User talk:Greater Carloso
Template import request
IFC lacking NPOV
Re my earlier note on the lack of neutrality in the IFC page - it appears that the problems persist. If you do not make the required modifications to reintroduce a NPOV, either by including both sides of the argument yourself, allowing me to ensure the other side is added if you are yourself incapable of doing so, or by removing all disputed content, I will formally request amendment or deletion of the article, either on or after 20 April 2017. Ausitoria (talk) 12:21, 25 March 2017 (EDT)
Thank you for your corrections to the article, which I have considered below. For convenience I have numbered the points.
1. I believe the militarization section is closer to attaining a NPOV, but should note that the list is disputed, e.g. by at least including the word "controversial" or "controversially" or any word to that effect. For instance it is certainly controversial that the Guadalupador Premier drove a car underneath an Ausitorian jumbo jet - since the incident was retconned, like most of the other points on the list, it is not only untrue, but it also does't even have any IC basis.
2. As for the reorganization section, I note that the opinion that Inyurstan's expulsion was illegal is still represented as undisputed. I would recommend my original wording, which simply said the expulsion was "highly controversial", or alternatively including both the viewpoint that the expulsion was illegal and the opposing viewpoint that the action was legal and indeed required by Resolution 0.
3. I should also note that you appear to have added a biased presentation of Ardoki's admission, which can similarly be defended on the grounds of an attempt to take control of Ardoki to lead it to a better future. If you choose to note that the incident was a failure, and wish to apportion blame, you should also note the viewpoint that it failed because SACTO/radicals refused to compromise.
4. It may also be that overall too much anti-Ausitorian viewpoint is presented, but this will no doubt depend upon the final wording, and therefore I shall leave such a matter for future assessment.
5. As previously advised, if you still do not make the required modifications to reintroduce a NPOV, either by including both sides of the argument yourself, allowing me to ensure the other side is added if you are yourself incapable of doing so, or by removing all disputed content, I will formally request amendment or deletion of the article, either on or after 21 April 2017.
6. Finally I should mention that while the IFC may seek to remove Ausitoria from IFC cannon, I have no intention of removing the IFC from Ausitoria cannon, and will take any suitable measures to retain a record of it. I should also note that if you seriously wish to remove Ausitoria from IFC canon, you should do so entirely, not partially, and therefore cannot use anything which is based on Ausitorian interactions, and therefore should remove everything I have written (which, in the case of this iiwiki page alone, is about half of the history, the entire notable organizations section, all the Speakers Ausitoria appointed, all the members that Ausitoria admitted, and arguably everything since Ausitoria joined). Of course to make life simpler I would suggest you learn to live with history as it is, rather than trying to change it: our nations all had reasons for their actions and it should be possible to avoid bias when recording them here - for instance I expect you would think it more satisfying to repeal my resolutions rather than retconning them and trying to fill in a gaping Ausitoria-shaped hole. Ausitoria (talk) 16:39, 26 March 2017 (EDT)
Meta-material, theft, and NPOV issues
In reply to your latest amendments:
1. Besides NPOV, there is also the prohibition of "meta-material" and the promotion of a strictly "in-universe" reading experience. I fail to see why, when all other Prime Ministers and Speakers are recorded, a two-term Prime Minister and Speaker, mentioned so many times, would not be mentioned clearly - it is biased not to include such a person, whoever they might be.
2. There is also the prohibition of theft of intellectual property. I regard all Ausitoria's past actions to form part of my intellectual property, and require that I am acknowledged if such details of trials and tribulations are included (see earlier assessment for examples).
3. In view of either of the above two points, you should therefore either (a) restore Ausitoria's name or (b) remove all my activities entirely, and again I would urge you to live with history rather than trying to get it changed, as trying to get it changed will be very messy.
4. Since it is anyway clear that that the references to an unspecified nation are still references to Ausitoria and its International Commonwealth Agency, my assessment of 26 March 2017, that the IFC page is still lacking in NPOV, would appear to remain relevant, and I would also regard not including Ausitoria's name to be further evidence of bias. Such an issue should therefore be addressed by further amendments.
5. If you do not make suitable modifications to reintroduce a NPOV, solve the prohibition of meta-material, and cease your unauthorized use of my intellectual property, either by rectifying these problems yourselves or by allowing me to rectify them, please be advised that I will formally request amendment or deletion of the article, either on or after 27 April 2017. Ausitoria (talk) 15:28, 27 March 2017 (EDT)