Talk:New Order: Difference between revisions

Line 28:

== October 7th 2014 Revision ==

Prior to this date the this page gave a mostly unbiased explanation of the player group in question with only some minor sections that could use cleaning up. Why was this changed? The Uni claims to be a neutral organization, but in this case a Uni director has changed the page to denounce another organization.

Prior to this date the this page gave a mostly unbiased explanation of the player group in question with only some minor sections that could use cleaning up. Why was this changed? The Uni claims to be a neutral organization, but in this case a Uni director has changed the page to denounce another organization. - Dragoslove

:Please sign your posts with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Enta en bauldry|Enta en bauldry]] ([[User talk:Enta en bauldry|talk]]) 02:09, 7 January 2015 (CST)

The page merely states that we do not support them, and that they should look elsewhere for information on that group. I fail to see how that is denouncing anyone. As you stated, the Uni is neutral. The definition of neutral would imply that we don't support them. [[User:Azmodeus Valar|Azmodeus Valar]]

What I really don't get is why this page exists at all. Most groups in eve do not have a write up on UniWiki, but someone decided to post (an admittedly excellent) write up about the practices of the new order. Some of the wording around how they deal with permits could be argued or removed to reduce bias, but instead the entire page was condensed to pointing out that we don't support them. No other group gets that distinction either. Yes, technically neutrality involves "not supporting" other groups, but pointing out a specific group as not supported does not sound neutral in any way. I strongly support reverting the article and changing the wording involving the validity of permits, or barring that, removing the page all together. By your own words, this page provides no information that is not already understood under the Uni's neutrality clause, and looking elsewhere for more information is understood if no page is returned when searching the wiki. [[User:Dragoslove|Dragoslove]] ([[User talk:Dragoslove|talk]]) 19:20, 5 March 2015 (CST)

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 == October 7th 2014 Revision ==
-Prior to this date the this page gave a mostly unbiased explanation of the player group in question with only some minor sections that could use cleaning up.  Why was this changed?  The Uni claims to be a neutral organization, but in this case a Uni director has changed the page to denounce another organization.
+Prior to this date the this page gave a mostly unbiased explanation of the player group in question with only some minor sections that could use cleaning up.  Why was this changed?  The Uni claims to be a neutral organization, but in this case a Uni director has changed the page to denounce another organization. - Dragoslove
 :Please sign your posts with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Enta en bauldry|Enta en bauldry]] ([[User talk:Enta en bauldry|talk]]) 02:09, 7 January 2015 (CST)
 The page merely states that we do not support them, and that they should look elsewhere for information on that group.  I fail to see how that is denouncing anyone.  As you stated, the Uni is neutral.  The definition of neutral would imply that we don't support them. [[User:Azmodeus Valar|Azmodeus Valar]]
+What I really don't get is why this page exists at all.  Most groups in eve do not have a write up on UniWiki, but someone decided to post (an admittedly excellent) write up about the practices of the new order.  Some of the wording around how they deal with permits could be argued or removed to reduce bias, but instead the entire page was condensed to pointing out that we don't support them.  No other group gets that distinction either.  Yes, technically neutrality involves "not supporting" other groups, but pointing out a specific group as not supported does not sound neutral in any way.  I strongly support reverting the article and changing the wording involving the validity of permits, or barring that, removing the page all together.  By your own words, this page provides no information that is not already understood under the Uni's neutrality clause, and looking elsewhere for more information is understood if no page is returned when searching the wiki.  [[User:Dragoslove|Dragoslove]] ([[User talk:Dragoslove|talk]]) 19:20, 5 March 2015 (CST)