User talk:TheBlackDemon1996

Daigo and Maki
As for why it's being made invisible -- the grammar is very poor, the terminology is all wrong, and the actual content doesn't focus on what's important about the scenes, but instead has a lackadaisical focus on the trivia. It's not appropriate for being published on the wiki, since it doesn't meet the basic requirements of the wiki's manual of style.

As for "expand and specify" - those portions of their history cover the greater majority of their screentime (and their own character history). Your write-up gives more weight to a short flashback at the beginning of one film than to the total scenes they had throughout the full four films. So, "expand and specify". Instead of just saying "he monitors Taichi", go into what the films actually show him doing. They were characters before that flashback.

Also, this kind of stuff is supposed to be handled on the article talk pages, since it's about the article text, instead of being treated like some sort of personal attack. Furthermore, don't ever just remove a change request without either completing the request or discussing it on the talk page -- it is considered edit warring and you will be censured for it if it happens again. 23:51, March 8, 2017 (UTC)


 * Well I hate to be rude my friend but if you thought my grammar was poor then why didn't you fix it? It's not like you couldn't, you use the thing that changes a page's info to make it invisible.  And what I put was a rough outline for others with more info that me to fill in the gaps, that's why I left the "this is a stub" thing.  Isn't that how wikis word? --TheBlackDemon1996 (talk) 10:39, March 9, 2017 (UTC)
 * "Well I hate to be rude my friend but if you thought my grammar was poor then why didn't you fix it?"
 * Because that's not my job and I have other things that I am also working on. I specified quite clearly what needed to be fixed. Why are you focusing on making personal attacks instead of focusing on improving the content? I am not the one who submitted the lackluster content, and criticizing me does not improve the quality of that content.
 * It's not like you couldn't"
 * In the time I had available, no, I very much couldn't do a passable job, where I would need to pull up the movie (or at least the scripts), run a spellcheck, and run a grammar check. Submitting or revising content so that it is, well, worth more than plain vandalism actually takes significant time.
 * "Isn't that how wikis word?"
 * No, they don't. As very clearly stated by the software when you go to edit:
 * FIRST RULE: Understand that your edits will be reverted or modified by other editors at will, and that this is a necessary function of the wiki.
 * SECOND RULE: All edits must be sourced to published material, and you should not make any changes to the existing material without checking the published material and following any existing citations.
 * That's how wiki's work. That's how wikipedia, one of the most prominent wikis, works. Wherever you got the idea that wikis work by "substandard, unsourced content must be left up and it is the job of those pointing out how it violates the Manual of Style to actually improve it", they were very, very wrong. If your edit doesn't meet the policies of the wiki, then there's nothing to justify publishing it visibly as if it does, where it can misinform readers until someone else takes the time to clean it up. 22:05, March 9, 2017 (UTC)