Board Thread:Wiki Discussions and Support/@comment-5407586-20141206094948/@comment-25227224-20141209044821

"And we have every right to "pick and choose", you have to consider that the organisational aspects"

I do take it into consideration. If you read what I posted above you would see that I clearly see it as an "undertaking task" with the latter of statements I've made after.

" There's a limit to just "do what the databook says".

Who gets to make the decision. It's a critical point. I've made a solution of allowing the users to vote on it. Another ignored point. Which people see more fit, apparently. It's a horrible precedent to set your confirmation bias. Readers view this wikia as an encyclopedia. Which I can provide plenty of links, of users using it. Because factually it comes down to organizational and empirical positions.

Ten-tails also makes great arguments in close contrast to mine.

"As TheUltimate3 made very clear, we have never used the databook arc names as article titles on this wiki"

And so what? It doesn't mean it's right. I understand the task is quite hard. But like Ten-tails stated

"Consensus, in this case, doesn't matter. Canon is canon, fan-made terms aren't. The end."

" I do not see any good coming out of mass fixing arc titles just to suit the whims of a databook we ignore in terms of arcs".

Dude, I don't like the names either. But by that argument that I made first was. Then if that's the case, then you might as well stop editing the wiki. With respect - It's absurd.