User talk:Spleet

Welcome

Welcome to Inkipedia, Spleet!

We're glad you decided to create an account and join us at the free, editable encyclopedia about the Splatoon series! You are now able to edit pages, join discussions, and expand our coverage of the series. Here are some resources to help get you started:

• The Manual of Style describes all page formatting requirements and general writing tips.
• The rules for the site as a whole, and more in-depth editing help can be found by reading the policy pages.
• The Ink Pump is the place to get help from the community, including ideas, proposals, and questions.
• Join us on Discord for more help or to play Splatoon!
• Visit the recent changes to see all the latest edits.
• Sign any comments you make on discussion or talk pages using four tildes (~~~~).
• If you ever have any questions, don't hesitate to ask any other editors or staff members.

Again, welcome—we're glad you're joining us! Sincerely, Heddy (talk) 20:27, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

I know you joined in March, but this welcome is better late than never! Heddy (talk) 20:27, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you haha Spleet (talk) 12:40, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Amiibo page edit

Hi Spleet, in future please do not add info to pages and/or cite sources relying on datamined content that is not yet available through legitimate means, as you did on the amiibo page for the Deep Cut amiibo gear. It is considered a violation of our policy on leaks to do so, regardless of how close the content may be to its release. I restored the info in this case (minus the source) since the amiibo are now available in some parts of the world, but they were not at the time you made your edit. Thank you for your time! Driftin Soul (talk) 21:16, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't know about that. Thank you for informing me! Spleet (talk) 21:10, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Request to help check the edits made by user "Leone 000"

Hi, I saw that you reverted one of the edits by this user in the revision Special:Diff/502504. Can you help check the other changes by this user, in particular these two changes, Special:Diff/502289 and Special:Diff/502292? If they seem incorrect to you, you can revert them by clicking on the link on the diff page which says "undo". Thanks. Harimaron (talk) 19:23, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Fixed them!! Thanks for informing me. (as for the diminutive "Leo", it can also be used for the name Leone, but Leonardo is way more common) Spleet (talk) 13:33, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing them. Harimaron (talk) 20:13, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

no problem!! Happy new year! Spleet (talk) 13:25, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

User issue

Hello. You've recently reached out to another staff member about an issue with a specific user or users. We never received a response, and so I am following up. If you still must contact us privately, please do so with me through emailing me, Discord, or leave another method of contact. I have Zoom (or Discord) if you'd prefer to speak verbally on the matter over text. We would like to help! Thank you for your time. Trig Jegman - 16:44, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry for not having sent an email yet. I am particularly busy with college tests. Anyway I'll try to send it as soon as possible. Thank you a lot for the interest. Spleet (talk) 20:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Disrespectful comment

This edit summary here is completely uncalled for towards another user and is quite disrespectful. If the page could have been rewritten to be made clearer, simply do so without passive aggressive comments. I don't think there is anything wrong with the comments that were made immediately preceding the reversion you made. Furthermore, if making links, do not link to the mobile version of the page (as was done with the wikipedia link). While perhaps not made clear by other staff as should have been, there is some hesitation with linking to Wikipedia on the subject and it is deemed not important enough to do so, hence why it was removed. If you have any further questions, do not hesitate to ask. Thank you! Trig Jegman - 16:37, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

I don’t personally see how have I been disrespectful, nor how the writing before was "good" (and your "fixes" too- "their relationship status as obvious" would imply Pearl has confirmed Marina's crush, which has never happened). Also, innuendo about me "intentionally not link[ing]" the term "groupie"? Really? When I just assumed everyone knew what a groupie was, so I saw no need to link it (while not everyone may know what a grouper fish is and the consequent fish-themed pun)? I bet that wouldn't have happened elsewhere on the wiki, but alas, "Pearlina" fans are just another planet of presumptious smartassery- if only that would limit to r/splatoon and not a literal encyclopedia. What's next now, a picture of the two holding hands in the grand festival trailer as "further implication" of them being a "couple"?

Plus, the original writing, which you reverted my edit in favor of, is not even correct in the fact that the song the remark is from is omitted, the word "grouper" is unnecessarily capitalized, plus personal opinion about the matter from both op and you ("even Frye can tell that" as if Frye was particularly stupid, or "their relationship [is] obvious" when Nintendo has never ever confirmed Pearl AND Marina to be in a relationship. I won't stop repeating a person having a crush on another is not the two being a couple). I’m really disappointed in how you, a member of the staff, defend an user whose only need was to state how "canon" their ship was, even stating the form they wrote it was good. The comments from the original editor were even less necessary and appropriate- an edit summary is not for stating a personal opinion on the subject.

As for linking to the mobile version of Inkipedia, you're in the good here. I did not know that. Spleet (talk) 17:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

If you feel another editor was behaving unprofessionally, the correct response is to simply fix their edit and/or bring it up in a respectful manner on a talk page, not to behave unprofessionally in turn. It does not matter how justified you believe it to be—even vandals are entitled to not be mocked, to say nothing of editors who are making good faith contributions and may simply need correction or encouragement.

Overall this response from you is extremely snarky and hostile and I think the degree to which you believe you are 'fighting bias' on our wiki while using such incredibly charged terms as "[a] planet of presumptious smartassery" is concerning to say the least. Driftin Soul [Talk!] 18:04, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

The very fact that Trig reprised the original edit, instead of just warning me, is a clear indicator that my edit was judged as "flawed" regardless of my edit summary. Which is not, since I just added two sources (the song and the fish which the term used by Frye is a pun on) and removed pov ("even Frye can tell"). Just warning me, if you believe my behavior has been inappropriate, would have done the job.

I feel my response has just the level of "hostility" the situation needs. Also, finding my behavior "concerning" is borderline defamatory- I've never stated something that can be interpreted to be "dangerous" or discriminatory towards everyone. If there's a strange thing, that's going all against me to defend a headcanon, but whatever. Spleet (talk) 18:13, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

The needed level of hostility is no hostility, to be clear, I'm not sure you're understanding that. Nobody is defaming you or implying you are dangerous either—your behavior is simply not conducive to a proper respectful and welcoming editing environment where disputes are expected to be settled calmly and rationally.

If you believe Trig's reversion is in error, that is something to bring up with them respectfully, but instead you've knotted all of these issues together to the point where you are justifying your own mistakes using someone else's. Driftin Soul [Talk!] 18:26, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Alright, sorry then, and thank you. I was not sure I could talk to Trig about their edit, as they are staff and I am a mere user. Spleet (talk) 18:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

You should always assume other users' edits are in good faith unless they are explicitly disruptive. The only thing wrong I see in Besnhasthefun's contribution is describing groupies as women "in relationships" when a more appropriate wording would be "seeking relationships". The sentence structure was slightly awkward, but nothing that should cause you to react this strongly. I also fail to see in which way "talking about [Marina] and Pearl here" means something akin to "look guys, they're dating".

Regardless: this isn't a "Pearlina-exclusive issue". Coming across an edit you find misleading, no matter how egregious, gives you no right to behave as such. (Also, the Grand Festival artwork showing them holding hands would not be mentioned as an evidence of Off the Hook dating, as Marina is holding Pearl's and Shiver's hands; the Squid Sisters are holding hands too.) Anemoia [Talk!] 18:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

You're absolutely right, even though I was not talking about Ben's edits! I was talking about the edit (and edit summary) made by Kittiecub. There's nothing wrong with Ben's edits.

Anyway, thank you for being civil and pointing me the actual issue. I should not had replied aggressively in my edit summary. Spleet (talk) 18:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

I have no idea what your beef with me is on the matter. It was not even the span of a few hours to allow me a chance to properly respond, mostly because I had left the house. I plead of thee: Simmer down. I reverted the edit to the old revision because of the aforementioned link but primarily because it makes more sense from my observation that Frye would poke at them actively being in a relationship regardless if they were or not because of their proximity/closeness. Both your edit summary towards other users and the edit itself were things that I deemed incorrect, but only the edit summary was something I felt actual warning. You are not being punished for the changes you have made and in many ways not for the edit summary either. The end goal was that edit summaries would not contain passive aggressive commentary and, if the situation required further discussion, that it would be taken into talk pages for an extended (and calmer) rationale.

I don't think that this is the real issue going on here. I provided a fairly clear explanation of why I made my reversion and also why I believed that the edit summary in question was improper. This was further rationalized by Driftin Soul and later Anemoia. Instead of trying to treat this as a simple conversation about why a reversion was made, we have been met with great hostility with accusations of persecution or defamation in nearly every response received. Nobody is trying to "defame" you. No amount of "justified hositility" is needed. I also don't see why you feel the need to treat my staff position as some sort of divine reason that my word must be valued over yours because that simply is not how we do things around here and neither does the other wiki you supposedly want us to be more like. I'm not god. Staff can make mistakes or be faulty on decisions. I'm not bulk protecting the page, I'm not constantly entering an edit war about it, and I'm not suddenly changing policy because it's something I don't agree with—in the same way that I'd hope you wouldn't do those things either. We're not the be-all end-all of decision-making.

I'd have been more than happy to discuss this set of edits in terms of their presentation and what's being shown, but now I don't really have the desire to have said conversation because I know it will be confrontational and needlessly hostile. This also seems somewhat pointed towards me directly. If I did something to upset or annoy you prior to this event taking place, I'm fully open to discussion either here publicly or through Discord or through email. Trig Jegman - 18:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry. I don't have any personal beef with you, as I don't know you personally- it just made me a bit baffled that my edit was reverted alongside the edit summary, making me think of a sort of spite or "revenge" on your side. If it isn't (hopefully), then, nothing against you! I'm just very worried about the situation regarding this specific topic that is often, mistakenly, called "canon" or "real". Misinformation on wikis can generate huge mandela effects, even at a serious level- the famous “coatis are a species of brazilian aardvarks” is just one case of that. That's what I would like to avoid.

I'd also rather not pick what is written in my personal page as fuel for the discussion, as it goes completely astray from the actual topic of the discussion we are having. Plus, I honestly don't see how any effort to improve the wiki should be ridiculed. What is written on my page is simply admiration for a wiki that is, in my opinion, well-managed and coherent, and hope that one day Inkipedia would reach those standards.

Aside from that, I swear I have nothing against you. There have been no instances of your behavior bothering me aside from what just happened. Spleet (talk) 20:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)