Posts made by Yannick

Yannick

Well then, first of all, I would like to point out that I've got nothing against Node.js nor NodeBB as some people like to claim here. I've been a Wikipedia editor for quiet some time and I've been keeping an eye on the "Comparison of Internet Forum Software"-page for quiet a while. Moreover, NodeBB has been removed from the list - by me and others - multiple times already. But this forum software isn't the only one, there have been plenty more:

And the mother of clean-ups:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comparison_of_Internet_forum_software&type=revision&diff=645137567&oldid=645136074

Anyway, for all of these changes and the many ohters besides them, it has been said in the edit description that redlinks are not allowed to be listed ("redlinks" or "[[WP:WTAF]]" refer to that). Additionally, this was - and still is - noted at the top of the article:

This is a list of NOTABLE internet forum software, as judged by Wikipedia's notability policies, obtained by searching Wikipedia for WP:N. Please don't add external links or wikilinks to nonexistent articles – instead, read our notability policies and write the article first, ensuring to demonstrate notability. Entries without articles, redlinks, external links, and links to articles that aren't about the forum software in question will be pruned periodically. Fill in the background info too, please, to make this article useful.

Which is another warning to not add in red links. However, while warned at multiple points in time, people from this community continued to redo revisions that where previously undone because they violated the WP rules. And while it is indeed true that most of Wikipedia's rules odd, some impossible to follow without breaking others and are just written down way to long, I think the "red link" one here is easy to understand. And you know, if that was addressed right from the start, nothing would have happened, heck, I would have added you guys back myself (as I browse Wikipedia to find out for myself if there are articles for forum software that are not jet listed on that page).

However, starting an edit war after being warned so many times should have ringed a bell that it might have been the wrong to go over it. And lets be honest here, does anyone here think these sentences should be on Wikipedia:

modern platform that will hopefully help shape forums of the future
Unlike competing forum software offerings
will soon allow integration with services such as WrapBootstrap

It wasn't the way that the article was written that made me decide to request deletion (as I first added templates to request improvements to the article for third party sources and a NPoV). I honestly didn't want to fill in a deletion request (because that too is actualy quiet complex to do, everything is complex to do on Wikipedia for that matter). You want to know what ultimately made me decide to delete this article? Well, it was the content in this very topic. I'm fine with a single user or 2 undoing my changes because they believe these changes where good and done with good faith.

What the mistake here was is thinking that WP editors don't do any research before adding templates like the third party sources and NPoV (well, not everyone does that, but I do). I did and doing so ingored the main website and decided to add these templates based on my findings, because I believed that the article could be improved. The issue is, after doing so, I stopped ignoring the main website and stumbled upon this topic only to find out that the edit war was being "fought" intentionaly by this community.

But again, I hope you guys don't take this personal, I remove any entry from that list that doesn't fit the rules of that article itself, not just NodeBB.

@ApfelUser said:

I added NodeBB to the Wikipedia site "Comparison of Internet forum software", that might be a first step to get a whole own page too. Let's see if they accept it, but I don't see any reason why they shouldn't. You can go here for the history, and click "thank" and maybe also write on the "talk" page. That way they see that people are interested in it.

And see, this is kinda where it all goes wrong. Adding to the Comparison of Internet forum software-page isn't the first step (as I've mention earlier), it's the final step.

@TiaZzz said:

If there is an "edit war", there need to be at least 2 persons involved. @YannickFran was one of them himself and actually started the "war" with this sentence to his deletion: "(Bye again!)". @YannickFran is wrong if he thinks that this is going to make us think that his contribution is legit. I myself thought that he just didn't like nodeBB and deleted it therefor. In general I understand that it wasn't okay to start this edit war, but the sentence to the first deletion was a bit misleading in my opinion.

That "Bye again" refered to the many deletions of NodeBB prior to that revision to the article. The article itself clearly states that added entries should have a page, not to mention that the revision list of that article is full of [[WP:WTAF]]'s which should have given an additional clue. Further, I've mentioned more then once to read the guidelines to add new entries to the article and refered to WP:WTAF. In fact, take a look at the "mother of all clean-ups", this cleanup included the deletion of NodeBB yet 4 days later it was there again (and it got deleted thereafter once more). One would think that 3 times (it might be more in fact, I didn't check the whole history) would be enough.

Further, because I made the first revert doesn't make me the one who started the edit war. As I've noted many times by now: the additions made where in violation of the Wikipedia guidelines and where uniform with prior reverts for the same reason without any bias. As long as that's the case, it's not an edit war on my part. And that was exactly the case.

And to make things even worse, this is another great way to make WP editors doubt your intentions:

@TiaZzz said:

Now can we move on instead of this deletion war? I'm not part of this community. I just reacted after finding nodeBB long after looking at the comparison and having missed it there.

Yet here you are, and before this whole debacle began. Editors don't like it when you lie in discussions like that. Especially as this topic was mentioned in the opening of the argument as one of the reasons for deletion.

So, there you have it, now you know why all of this happened. It was nothing personal nor preference for anything. Just me and the other editors following the Wikipedia guidelines. And yes, they can be rediculous. But they are the guidelines, and until someone decides to change them, they have to be followed.

Anyway, have a nice day.