I deleted your article, Trending, as I felt it was not an appropriate topic for an article here. If there's something about economic trending that you're interested in including in the economy guide feel free to add it, but as it stands it's basically an article about Friends Chat rules. ʞooɔ 01:42, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
It's not "a" rule of "a friends chat" it is a common rule of many friends chats and it is also a term outside of chat rules. I said it is commonly disallowed which implies that it exists outside of chats. Should we delete the articles on manipulation because they arent allowed by chats?
- I never said "a friends chat" -- I'm aware that this is a common rule among price checking groups. The entire article appeared to be about different ways that people could mention trending within the context of those price checking friends chats. As an entity, the wiki's articles don't care about individual community groups or their rules. If you have something to say about trending on a more economic, non-arbitrary level, you can put it on the guide I linked above. As it stands though, we do not have articles about rules that Friend Chats have. ʞooɔ 01:55, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
What is this wiki for if not for specific and discrete information about content players may encounter while playing the game? The wiki as an entity has not messaged me, you have. I don't care about your justification for deleting the article. The examples listed in my article where how a player may trend. Players interact through text conversation, you merely posited that the conversation occurred in a chat when in actuality it could occur in any venue of the game.
- For the same reason that we try not to mention specific friends chats, we're also not interested in including information about the rules of specific friends chats. Something like that is not even slightly encyclopedic (especially as you have written it), nor is it something useful in guide format. It is not our job to define what trending means, as such a word (in your context) is defined by the Friends Chats who use them. In any case it's not something that we can have authority over. ʞooɔ 02:09, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
when was a specific chat ever mentioned? you even said "I'm aware that this is a common rule among price checking groups" also it is not your job to do anything. this is a wiki, it is written by the people.
- Just because something is a common rule among specific chats, that doesn't mean it's something we need to include. And you're right that the wiki is written by "the people", but it is my job to make sure we keep the content at a high quality and adher to our editorial policies. ʞooɔ 02:32, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
I want a better explanation as to why you dont include specific information other than its not your policy to do so. "because" is not a valid reason.
- If you want an explanation that doesn't rely on existing wiki policy, here it is:
- The article's topic is extremely misleading -- it's not about the process where items' prices change in a specific direction. It's about how people talk about the changing prices within friends chats, and whether such discussion is allowed in chats. The wiki doesn't care, nor can we take a position on, whether such discussion is "permitted". That's a ridiculously small topic for an article, useful to very few and confusing to everyone else.
- The guide is completely unsourced and introduces vocabulary that I highly doubt exists anywhere beyond yourself.
- The article was very poorly written with very unnecessary quotes. ʞooɔ 02:52, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
"very poorly written with very unnecessary quotes"...you tell me what is very poorly written. have fun with your mediocre life and your mediocre responsibilites. Your analysis of my article was bogus. You don't know what you are doing and you tried to subtly slip in insults where there was no merit. My vocabulary exists outside me. If you missed that year of grade-school, I'm sorry. You have killed the beautiful idea of a wiki. Yes very few people will find the guide useful but then again how many people read the Tomoko Ohta article on wikipedia? I did this to help anyone who asked for a definition of trending. It apparently was of great consequence to YOU, not the "wiki" as "an entity" but YOU. Oh well, I'll go back to my life now, I have better things to do than drool over my computer screen looking for the 'bad people'. I hope someday you find something more fruitful to occupy your time.