User talk:If and while

Undoing someone's edits without reason, especially when someone clearly knowledgeable about the Legacy of Kain series provides a good, valid reason, is unacceptable. I have locked the page in question until tomorrow. Please explain yourself here as further undoing without a given reason in the edit notes says nothing but "I don't like this edit, so I'm going to remove it".

Of course. The user Wrace is very known in the LOK community to be the cause of many chaotic episodes in the past; including with Soul Reaver 2 and Blood Omen 2 a few months ago cuz the removal of many important details from their pages (luckily then restored). Then... Talking about Blood Omen 1, he had deleted an important description about the FSB issue and then he's reclamed that the "CubanRaul's Community Patch 2.0" would work for Win98 as well; when on the official website dedicated to that fix reports Win2k to be the minimum required for the v2.0. While for the v2.2, the minimum required is Win7 (source: http://cubanraul.altervista.org/kain/index.htm).

If the 2.0 version of the community patch works on Windows 98 with extra steps, such as needing to manually bypass the installer - the results of which could be provided in this very wiki's community files section for convenience - then I fail to see why the patch shouldn't be included in the article.

While I definitely have issue with how Wrace phrased his statement for Blood Omen 1, if the patch works as advertised in the fashion I described above, his past behavior **should not** be used as an excuse to ignore a useful solution for those unable to run the separate OpenGL version.

This one https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Dino_Crisis_2&diff=prev&oldid=1427159

I don't know if you are an official editor or someone with more knowledge of how to write the articles.

The point of adding that note was because the older version has wrong info about the languages added by someone else because some people remember the languages from the PS1 version like if the PC version has them, but it has not. In fact i ask the one that added that info https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Topic:Xjsjpbnq1qudsiwg and they point out a video about the PS1 version. Also there is a auto-claiming "Spanish PC version" out there which is in fact a PS1 version with the ePSXe emulator bundled, making this more confusing.

Making that note (or something like that, i open to advice) is for "We know the PS1 has those languages, but we are talking here about the PC version, and as far as we know, it has these languages" because this could be something that some people would want to add again and again thinking they are right but adding the info about the PS1 version, and they need to be sure about it is about a real PC version.

In fact, this same issue is shared with Metal Gear Solid 1, which have the same exact issue but i didn't edit the article yet searching more info about the various releases it had.

Thanks!

Hello.

Sorry to spam here, i just realised a much better way to add the information to the article, adding the known languages in the PS1 version as not available in the PC version, adding the part of that not all available languages as a disadvantage in the top, and adding refurl to the talk page to all of them. That fits better the editing guidelines.

I will edit in that way and if there is any issue, as you are watching and reviewing the article, tell me.

Thanks.

Sorry for being a bit blunt in my edit messages about the removal of the citation requests. But have to say that those were added in case no reference was available that confirmed the information to be true or the fix working. These requests shouldn't be removed in case they are not replaced with a source/reference as that would likely cause them to never receive a reference + from the date a citation request was made, you can often see how long it has been without a citation and thus judge its validity in some way over time. Hence why it is almost never removed without adding a reference right after :)