Because you won't

Don't use the undo feature to question the status quo regardless of what you think of it. If you have questions then YOU make a talk page, don't tell others to, you're not above this. To answer your question, yes there is precedent and that is the conclusion we came to partly because of you (and others like you) in fact. The clearly defined rule of zero speculative material stems from a time when you and some others banded together to discuss whether Aer really was Macha or not, even after it was shown she wasn't but you guys thought it was worth mentioning anyway.

And therein lies the issue, what is and isn't worth mentioning. Wikipedia (which admittedly isn't us and works in a different manner) have a very strong rule regarding notability/importance. For this wiki it remains an unwritten guideline of sorts (again, one that was decided upon by several members including current staff). Don't write dumb/pointless/inane things on the wiki. So yes, to a certain degree that is open to interpretation. Common sense should dictate what is and what isn't important in the context of a game guide. This shouldn't even be an issue but certain users seem to think that Cichol's favourite brand of cologne is important, as opposed to things that are actually notable such as how to participate in the latest event. You once said something along the lines of "All information is important". No, that is not what was decided.

Members have since acted to remove "detritus" and with some zeal at that. But at this stage if you don't like this then what you need to be doing is not being uncooperative and playing mod. If you think something's worth keeping, fine. But you're going to have to present a convincing argument why editors should be wasting time on trivial matters when all good sense of design and quality indicates otherwise.

I would like to begin by saying I did not claim the information in question on the Professor J page is worthy or not, that'd be for a thread. A thread that you are in obligation to make as it is you who is trying to change the page. I can make one for you if you like. I have taken the time to reeducate myself on this wiki's policy.

First of all

“	If a disagreement occurs, a reversion may happen. You must respect this reversion, even if done by another user, and prefer to discuss the issue in the talk page for that page.	„

I requested that you continue the discussion on the page in questions' talk page. I would like to hear your argument, and might even agree. I am not strongly in favor of keeping or removing the line. I am against removing things without due process.

Furthermore, I am not taking the role of a mod. I am following the wiki policy, the guidelines that we are all expected to follow. (And before anyone questions whether I or Mystic have the right to revert eachother's edits, there is nothing stating otherwise. Only that we may not undo mod's edits.)

“	If an administrator or moderator (collectively considered moderators) reverts a contribution or makes an edit as a deciding factor in a tensioned discussion, argument, issue, or etc. it is an offense to revert it. These are to be considered final judgments and an explicit end to the argument. If one takes further issue it must be presented as an appeal to the moderator on that moderator's talk page.	„

So what should really be discussed? First of all, what is the wiki's policy on removal? All I found is:

“	In main spaces you may contribute only content. This includes corrections to content in meaning, form, and lexico-grammatical ways. You may not completely remove content from a page that is in accordance with our policy, however this does not prevent you from presenting the data in a different or more summarized way so long as all the content is still represented in some way.	„

There is no alleyway for content to be removed, as far as I see it in these guidelines, unless something is considered not to be content (or a moderator says so because they have the final say).

Instead of quesitoning what I'm doing, you should be making a thread in Professor J's talk page argueing whether that line of text is considered content. The policy says:

“	Textual content is text written on the wiki within the main namespaces (or also just "spaces") of the wiki. Image content is an image displayed on the wiki within the main namespaces. Video content are videos displayed on the wiki within the main namespaces. Audio content is not currently supported individually by the wiki and would instead be displayed in a video form.	„

It goes into further detail on what each type of content is. The line on the Professor J page most clearly matches descriptive content.

“	Descriptive content is content such that it describes an object, event, place, NPC, plot, ability, concept, or process within the game. Description is factual in nature and does not use subjective terms or subject matters such as, but not limited to, quality of appearance. It is generally done in words rather than numbers. Descriptions are considered claims of facts present in Mabinogi that should be indisputable. If you are not 100% certain of the authenticity of a claim, seek feedback in the talk space of the relevant page.	„

The Professor J page says:

“	In Iria II: Episode 1, when the Aces are requested to deliver relief supplies, Professor J holds onto them as he did not trust Merlin. Strangely, upon arrival at the delivery point, all characters and the description of Episode 2 state that Merlin had been carrying and lost the supplies.	„

This is factual. It describes the plot. You were not questioning the authenticity of the claim. There is no precedent in the policy, as far as I see it, that allows non-moderators to remove content. You can only improve on it, or start a discussion on it. In the case of improving on it, the only thing, to me, that seems opinionated in the post is the word "strangely", which can better phrased with the word "however".

If you would like to reread the wiki policy regarding content, and see the sources of my argument, go to Mabinogi World Wiki:Policy/Content.

It's not that there's no alleyway for content to be removed but it certainly should be discussed, yes. This whole thing falls mostly under style I think (tho Blargel's argument is valid too, I hadn't thought about it). I want style to be discussed among users even tho moderators can define it. It's ill defined though and it's not something I can work too well into policy. I can try to work on a page about removal, though, that can touch on things like style and invalidity. It might be worth doing.

As much as you are right about the reversion policy the point of the policy is to stop reversion wars, so, I think if you're put in a position to revert again because someone's not listening, it may be better to start the discussion thread yourself.

(EDIT: To advertise fairness, I did discuss this with Mystickskye in private as well.)

That would actually help. It's not exactly required by the policy right now, but I feel like we should talk about things like these (and things unlike these) before removing them. Afterwards we can set up a sort of horizontal stare decisis and make people appeal to have content on the pages, rather than appeal to take them off (since that seems to be what people like Mystic seem to think is happening), but there should at least be a day's worth of discussion before we rush to delete things that have no clearly defined precedent. (And I would like to be linked to the discussion Mystic says sets the precedent.)

Also I apologize about the reversions.

For this particular case, I agree with Mystickskye. Although the content in question is technically following the policy, it has nearly no value. The main focus isn't even the Professor J character; it's more about a consistency mistake in the story. Yes, there's nothing about what kind of content does not belong on the wiki. That's because that sort of thing is, admittedly, fairly subjective. At this time, the judgments are being made at the discretion of the moderators who encounter the content in question. As such, I'm going to remove that trivia.

EDIT: The other trivia on that page is questionably relevant... I'm going to leave it for now, but it's kinda bugging me.

It not pertaining specifically to Professor J himself is a good argument. Wouldn't it be better in this case to move it to a more relevant page then? Such as the pages specifically made for storyline? Such as Mabinogi Storyline Recap.

Looking over the edits going on the page, it's nothing more than a continuity error, if anything. I don't see the point of it being on J's page, let alone anywhere else. Could be caused by something lost in translation. The recap page isn't a good place for it either. That storyline recap is due for an overhaul, and not to mention the varying nature of choices (I'm looking at you G15) does not really help matters in making a "canonical" storyline.

I'm going to have to side with Mystick and Blargy on this one. As much as it follows policy, there's little value in such a thing.

As much as it may be of little value, fun little tidbits such as those are still part of a story. That's why they're in the TRIVIA section rather than the MAIN STORY. You guys are making way too much a fuss over this. If it's canon and mentioned by official sources, it's worth putting under trivia. Believe it or not, people do enjoy such little things and actually do look on wikis for those.

So for the love of everyone's sanity, please just drop this. All of you. As long as it's official, the aforementioned information deserves to be there as much as the main content.

Who r u?

Unfortunately, you do not get to make that call. I also do not believe you speak for the majority opinion.

You're right it on it not being Kitty's call, but I don't believe any of us knows the majority opinion. For that, I'd suggest a survey, on both Mabinogi World Forums and Mabination Forums, to see the results. That is, if such results would be taken into consideration at all. Since, as you said, you removed it because you judged it ill fit to be on the wiki, and that it is currently solely based on moderator judgement. And Mikaya's final sentiment was that it didn't have anywhere to go and that she considers it of little value. Would you like to explore whether people actually consider it valuable? I think it'd be a healthy exercise to see what viewers like and don't like. Maybe you could get some helpful feedback for other things while you're at it.

I'd definitely be interested in the results of such a survey except that I think it'd be best if the results were from regular users of the wiki, even the unregistered ones. I dunno how the heck we'd get those unregistered users to take it though...

We could set a banner on the front page/on the top of the pages, encourage people to make accounts (last I remember the account making process wasn't difficult), and keep such a discussion/survey up for 1~3 weeks. Qualitative results would be preferable to quantitative in my opinion, but both would work. I still think we should cover multiple websites for a higher participant pool, though.

The storyline page sounds like it would be perfect for "plot holes" or story inconsistencies. Why wouldn't it be a good place for it?

Just because a page is incomplete doesn't mean you can't add minor details to it. The policy says:

“	However, you are and cannot be held responsible for completeness; it is the job of the community at large to strive for completeness.	„

and also

“	You may not completely remove content from a page that is in accordance with our policy, however this does not prevent you from presenting the data in a different or more summarized way so long as all the content is still represented in some way.	„

It seems like it'd be better to have the content somewhere, even in a page that's already messy, and personally improve on it, or improve on it as a community.

The page is named Mabinogi Storyline Recap.

The point of a recap is to super-simplify/summarize the story from the content given. This does not include minor details, and as such, wouldn't really fit in. If you're going to add minor details to something that should be straight forward and simple, then it's not really much of a recap.

That is a good point. What if I began working on more detailed pages for individual storylines? I am willing to take responsibility, if you think in such a scenario these plot inconsistencies would have a place.

So what's going on? Are we going to the study? Would updating/making new more detailed storyline pages and including plot holes in them be acceptable?

No one's replying, but I think the best course of action is to make some plot-dedicated pages. Be sure to include spoiler warnings at the top, of course.

I'm fine with anyone handling it. If you need references towards official scripts, there's a completed script for Generation 1, and partially completed scripts for Generation 2, and for whatever reason, Generation 19.

You can also use this god forsaken project that was too much for me to handle, as I've paraphrased everything based on the actual in-game scripts (With some exaggerations...). There are a lot of gaps, but Generations 7, 8, 17, and Saga I are completed in its most of its entirety, save a few details.

As far as some ground rules:

• No Speculations/Theories. Keep everything as true to what is said in-game.
• Spoiler Warning at the top (Blargel already said, so just reminding you)
• References, if any, should be cited.
  • I guess you could make a note on what quest(s) are related to the part of the plot of that page or something?
• Make less of story page and keep it professional.

I can't think of anything else right now, but yeah, try to use common sense. As far as page names, I'm not entirely sure, but probably make it a subpage of the generation it's relating too? That sounds the easiest for me.

Everything sounds good so far. Subpages sounds like the best solution, either a subpage of each generation's page, or the subpage of a new disambiguation-sort of page that has links to all the others. But I'm not sure what you mean by "Make less of story page and keep it professional."

I'm halfway through Generation 1 on my new character, I'll try and write it from scratch and reference those resources for corrections and for the first part.

Do you guys think there should be a "Storyline" page or something along that line that links to all the individual storylines' pages?

“	But I'm not sure what you mean by "Make less of story page and keep it professional."	„

Don't describe every single little detail unless it's important. Sorry if that wasn't clear. Also, professional as in proper grammar and such, like how wikipedia are written I guess, lol...

My biggest worry is that I might become too technical. I'm used to programming, and when I do occasionally write, it's like "to achieve this you must do this in this proper order". Which is why I usually avoided editing NPC pages and left it to the likes of you and Infodude. Do you have any advice in that department? How I can make it balanced and professional but not robotic.

Completely off-topic, but could you show me some of the things you've programmed?

Well you can always go for a first draft and if someone passes through and thinks something is weird, they can edit it or talk it out with you.