This 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.

He man, how you doin'. I saw you undoing again, but the article refers to: character MOVES, character WEIGHT classes, unlockable characters. etc. Not the basic information. People use wikimedia to see that data in an overview. I understand that wikia is more a website for detailed game info, but I disagree with not listing the basic players (like every game has). Or it should be expanded. Please reply. And have a great day :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinhio84 ( talk • contribs) 14:24, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't see the difference between "unlockable characters" and "characters". Bare lists like that aren't used unless there's a paragraph of information to go after them, (like Tales of Graces) or of the characters used is crucial to understanding the premise of the entire game (like a crossover game like Super Smash Bros. 4.) Sergecross73 msg me 16:15, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

The term "radio edit" isn't proper for one version on " Guilty All the Same". Somebody said it is, but it's not for me. I know it's supposed to be labeled as "Radio Edit", but it kept saying "radio edit" instead. The "R" and the "E" are to stay capitalized for the radio edit version of the song. I'm sorry if I am telling you this, but I hope you agree with me on this. Skylar3214 5:29, 5 July 2014

I'm not sure I understand the problem...and looking up your edit history isn't helping either. I'm not sure what you're talking about... Sergecross73 msg me 16:12, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Look up "Radio Edit" on Guilty All the Same from a user's talk page, and you'll see for yourself. Skylar3214 11:29, 6 July 2014

In the track listing on " Guilty All the Same" when (radio edit) appears, this user wants it to be capitalized as Radio Edit for some odd reason. They have bugged me about this for weeks and still have not given up seemingly, I have no idea why it is such a minor thing. STATic message me! 18:34, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

"A users talkpage" is all the guidance you can give me on where this is happening...? Sergecross73 msg me 18:43, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Is this being discussed anywhere else? Has anyone indicated why we'd want it to be capitalized for this instance? Sergecross73 msg me 18:47, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely not, Static. It isn't proper for "radio edit" to look like that, and no, I never give up on anything. "Radio Edit" is more proper for a version of a song. Skylar3214 5:24, 6 July 2014

Okay, but can you define "proper" here? According to what exactly? Sergecross73 msg me 00:30, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

It's just unnecessary for "radio edit" to appear for a version of this song. It should be labeled as "Radio Edit" instead. Skylar3214 6:18, 6 July 2014

But why. You still haven't explained why? Is there a policy or guideline you're applying to this? Is there a reason why this radio edited song is different from others? Sergecross73 msg me 01:26, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure which one, but I still agree that "Radio Edit" is more suitable than "radio edit". Skylar3214 6:40, 6 July 2014

You're going to need a point of reference like a guideline or a precedent if you're going to convince anyone... Sergecross73 msg me 02:11, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

To be fair, "Radio Edit" with capitals intact is standard to see on, say, iTunes and often on the CD track listing. I think the most relevant point, though, is that it's not part of the song's title. If they were playing that version in concert, for example, they wouldn't say "Alright, how many of you awesome fans have heard of a song called 'Guilty All the Same (Radio Edit)'?" I'd compare this to how most rap songs nowadays are featuring someone - Wikipedia wouldn't list a song title as "I'm Rich and I'm Bringing Auto-Tune Back, Bitch (feat. Lupe Fiasco, Common, Chief Keef, Cher Lloyd, Eminem, Tupac's Ghost, Travis Barker, Henry Mancini, Merzbow, the Rappin' Grandmas from That One Episode of Malcolm in the Middle, and Some Homeless Guy Who Wouldn't Leave Us Alone and Insisted He Was Born to MC)". Tezero ( talk) 19:36, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

I didn't realize they were listed with caps on ITunes, so that's good to know. (Can't recall personally ever purchasing a radio edit myself.) I'm not sure that what Skylar was referencing though, considering he failed to articulate that the last 3+ times I've asked... Sergecross73 msg me 19:54, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

I couldn't get one Serge, so I need a question that I can easily answer instead of a difficult one. And I agree with Tezero, who's got a very good point about it. Skylar3214 2:34, 7 July 2014

( talk page stalker) I think what everyone here wants you to do is to explain exactly what makes "Radio Edit" better than "radio edit". You've been terribly vague about why you prefer the capitalized version, so it would be a lot more helpful if you gave everyone more insight into your reasoning.

Also, wouldn't agreeing with Tezero be the same thing as agreeing that "radio edit" should NOT be capitalized? The phrase doesn't seem to be part of the song title (unless you're trying to say it is), so by Tezero's definition it should stay in lowercase. 23:14, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I'm confused again. Which one was the "difficult question"? I only asked you one question - "Why"? Do you mean to tell me that defending your edit is that difficult of a question?? Sergecross73 msg me 23:31, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

OK, fine. You win. Let it say in lowercase then! When I got the song since it came out in March 2014, I never put "radio edit" in lowercase. Skylar3214 5:53, 8 July 2014

Russia in Russia article is ranked 8th with 2,092 trillions as nominal gdp.Russia is ONLY 9th as nominal gdp in fact Italy is 8th with 2,171 trillions $.All data for all countries are based on IMF 2014 April estimates.So Russia is 9th and not 8th.In Italy page Italy is correctly reported 8th with 2,171.I've already opened a post in the talk of Russia to make it correct.Please could you correct this huge mistake?Thanks. 151.40.12.61 ( talk) 22:36, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry 151.40.12.61 your wrong, Russia is the 5th largest economy now and will be number 4 in 2016 and is the biggest in Europe [1].

Here's the facts http://rt.com/business/russia-gdp-5th-largest-158/

http://thebricspost.com/russia-ranked-5th-largest-economy-world-bank/#.U7x7oE1OXnM

http://en.ria.ru/business/20130715/182248723/Medvedev-Lauds-Russias-5th-Place-in-World-Banks-GDP-Rating.html

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/russia-takes-5th-place-in-world-gdp-rankings/483190.html

http://www.bne.eu/content/moscow-blog-russia-overtakes-germany-become-5th-largest-economy

http://www.fundweb.co.uk/emerging/russia-now-worlds-fifth-largest-economy-in-gdp-terms/1075160.article

http://rbth.com/business/2013/07/17/russian_economy_becomes_biggest_in_europe_28149.html

-- 204.15.111.27 ( talk) 23:23, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Please, just discuss on the respective article's talk page. Again, I neither know nor care about this political stuff. I'm only assisting with Wikipedia conduct and policy in this area. Sergecross73 msg me 23:45, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi. The image that was uploaded for " Out of Time" is a non-free image, and it's also not the official single cover. Here are the few links for the official single cover that's proven for its official use only, even for Google Play and xBox Music, also iHeart Radio and CD Universe, not iTunes:

• https://lh4.ggpht.com/FuCnAIJ7jsGLe9nmeF3kBpXKY8krdARrv_A9Do6jPhFPhMFJ169Gr8dqlJ_Zv1E6RUu1Ndtt
• https://play.google.com/store/music/album/Stone_Temple_Pilots_With_Chester_Bennington_Out_Of?id=Bzrghperznjp67rinuonlvwc3wi
• http://music.xbox.com/album/stone-temple-pilots/out-of-time-with-chester-bennington/d540e707-0100-11db-89ca-0019b92a3933
• http://www.iheart.com/artist/Stone-Temple-Pilots-58584/albums/Out-Of-Time-with-Chester-Benni-23437184/
• http://www.cduniverse.com/productinfo.asp?pid=9041999&style=music

Of course "Out of Time" is on iTunes, along with the other four tracks, but the single itself is only on High Rise through iTunes instead since the single takes you to the album on iTunes. There's just one problem: User:MatthewGoodfan101 believes the image that's non-free is the official single cover for the song. Well it's actually not, due to the links I've put in the talk page for "Out of Time", and his talk page as well. Skylar3214 1:04, 13 July 2014

Looking through the edit summaries, it doesn't look like he's arguing that it's the correct image, but rather, its better than nothing. I don't think he'd oppose you if you just uploaded the correct image and replaced it... Sergecross73 msg me 23:04, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

But I could tell he was. If I upload the right image and replace it, then he would revert it and put it back to the way it was. After all, it's not my article. Skylar3214 4:29, 13 July 2014

If you (or anyone) uploads your image, I'll help you enforce its use. If you don't, then I have to admit, what is already there probably is better than nothing, especially if it is used somewhere. Sergecross73 msg me 23:42, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

I'll have to agree with you at this point. Skylar3214 4:53, 13 July 2014

Hi there Serge! PiEditor314 ( talk · contribs) is a problem. After the junk at Hyrule Warriors, I checked his history. OMG, it's a train wreck warpath. I just posted a welcome/warning to his talk page and I will now have to tediously undo countless things.  :-( I just thought I'd let you know because I foresee administrative action. Thank you, thank you, thank you Wikipedia for allowing absolutely anyone to do absolutely anything to absolutely anything. I'll also alert @ Arkhandar: of this.

Update: I have undone his damage to Hyrule Warriors, The Legend of Zelda (2015 video game), and The Legend of Zelda so far. He had spontaneously undone two days' worth of dozens of edits, resulting in giant additions and removals, giving a non-explanation, and nobody did anything! That's just one of countless obvious examples if you glance through his history. Hours of my time, down the tube.

Thanks for everything you do. I've been a fan.

— Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 08:50, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Smuckola. Thank you very much for cleaning up his messes while I was busy and away. I appreciate it. I'm going to wait on warning him until we see how he reacts to your comments. On a related note, since the issue is recurring, can you leave a comment on Hyrule Warriors talk page about gamecruft and not having a character list. It is pretty basic interpretation of policy, but it'd be nice to have both policy and a consensus to point to on the talk page. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 18:40, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

@ Sergecross73: Well, did you see how he helpfully corrected your last instructions to him already? — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 20:09, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that. But you left your warning on his talk page after that correct? Sometimes newbies don't notice edit summaries, but acknowledge talk page messages. We'll see. Thanks for the note on the article talk page too. Sergecross73 msg me 02:35, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Well. He did deliberately click 'undo' right next to it. I hope you read his User page. <3 About the Hyrule Warriors junk, let me know if anything I wrote is not optimal and I'll change it! ^_^ — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 05:24, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Wellp. You got your answer, as predicted, a big fat shiny middle finger. Congratulations, fellow censor! We're in a special new club now! — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 10:47, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Yup, guess I was too hopeful. Warned. (Kinda funny he choses the word "censorship when he's writing about Zelda fiction mostly. Why the heck would that be "censored"?) Sergecross73 msg me 13:10, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

EYES OF GANON ARE EVERYWHERE BE CAREFUL — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 20:33, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Hey, I wanted to know why was this page deleted. I asked this on the talk page of the soundtrack and I was told it was created by a user who was block evading while being blocked. So I wanted to ask whether it can be created again? Or should I create the page? Mike:Golu · ^{[ Confidential message ]} 09:24, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that is why it was deleted, on addition to the fact that it was terribly written and sourced and didn't meet the WP:GNG. You can recreate it, but I wouldn't recommend it without a few good, dedicated sources giving it significant coverage, and working pretty hard on it, as it's already on multiple peoples radar as an article that doesn't warrant an article. It could be sent to AFD pretty quickly otherwise. Sergecross73 msg me 13:15, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank You, and I would try to find any reliable sources, and see if the article can stand. Thanks. Mike:Golu · ^{[ Confidential message ]} 05:53, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello Sergecross. Can you offer a second opinion whether Goldmine and NewHampshire.com are usable references for Megadeth? Please leave your response bellow the comments from L1A1 FAL. I would appreciate a quick reply. All the best.-- Retrohead ( talk) 09:10, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Hey Serge, can you post a comment about the second one, or perhaps you're not sure about that one?-- Retrohead ( talk) 11:22, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! This is not to imply any error on your part. You tried to reason with another editor. Robert McClenon ( talk) 19:52, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

 Thanks RobertBolan ( talk) 01:45, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

I reverted an edit on Mario Kart 8 that removed the parent category only to have it reverted back [2]. This isn't the first time this user has removed the parent category from articles [3]. Can you explain to him how it was decided years ago to have both categories in articles? SNS ( talk) 04:36, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Is there a reason that you're not talking with him directly on this? The only interaction I dug up was you reverting him without an edit summary... Sergecross73 msg me 14:04, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Serge, I'm here to help...Please be reasonable with me. This article was in very poor outdated shape before I took initiative to add relevant content. I've spent a lot of time researching them and took it upon myself to step up this page making it a detailed up to date cited and sourced article on Cash Cash. I'm not here to delete old content, I'm here to expand. My objectives were simple. #1 To throughly explain all the transitioning they've gone through over the years which is a lot given their history...It was very confusing and vague. I truly believe I succeeded in fixing that problem. #2 to add some relevance to the page as the last 3 years were obviously their biggest one yet. Their recent chapters were nowhere to be found on their page with regards to new touring, releases, members, styles, remixes, labels, etc....It lacked a lot so I spent months fixing that and I'm so proud of my contributions. My intentions are good and I hope you can see that.

~ Lauren

And that's great...But I really think you need to take a look at WP:OWN. You did some work on the article...but that doesn't give you any special authority over it. Especially since you seem pretty unfamiliar with policy and guidelines. Sergecross73 msg me 10:32, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Should I create an article for the Stone Temple Pilots song for "Black Heart" on this website? I'll have plenty of sources for it, if necessary. Skylar3214 12:37, 21 July 2014

1. Why don't you post your sources here. I can advise on if the sources look reliable and cover the song in enough detail.
2. Did the song chart anywhere? While it's not a guarantee that the article is kept, it usually seems to deter people from attempting to delete or redirect it. Sergecross73 msg me 19:54, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Those questions are the ones I am able to answer. I'm getting to work on it right now. Skylar3214 1:15, 21 July 2014

Here are a few resources for the articles that may or may not be reliable for the article to be made:

• http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/stps-chester-bennington-says-black-heart-was-last-song-to-be-completed-for-new-ep/
• http://www.iheart.com/artist/Stone-Temple-Pilots-58584/songs/Black-Heart-23489667/
• http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/stone-temple-pilots-black-heart-lyric-video-released/
• http://loudwire.com/stone-temple-pilots-new-song-black-heart/
• http://vimeo.com/91777855
• http://noisecreep.com/stone-temple-pilots-robert-deleo-debuts-special-bass-black-heart/
• http://theriver1079.com/stone-temple-pilots-black-heart-live/
• http://www.theprp.com/2013/09/18/news/stone-temple-pilots-chester-bennington-stream-new-song-black-heart/
• http://klaq.com/stone-temple-pilots-perform-black-heart-on-the-tonight-show/
• http://exclaim.ca/MusicVideo/ClickHear/stone_temple_pilots-black_heart_with_chester_bennington
• http://krro.com/news/articles/2013/sep/23/stone-temple-pilots-with-chester-bennington-get-tattooed-for-black-heart-lyric-video/
• http://www.moshtix.com.au/v2/news/musicnews/stone-temple-pilots-release-new-track-black-heart/20354
• http://www.azcentral.com/thingstodo/music/articles/20130927stone-temple-pilots-concert-review-tempe.html

As for the chart position, see Stone Temple Pilots discography for the singles discography. It charted at 15 for U.S. Main Rock. Skylar3214 2:16, 21 July 2014

Oh wow. Yeah, if it charted, and they're playing it live on national television, and have a bunch of those sources, I think you're in pretty good shape. I'm kind of surprised that it hasn't been made yet. Sergecross73 msg me 21:53, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks so much, Serge. Skylar3214 2:56, 21 July 2014

I'm making it on my Special Page, which will take me time to finish up in a couple hours or so. Skylar3214 3:39, 21 July 2014

All finished with the article. See Black Heart (Stone Temple Pilots song) and see what you think of it. Let me know when you're done reviewing it. Skylar3214 4:27, 21 July 2014

I apologize, I looked it over yesterday, but forgot to respond. It's looking pretty good. Good job Skylar3214. Sergecross73 msg me 20:16, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Serge. I will never forget this. It's also one of my very first articles I've created. And there is no need for apologies. I understand what you mean. Skylar3214 1:25, 22 July 2014

Yeah, that's fine. I don't care; I was just wondering. Hell, I stalked your talk page earlier today. Anyhow, here's an accusation of pro-Russian bias and Russian nationality, here's an unoffensive but obstinate and poorly formatted request, and here's an ironic condemnation of the article's perceived laughably poor quality, along with another suggestion that my familial link to Eastern Europe extends to the present day. You can decide what to do; I just want the article to gain a reasonable level of stability.

Oh, and I haven't merged any of the Sonic characters since Wisps. You can do that if you want. I guess I'm not picky as long as the section is reasonably complete for the average reader; I'm probably going to be rewriting everything there anyway if I decide to pull through with the characters topic, since it would need to be an FL. Not that I want anything to do with character articles in the near future, but you know... Tezero ( talk) 01:24, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

I gave the IP a warning. Let me know if he doesn't stop, or gets worse out of spite or something (I don't especially intend to keep following the discussion unless you need Admin like assistance, which is fine to request of me, just because I'm pretty disinterested in things like politics typically.) If he doesn't get better, I'll give him a last chance, and then a block. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 02:52, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

I hate to be burdensome, but would you mind keeping an eye on the GAN altogether? You know, just seeing to it that the acrimony eventually flattens out and the citations get fixed to something above bare links. I've been spouting for a while that a Wikibreak is upon me, but it's about time to put my money where my mouth is, because my last GAN for the time being is finally done and some IRL events in the coming weeks make excessive Wikipedia editing a bad idea. Or maybe you can find someone who's as neutral as you or me and willing to stir the cauldron. Tezero ( talk) 04:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Sergecross73 I would like to report that Tezero is correct about ip user 151.40.13.125 for being disruptive on the Potential Superpower GA discussion and disruptive editing on the Potential Superpowers article. I agree with Tezero that I too want the Potential Superpowers article to gain a reasonable level of stability adding Russia in as a superpower with the sources needed if editors can start to agree and allow in. However I will report the example problems with ip user 151.40.13.125 of ip hoping as I kept the ip's editing history for questioning; who is speaking entirely against Russia in all ip’s I found below. All the same editor, all ip addresses are from Florence Italy. I would like to discredit this user out of this discussion since it is all the same wording slamming disruptive edits against Russia since 2013 that this is not effective when users like this are disruptive and are doing the opposite. Here is the list with links of the contributes starting July 8, 2014‎ - 151.40.13.161 [4] , July 7, 2014 151.40.45.125 [5], March 17, 2014 - 151.40.95.82 [6], April 2013 - Bocca Trabaria [7], March 2014 - 151.40.24.9 [8], March 2014 -151.40.7.192 [9], Sept 23, 2013 - 151.40.18.30 [10], Sept 15, 2013 - 151.40.55.125 [11], March 18, 2014 - 151.40.35.236 [12], March 18, 2014 - 151.40.9.149 [13], March 17, 2014 - 151.40.72.141 [14], March 16, 2014 - 151.40.14.179 [15], March 16, 2014 - 151.40.83.17 [16], March 15, 2014 - 151.40.69.199 [17], March 15, 2014 - 151.40.34.218 [18], March 15, 2014 - 151.40.120.19 [19], Feb 4, 2014 - 151.40.63.30 [20], Feb 4, 2014- 151.40.16.167 [21], Dec 28, 2013 - 151.40.107.93 [22], Dec 27, 2013 - 151.40.27.25 [23], Dec 27, 2013 - 151.40.64.77 [24], Dec 25, 2013 - 151.40.54.32 [25], Dec 23, 2013 - 151.40.41.170 [26], Dec 22, 2013 - 151.40.9.139 [27], Sept 8, 2013 - 151.40.102.200 [28], August 14, 2013 - 151.40.125.50 [29], May 10, 2013 – Mediolanum [30], Oct 22, 2013 - Glc72 [31], May 21, 2013 - 151.40.11.180 [32], May 14, 2013 -151.40.59.151 [33], May 14, 2013 - 151.40.60.108 [34], May 11, 2013 - Bocca_Trabaria [35]

That is the list which this ip user 151.40.13.125 is certainly not a good editor because of past disruption on this very subject. If you click on the URL links above, you'll notice the same writing style and same pushing on the same subject. I appreciate your help, thanks.-- 173.224.116.150 ( talk) 09:27, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Tezero - I'll try to keep an eye on it, and I've got a bunch of "talk page stalkers" that may also see this and help. (Though, since I never edit in the area of politics, the type of people who have watchlisted my talk page may not really either.) I feel like page protection could be warranted, but at the same time, could protecting it be a "concession of instability" that could hurt your GAN efforts. Let me know of you'd like me to do it or not. Sergecross73 msg me 12:00, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

I wouldn't go full-protection, although I can't stop you if you want to. Semi-protection I normally think is a bit overdone, but here I think it could be helpful because there's so much drama with which IP is who; they can just get accounts if they want to continue. And yeah, I'm well aware that it's unstable now, but eventually it should boil over. Thanks, by the way. But what do you mean by "hurting my GAN efforts"? Does an article turning unstable while I'm reviewing it make my reviews worth less or something...? Tezero ( talk) 15:35, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Don't worry, I rarely do a full protect. (Only one time comes to mind ever actually.) I just meant semi. And while I could be wrong, because I'm only conceptually familiar with the GA process, rather than doing it first hand myself, but I was referring to WP:GACR # 5. Sergecross73 msg me 15:44, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Oh. Yeah, I know; that's why I won't be able to just pass it myself for some time. Thanks. Tezero ( talk) 15:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

IP - Thank you for the resources. It will be helpful if he continues to be difficult. Sergecross73 msg me 12:03, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

• After skimming the above, I would be happy to consider a request for SPP (for the GA page) or for a rangeblock but I'll need a clearer explanation of what exactly is the problem with that user. ☺ ·  Salvidrim! ·  ✉ 13:19, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

• I haven't checked all the difs, but most of the original ones provided from Tezero were more along the lines of making comments that, while not terrible, were not very helpful either. Being melodramatic and saying that "this is so bad scholars are laughing at Wikipedia" type stuff. He's focusing a little too much on editors and hyperbole instead of the actual discussions. I gave him a warning for it, no response yet, the last time I checked. Sergecross73 msg me 13:50, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

It seems you listen a lot russians...are you not partial?Watch the talks now.Many people are against Russia and Brazil in the article. There are posted some academic sources against Russia.Have a look..i want to see if you are so quick in acting as if you acted in favour of russians.Spashibo tovarish. 151.40.12.61 ( talk) 18:46, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

You misunderstand me. I don't care about world powers or politics or any of that. I'm not siding with anyone on any of that. I'm warning you, as an Admin, to cut it out with the accusations and the melodrama, or you're going to get blocked from editing. Last warning - cut it out. Comment strictly on the issues, not editors. Sergecross73 msg me 19:07, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer... 151.40.12.61 ( talk) 19:30, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Today the anti Russian ip is 151.40.12.61, yesterday he was 151.40.45.125 and the day before he was 151.40.13.161. All the same person making anti these Russian statements and edits, please stop this nonsense of making arguments on why Russia is not a superpower when it is.-- 204.15.111.27 ( talk) 23:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Sergecross73 I am reporting the continued ip hoper is now Gladio4772 [36], the hoper has hoped ips since July 17 till today. If you can please step in would be appreciated.

ip history here: 151.40.120.34 July 19, 2014 [37] 151.40.123.202 July 19, 2014 [38], 151.40.117.74 July 17, 2014 [39], 151.40.13.161 [40] , July 7, 2014 151.40.45.125 [41], March 17, 2014 - 151.40.95.82 [42], April 2013 - Bocca Trabaria [43], March 2014 - 151.40.24.9 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/151.40.24.9], March 2014 -151.40.7.192 [44], Sept 23, 2013 - 151.40.18.30 [45], Sept 15, 2013 - 151.40.55.125 [46], March 18, 2014 - 151.40.35.236 [47], March 18, 2014 - 151.40.9.149 [48], March 17, 2014 - 151.40.72.141 [49], March 16, 2014 - 151.40.14.179 [50], March 16, 2014 - 151.40.83.17 [51], March 15, 2014 - 151.40.69.199 [52], March 15, 2014 - 151.40.34.218 [53], March 15, 2014 - 151.40.120.19 [54], Feb 4, 2014 - 151.40.63.30 [55], Feb 4, 2014- 151.40.16.167 [56], Dec 28, 2013 - 151.40.107.93 [57], Dec 27, 2013 - 151.40.27.25 [58], Dec 27, 2013 - 151.40.64.77 [59], Dec 25, 2013 - 151.40.54.32 [60], Dec 23, 2013 - 151.40.41.170 [61], Dec 22, 2013 - 151.40.9.139 [62], Sept 8, 2013 - 151.40.102.200 [63], August 14, 2013 - 151.40.125.50 [64], May 10, 2013 – Mediolanum [65], Oct 22, 2013 - Glc72 [66], May 21, 2013 - 151.40.11.180 [67], May 14, 2013 -151.40.59.151 [68], May 14, 2013 - 151.40.60.108 [69], May 11, 2013 - Bocca_Trabaria [70] Thanks-- 198.23.81.141 ( talk) 22:03, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm not happy with him either...but I blocked him for a week 2 weeks ago, and I haven't noticed him do anything blockable since. By all means, update me if Gladio says anything inappropriate though... Sergecross73 msg me 00:35, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

I had an idea this morning while I was driving back from a community college where I tutor: What if we placed a notice at the top of the article that said something like:

This page is merely a summary of published academics' opinions. It is not intended as an original, critical assessment of countries' likelihood of becoming superpowers.

The page isn't getting any more stable, and this is unorthodox, but it just might help to cool the flames. Tezero ( talk) 16:42, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

(In case you didn't see this among ProtoDrake's edits: Sergecross73)

Tezero - No harm in trying it out. You could be bold and just add it, and if challenged, see if you can a consensus for such a thing. If it looksije it'll just be the source of endless fighting, you can just drop it. It could all depend on who happens across it. I once put up a simple, non-controversial notification on a super obscure game, only to have it break out into a huge argument. Sometimes you never know what will or won't set people off. Sergecross73 msg me 17:07, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks; I'll do it now. I wouldn't expect it to be the cause of more fighting; what I'm trying to say with it is "Hey, we know you have strong opinions. That's fine, and these academics are wrong sometimes, but our hands are kinda tied in not allowing open debate here." Good that you brought that possibility up, though. Tezero ( talk) 17:12, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for nuking Heaven Sent Gaming. Since you've done that, could you also close the associated AfD? -- RoySmith (talk) 14:39, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

I was hoping someone could close it on my behalf. I've only got mobile access until much later in the day... Sergecross73 msg me 15:58, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Nevermind. Someone else closed it, and I just revised their closing comment a bit. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 16:08, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Don't forget the talk page. ;) -- ferret ( talk) 18:59, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Oops, I thought I had. Fixed. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 19:26, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Since I noticed you had blocked one of the IPs, and I have suspicions it might be Lar409 not logging in anymore... please be aware of the case page. :) ☺ ·  Salvidrim! ·  ✉ 13:37, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Oh wow, I didn't realize I got into such a big deal. I thought I was just deleting obvious hoax articles. On one hand, as disruptive as Lar was, he mostly just made bad judgment calls on organization, and couldn't work with others, rather than outright hoaxes, right? Or am I forgetting some of his work? Or maybe he's gotten worse over time. Regardless, thanks for the heads up Salvidrim. I'll help however you'd like. Sergecross73 msg me 03:02, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Maybe my mind is connecting too many dots; a red flag goez up when you look at the history Template:Wario series with the tool thingy that striketroughs usernames of blocked users (which I assume you have). ☺ ·  Salvidrim! ·  ✉ 04:10, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Might want to make it a month to match his IP. -- NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:59, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I launched a report at SPI noting how Technotopia returned after a months-long absence mere hours after the IP got blocked and their first act was to undo the revert of the IP's biased RfC. Quacking ensued, and wouldn't block evasion add to it on both? -- McDoob AU93 18:02, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, and his last block for edit warring was a 2 weeks long one too, and they usually escalate, so it all around should probably be longer... Sergecross73 msg me 18:07, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

• If most of his edits are about this one issue, and he isn't likely going to ever leave it alone, why not make it permanent? Look at his total contributions. [71] Most of them are what he got blocked for, four times already. [72] No reason to think he is ever going to do any constructive editing on Wikipedia. Dream Focus 00:23, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

This is my plan if he comes back and starts up again after his block, as he said he plans to do. He's on the thinnest of ice, don't worry. Just let me know as soon as you catch him anywhere. Sergecross73 msg me 00:31, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Hey, have a look at this edit history...does it look at all curious to you?

[73]

Chubbles ( talk) 02:02, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

That certainly is bizarre, that they're conspiring together at a sandbox. I can't help but find it suspicious - 2 relatively new editors with the exact same type of stances, basically showing that band in their favored POV rather than what RS's say. I know I'm supposed to assume good faith, but I really get the vibe that those 2 are like people from their label, or fanclub, or fansite, or something like that... Sergecross73 msg me 03:50, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Naturally, that was my thought at first, but they said they weren't, so I guess I have to take their word for it. Chubbles ( talk) 15:06, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Okay, what do I do? Where do I go? The editwarring continues; they are tag-team reverting me and stonewalling with the same stale, bad reasoning. I am, by my approach, teaching them how to talk to me so that I end up on the ropes. I tried DR, that didn't work; I can't file a 3RR report because they aren't reverting fast enough - and for that matter, I am eventually reverting them, too, though of course I believe I've done so after leaving much time for discussion and referencing (so much for watching that reasoning fly in front of a tribunal, though...). So...what do you suggest? I'm so tired of this. Chubbles ( talk) 19:19, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I've protected it so people are forced to come to consensus first. Sergecross73 msg me 00:32, 2 August 2014 (UTC)