Thread:Mfaizsyahmi/@comment-4369412-20130310195129/@comment-3307002-20130311223156

Shomronon wrote: "and as Benad says, let me edit his articls, there shouldn't be any censoring just because it's deemed unflattering to some people" oh sure lets do it both way, let me edit his page with filth also! (nah i wont give him so much attention, but u get the point). Nobody puts 'filth' on the pages of others. For example, is the controversy surrounding Master Studios' awards (and how late they are), and other such things, 'filth'? He even edited one of those sections himself on his own page, and had no problems with any sort of bias. Is mentioning that some untergangers have views that are controversial, automatically 'filth'? And so on...

To you, ANY sort of criticism of an unterganger, and any sort of controversies mentioned, on any articles, are automatically 'hate' and 'filth'. Is it 'filth' to say that you made controversial remarks, and is it 'filth' to document things?

Because this is what the wiki is here for. To document. Not to censor anything that may reflect on someone badly, and to paint a perfect picture. If an unterganger is controversial, and has invoked much criticism, then why not mention it (in an unbiased way, of course)?

I've said my piece regarding this matter, so carry on. Anyone is free to edit any page on the wiki, apart from on pages that they may remove information from.