(In)Famous Warring
For heaven's sake, guys, why not just remove the word entirely. It's an adjective! -Wulfenbach (talk) 23:41, January 18, 2013 (UTC)
I wasn't comfortable with removing the word completely, since it did add to the meaning of the sentence. But I feel that "infamous" connotates the wrong feeling for the Inquisitorial sigil. While some members of Mankind may feel fear and horror (emotions signified by the word "infamous") at the approach of the Inquisition, I do not. I like the Inquisition. I think its actions (in many respects) help Mankind.
Compare the definitions of the two words.
Infamous: having an extremely bad reputation; deserving of or causing an evil reputation.
Famous: having a widespread reputation, usually of a favorable nature; renowned; celebrated.
While the Inquisition might not always have a favourable reputation, it certainly is well-known throughout the galaxy. It's clear, from comparing the definitions, that "famous" is the correct word with a more neutral meaning; and "infamous" is a pejorative term used by those who hate the Inquisition.
Unfortunatley, the admins, both Whitefang and Montonius, have refused to give any reasoning behind their strange insistance on the negative word. This is against the spirit of the wiki, as expressed on the wiki page: "it is an Administrator's responsibility to explain the reasons for his decision clearly and forthrightly." It's unsophisticated to 1) refuse to explain yourself; and 2) when confronted with a good argument, lock the page. Elric Grey (talk) 01:16, January 19, 2013 (UTC)
Your argument is not a good one; the Inquisition is feared throughout the Imperium and the word "infamous" is correct as used in my judgment. If you disagree with this, I am sorry, but so be it; we will agree to disagree and the page will remain as is, though I do not necessarily think the page needed to be locked to prove the point; though it is Algrim who will have to make the decision to unlock it. While I do not wish to speak for Algrim, I believe he locked the page because of your continued insistence on this course of action after it was made clear to you that the change was not going to stand, a point which you are now pursuing beyond all bounds for your own personal satisfaction in an effort to prove you are right and your opponents in the disagreement are wrong. The admins of this wiki have quite large workloads and we will not be documenting every minor change and reversion; to do so would quickly become laborious and inefficient. If you disagree with that reason, so be it, but it IS the reason. I have now also given you the reason you requested behind the reversion, if you disagree, that is your opinion and you are entitled to hold it. However, the decision has been made by the legitimate authority whether you agree with it or not. Move on. If Algrim wishes to add to this, or if he feels I have mischaracterised his actions, he can feel free to weigh in. That is the last I have to say on the topic. Montonius (talk) 01:40, January 19, 2013 (UTC)