User talk:Wally787

I am in charge of editing the page ASW

o kay go ahead kk Wally The Masked Admin (Talk) 23:09, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

I keep seeing vandalism on the SCAW Main page.

Its not vandalism. There's sourced evidence that you use Sub4Sub, so its a legitimate addition to the page. The only person you should be blaming for this is yourself. ~ Amez

ok. I'm ordering a Cease & Desist on this back & forth between all parties. The CAW Wikia Page is neutral grounds, and should be no bias one way or another. If you want to dicsuss this further, you can do it elsewhere.

Also, I am not interested in this escalating any further, and I'm removing all opinions page off from the talk page since negativity is not allowed on the CAW Wikia.XtremeTony 04:42, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

To the case in point about the SCAW page. Besides the evidence of Sub4Sub is it really relevant to their Caw show. This is not a wiki about ranking the CAW shows, its mearly to document CAW history. Nowhere else in the article is the word popular even mentioned...So the section on the page just seems like seems like blatant mudsligning. It is fine for this to be said on forums but not here. So I am here by deleting that section.

Onto another case and point: What?!!?! Negativity is not allowed on CAW wiki? That makes no sense. This wiki, as co-admin should be a place of discussion, thats what talks pages are for. We are not supposed to censor peoples opinions, this isnt a dictatorship its a democracy. However there is obviously a difference between putting a show down/bullying and a negative opinion. Opinions should be left at talk pages and put downs well just leave them for the forums. Wally The Masked Admin (Talk) 03:48, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

Ok. What I mean by the negativity is strickly the putting down, personal attacks & page vandalism. If they say a show sucks, and say why by give specific points, then it's not negative, it's a valid contructive critisism. That's pretty much what I'm trying to say, so as long as there is something to build on, then it will be allowed.XtremeTony 03:59, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

The Sub4Sub thing isn't "mudslinging and putting people down". The SCAW page DOES in fact boast of its popularity in the article outside of the Sub4Sub mentioning: http://caw.wikia.com/wiki/SCAW:_Superstars_of_CAW#How_SCAW_Got_Its_Start

Wikis document everything about a subject; positive or negative. The Sub4Sub comment is the equivalent of mentioning steroid allegations on an athlete's page, or a lawsuit on a company's. If Lonestarr is artificially boosting his own subscriber base through shady means, the people have a right to know about it. Especially when the guy is claiming he has one of the most "recognizable feds today". Yes, there's a difference between opinions and facts, but that's just it; this isn't an opinion, it IS a fact. I've provided irrefutable evidence that Lonestarr uses Sub4Sub to boost SCAW's subscriber base. The "video looking spammy" really doesn't matter. If you go on the original Sub4Sub video thats mentioned in the proof video, you'll even be able to find a comment FROM Lonestarr himself; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMcQwUo0Gns ~ Amez

SCAW page
We received a complaint about the SCAW page here and after looking at the history and reading the discussion here I have sysop level protected it. There are two admins here who can undo this when the discussion about appropriate content for that page is finished and all users can agree with it. -- Wendy (talk ) 04:24, May 23, 2011 (UTC)