Welcome to the Order, ZéACNS!
Welcome to the Assassin's Creed Wiki!
We hope you enjoy your stay, and we look forward to working with you!
|Have you something to say?|
We seek unity, stability and order.
|We wish you safety and peace on your future endeavors.|
- 1 Images
- 2 Images reminder
- 3 Continual Edits
- 4 Categories
- 5 Pirate Republic
- 6 Article creations
- 7 Edit spamming
- 8 Flag images
- 9 Edit Spamming... Again
- 10 Article creation
- 11 Historical figures Affiliations
- 12 Edit spamming, again, again
- 13 Assassin branch religions
- 14 Unsourced articles
- 15 Blocked
- 16 Edits on Assassins & Templars
Please note that you need to source any and all images you upload to the wiki in accordance to our image policy. For more information on how to source images, check this page. Also check the information about naming images appropriately. Badly named or unsourced images will be deleted. Feel free to reupload your deleted image with proper sourcing. Thank you. Stormbeast ♉ The Helpful Place 22:20, September 23, 2015 (UTC)
ZéACNS, please allow me to remind you that you need to source any images you upload to the wiki. Images like File:Italian Flag.png and File:French Flag.png need to be sourced as per our Images policy (linked above), even if they're personally made. --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 15:09, December 16, 2015 (UTC)
ZéACNS, I noticed you've edited a bunch of pages (e.g. the Braddock Expedition, Napoleon II, George III, etc.) repeatedly within a few minutes, and the only changes are generally changing a few words to the same sentence or adding/removing a few categories. Instead of constantly editing, might I suggest (1) doing one "group edit", in which you add/remove the details of interest in one edit; and (2) using the "Preview" option, which allows you to see what the final page will look like instead of saving the page then editing it again because the wording is off. Just a thought to consider. --Darman (talk) 00:26, April 9, 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for listening. Doing larger edits not only is more efficient, it decreases the instances of edit/award spamming, which is generally frowned upon. Just a head's up for the future. Otherwise, keep it up! Darman (talk) 01:27, April 9, 2016 (UTC)
- Given how I've been browsing the Recent changes feed, I'd like to ask you to remember Darman's advice about multiple edits in a short span of time to a single page. If it's a matter of using the Visual Editor as it is, I can understand where you might have got carried away, so I would recommend using the classic, bare-bones editor. Thanks for reading; Slate Vesper (talk) 01:21, April 27, 2016 (UTC)
- I'm "bumping" my advice, since many of your recent edits either should have been classified as a minor edit, or could've been combined into a larger, more thorough edit. I'm also "bumping" Slate's advice to use the Source code Editor if need be (
text will look like this), as the Visual Editor can get messy. Cheers, Darman (talk) 13:20, May 5, 2016 (UTC)
Consensus here was clear to change :Category:LGBT to something more inclusive sounding. http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:205425 --Alientraveller (talk) 13:32, April 11, 2016 (UTC)
- Also, don't enact big category changes on your own, especially ones that presume a hell of a lot about the characters you're categorizing :/ Crook The Constantine District 19:20, April 11, 2016 (UTC)
Darman again. I'm confused: Why create the Republic of Pirates page? The AC4 Database explicitly says Nassau was the Pirate Republic. That's why there's a redirect here. --Darman (talk) 03:04, April 26, 2016 (UTC)
- Hello , I was with the intention of creating a new faction existing in the game --ZéACNS 00:16, April 26, 2016 (UTC)
- Yes. --ZéACNS 07:38, April 27, 2016 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks for the heads-up. -- ZéACNS 07:56, April 27, 2016 (UTC)
Hello ZéACNS. I see you edited the British Empire page 21 times in 2 hours. Rather than making so many small edits can you please use the Preview button to see if you've missed anything in your edit? -- Master Sima Yi Talk 13:21, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
EDIT: I see you have already been warned for this a few times, so I am hereby giving you an official warning.
- Alright, thanks for the heads-up, anything correct me again. (Certo obrigado pelo aviso, qualquer coisa me corrija novamente) -- ZéACNS 12:53, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- PS: If you can, help me correcting the grammatical errors. Thanks. -- ZéACNS 13:04, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- So, Holy Roman Empire, British Empire and others are still getting multiple edits in a row. Please try to use the Preview button for Desktop on your right before you commit to play nice with other editors monitoring Special:RecentChanges. DarkFeather Raven's NestRaven's Hunt 15:22, June 16, 2016 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks for the heads-up, sorry for my grammar errors. (Certo obrigado pelo aviso, peço desculpas pelo meus erros de gramatica) -- ZéACNS 12:32, June 16, 2016 (UTC)
ZéACNS, all the images of flags you used are not attributed to an AC-related source, and thus they are original research. They do not show up in any AC medium. I already recall deleting them before, but now I see they've been readded everywhere. Please take care to only add information and images from AC sources in the future and to not do original research. -- Master Sima Yi Talk 10:08, November 6, 2016 (UTC)
ZéACNS, you've received multiple warnings already. Once again I like to restate that we appreciate your dedication, but your ignoring of previous warnings cannot be condoned at this point. In light of the recent images you've uploaded, Wikipedia is not, as you can read in our policies, a valid source. -- Master Sima Yi Talk 16:01, February 10, 2017 (UTC)
- If I may, I think that the community has been a bit inconsistent over how strict we should be enforcing "no original research". That is to say, I have noticed that we often find it okay to include birth or death dates or places of birth or death or other basic information about characters even when such information doesn't come directly from an AC source. I remember Jasca Ducato, for example, didn't mind using the 2 January date for the end of the Granada War even though that's technically derived from real-life sources. I noticed that we can have a hard time writing fluidly for some events or subjects without drawing some basic information from real-life sources, and I asked Crook about it, and he was of the opinion that for the sake of clarity, it was fine to take a little from real-life sources, as long as it's basic information.
- For instance, our article on Madrid states that it's the largest and capital city of Spain. However, if we were strictly sticking to AC sources, we should really only describe it as a city in Spain, or maybe just a city... if AC media never specifically said the city is in Spain given that it's assumed the audience already knows. While it's not necessary to describe it as anymore than just "a city", it's just not very helpful I think... I think that people around here are a bit divided about how much we should allow ourselves to draw from real-life sources, even though technically, we should not at all. For this reason, I think something like taking the flags of countries falls under the same category of "basic information". I'm not arguing that it should be allowed, only pointing out that users throughout this wiki are not in agreement over a policy concerning this. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 07:23, February 11, 2017 (UTC)
Edit Spamming... Again
With your antics on the Colonial Rite of the Templar Order page, I'm gonna have to echo the messages you've received in the past: please don't spam edits, especially teeny tiny ones that show you're not using the preview function at all and continuously mess up the layout of an article. It's very annoying. I'd like to remind you that you've received plenty of warnings about this before: do it again, and you're looking at a temporary ban. Crook The Constantine District 16:17, January 14, 2017 (UTC)
- It's impressive, it seems he never reads the messages they send to him, just answers them... TheCreedX (talk) 06:37, February 5, 2017 (UTC)
I feel like, at this point, you really should know that images that don't appear in AC media aren't allowed on our articles because they constitute as original research. In addition, the House of Hanover, Bourbon and Bonaparte articles were deleted because they basically only consisted of one line of information; there was barely any purpose in having them on the wiki. I've kept the House of Romanov cause I can at least see opportunity for expansion there. Please remember to follow our guidelines when creating articles in the future and make sure they actually have some content. Thanks for reading. Crook The Constantine District 10:29, January 30, 2017 (UTC)
Historical figures Affiliations
I reverted one case of this, but I really should be just taking it to your talk page. In regards to Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy, is there any verification that they were affiliated with the Assassins (either as members themselves or as allies)? It's entirely possible for people to be targeted by Templars and not be affiliated with the Assassins. For John F. Kennedy's part, I always interpreted him as a neutral party who had an Apple of Eden passed down from the U.S. Presidency. As for Abraham Lincoln, even if the Assassins opposed his killer, Lincoln might not have been allied with them or had regular contact for all we know. They might have swooped in only after he was killed to find the Templar killer. I'm saying this even though I think it is likely Lincoln was an Assassin ally—I don't think there's any verification of it. As well, perhaps an Assassin can help a person one time, but without an established long-term connection, that person isn't really an ally. Queen Isabella is a good example of this, having colluded with both the Templars and the Assassins without realizing it, to the point both had a hand in trying to assassinate her at one point (the Assassins saved her life from the Templars only to kill her later o.o).
Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 10:16, February 8, 2017 (UTC)
Okay, next time, I'll have to be sure before editing anything that's confirmed.
PS: Forgive my English, in case of error please correct.
User:ZéACNS, User talk:ZéACNS 08:31, February 8, 2017 (UTC)
Edit spamming, again, again
Hey there. Despite having been warned about this numerous times (By Slate, Crook, and 2x Sima), you continue to spam your edits, rather than using the preview button. Seeing as you've had two official warnings already, I'm issuing a two-week ban. I'm sorry, but we can't keep issuing warnings forever. --Amnestyyy (Contact me!) 19:00, March 3, 2017 (UTC)
Assassin branch religions
I disagree with detailing the religions of the various branches of the Assassins because for one thing, Assassins are conventionally irreligious, and when an organization is secular, there's generally no reason to name a religion in the first place or even explain that they're irreligious. The fact that it's irreligious means that the topic of its religious status isn't very relevant in the first place, and it's a little superfluous. See for example United Nations. Its infobox does not mention its religion. However, more importantly, because the organization is irreligious and secular, the religions of its individual members doesn't have any bearing on the organization's religion. That is to say, if an Assassin is Buddhist, then his status as a Buddhist is an independent and personal affair not connected to the Assassins. The fact that you even include that the branches are also "non-religious" supports this.
Perhaps most importantly though, it's all unsourced. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you're assuming the religious status of potential members of each of these branches based on the popular religions of the regions of each of these branches, which is entirely wrong. Assassins have always been progressive for their time, and their Creed actually advocates agnosticism. It's entirely possible even an ancient Egyptian Assassin would not be a believer of ancient Egyptian religion.
I hope you don't mind if I revert all of these edits.
Site-note: if you're listing the religions of an organization, you should be referring to the religion itself, not the people of that religion. (e.g. Islam not Muslim). Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 16:37, March 21, 2017 (UTC)
Hello again, I'm sorry for my spams on the page Age of Enlightenment, about my last issue, I think I was generealize the religion of each branch, according to a religion of the local people, believing that besides not following any religion, each branch follows its original religion.
But you're right, some things are changing to have more links with a lore. User talk:ZéACNS 14:26, March 21, 2017 (UTC)
- Hm, I'm not entirely sure I understand your response. I noticed that you changed the Colonial Brotherhood's religion back to "various", which is incorrect because again, when we talk about what is the "religion of the organization", we don't mean what is the religious demographics of its members, but what religion is designated as officially endorsed by the organization, or what religion that organization revolves around. For example, while individual Assassins may be members of various religions, the order itself doesn't espouse any religion. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 22:42, March 22, 2017 (UTC)
- This is aside from the fact that even if we can assume that there were Assassins of different faiths, if we don't know examples of these Assassins, we really shouldn't add that information on there based on our assumption, especially since the Assassins' Creed is agnostic, and Altaïr and Arno both have cited that it repudiates the notion of divinity (even though it's not impossible for some Assassins to be agnostic theists). Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 22:48, March 22, 2017 (UTC)
I see that you just cited that to Assassin's Creed III. Can you explain where in Assassin's Creed III is it stated that the Assassins of this branch were of various faiths? In the meantime, I'm going to confirm with others that the "religion" parameter refers to the religion endorsed by the organization not its religious demographics. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 05:41, March 23, 2017 (UTC)
- Please respond to me ZéACNS so that we can talk this through. I think that you're just going ahead and adding sources based on the main appearance of those branches not whether those sources actually confirm that members of the branches were religious or not. I don't recall Unity, Revelations, III, I, etc. suggesting any of the Assassins and Templars were of those religions. The one exception is that Raphael Sánchez and Luis de Santángel in Discovery are Jews (or Jews forced insincerely to convert to Catholicism for the sake of their work). In fact, in AC1 and Unity, Altaïr and Arno explicitly describes their Creed as not only agnostic, but atheistic. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 19:12, March 24, 2017 (UTC)
Well, you're right,I classified the religion of the Italian, French, British Brotherhoods... as Jewish for a reason that is more in theory, not in fact. But I did it because I believe that one or another Assassin of such country in Europe follows that belief, beyond Christianity. Anything I can revert my last editions. ZéACNS 16:36, March 24, 2017 (UTC)
- Hey thanks for the reply. Yeah, I think it is best that we revert them :/. We're not supposed to go off only our presumptions and beliefs. If you don't feel like going back through them to revert, I can. Aside from the issue of sourcing, I'm asking other editors right now what they think the religion parameter means, and it doesn't seem like they agree it should be for religious demographics. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 05:15, March 25, 2017 (UTC)
Hello again, feel free to revert to my last edits. ZéACNS 02:24, March 25, 2017 (UTC)
Hi ZéACNS, I must ask you to provide proper sourcing for the several articles you have created recently. Because many of them, as far as I can tell, have never been mentioned at all. What source do you have for the Mexican Revolution? The Korean War? The Polish Brotherhood/Rite? Many of these don't seem to have ever been mentioned at all, in which case they should be deleted. The Wikia Editor (talk) 21:28, March 27, 2017 (UTC)
I have to second this. I'm concerned about articles like the 1954 Guatemalan coup d'état, the 1976 Argentine coup d'état, and the 1964 Brazilian coup d'état in particular. I'm assuming the 1973 Chilean coup d'état can be sourced to the Rifts in Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood. ZéACNS, do you understand that sources are vital to each and every article and content we add to this wiki? We can't go off of assumptions alone. :/ Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 08:40, March 28, 2017 (UTC)
You're right, I'm actually basing myself on the glyphs of Assassin's Creed II, and Brotherhood. I believe, that there is something related to these events in the series, as the glyph approached Pinochet of Chile, and the Coups d'état in Guatemala and Argentina at the time. Anything that is not related to the series, feel free to remove. ZéACNS 05:47, March 28, 2017 (UTC)
I'm sorry to say that I've banned you from the Assassin's Creed Wiki. I don't think I need to say more other than that you've been warned a lot of times to follow wiki policy, and you've been cut a lot of slack. I'm sorry it came to this. -- Master Sima Yi Talk 13:56, April 18, 2017 (UTC)
Edits on Assassins & Templars
ZéACNS, the notes in the editing menu in the Assassins and Templars articles are very clear that the notable lists are not to be modified since they have been the subject of intense edit warring, and we eventually decided on fixed lists which reflect in-universe significance. If you wish to dispute them, you must take it to the talk page.