Thread:Jekkers/@comment-12776-20151201063609/@comment-12776-20151202031941

First of all, I think I overreact somewhat yesterday. Yes, it was pretty new then, so I shouldn't blame you for it.

Sorry. Good proof that I require more time off.

But that doesn't mean my point is moot.

While I guess using "actual title pending" instead of "title translation pending" can be overlooked (it's misleading, and fact that he's allow to post as instead of gone through discussion then has you post it - like how we did with Alice's Tales - seem wrong, I guess it isn't a big deal).

What's truly bad is descript the mamono in vias tone as "villainous". Now I saw all of sample pages on Kurobinega, and yes she's indeed take the man by surprise, so it's likely to be rape too. BUT in hentai, and especially MGE (as seen in Stealth's doujinshi), just because it start as rape doesn't mean the character is "villain".

I say Ilias shouldn't be allow to write on main article anymore, or at least need to gone through the staff first.

Before you accuse me with something along the line of "thought police" or something again. Jekkers, you said this, remember?

''There is a ton of ambiguity left in the translations we receive but as we know, that's completely intentional. It's the reader's job to digest the material "as is" and come up with their own conclusion. If we start allowing people to contribute edits based on what they can surmise from their limited knowledge, then we've failed to uphold the author's original intentions.''

This one is just recent, but he has done it before. This is one that I removed from Spirit Energy article, and we only become aware of it because an anonymous confused it as fact in a discussion. And who know where else he hide crap like this among the bulk of text?

Here's even more ugly one, here is when I removed his synthesis (but written as fact in "References" section), and he sneak it in later while revert a vandal edit.

It's clear that he has problem to separate his opinion from raw information, and isn't above underhand tactic to keep it in the article. (In fact, the "villainous predatory rapist" part would be fine if it's in discussion, the problem is that it is in the article.) So again, I suggest that he shouldn't be allow to write on main article anymore, or at least need to gone through the staff first.

Best regards.