User talk:Algrim Whitefang

imperial fists (again)

instead of responding to my last querry, you deleted it. I have looked and not found any style notes that indicate it is correct to embolden every mention of the page title. I am therefore erasing that 'contribution' of yours. --augustmanifesto 23:18, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Sourcing guidelines

It is forbidden to use the ref-wikicodes, they create problems. Also I will have a close look at your recent work, there are quite some doubts and issues to address. Please refrain from making any further contributions until things have been cleared up. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum 14:29, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

General question

Okay, I will ask bluntly: you used warhammer40k.wikia.com as a source? And I expect an answer. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum 14:35, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

More issues

• Any and all, let me repeat it: all additions to articles have to be sourced and marked with footnotes according to the Lexicanum sourcing guidelines, also pictures. You have been told that several times now. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum 14:53, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

13th company

Again footnotes missing plus 1:1 copy from redelf or alternatively 1:1 copy from original GW material -> reverted. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum 21:26, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Ripping off the lex

Hello. I was told that the 40Kwikia article on Thousand Sons now reads very similarly to ours, so went to have a look. It has a design and structure quite similar to the one I and another user invented for the Lex, and it's pretty weird to read my own sentences rejigged with a new word here and there. I mean, I didn't invent the information, but I reworded it and turned it into a readable 'story' and whoever edited their page basically just copied it and altered it enough so it isn't a xerox. I find it pretty sad that whoever did that page has to 'steal' hard work put in here rather than do their own, and also kinda rude that they don't even think it's worthwhile to swing by and tell me and the other user that they like our work and want to transpose it. I see that you have a lot of edits on that page, so I thought it might be an idea to express to you that this isn't cool (although I guess there's nothing I can do about it.) and ask you to pass it on to whichever sad case has to copy my work rather than write anything themself. Thanks.--Mob 15:30, 25 March 2011 (CET)

Do I have to come over to the Wikia for stealing the Lexicanum texts again? REALLY? --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum 15:33, 25 March 2011 (CET)

I wasn't aware this was an issue until today; I don't actually go there. I've left a message with who I assume is the sysop, and I'm noting the identical/near-identical material in the article.--Mob 15:50, 25 March 2011 (CET)

Oh yes, I already went there and added tags to the articles they copied saying "This text was stolen from the Lexicanum". Go to Montonius User talk page and leave him a message that if he thinks his wikia is so superior he should better make sure they don't copy our stuff :P" --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum 15:59, 25 March 2011 (CET)

Wolfspear

I don't think that private twitter feeds count as official and canonical sources. If anything it would constitute a very grey area that would have to be discussed first. Also Guy Haley did not comment on the actually used imagery, therefore it is more than a stretch to claim he approved it (see screenshot). Also the images lacked copyright disclaimers and most other required info. Removed the images and information without footnotes. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 23:39, 24 September 2019 (MDT)