Welcome[edit source]

Hi, welcome to Supernatural Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the User blog:EmpyreanSmoke/Weaknesses page.
Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help you with anything!
Also note that we are in the process of converting articles written in the present tense to the past tense. So you are welcome to edit any such article you come across. Once again, Welcome! EmpyreanSmoke (talk) 01:59, October 2, 2015 (UTC)

You need to stop reverting the unbiased edits I am adding. If you keep reverting them I will have to lock all the pages that pertain to this issue. please stop. EmpyreanSmoke (talk) 03:56, October 11, 2015 (UTC)

Deities Edits[edit source]

Oh sorry, I misunderstood your edit comment, for some reason I was under the assumption that you thought God/The Darkness could not kill these beings. Yes you are right, it would be better to just include it as Higher-tier entities. Lambda1 (talk) 07:27, October 10, 2015 (UTC)

I have added unbiased information until the full consensus has been reached. This is the only way we can have the articles not express either side of the argument. To not have it at all would be expressing your side, and to list it as a weakness would express the other users. Listing it as a possibility is the only unbiased thing to do. EmpyreanSmoke (talk) 18:46, October 10, 2015 (UTC)

It is the only unbiased thing to do. If we leave them out of the page completely, then it would show bias towards those who don't want it on the page. If we leave it on the page, it shows bias towards those who want it on the page. If we list it on the page as a possibility, not leaning towards any answer, it will remain unbias. If the consensus shows that the wikia as a whole doesn't want these to be on the pages, then I will put my views 100% aside, and remove them from the pages. EmpyreanSmoke (talk) 19:01, October 10, 2015 (UTC)

The exact time span is not defined, one of this wikia policiy says that silence it the weakest form of an agreement, as nobody reverted it the days after 30th, one could consider this as the consensus... but let's see how Calebchiam sees it. Lambda1 (talk) 04:08, October 11, 2015 (UTC)

I am willing to discuss this, but you can't just re-edit anything without arguing about, nobody will just accept it. Lambda1 (talk) 04:11, October 11, 2015 (UTC)

You had the chance to discuss it, you ignored it and are unwilling to argue about it. EmpyreanSmoke did the right thing by blocking any edits. Lambda1 (talk) 04:18, October 11, 2015 (UTC)

I've left a reply here. I do get your point and you are correct in this case (though I think you could be fairer to Empyrean.) On a general note though, revert wars never work past the first revert. Both sides can go on indefinitely until one or the other gets blocked - in all cases, it is wiser to take it to the talk page. Just a piece of advice. In the meantime, let's try and figure out what deserves to be labelled a weakness. Your views are quite similar to TD5's, and I generally agree it's more practical to just list the creature-specific weaknesses as opposed to everything possible (though there may be some grey areas open for discussion.) Cheers. Calebchiam Talk 14:45, October 11, 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the look into that! I've read over both arguments and I do tend to agree with you and Caleb, "its more practical to just list the creature-specific weaknesses as opposed to everything possible." However as you've already seen the users here are very keen on adding these details and have been for years, so this isn't a new thing. I'm sure you've seen the arguments on different blogs that have gone on for weeks over who's more powerful and who can kill what when the show will likely never address any of these things. We have a few users who like to be EXTREMELY thorough and they've always preferred that everything possible is laid out in the weakness section. Technically you are right, if the show never mentioned or implied it, it shouldn't be listed. I will try and post a more detailed response in the blog when I can! Bkshadows (talk)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.