Talk:Revolutionary Movement for a Free Anarchosyndicalistic Wurstmineberg

Government definition
The part "The Wurstmineberg government consisting of the Dictator Jemus42 […]" implies that Jemus42 is the autocratic dictator of the Minecraft world, which is hilariously false. In fact, as can be seen on Hosting, not only Jemus42, but also Fenhl, L3viathan and even Farthen himself have full root access to the machine and therefore the Minecraft server and world. Therefore can be concluded that Farthen himself is already part of the de-facto government of Wurstmineberg, since he has full administrative access.

The claims of fascism and oppression are therefore invalid. Wurstmineberg is not a dictatorship, at best it's an oligarchy. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Jemus42 (talk).


 * Please sign your statements. Regarding the topic: A section "Critisism" might be helpful. L3viathan (talk) 19:58, 30 October 2013 (CET)


 * The title "Dictator" for Jemus42 is well documented. The exact governance of Wurstmineberg is covered in Wurstmineberg government. Be reminded that the article should be written in a NPOV. Since you are the claimed dictator, you can't be trusted on that issue. --Naturalismus (talk) 20:07, 30 October 2013 (CET)


 * The most objective source on said issues might be the Minecraft server's log files, which are accessible to everyone listed the appropriate section of Hosting and in part through Wurstminebot. Every other account of past events, whether from me or allegedly suppressed players, are to be handled with the same type of precaution as every other eye-witness account. If you intend to claim that my statements are not reliable, be aware that your own personal statements are subject to the same criticism. --Jemus42 (talk) 20:19, 30 October 2013 (CET)

Citations missing, style, ...
The article in its current form is a stub, is missing citations and should therefore be deleted. The author should address these issues as soon as possible to avoid a deletion (request). L3viathan (talk) 19:58, 30 October 2013 (CET)

Section Chats
The section Chats is unquoted and has no apparent use in the article. Requesting speedy deletion of that section or significant improvements by the author. L3viathan (talk) 20:48, 30 October 2013 (CET)


 * Agree. If nothing else, it should be renamed so that its relevance to the article becomes clear. —Fenhl 20:54, 30 October 2013 (CET)
 * Agree. Furthermore, the contents of the section have no accessible source, its contents could be completetly fabricated and should be considered irrelevant. --Jemus42 (talk) 20:58, 30 October 2013 (CET)
 * Disagree. I know all people involved in that chat personly, and I witnessed the chat. I have screenshots! Furthermore, it's relevance is obvious. --Naturalismus (talk) 21:37, 30 October 2013 (CET)
 * Disagree. Personal accounts are not a reliable source, anybody could claim to have seen anything. Besides, given the nature of said chat, any screenshots or logs from that chat are not allowed. As for it's relevancy: Since it is without any context, it is not obvious that there was in reality no sign of sincerity in said statements, and no aggressive retaliation is planned. --Jemus42 (talk) 21:42, 30 October 2013 (CET)

Section Ideology
While the statement has a citation, the tweet very weakly supports the propositions made. The inference from the disapproval of "Massentierhaltung" to "vegan lifestyle" constitutes original research and needs to be supported by more convincing sources or removed. L3viathan (talk) 21:27, 30 October 2013 (CET)