For some reason, I think the irony of calling me a "racist" and a "bigot" while referring to the image of Darius as a "half man half black monkey" is completely lost on you...but since I'm a wiki admin and not a psychologist, I'm going to respond within the scope of this wiki and its editorial policy.
I am not the one who originally uploaded the image. I reverted and protected it after it was changed by someone who, like you, wanted to see an image of a light-skinned Darius instead of the dark-skinned Darius that originally appeared in Civilization IV and its expansions. Since this wiki is devoted to the Civilization games, we remain faithful to our source material by taking all of the images for leaders and other in-game entities from the games themselves, historical accuracy notwithstanding. Moreover, if you'd actually bothered to read the article, I'm sure you would have seen the note in the Trivia section stating that a patch lightened Darius' skin tone to be more consistent with both Cyrus' in-game appearance and historical records.
If you can find an image of Darius as he appeared after the patch, share it with me and I'll be happy to use it in place of the current one. Otherwise, we'll continue to use the current image on this wiki until and unless Firaxis decides that Darius needs a(nother) redesign.
What irony? that is not a picture of any modern human at all. That's not a fully evolved human being's facial bone structure. This is not just about light skinned vs dark-skinned. Anthropologically, the modern homo sapiens don't have that overly protruded facial bone structure. So whoever created it and whoever insisted on keeping it up as Darius's pic, have ulterior motives. Also, one doesn't have to be a historian to know that the Indo-European of group moved up to Mesopotamia and one group left for Europe and one group left for what became ancient Persia. Those settlers are called Aryans. This is history 101 and the irony of a rendition of an Aryan king as a non-human with dark skin can't possibly be coincidental and out of total ignorance.
The fact that someone wanted to change it before and you put your foot down and insisted, shows your motive. Otherwise, you would have respectfully complied and changed it to a rendition of a human!
If this image is just for the game, then why does it appear on the main page of wikipedia as the MAIN image?
We have no motives on this wiki beyond accurately portraying in-game entities using the graphical assets provided in the games. The image posted on Darius I (Civ4) uses actual in-game graphics, and I couldn't care less what image his Wikipedia article uses or whether or not you think he looks like a "fully evolved" human.
It seems to me that your bias and your overly narrow conception of "evolution" are infecting your reasoning. You accused me of racism while simultaneously denigrating the image of Darius from the game...with comments that, if anything, mark you as a racist because of your refusal to acknowledge the figure depicted as a human. I'm just waiting for you to argue that the images of Shaka Zulu, Zara Yaqob, Haile Selassie, Mvemba a Nzinga, and Amanitore don't depict humans and should be removed or replaced, as well.
Unless you're a consultant for Firaxis and have a graduate degree in evolutionary biology, you're not going to get the image of Darius replaced no matter how carefully you scrutinize it. You might, however, get yourself banned from filling this wiki with your inane conspiracy theories and assertions that we're advancing some hidden agenda. Please, save yourself the trouble.
Fascinating! threats came faster than I thought. I DO have a PhD in evolutionary biology and anthropology! I'm a biologist, I have a clear conception of Darwinian evolution. I have done research on it for 15 years. The rendition of Darius that you are closely guarding is of Homo heidelbergensis not modern Homo Sapiens.
the rendition of Shaka Zulu and others you mentioned, depicts a fully evolved modern homo sapiens. If these pictures are uploaded solely as game-entities but appear on the main picture of Wikipedia for the actual human being and a historical figure and your attitude is and I quote "I couldn't care less what image his Wikipedia article uses" clearly shows your ulterior motives. otherwise, to respect the historical facts and separate them from in-game graphics, you shouldn't have any objection to make sure a game rendition of whatever that thing is, has no bearing on providing misleading and insulting information about an actual historical figure.
Compare the picture of the white man with overly delicate features that you have uploaded for your own profile with the freak of the nature creature you are putting up as one of the history's greatest kings and you tell me who is conspiring to mislead the public, humiliate an important historical figure and 80 millions of its nation in today's Iran and threat to ban anyone who is attempting at correcting the wrong you have done?
I believe, good doctor, that you could make better use of your time by writing a research paper on how the admins of the Civilization Wiki are disseminating propaganda by using in-game images to represent the entities depicted in the games their wiki covers. (Do let me know if it gets published. I'd love to read it.)
It would be more productive than arguing your case on my wall, at least.
Sarcastic comments about my work? Why would I think you are above that? I have no issues with you depicting in-game images for the purpose of introducing the game to the enthusiasts. You are deliberately positioning that image as a depiction of an actual historical figure not an in-game character which is wrong on every level and its a laughing matter to you. Racists with hidden agenda like you should be banned from filling Wiki.
REMOVE the picture of Homo heidelbergensis that you have currently uploaded for Darius. there are plenty of historically more accurate pictures of him, starting by Homo Sapiens.
Faithfj, I assure you, none of the admins in the wiki have any racist agenda. I believe I may have been the original one to upload the image of Darius, even if the file history was lost at one point. That's just how Firaxis has chosen to portray Darius in the game, so don't shoot the messengers, OK?
However, now that I've learned that Darius has been updated in some patch, I'll install the game again and see if I can get a screenshot of his newer version.
Also, I'm curious: where in Wikipedia is that image used? I couldn't find it there.
Well, I learned that the appearance of Darius I in Civilization VI has not been officially changed, but only in a mod named Blue Marble. I tried to install the mod but couldn't get it to run so I couldn't get a screenshot. Unfortunately there's apparently something in the way Steam handles the game and its expansions that's not compatible with the mod.
To be honest, I wasn't 100% sure that it was vandalism, and I haven't looked at the editor or the game's data files to verify - in fact, I can't, since I don't own Civ3.
What I know is that Olivers Mor and Philippe Sutter Pik don't sound like the names of any famous Germans I'd heard about, so I did a Google search for them. None of the top results were remotely related to historical figures. Considering that the editor who added these two names to the list back in January has no other edits to his/her credit and didn't bother to capitalize the names, I'm inclined to believe that this was an instance of vandalism that no one caught until now.
If you find that I'm wrong and these are indeed the names of Great Leaders in Civ3, please let me know.
Not sure about the text files, but the Editor has them under each Civilization. I've filled in the German page.
Question: Previous edits have added first names to Barbarossa and Richtoffen, though the editor does not show them. Can anyone (a) verify if those two have their first names shown in-game, and (b) if not shown in-game, do we still want to show that on the page?
For the sake of consistency, I don't think we should list the Great Leaders' titles or first names unless they're listed in the game. And for the record, the (incomplete) list of Great Leaders that was originally posted on the page seems to have come from this site:
I don't see a problem with keeping those, as long as we keep the parentheses so readers will know the information isn't given in the game. Not sure if other people feel the same way, but those are my two cents.
Hey, I noticed you added Category:Universal wonders to a few articles. Do we really need that category at all? I'm not sure if the term "Universal Wonder" exists in any of the games, plus it's not disambiguated, so if we just add all World Wonders from all games, as they are more commonly known, the category will just become convoluted and inaccessible. What do you think?
Yeah, I thought about that and tried to add it only to the articles to which it actually applied (specifically, the national wonders), but I don't think it's strictly necessary. I'd be fine with either renaming it appropriately or deleting it entirely.
We need to expand some articles. Examples? Social Insurance (CivRev2), American (CivRev2), Egyptian (CivRev2), and others. People like me are still playing the game and need to know the information. I know some strategies (excuse my spelling) and can help out with background facts, additions since Civ Rev, and the like.
I've never played CivRev2, but if you or anyone you know has information about the game or strategies you've learned since you started playing it, I strongly encourage you to add your knowledge to the wiki. Try to follow the same basic format as the CivRev articles if you're at a loss for what to do.
In the Thailand Tomorrow section of Civ 5's Siam kingdom, the article discusses about Thailand's future and about the King. The article needs to be updated since King Bhumibol Adulyadej has recently passed away, and will be succeeded by his son, Maha Vajiralongkorn.
I understand your reasons for making the change and appreciate your commitment to historical accuracy. However, as I explained after reverting your edits, this is not a historical wiki. The information in any section entitled Civilopedia (Entry), Historical Info, or Historical Context is presented exactly as it appears in the in-game Civilopedia, which is written by the developers. Even if this information becomes outdated, please leave it as is unless Firaxis officially changes it.