Talk:GIL

From Touhou Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

GIL's twitter

The link does not exist anymore. Is it still necessary to keep the link? Deathsoul60 17:18, 15 November 2010 (PST)

No, but if you're going to take it out, do it in the wikia wiki. Master Bigode 17:27, 15 November 2010 (PST)

GIL is a cheater.

nothing else - —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cactu (talkcontribs) 10:17, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Because GIL's cheating is obvious, I have altered the page. Simply watch his behavior in the Border of Life and Death timeout and there can be no question. Really his page should be deleted in its entirety, but I don't think I have the power to do that. - Zil (talk) 22:06, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Page contents cannot be deleted as he was recognized in the past before he was suspecious of cheating, like in Wikipedia there is some famous figure who take drug and doesn't mean his article must be deleted - KyoriAsh (talk) 06:13, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Indeed, the article should remain to prevent any future confusion regarding him. That is to say, it should state clearly that he is a cheater. I've just revised it. Zil (talk) 10:54, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Current article content is sufficient to note that he was acclaimed cheating, please do not insert your point of view into the article - KyoriAsh (talk) 10:57, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
It is poorly written, using too many words to state something simple, states something untrue (he's been inactive for ages, not as a result of the accusations), praises him for no reason when simple statement of facts is all that is necessary, and not does not state clearly what is suspicious about his playing. The changes I have made are simplifications and clarifications of what's already there. Your grasp of the English language is obviously weak so please stop removing my corrections for no reason. Zil (talk) 11:10, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
I wasn't going to say anything when the page was first changed last year but if we are picking sides I 100% agree with KyoriAsh statement, the page should be up, include as much context as possible and not include personal bias/point of view statements. It's a minor nitpick but please don't take jabs at others grasp of English, especially when your own grammar isn't exactly perfect. Ycdtosa (talk) 17:04, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Zil's revisions are pretty poor, but I think the state of the article even before that was pretty iffy. I'd be down to rewrite it, but I'm not too familiar with the subject. (Are there any external sources that discuss this?) Polaris (talk) 01:27, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
To the clowns reverting the article, my edit was strictly an improvement, and so reverting it is strictly destructive. If you want it to be better you'll have to actually exert yourselves. Zil (talk) 08:50, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Evidence compilation

Going forward with this article, while I think it's perfectly obvious that GIL is a cheater, and the current article does a pretty good job of letting people read between the lines (e.g. of course somebody cheating might want to show off, of course somebody cheating would rather do "interesting" challenges over the real effort required for scoring, of course when they would score they could achieve inflated scores), it is important that some form of tangible evidence be present in the article to support some of the text. In particular, while I think it's okay to state he has been accused of cheating, and even that there is substantial evidence backing these claims, that evidence should be linked to; otherwise it should be slapped with a citation needed.

Breakdowns, whether individual posts, thread, videos, etc, are good valid sources of information. For example, there was this thread discussing claims about ichizoku, and I'm pretty sure cactu also made a video explaining this in detail. The thread was made early into investigating and feels a bit more speculatory so it isn't the greatest quality evidence by itself but this is the kind of stuff that should be considered. If there was even a pastebin or something detailing parts of GIL's runs that are suspect, or if somebody wants to make one, that is appropriate to link. Even saying something like "Top scorerunner [some top player] believes GIL's runs to be cheated", linking to such a quote, is alright even if it's an argument from authority, because it gives a source to the controversy rather than just saying "there is controversy".

Any breakdowns should not be present in the article itself, just used as reference. Basically, you keep it to the point in the article, and use good external sources that validate what's written in the article. Examples:

  • "as his movement during this attack is erratic": Should be linked to anything explaining why and where the movement is considered erratic, even if you or I could see it through experience with the game.
  • "leading the community to consider the run as having been cheated": Maybe link to external pages that have taken down his scores or links to runs. Like showing how ichizoku's scores have been removed from Royalflare.
  • "The run has since been widely discredited.": It has, but how do we substantiate this? Same as above?

Please post any evidence relating to GIL's cheating in this talk page so it can be discussed and then added to the article. I really don't think it will be difficult to substantiate. Drake Irving (talk) 06:40, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

MaribelHearn showed me a tweet conversation KyoriAsh had with OOSAKA about GIL, found here. Basically he says that he doesn't remember GIL's EoSD play but he thinks his PCB play is unquestionably cheated. The second tweet notes that he hasn't watched all the replays or anything (because Kyori linked some), but "in our circle"/"around us" (僕らの周り) they consider GIL obviously a cheater. Drake Irving (talk) 21:50, 21 February 2018 (UTC)