Non-KR/NA Updates

@Blargel This is an opinion, yes, but there is no such thing as too much information. We can not be too detailed (so long as we're not explaining how to open your inventory and equip a bow and arrow in the description of an archery skill). The more information, the better. The question is not if we have too much information, its how are we organizing it. Also, in the same post you're responding to, I clearly said there are things outlined we should not talk about, including the things you are using in a response to prove my statement wrong (at least that's how I am perceiving it). But back to the point, in order to not drown useful information with deemed less useful information, the solution would be to separate the two.

@Yinato Valid argument. I'm not saying we should or should not listen to Nexon NA, but based on even their patch notes, significant things that they write can be proven wrong with simple ingame testing. They seem to be uninformed in everything other than events, ignoring for the fact that what they tell Sabina to say is also wrong. I'm just saying, lets take it with a grain of sand, not as the law of the land.

@Mystickskye The feelings are mutual.

So assuming we do keep future content and skipped content (not saying we are but for the argument if we are), what are peoples opinions of mixing the two into a foreign content section, or its own version of the patches page (which would include unreleased patches such as Treasure Hunter), and make it explicitly clear all or some of these updates and parts of the updates might not ever be added to NA?

There is such a thing as too much information.

-stares at Lugh's Trivia-

I tried cleaning that out once. Guess who opposed?

Waaas it the ghost of Christmas past?

Okay, I definitely didn't read the post I replied to carefully enough. Still you say there's no such thing as too much information yet you also say that we shouldn't be describing how to equip a bow and arrow, etc. You're clearly drawing the line somewhere on what is too much information, just like the rest of us, but this line appears to be in a very different place in comparison to the majority of other editors (as far as I can tell anyway... you're the only one I know of that is this vehemently opposed to removing certain things).

Yes, as I said, there is such a thing as too much information, I purposefully contradicted myself in the same post, but as I said, that is not the type of thing we are doing, this is a different case entirely.

Majority does not equal right either, not that majority is right or wrong. If the majority of the game wanted to remove information about housing so only those who knew could benefit and players who do not know cannot find out, that does not make it right either. A sort of exaggerated example but that is exactly how I see it. There is not legitimate reason to remove the information, at least none mentioned in this thread so far as far as I can see.

“	I purposefully contradicted myself in the same post	„

Translation, you screwed up and have no idea what your view is on the matter.

“	Majority does not equal right either, not that majority is right or wrong.	„

Way to state something without actually stating anything...

Everything you've said thus far is based on your own closed-minded views and opinions. Let me make this clear; you are but one "editor" who is trying to make the wiki into your own vision. Your reasoning is circular, your points lack common sense, and the fact that you've stated that you will be closed-minded on the matter means that no matter how valid a given reason may be, you will just turn around and say "nope, not a good reason".

“	Translation, you screwed up and have no idea what your view is on the matter.	„

I was going to quote the same thing, but I decided not to waste my time. lol.