Hi Modanung,

I've reverted your recent edit to the chaos magic article, for several reasons. I'm trying to clean up the entire article to bring it in line with other Wikipedia articles on different philosophies, religions and belief systems.

The Chaosphere I've uploaded is the most frequently used version. It's more or less the one used in Liber Null (on page 68), which originally introduced the symbol to chaos magic. It's also the one used on both the IOT UK and IOT USA websites, [[1]] and [[2]]. It's therefore the most appropriate symbol to use in masthead position on this article.

The symbol you uploaded is a variant. If you look at some other wikipedia pages on other subjects, they use the most generic and widely used version of a particular logo in masthead position -- not an infrequently used variant. The article on Christianity, for example, uses a simple SVG cross, not an elaborate celtic knotwork design. The article on Hinduism uses a simple SVG image of the Aum symbol -- the most widely used and generic symbol for Hinduism.

The version of the chaosphere I've uploaded follows this basic protocol.

I've also posted a copy of this comment to the chaos magic talk page. If you disagree, please let's have a conversation about it, rather than simply reverting my edits. I am merely trying to bring the article up to the same standard as any other belief system, which I'm sure we can both agree it deserves. Rune370 (talk) 21:18, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Modanung, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Urho3D, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Amaury (talk) 05:48, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Urho3D requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Amaury (talk) 05:48, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article Urho3d has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I find no evidence of notability for this engine. Few Google hits, one possibly an independent reliable source.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Largo Plazo (talk) 05:59, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What is going on in that image? It's hard to tell what's happening there, and the caption about "eSpell" that unhelpfully links to computer programming doesn't help at all. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 18:36, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's a chaos magician visualiszing a fraction of the Akashic record. Modanung (talk) 19:31, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And what's an "espell"? — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 19:34, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's a chaomagical term for a computer program. Computer programming is part of a chaos magicians basic skill set. Modanung (talk) 20:03, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, that's bull. I didn't need to learn programming to be a chaote. Anyway, you're gonna have to edit that picture caption because seriously, regular people need to be able to understand what's going on in our articles. You can't use the word "eSpell" because it's an obscure neologism which is not defined in the article. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 20:11, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are you calling bull on a fellow chaote? To me this seems like a contradictio in adjecto. Everything is permitted. Modanung (talk) 08:09, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Everything is permitted." -- not on Wikipedia it ain't. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 09:41, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well... the Chaos magic page kind of is the place where this holds true. Since chaos magic is a decentralized fractal disorginisation wherin each magician finds his own path and in doing so defines chaos magic. I'll write some more on eSpells. Modanung (talk) 22:23, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Write about it where? Not in the article, I hope, unless you have reliable sources. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 08:50, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes to chaos magic there is no source more reliable then the magicians themselves. Modanung (talk) 09:53, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, no. Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 11:14, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In that case Chaos magic may not be suitable as a wikipedia subject. Either accept it's chaotic nature or don't mention it. Modanung (talk) 11:37, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is suitable because it's a notable topic itself. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 13:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That was fun, have a nice day! :) Modanung (talk) 20:05, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Modanung, I just wanted to let you know I deleted 👾, which you had redirected to Cthulhu. Previously, that character redirected to Space Invaders, and it was deleted at Redirects for discussion (link). There was a lot of discussion about various things it could refer to, but Cthulhu never came up, and it was ultimately deemed too ambiguous to function as a search term. See also Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Common outcomes#Emoji, and let me know if you have any questions. --BDD (talk) 19:54, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

k Modanung (talk) 20:30, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Chaos magic. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Tyw7  (🗣️ Talk to me • ✍️ Contributions) 12:28, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been reported at WP:Administrator intervention against vandalism --Tyw7  (🗣️ Talk to me • ✍️ Contributions) 12:43, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]