28, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Ditto. TherasTaneel (talk) 00:43, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Does he have any redeeming qualities or features? He helps with somethings somewhere, right?--SWM2448 00:48, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

What you called making excuses, is what i call discussing or arguing, so we can find common ground and establish that on the article, nobody is incapable of improvement, i'm trying my best to avoid being disruptive, i still think there are some common standards that should be applied to all articles/templates of that type for certain things to become less confusing(that's why i set a thread up in the forums which has largely been ignored), i haven't created any edit wars as far as i'm aware, when disagreements are found i try talk them on talk pages, i have flaws too, i know i'm persistent, and maybe sometimes annoying, but i'm trying to improve, of course that hard when most are not up to discussing.--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:53, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

If it's about what i do:

• I made with help the template:sapient race and made and updated most of faction templates, and remade the creature template.
• I updated the very ancient articles religions, eternal and demigod and also updated most of the creature pages.
• Shifted categories around that were wrong and corrected information on it that was wrong.
• When the rpg was non-cannon i shifted a lot of categories and corrected and separated a lot of articles information.
• Made some Online sources articles.
• I have over 5k edits, so to this day i did a lot of stuff and i hope to continue improving wowpedia.

--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:58, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, aside from the suspicions and the incessant things current, other edits are quite fine. Perhaps recent edits overshadows the whole? TherasTaneel (talk) 01:02, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Over 6.6k edits, this always happens when i try to change something so it works better, guess this time was my annoyance at them reverting to a broken form after i updated the organization article with lon-ami help some time ago, sometimes i concede, others i do not, probably because i usually make more lore significant edits than others.--Ashbear160 (talk) 01:06, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Quantity is not equal to quality. I can not say what that quality is. TherasTaneel, this has gone on for a while. The recent edits were just a final kick for me to make this topic.--SWM2448 03:12, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

So what bad articles did i make? my usual procedure is edit, someone reverts, i revert with justification in the edit, if someone reverts again i try to discuss it out in the talk page, tell me is there any problem with that? because i feel like i'm on trial here to be banned, and i devoted a lot of time to try to improve this wiki, trying my best to avoid edit wars.

only coobra presented a good criticism of me, i need to be more patient when asking permission to do stuff and the time when i do stuff, and that is a good thing to be bold, and sometimes i misunderstand what people meant.

you stated that i did not engage in consensus building, that i disregarded other questions and requests, yet when dark T criticised my edit on the dragon whelps and asked me not to make new articles i accepted because he had a good point(one mob does not a good article make), instead, when coobra stated that ban'thalos and dori'thur were not owl scouts, i accepted it and had gone back to the articles and reverted parts that error, i make mistakes and when someone points them out i try to correct them, you cannot say that i disregard other people opinion and consensus, and if you also stated that i mostly leave it to talk pages, so now it's a bad thing to talk the problems i see in the article in the talk pages.--Ashbear160 (talk) 11:52, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for sounding too defensive and verbose, but i feel like i'm on trial here to be banned, by a person that admitted that has a bias against me, when i dedicated a lot of time to the improvement of this wiki, while trying my best to improve my attitude.--Ashbear160 (talk) 11:54, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

This is not a trial, this is an opinion poll. Also, I have forbidden myself from banning you (despite what you may think). Someone else needs to do it, if it comes to that.--SWM2448 21:01, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok, but i'm just trying to do what's i think is best for wowpedia, and contrary to many people think i hear other opinion, in fact most of the templates i build was based on others criticising my early versions of them.--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:22, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I onlike dislike that you seem to "rush" too much when editing. I mean, you don't usually do "definitive" edits, and often come back to fix grammar or other errors. You should use the preview and the see changes tools more often, and don't save page with each minor edit. Make a load of them and save it later.

Also, use your user page to create experiments if you can't wait for a response. Create them and move them later to the public space in case people like them.--Lon-ami (talk) 16:03, 16 July 2011 (UTC)