Block
1,976
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 326:
Line 326: + + + + + +
Talk:Left Behind: Eternal Forces (view source)
Revision as of 02:12, March 23, 2008
, 02:12, March 23, 2008→Edit war
:::::Jinx, the whole purpose of doing [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Left_Behind:_Eternal_Forces&diff=403143&oldid=402121 this edit] was that, according to you, you had found proof that no issues were remaining, in the link you added. If you read what you have written on DanH's talk page, the various comments you put in edit summaries, plus what you have written here on this Talk page, that is completely clear. In fact, your link is no such thing, which is why, in the spirit of compromise, as it appeared to be important to you to have that source in the article (even though it doesn't actually prove what you think it proves) I moved it to a more appropriate place in [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Left_Behind:_Eternal_Forces&diff=next&oldid=403167 this edit], and put in the word 'some' as there is no way to determine how many of the issues fixed in patches are down to complaints, and how many are down to something else (internal testing, getting around to fixes that didn't make it in pre-release development, etc). You had been continually reverting my edits, and continued to do so, based purely on the idea that your link DID prove this, as can be seen from your [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Left_Behind:_Eternal_Forces&action=history edit comments], so don't try now saying otherwise. HelpJazz's version makes no reference to how many issues were or were not fixed due to complaints, or whether or not there are any remaining, and has left the source in the appropriate place. In essence, he has done my edit in a slightly different way, so, as far as I'm concerned, that's fine. [[User:Urushnor|Urushnor]] 21:18, 21 March 2008 (EDT)
:::::Jinx, the whole purpose of doing [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Left_Behind:_Eternal_Forces&diff=403143&oldid=402121 this edit] was that, according to you, you had found proof that no issues were remaining, in the link you added. If you read what you have written on DanH's talk page, the various comments you put in edit summaries, plus what you have written here on this Talk page, that is completely clear. In fact, your link is no such thing, which is why, in the spirit of compromise, as it appeared to be important to you to have that source in the article (even though it doesn't actually prove what you think it proves) I moved it to a more appropriate place in [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Left_Behind:_Eternal_Forces&diff=next&oldid=403167 this edit], and put in the word 'some' as there is no way to determine how many of the issues fixed in patches are down to complaints, and how many are down to something else (internal testing, getting around to fixes that didn't make it in pre-release development, etc). You had been continually reverting my edits, and continued to do so, based purely on the idea that your link DID prove this, as can be seen from your [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Left_Behind:_Eternal_Forces&action=history edit comments], so don't try now saying otherwise. HelpJazz's version makes no reference to how many issues were or were not fixed due to complaints, or whether or not there are any remaining, and has left the source in the appropriate place. In essence, he has done my edit in a slightly different way, so, as far as I'm concerned, that's fine. [[User:Urushnor|Urushnor]] 21:18, 21 March 2008 (EDT)
::::::I never said no issues were remaining. Of course issues remain which no patch can fix, namely bigoted complaints about the religious aspects of the game and people's lies about the game promoting killing gays and non-Christians. To raise such complaints in regards to issues remaining to be patched is, well, just plain stupid.
::::::On the issue of use of the word "some," it was an unnecessary addition as there was absolutely no implication without it that all issues had been fixed.
::::::To my knowledge, only one website reviewed (re-reviewed, actually) the game after some patches had been made available, and their rating for the game improved quite a bit. Every other criticism that is cited is based upon months-old reviews of the pre-patched game. These reviews are not representative of what the game is like now and drawing upon them to judge what issues remain is really rather weak.
::::::"Fully patched" continues to mean "fully patched" and your faulty use of the Windows security hack issue doesn't change that. If that security hack had never happened, there would have been no outstanding issues and the program would've remained fully patched.
::::::Finally, there is very little difference between what my earlier edit was and what HelpJazz's current edit is. See the difference to my edit [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Left_Behind%3A_Eternal_Forces&diff=409672&oldid=407671 here] compared to your edit [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Left_Behind%3A_Eternal_Forces&diff=409672&oldid=407696 here]. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 22:12, 22 March 2008 (EDT)