![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Please erase all agressive comments from Daishokaioshin on your talk archive. I will not permit that any insults, as violent as Daishokaioshin committed (she went as far as racial insults) remain on a public archive.
If they remain, it will only force me to react to them here.
You have not moved a full discussion. You've forgotten the message from Daishokaioshin which triggered it all. Without it, the discussion you have moved didn't make any sense, and you're letting very offensive comments remain to the view of anyone, without the possibility of rectifying the lies of Daishokaioshin. I'm deeply offensed, and we must all respect each other (we are forced by the rules). Please delete these horrible comments. Folken de Fanel 12:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
By Wikipedia:Remove personal attacks:
"Whenever you refactor, do not destroy the context of a conversation -- all statements in the discussion should still make sense after the refactoring. So if you refactor a personal insult, but do not refactor an insulting response, that destroys the context in which the response has been made. Don't do that."
...Please remove the said comments by Daisokaioshin.
The question here is not whether it is personal attack or not. You have chosen to "refactor" a discussion between Daishokaioshin and me. But in doing so, you've forgotten to remove a part of the discussion, thus destroying its context. Folken de Fanel 22:36, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Just FYI, you blanked Tournament Announcer and moved it to the appropriate list page. While I consider this a good thing, you should note that it has been WP:PRODed and failed. That means that your redirect could be considered controversial. In this case, I doubt it will be challenged but the more correct response might have been to open the move for discussion. JRP 01:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Don't revert other people's pages that have been edited by other people. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
76.18.145.172 (
talk •
contribs) 76.18.145.172
When ya can, see the
respective talk page for your opinion. Thanks!
PL(DB)
17:48, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
When you can, see Talk:Power level (Dragon Ball)#Okay, let's get these power levels right!, thanks! Power level (Dragon Ball) 19:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Hey TTN, would you be interested in joining our Wikiproject? Wikipedia:WikiProject Dragon Ball -- bulletproof 3:16 02:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I should let ya know too. Whenever you can, please see Talk:List of Dragon Ball special abilities#Garlic Gun. If you see that Garlic Gun there, that is just a sample of how the techniques should be classified and titled. I am going to change all of the techniques on the list (except Kamehameha, Dodonpa, Genki Dama, Kaio Ken and any others that were used as romaji names in the English manga/anime) into their literal English translation in about five days from now. This change will be similar as to how Bardock was changed to Burdock (name pun) and Hercule to Mr. Satan (which was his original Japanese/romaji name). Please comment on anything else if you have something you may want to add on to it. Thanks! Power level (Dragon Ball) 23:23, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
This was indeed a bold move ;) Pea ceNT 13:27, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
I undid your edits again to those pages. Please wait for bulletproof, SUIT, or DDF to share their opinions before you do that again. Thanks! Power level (Dragon Ball) 04:19, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
If I may make an observation: articles that you take the time to condense/clean-out seem to have an easier time getting redirected. I realize that this is an extra step that you shouldn't need to do at times, but doing this first seems to lead to fewer arguments with Dragon Ball editors. Just thought I'd point that out for one reason or another. ~ Snapper T o 00:10, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
I'll AfD them. It's the only way to stop his nonsense. He will wikilawyer over the articles' existence for as long as he possibly can. He will do everything imaginable to keep them intact because he seems incapable of letting it go. He is also incapable of listening to what you or I tell him because we are not admins. He will only pay attention to those capable of making him shut up. PL, once you read this, do not bitch. This is exactly how you act. — Someguy0830 ( T | C) 02:34, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
I've been tagging everything in the Nintendo category, and I've arrived at the Pokemon section. I was also unsure, but I was told that they are a part of the Nintendo project because stuff under umbrella projects is still covered by larger projects (ie. That's why Nintendo games are tagged under C&V and the Nintendo Project). -- Scorpion 20:30, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Hey Nemu. Are you sure Garlic Jr and his henchmen constitute as "earthlings?" I though that they were from Makyo-sei or another dimension or somethin'... Power level (Dragon Ball) 05:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Well your opinion on the Shichibukai thing staying defeats the practice on the One Piece pages that has been there the last 2 months. This is the benfit for everyone and all real or fake chapter info is treated as "rumours" until the scanalation is out. Those fake spoilers a month ago caught a lot of people out even the bigger editors like me. You have to draw a line Nemu... Whether you want to or not.
And believe me. I don't give two hoots about Gecko not being on the page, he should be. But why develope a practice like this with a few others and then just let it slip for something like this. Everyone is excited we have a new shichibukai, thats all, normally we don't have a problem with removing the info. Angel Emfrbl 23:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Although I agree in some way that the opening text is irrelevant, the trivia references other things and characters from later games the developer created, and most non-Japanese who have played this game originally did so on the ROM, prior to a re-release on the GBA in the Mother 1+2 collection. Without the ROM and development information (not to mention the reception), the article is a stub, and really serves no purpose. -- PeanutCheeseBar 17:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Revert warring is not a very good way to go about it. -- Aurochs ( Talk | Block)
Listen here, there's a rule that says do not get rid of other peoples stuff they just edited so please do not do this again. -- Naruto134 00:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
For merging the Crash articles. The was some drama I didn't want to deal with! - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
|
Cool as a Cucumber Award | |
For staying cool during discussions that would usually drive someone mad. The Dragon Ball merges for example-- $UIT 03:27, 24 March 2007 (UTC) |
Thanks for uploading Image:Docchaos.PNG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:54, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Me here, I noticed you and Darkwarriorblake are having differences about where ever we should merge this page or not. I won't revert changes made by either one but I will ask a favor out of you two, please discuss the change at Talk:Garlic Jr. before you violate the three revert rule, remember we are a group here and I don't want any of you getting blocked for violating the 3RR, I already leaved a simmilar note on his talk page so I hope he will cooperate, Cheers! - DDF 18:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Ahem. Yes. I just wanna take the time to apologize for flying off the handle lately. I've really been the only one working on that article since it's merge into it's current state. I've had the goal of it being a featured article from the very start. I guess to see it ripped apart and nearly deleted over such small things just threw me over the deep end. It would have literally rendered the past few months of my life a complete waste of time and I guess I just couldn't take it. I mean, I don't mind it being edited and all but to see it come so close to GA and then vanish..gah..I'm just repeating myself. Anywho, I'm like...a way better dude than this and I just hope we can come to terms in the future. Gah..take it as you will GrandMasterGalvatron 19:18, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Was there some discussion somewhere that led you to do all that merging? If so, where? If not, I'm not sure you should have removed that much information without discussion. Rhindle The Red 03:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
So... you merged E-102 Gamma into the E-Series article. Why? Paul Haymon 11:30, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
To add a bit of information to my question, the entry for Gamma at the current E-Series article is relatively poorly written and lacks detail. I saw no reason to merge it; actually, the old article stood a chance of eventually becoming featured or at least good. Please explain; thanks. Paul Haymon 11:32, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
So, you think it's all a character deserves, eh?
Do me a favour, and go delete all articles for TV series episodes they are not needed.
Meh, guess what, Nemu? You are an hypocrit. People like you are the cause of Wikipedia's bad reputation. People like you are the cause of lack of information. I hope you never have to do a thesis, otherwise, you'd be screwed. User:Eriorguez
Anyway, if the merge is done, don't destroy information. Just copy and paste.
I see you've redirected Nack to the minor characters area... I don't think he's that minor. Besides, his article was fairly large before it was redirected. Perhaps we should give Nackery his own article back, but have him also listed in the Minor villains area, with a link to his article, possibly like this:
What is your opinion? RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 18:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
I did, but no one listened. RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 00:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Look. It's a list for minor characters. All the major characters have enough information and importance to keep their own articles, only merge if they're only a stub or a couple of lines. Besides the article is long enough as it is. Retiono Virginian 21:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Stop what? Are you treating me like I'm some kind of vandal? Well I'm not. I am a very experienced contributor here, and I really think this merge plan is obnixious. Retiono Virginian 14:43, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't think you were correct in removing the information from the article. While it's true that "video game guides" are not to be included, that was not a guide, it was a list of the contents of the game, akin to a plot summary. As it is, it is referenced by the work itself and completely independantly verifiable, not requiring additional references. Rhindle The Red 12:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Please erase all agressive comments from Daishokaioshin on your talk archive. I will not permit that any insults, as violent as Daishokaioshin committed (she went as far as racial insults) remain on a public archive.
If they remain, it will only force me to react to them here.
You have not moved a full discussion. You've forgotten the message from Daishokaioshin which triggered it all. Without it, the discussion you have moved didn't make any sense, and you're letting very offensive comments remain to the view of anyone, without the possibility of rectifying the lies of Daishokaioshin. I'm deeply offensed, and we must all respect each other (we are forced by the rules). Please delete these horrible comments. Folken de Fanel 12:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
By Wikipedia:Remove personal attacks:
"Whenever you refactor, do not destroy the context of a conversation -- all statements in the discussion should still make sense after the refactoring. So if you refactor a personal insult, but do not refactor an insulting response, that destroys the context in which the response has been made. Don't do that."
...Please remove the said comments by Daisokaioshin.
The question here is not whether it is personal attack or not. You have chosen to "refactor" a discussion between Daishokaioshin and me. But in doing so, you've forgotten to remove a part of the discussion, thus destroying its context. Folken de Fanel 22:36, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Just FYI, you blanked Tournament Announcer and moved it to the appropriate list page. While I consider this a good thing, you should note that it has been WP:PRODed and failed. That means that your redirect could be considered controversial. In this case, I doubt it will be challenged but the more correct response might have been to open the move for discussion. JRP 01:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Don't revert other people's pages that have been edited by other people. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
76.18.145.172 (
talk •
contribs) 76.18.145.172
When ya can, see the
respective talk page for your opinion. Thanks!
PL(DB)
17:48, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
When you can, see Talk:Power level (Dragon Ball)#Okay, let's get these power levels right!, thanks! Power level (Dragon Ball) 19:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Hey TTN, would you be interested in joining our Wikiproject? Wikipedia:WikiProject Dragon Ball -- bulletproof 3:16 02:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I should let ya know too. Whenever you can, please see Talk:List of Dragon Ball special abilities#Garlic Gun. If you see that Garlic Gun there, that is just a sample of how the techniques should be classified and titled. I am going to change all of the techniques on the list (except Kamehameha, Dodonpa, Genki Dama, Kaio Ken and any others that were used as romaji names in the English manga/anime) into their literal English translation in about five days from now. This change will be similar as to how Bardock was changed to Burdock (name pun) and Hercule to Mr. Satan (which was his original Japanese/romaji name). Please comment on anything else if you have something you may want to add on to it. Thanks! Power level (Dragon Ball) 23:23, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
This was indeed a bold move ;) Pea ceNT 13:27, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
I undid your edits again to those pages. Please wait for bulletproof, SUIT, or DDF to share their opinions before you do that again. Thanks! Power level (Dragon Ball) 04:19, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
If I may make an observation: articles that you take the time to condense/clean-out seem to have an easier time getting redirected. I realize that this is an extra step that you shouldn't need to do at times, but doing this first seems to lead to fewer arguments with Dragon Ball editors. Just thought I'd point that out for one reason or another. ~ Snapper T o 00:10, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
I'll AfD them. It's the only way to stop his nonsense. He will wikilawyer over the articles' existence for as long as he possibly can. He will do everything imaginable to keep them intact because he seems incapable of letting it go. He is also incapable of listening to what you or I tell him because we are not admins. He will only pay attention to those capable of making him shut up. PL, once you read this, do not bitch. This is exactly how you act. — Someguy0830 ( T | C) 02:34, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
I've been tagging everything in the Nintendo category, and I've arrived at the Pokemon section. I was also unsure, but I was told that they are a part of the Nintendo project because stuff under umbrella projects is still covered by larger projects (ie. That's why Nintendo games are tagged under C&V and the Nintendo Project). -- Scorpion 20:30, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Hey Nemu. Are you sure Garlic Jr and his henchmen constitute as "earthlings?" I though that they were from Makyo-sei or another dimension or somethin'... Power level (Dragon Ball) 05:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Well your opinion on the Shichibukai thing staying defeats the practice on the One Piece pages that has been there the last 2 months. This is the benfit for everyone and all real or fake chapter info is treated as "rumours" until the scanalation is out. Those fake spoilers a month ago caught a lot of people out even the bigger editors like me. You have to draw a line Nemu... Whether you want to or not.
And believe me. I don't give two hoots about Gecko not being on the page, he should be. But why develope a practice like this with a few others and then just let it slip for something like this. Everyone is excited we have a new shichibukai, thats all, normally we don't have a problem with removing the info. Angel Emfrbl 23:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Although I agree in some way that the opening text is irrelevant, the trivia references other things and characters from later games the developer created, and most non-Japanese who have played this game originally did so on the ROM, prior to a re-release on the GBA in the Mother 1+2 collection. Without the ROM and development information (not to mention the reception), the article is a stub, and really serves no purpose. -- PeanutCheeseBar 17:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Revert warring is not a very good way to go about it. -- Aurochs ( Talk | Block)
Listen here, there's a rule that says do not get rid of other peoples stuff they just edited so please do not do this again. -- Naruto134 00:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
For merging the Crash articles. The was some drama I didn't want to deal with! - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
|
Cool as a Cucumber Award | |
For staying cool during discussions that would usually drive someone mad. The Dragon Ball merges for example-- $UIT 03:27, 24 March 2007 (UTC) |
Thanks for uploading Image:Docchaos.PNG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:54, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Me here, I noticed you and Darkwarriorblake are having differences about where ever we should merge this page or not. I won't revert changes made by either one but I will ask a favor out of you two, please discuss the change at Talk:Garlic Jr. before you violate the three revert rule, remember we are a group here and I don't want any of you getting blocked for violating the 3RR, I already leaved a simmilar note on his talk page so I hope he will cooperate, Cheers! - DDF 18:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Ahem. Yes. I just wanna take the time to apologize for flying off the handle lately. I've really been the only one working on that article since it's merge into it's current state. I've had the goal of it being a featured article from the very start. I guess to see it ripped apart and nearly deleted over such small things just threw me over the deep end. It would have literally rendered the past few months of my life a complete waste of time and I guess I just couldn't take it. I mean, I don't mind it being edited and all but to see it come so close to GA and then vanish..gah..I'm just repeating myself. Anywho, I'm like...a way better dude than this and I just hope we can come to terms in the future. Gah..take it as you will GrandMasterGalvatron 19:18, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Was there some discussion somewhere that led you to do all that merging? If so, where? If not, I'm not sure you should have removed that much information without discussion. Rhindle The Red 03:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
So... you merged E-102 Gamma into the E-Series article. Why? Paul Haymon 11:30, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
To add a bit of information to my question, the entry for Gamma at the current E-Series article is relatively poorly written and lacks detail. I saw no reason to merge it; actually, the old article stood a chance of eventually becoming featured or at least good. Please explain; thanks. Paul Haymon 11:32, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
So, you think it's all a character deserves, eh?
Do me a favour, and go delete all articles for TV series episodes they are not needed.
Meh, guess what, Nemu? You are an hypocrit. People like you are the cause of Wikipedia's bad reputation. People like you are the cause of lack of information. I hope you never have to do a thesis, otherwise, you'd be screwed. User:Eriorguez
Anyway, if the merge is done, don't destroy information. Just copy and paste.
I see you've redirected Nack to the minor characters area... I don't think he's that minor. Besides, his article was fairly large before it was redirected. Perhaps we should give Nackery his own article back, but have him also listed in the Minor villains area, with a link to his article, possibly like this:
What is your opinion? RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 18:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
I did, but no one listened. RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 00:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Look. It's a list for minor characters. All the major characters have enough information and importance to keep their own articles, only merge if they're only a stub or a couple of lines. Besides the article is long enough as it is. Retiono Virginian 21:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Stop what? Are you treating me like I'm some kind of vandal? Well I'm not. I am a very experienced contributor here, and I really think this merge plan is obnixious. Retiono Virginian 14:43, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't think you were correct in removing the information from the article. While it's true that "video game guides" are not to be included, that was not a guide, it was a list of the contents of the game, akin to a plot summary. As it is, it is referenced by the work itself and completely independantly verifiable, not requiring additional references. Rhindle The Red 12:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC)