Sure, I do what I can, not an admin but best to pay care to the wiki as aa whole, I ma just glad one of the admins blocked him while I was undoing the vandalism so it wasn't a futile effort. I can only do so much so hopefully the further back ones will be attended to by the admins as well.
Please do not add your personal opinons onto pages. The Ulfric Stormcloak page had a lot of biased and/or inaccurate information on it, which I removed. I'm going to explain in detail how the information you have re-added is incorrect.
The Stormcloak motto isn't "Skyrim Belongs to the Nords" there is no proof of this what so ever, and is opinion based, you cannot add speculation of what there "motto" is, since there is nothing saying that they have this as a motto, it's speculation, therefor has no place on the page.
The second thing I removed is simply opinon based, as there's no way to tell that's why people join the Stormcloaks, so that's why I removed it.
Ulfric has never shown a sign of disliking "all non-Nords" only Dunmer and Argonians, races such as Altmer and Imperials live in his city with no signs of harassment from his soldiers or people living in the town, meaning this is incorrect, and (or) speculation!
The Kahjiit Caravans are not allowed in any cities, saying that it's just the Stormcloaks is downright dishonest, again is false and needed to be removed from the page, which I did...
Ulfric never admitted he was wrong in Sovngarde, if you see his dialogue he never mentions the Thalmor, he only mentions how it strengthened Alduin, it is false and needed to be removed.
I will re-remove the information, please do not add it back. It is false or speculation for the reasons I explained.
I corrected the motto actually to that of the Stormcloaks, you altered and sanded off everything that even remotely implied racism, which would be fine if he was just fighting for his country, but as stated a variety of policies are directed at his own country-men who are just non-nords, that is not Nationalistic, that is racist. He does admit it, he express sorrow at dooming his countrymen to die
"And so in death, too late, I learn the truth - fed by war, so waxed the power of Alduin, World-Eater - wisdom now useless."
But you are corrected he never actually admits to acting out of pride, I must have been confusing his admition of sorrow with King Torygg's comments about Ulfric's ego.
As for the caravans I agree actually, such details were added after my original article by other contributors but I did not wish to step on any toes removing what other contributors considered important, but just removing all of it, playing down the policies of Windhelm to make Ulfric look like he is not a villain period, that is also something I have been on the watch for. You have edited less than 30 things in more than a year, perhaps I jumped the gun but I have seen similar contributors who come on edit 2 things they saw and did not like in passing on a web search and then leave the wiki forever. I admit after seeing such sections softened combind with your edit history I became suspicous of how much work you actually intended to put in and may have jumped the gun by just reverting to the previous edit, for that I am sorry.
You see part of the civil war dilemma is do you side with the racist rebels or the rights trampling soldiers, Righteous and fanatic vs Cruel but fair. So to have one side of that played down is a really nasty cop-out I am highly on the lookout for. I tried my best not to put any personal opinions, I stated only policies, I gave a full background of what lead to certain events and ideas implanted in Uldfric, wrote up-front that he is only a villain if you side against him and posted an article on Tulius for those that side with The Stormcloaks; but to have so much of it taken out because "He's not racist" No I am not going to settle for that. Now you can take it to a admin if you like, better than getting into a flame war for us, I will gladly abide by such a ruling and look forward to bringing up exact quotes from the game. I am going to re-post the article without the emphasis on the iffy stuff and a clear indication of the quote's source but I will not keep the wishy wash stuff that tries to play down Ulfric's policies. I hope it will be acceptable, but I am not going to let the racist stuff be played off as nationalism or justified since a lot of players who do side with him hand-wave such issues like they are not there.
Please check to see if the finished product is something you can live with, I combind the previous edit with some of but not all your reforms.
I'm alright with you changing the Nationalistic thing to racist, the only thing I had a problem with was the incorrect information that was re-added, I get that this page is supposed to show how Ulfric is a villain (we are on a Wiki dedicated to that after all!), but it simply appeared to be extremely one-sided and got blantent information incorrect (atleast in comparsions to the General Tullius page), but I'm okay with going into the racism more, it's just the conjecture and theories against him which I do not like to see on the page.
The Imperials are cruel, torturous, murdering monsters. Whether you believe these actions were undertaken mainly at the behest of the Thalmor is irrelevant. The Empire has agreed to enact atrocities in their name - this is absolutely unacceptable. Tullius is a callous and ignorant tyrant-governor, resorting to outright execution of "unwanted" individuals without trial or inquiry. He makes no qualms with letting the player know he doesn't know or care about Nord customs, wants or needs, as shown in this quote: "Well Ulfric, you can't escape from me this time. Any last words before I send you to... to wherever you people go when you die." This is RIGHT BEFORE he kills Ulfric, when he could have easily said nothing and still done the deed. Players' standpoint is indeed subjective plot-wise, but Tullius (and his puppet-empire) is the true villain of the story, however you look at it.
It's ironic to characterize Ulfric as merely a racist against Dunmer and Argonians. Ulfric has no personal love of the Dunmer, yet neither do the Dunmer like most non-dark elf races. Dunmer have been raiding, plundering, capturing, and enslaving the Nord people (among many others) for thousands of years. They are extremely intolerant of outsiders (which they like to remind whomever they encounter, are "outlanders"), are generally nasty, rude and openly shun those not born among them as inherently inferior. If Ulfric knows all of this, he has most certainly grown to resent them because of it.
If not liking to see his country enslaved and put under the thumb of a Thalmor-controlled puppet Empire, the banishment of open Talos worship in a country where it is CENTRAL to everyday existence, and the execution/capture of unwanted people makes Ulfric a villain, then nothing I can say can convince you otherwise.
Never thought I’d get this passionate over a damn PC game. I just really don't understand peoples' justification for violence/tyranny.
True on most counts, except Tulius, and nearly all the Imperials, realize they are pawns. No one like that treaty. Ulfric was conned by Elenwen into believing the empire was victimizing him and the Thalmor were just the hands on the whips. As for the racist thing, no that is pretty clear through-out the game. See while Ulfric himself isn't exactly KKK material he stops caring about any countrymen who are not Nords, he is very protective of any and all Nords abused but can not be bothered to put forth any effort to stop abuse towards non-Nords, Whether they are elves, beastfolk Imperials or Bretons. That is racism in essence, soft-core-racism to be sure, but racism none the less, Consider the Stormcloaks are ONLY Nords, with the possible exception of the Dragonborn. The Imperials, while mostly Imperial have Redgards, Orcs, Altmer and Dunmur spread through-out their troops. As the article says Ulfric himself is not hard core racist but he intentionally ignores or enables acts of prejudice to occur while getting extremely protective of his, and only his race's right.
As for the empire, it really can't be justified either, not as a whole, that is for a player by player call. If you participate in the civil war arc you will have to justiy something. Either you will need to justify loss of stability/safety, with a side of racial supremacy for the basic concept of cultural/religious freedom, or you will have to justify oppression and subjugation for safety and stability. But I know how you feel, the dilemma the game creates for players is really well done since different players can get passionate about a made up game like it is actual politics, it's a mark of good writing.
Hey mesektet, you remember me right? well, I gotta ask your opinion about patrick and spongebob, people have been calling them outright monsters. But do you think that's true or do you think that their exaggerating.
To be fair villains wiki has more structure there are less spelling errors, more complete pages and all categories based on appearance and race have long since gone, I and the other admins there are trying to get Heroes wiki up to those standards. But as of the past year or so more and more articles are added based almost entirely on fan hatred to the point where it is starting to become less of a wiki and more of a fan website. I hope Magma Dragoon and the other admins here can keep it from getting to that point, things like that are the reason I personally eliminate any similar additions to heroes wiki when I see them.
As for my opinion on the Patrick and Spongebob pages, no I don't think they come close to outright villains, Doctor Doom is an outright villain, Cobra Commander is an outright villain, Chucky Ray is an outright villain!; Spongebob and Patrick Star are not, heck I don't even think they qualify as villains in the first place, for those all of 3 episodes when they did "bad, naughty, meany-face things", or whatever is being used to validate their presence here. It's fan hate plain and simple, good luck trying to fight that.
But if you want something to hang your hat on consider this, there is a category called Villains by Proxy, contributors love to add to that one since it applies to villains who are antagonists of a story without being evil, I know because I made it. It was deleted at first due to being uneeded and I helped get rid of it to make up for adding it, but then later an admin brought back as essential since more and more pages were appearing that it seemed to apply to. See if that category has been added to either page, if it has then the characters can not be Outright Villains since Villains by Proxy is the precises opposite of that. To have Outright Villains and Villains by Proxy on the same page is contradictory so if Villains by Proxy is already on there you have a good shot at gettiing the admins to put their feet down.
You guys do have plenty of flaws on heroes wiki, but at least you guys have standards of what qualifys as a hero. Villains wiki just let's any character that's hated by fans be put on this wiki. A perfect example would be Patrick star since he is a jerk but people have been calling him a complete monster, heck even spongebob is being called a complete monster. This is really an exaggeration, the same goes for mr krabs who despite being mean, he isn't downright evil. Many fans have been calling squidward, Patrick, mr krabs and spongebob complete monsters.
Except, Mr. Krabs commits many morally wrong things. He tried to sale contaminated meat to people just to make a profit, he almost made Plankton commit suicide, he abuses his workers, he abuses animals, and naturally, the list goes on. And as for Patrick, there is such a thing as a Villainous Jerk. People who call these characters complete monsters simply do not know what the term is, and it's mostly their own personal opinions. They are best to be ignored.
Overall, Patrick and Krabs both have reasons for being here, and each article doesn't employee fan opinion in them.
I can understand your point, but mr krabs isn't an outright monster. I've actually found some of his antics to be funny since they almost always backfire. Plus hes been remorseful from time to time. Don't get me wrong i was very questionable towards mr krabs on one coarse meal and born again krabs. But I wouldn't consider him a monster. Plus hes been unfairly punished from time to time. And he's not a karma Houdini because his actions have been known to catch up to him in future episodes. But I think that calling them complete monsters is going overboard. Plus mr krabs and Patrick have been shown to truly care about spongebob.
Oh, right... let's get back to the main point: I specially don't agree when protagonists behave like jerks at some moment and people just add them here like its nothing. I still do not like the Teen Titans from TT GO! and those Spongebob characters you mentioned being here because of that. The Wiki has standards, but it requires more vigilance; people often do not have the same definition for the word "villain", and there's also the fact that there are some who take some articles personal. I believe it gets out of hand when lesser concepts with no plot start making its way here as articles, which happens a lot.
You know even though the creator said that krabs was one of the main antagonists, I would still consider him more of a secondary. And you know spongebob isn't completely innocent either but he's no villain, except in maybe the episode where he tried to be mermaid man and then arrested the entire town along with Patrick. But they were both being oblivious to that fact. But spongebob is mostly a karma Houdini, considering the fact that other characters(especially squidward) have been punished for what he did. But overall I think were exaggerating every spongebob character.
How I see it is that a character like Krabs can be added here just as long as their bad qualities balance out with their good qualities. One page that I consider to be the epitome of fan hatred has to be the Finn Human page. This page was repeatedly added to this wiki despite that fact that it was deleted multiple times. What's worse is that there is absolutely no context to explain why Finn belongs here. Also, Finn also cannot fit here on this wiki. He cannot fit, because his good qualities outweigh his bad qualities, and the show never treats him as a bad guy. Someone like Krabs, however, can fit on this wiki, because his good actions are, usually balanced out with his bad qualities. He's also shown as being an antagonist several times, as I have mentioned above.
Overall, I am quite certain that those characters weren't added here because fans hate them. They both equally have reasons for being on here, and so does most of the TT Go characters (especially Robin).
Again, they don't know what qualifies for that trope. They are also very emotionally-invested with the show, and they would get pissed off whenever their favorite characters start acting like jerks or sociopaths.
You know mysterious mr enter really thinks that Patrick is a monster. He obviously isn't paying to his good deeds. And I know what you mean it's hard to ignore their actions, but they have felt sorry for their bad deeds. And they've done some good things too.
You guys know that somebody put pops maellard in villains wiki even though hes never done anything wrong except in think positive but that was unintentional. Also I think that having benson in this wiki is a bit much considering the fact that he only threatens to fire them if they do anything wrong, which I can understand.
Oh, THAT GUY. Yeah, he's made over 5 accounts and has constantly vandalized this wiki. You know that guy who kept calling Freddy a remorseful villain, and later a redeemed one? THAT was Horrornut, just with a sock. He's also known as Gojirules, the guy who got the Godzilla page locked and tried to justify rape. He's really infamous at Wikizilla as well. He's been globally banned countless times.
You know I understand that you guys allow anyone if they're a protagonist, but what about those protagonist that are complete monsters in their media how are they going to qualify for heroes wiki or technically protagonist wiki. And villains wiki pretty much allows anyone if they are hated by fans. I understand that people are pissed off at them, but that doesn't mean they qualify for villains. They only qualify if they have done something that qualifys them to be a villain, but if was only a one time thing or they weren't even that bad then theres no point in adding them. An example would be Richard watterson and woody woodpecker, sure what they did was wrong but hey there actions weren't that bad. Now for heroes wiki, or technically protagonist wiki, there are many heroes that are unredeemed and they kill, torture, mutilate, destroy property, continuously abuse others without having any remorse or care, but I guess since they're a protagonist then they qualify for heroes wiki, you guys need to think do they really have good intentions, or do they just want to kill others for no reason. An example would be Trevor he has killed numerous people for no reason, in fact the reason he killed johny was because he scolded at him for having sex with his girlfriend, and then after that he killed his entire gang without any reason except that he was pissed off. Now people like magneto, the punisher, kratos, they all qualify because they all had some redeeming qualities, maybe not much but still, they fought for the side of good on some occasions. But Trevor he had no remorse, nor did he ever fight for good.
Well, and this is the standard I use not the one Villain wiki does mind you, I think a villain needs at-least two of three things to be a villain, 1 Genuine malicious intent, 2 is a serous threat to the world at large and 3 is an antagonist in the narrative.
In a hero's case I would use similar though inverted principles 1 Are they good hearted, 2 have they actually done good deeds and 3 are they protagonists in the narrative. In say Richard Watterson's case the big ninny is good hearted, if prone to selfishness from time to time, and is the protagonist of the narrative. On the Villain side he is a serious threat to the world at large and in a few episodes has functioned as an antagonist (as parents are bound to do from time to time in shows centered around children.) Can't begin to justify the likes of Woody Woodpicker though since it varies from writter to writter, same as Bugs Bunny.
As for Trevor there is no need to convince me, I have voted "nay" for keeping him but one of the other admins says "ye" and we are still waiting on the third, who I assume by now has not checked in for a while, he is usually very active but real life issues happen. I have not played the game myself so I felt it responsible to check in with other admins before I just deleted the page and again sorry it is taking so long, I have been waiting on that final vote same as you. Either way from what I have read on other wiki's he is a protagonist villain but one with no redeeming qualities, the standard psycho team-mate who just happens to be on your side leaving him with only 1/3 of the standard I use. I should wait for the final vote to come in but I must admit this is getting a bit ridiculous. The article is mostly plagiarized so I may have the leeway to delete it, understand this though, since the third admin may yet vote in the page may be restored, But if it does it will need to be from scratch since the information is plagiarized, so if deleted it will only be restored if another contributor puts in fresh effort to writing the page.
Honestly I was thinking of deleting it and remaking it since it is still new and it is not capitalized, but decided that would be in poor form for a minor semantic. As for the basic idea, seems good though, I encorage you to watch the category though, people like using categories like that to try to pass villains off as heroes, I need to keep watching Villains by Proxy for the same reason.
Well technically a hero by proxy isn't necessarily a redeemed villain, sometimes it means that they were just normal people but then they were forced instead of willingly. An example of this would be aang since he didn't want to be the avatar, but because the monks forced him he had to be a hero. Plus just because a villain is in villain by proxy or a hero is a hero by proxy doesnt mean they can't be pure of heart or complete monster, but that's only if they start getting used to it, again an example of this would be aang since he didn't want to be a hero, but he got used to it as the series went by. But don't get me wrong, I'm not saying he was a jerk or anything( he was a minor jerk in some occasions, such as when he ignores katara but it was only because hes a child and children have been known to be ignorant from time to time.)
On the note of Aang, keep in mind he is still naturally good hearted and helps people regardless of fate or anything like that, he would almost certainly be the same form of person even if he wasn't the Avatar, his case more seems Messiah by proxy. He almost certainly would do things like try to teach firebender children to have fun, free people captured by a crazy Bloodbender, try to help free a city and so on whether he was the Avatar or not, being the Avatar just meant he also had duties to do things like save the world bring balance to the force etc etc...but I won't make a fuss over that, just food for thought.
But my original point was that people will still try to pass off villains as heroes through that description be on the look out for fan heroes.
Heroes by proxy can still be kind hearted people and still be extremely caring, but even in aangs state, he is still a hero by proxy because he was kindhearted and a very likable person, but he was still forced into becoming from a very kindhearted and well meaning citizen into a hero, he was very sad by this circumstance because he was sort of like an outcast, but only in a very tiny way and nothing harsh. Okay here's the thing, there is even a message saying that they can still pure of heart despite this, like aang.
I'm sorry to butt in, but new categories are prohibited from this wiki. You can get banned for it. Categories on franchises are permitted, however, just as long as you can get 20 articles on the category.
Actually they are, at least doing so without checking in with the admin, it is on the rules page. You may want to clear it with an admin from now on otherwise they may be deleted without warning to enforce the policy, it has happened before.
True, but in that case magic was involved, on her own she was incapable of feeling bad for anything she had done. One might even argue, based on the rules of Angel/Buffy, that Darla the CM and Darla the human were two different beings same as Angel and Angelus, the whole soul v no soul thing.
But the Darla that sired Angel and died was a CM, the whole magic curse reensoulment thing threw a MacGuffin into the normal rules.
Very good point. Sadly the page is just Darla so there is no page with her other self. And technically it wasn't magic, she felt the way she did because Connor inside her had a soul, but I get your point. Btw, is Penn from the Angel episode Somnanbulist a CM?
Hard to say, like all vampires he is incapable of feeling regret or empathy, so he CAN became a CM if he does enough bad things. According to Angel he was one of his best students and tagged along with him and Darla for a few years so, maybe. He is only mentioned in one episode, but just because we don't see the worst of what he does, doesn't mean he isn't one. I'd say he probably is myself, just based on the whole no soul thing + being Angelus's pupil for a few years, and the whole murdering young women just for it's own sake thing.
Well no need to worry about that, at the point when a vampire becomes a vampire you need to judge them just as that. It's zombie logic, you don't judge them by who they were when they were alive cause those people are effectively dead, you judge them just as how they act in the span of their undeath. With vampires it's just that they have the memories of the people they were, that's all. It may appear less cut and dry since they can seem like they are the original people that died, but memories ≠ soul.
I've thought of that myself a while back, though ultimately you'd have to ask Whedon, I eventually came to the conclusion that technically love is a selfish concept in it's core, it requires no empathy to speak of just enjoyment. 9/10 when Spike or other vampires on Buffy/Angel fall in love with someone it takes the form of lust mixed with obsession. And again with Darla+Angelus it comes down to both viewing the other as their perfect match, even if that match is based on surface reasons since there is nothing beneath the surface that was all that mattered.
It's about Ryan Anderson from I've Got You Under My Skin. I know he was evil, but was it him trash talking Wesley and Angel and strgling his when they tried to exorcise him or the demon? Or was it the demon making him do it? That confuses me because why would the demon distract them if he wanted out of the boy's body? And if it was Ryan, how did he know about Wesley's dad and all that? Was the fact that he had no soul implying that he was a demon?
Well the demon was talking from the potion onward, but prior to that, the "trouble" Ryan got into in previous towns/schools was not done by the demon just Ryan, the whole thing was Ryan could not be possessed because he was a sociopath, at-least until the spell which brought the demon to the surface, so even though he was bound at the time from Angel's attempt to bring out the demon, until the conclusion of the exorcim the "Ryan" seen was actually the demon.
No I know he didn't have control until Ryan ate those brownies and stuff, just curious why the demon would make matters more difficult to get him out if he wanted out. And I mean afterwards like you said.
Oh that, well keep in mind, demon is still a demon, he's not a nice guy. And let's face it demons on Buffy/Angel love to be over-dramatic and play-up their big damn monster rolls, also since possession can make things ambiguous, it's probably easier to get yourself exorcised by sending a stealth message pleading for help rather than outright asking them to do so since no one would trust him.