Talk:Fort Leniex

Tracky "If there was no spoiler I would have understand removing the base's location, but there is a spoiler. Reverted back to chris edit."

The spoiler was removed by request of the owning factions. Removed the entire Location section. Raisu 13:48, 7 February 2010 (MST)

Not a good enough excuse. There is no 'owning faction' discovery-wide, it varies depending on server. Reverting to Trackpad's version. --Alex 16:52, 7 February 2010 (MST)

---

Lane Hackers, any of whom would know about Leniex perfectly within the limits of their characters, use the wiki as much as anyone else. Those that have trouble separating the interests of themselves as players and those of their characters should, instead of continuing to champion their characters, become familiar with this vital aspect of role-playing. (From Eyvind in wiki chat)

I concede your edit about removing the detailed instructions in the spoiler, but not the location in the infobox that can be easily found by anyone in datastorm or other programs. ~cshake ^{(talk) (sysop)} 17:22, 7 February 2010 (MST)

Fair enough, however "new" Lane Hackers wouldn't necessarily know about it and would then need one of the older Lane Hackers to advise them of Leniex's location. That was part of the reasoning for the request. Raisu 17:34, 7 February 2010 (MST)

(Though the issue seems resolved, I would like to add to the subject.) Granted; a truth contributed to by mechanical difficulty of finding the base as well as the lack of any specific information here. The base doesn't appear on scanners and you would either have to spend a good long while searching for the base -- in which case you are likely a legitimate Hacker of free movement in Vespucci -- or be given more specific and helpful pointers regarding the location.

Naturally, anyone who knows the information could give it. The way the player obtains the information is up to him and there is no way of controlling it. There are probably not many good reasons to even attempt to control it. If a player would like to play out the story of his character -- from his recruitment to, through and beyond his inception as a member of the Hacker core -- he could. If, however, he is not keen on that approach and would rather focus on other aspects of the experience, I don't think anyone has the right to prevent him from taking a negligible role-playing shortcut.

It is a widely accepted convention, skipping the role-play of actual induction into a faction in favor of the experiences the player can have as a member; a practice of the vast majority.

--Eyvind (Talk) 18:16, 7 February 2010 (MST)

Location issue... again.

Verlorenen, the exact location was not there for a reason. The Hellfire Legion, as the official faction who owns the system on the official DiscoveryGC server, would like to stress that the location of this base is not public knowledge, and while it is true that people who know where it is as a player and use that meta-gaming knowledge on an unrelated character need to learn that aspect of RP better, it's very difficult to find such a person to instruct them in this matter if they're only in the system for ten minutes. This has been discussed before, and it was concluded that the sector, but not the specifics of the exact location, would be included.

Please read the Talk page first in the future.

Exact location removed.

Hellfire Legion 09:55, 8 April 2010 (MDT)

I would like to remind you that the Wiki is OORP, it is supposed to be an impartial and absolute reference for EVERYTHING regarding discovery mod. True, the Hellfire Legion owns the system in question, but it does not own the wiki page. Given this, it goes against everything the wiki stands for to falsify information. Yes, this is lying - a lie of omission - and it sets a very bad precedent. What's to stop other factions from stomping about the other pages of wiki? According to the HF's rationale, every faction owns every wiki article that addresses topics that involve their in game "property" and have free reign to falsify anything they see fit. What's to keep the Phantoms from removing all articles involving them because it's "not part of public knowledge" ? What about the nomads and the keepers - there is WAY more about ship and weapon specifications than is in the realm of "public knowledge" - all that, according to the HF, would disappear. Hell, weapon, ship, item, and base data that each faction finds "inconvenient" to be part of public knowledge would also be gone. No, this isn't what the Wiki is supposed to be about - and I will revert this as many times as required to preserve the integrity of the wiki.

Verlorenen 11:09, 9 May 2010 (EST)

Please explain why only Fort Leniex must have a section describing it's location and not every other base on the wiki?

Simply put, the location data is unecessary, as the sector is already stated earlier in the article.

This is a wiki.

Not a road map.

--Edran Vayrn 10:34, 10 May 2010 (MDT)

There is additional information about the location of Fort Leniex in the wiki because there is more information to be had about the location of Fort Leniex. This is just like how bases that do not sell commodities do not have commodities listed as sold on said base, while bases that do buy and sell commodities list commodities bought and sold. There is simply additional relevant information available. Simply put, the location data is necessary, as the mere sector listing is inadequate for the efficient location of Fort Leniex. Critical information regarding the subject matter of an article is worthy of mention on a wiki page.

This is wiki, not a lobotomized tour brochure for the Hellfire Legion's convenience. Also, Fort Leniex is not the only base with additional relevant information regarding location - Corsica Outer Sanctum also has this.

Verlorenen 4:15, 10 May 2010 (EST)

The info is there, and will stay there. Read the top of the page for all the reasons, and there is discussion on the wiki forum as well. Page locked. @Hellfire Legion - discuss on the forums. And the talk page already says why it is shown.

~cshake ^{(talk) (sysop)} 15:45, 10 May 2010 (MDT)

How is this, in any way, a middle ground? Either the facts are there or they are not - and in this case, they are not :/

Verlorenen 11:41, 10 May 2010 (EST)