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.

Remember the issue I brought up to WPVG some time ago regarding the Hatsune Miku: Project Diva game series, where IP editors are often inserting crufty tables of in-game player costumes? Well, it's happening again. -- benlisquare _{T• C• E} 07:05, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I've blocked the IP, as I imagine its the same person. If another IP pops up to re-add the information, let me know, and I'll protect the respective pages. Sergecross73 msg me 12:13, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Serge. I did no war. I added some some true, relevant info. Here a user added a vandalism tag https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=2015_World_Touring_Car_Championship_season&diff=661103892&oldid=661103236 but it was an abuse removed by the WP robots !

• obviously I did no vandalism : you already perfectly know that all my actions are accurate and right. I added some true and relevant info. like a visual sum up of the circuits of the season, a sum up of the victories, podium and pole position, the fact that a driver left the WTCC during the season. I also added some info. about the compensation weight that were missing to have a clear view of the final results. Nobody thought to that before, so you could honestly congratulate me to have done all these actions : only some true, relevant info. and connected to the subject !
• this user had no right to add this tag, because first my actions are certainly not vandalism -all this info are true and relevant- and the robot removed this tag automatically, because it is not a protected page https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=2015_World_Touring_Car_Championship_season&diff=661172760&oldid=661103892

This user "used" a rule to remove my stats. But this rule is not relevant here , because only three sums are NOT "an excessive amount of statistics" ! So it was just an false excuse. Yet he continued again and again to remove these THREE stats.. You could blame him for that -removing some true info, using a rule that cannot be applied here, because 3 is not an excessive amount *LOL*-, not me. Your position towards these facts describes your "spirit" !

I also added some info. about the fact that a driver left the WTCC, it is relevant, but this user erased this true and relevant info. This is considered as a vandalism, not my actions =)

All my actions are good for readers and Wikipedia, but if you want to support some lies saying that I would do vandalism or dispute, please do : I don't mind if WP is poorer and if you want to support the people who don't want to cooperate and create a dispute whereas I have all the proofs that my actions are good.

On the contrary, I explained that I create no dispute and I pointed out that a little wisdom would be necessary here https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=2015_World_Touring_Car_Championship_season&diff=661087161&oldid=661084691

You want to blame my positive actions ? You want to block this IP ? You want WP to be poorer ? You let a user and its friends to remove my true and relevant content ? Yet, some other users accepted it ! I don't mind that you support the users that make WP poorer and remove the true info, what is considered as a vandalism. I was cooperating to make WP more relevant and richer. So, people will read some articles on some others sources to get the right info. ! =) Removing some true and relevant info. is certainly not a mean to support WP !

On the contrary, you could ask some users to stop childish dispute and to remove some relevant info., what is considered as vandalism, not adding some like I did. You do what you want, and what you do describes your "spirit". Some people just want to prove that they are important, and remove the relevant info. Some people have a biased view and don't want some info. to appear. If you want to support that, it is your responsibility =) You want to take a false opportunity to blame me ? Please do !

One more proof for my publications =)

Thank you =) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.157.24.224 ( talk) 13:03, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Please actually read WP:EW and WP:3RR. It doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, the problem is that you keep on reverting other editors over and over again. Its undeniable that you did this 5 times here. That's technically enough to block you right there, but I went with a warning since I assumed you didn't know policy. Now you know, so next time its a block.

I'd also like to remind you that you're also at your final warning for bad faith assumptions of other users, and you're getting dangerously close to violating that. Use talk page. Discuss content, not editors. Final warning. Sergecross73 msg me 14:34, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

The user accused me of being bad faith, by adding a "vandalism" tag, whereas I did no vandalism ! But you don't "warn" him for that. Why ?' I would like to understand your point of view. On the contrary, why warning me again and again whereas no bad faith and no false info. from me were proved, OBVIOUSLY ? I would like to understand your point of view. Some user create a dispute by removing again and again some relevant info. As to me, I almost never remove some info., easy to prove this. I save each of my modifications. Some other users reverted more than 5 times (Cybervoron -the name that he used to describe himself !- reverted NINE times, much more than 5 times ! But you don't warn him for having reverted NINE times either. Why ? I'd like to understand your point of view. Finally he ACCEPTED my relevant info. about Borkovic, a PROOF that I was right to insist =) You are welcome ! =) Even this sudden opponent had to accept my adding, because it was "impossible" to continue to remove it a 10th time =)Thank you to explain your choices to blame me for 5 "reverts", but not another user that did NINE reverts =) As I wrote previously, I absolutely don't mind if you prefer to support the people who remove some relevant info. and make WP poorer. People will read some other sources, instead of WP, that's all ! Not good for WP and readers, yet... To bad, but no drama ! In addition, you do not count all the users that accepted my adding, you count only the 3 ones who suddenly appear there and revert, one after the other. Would you like to remind the policy to the user who reverted NINE TIMES ? You did not yet, did you ? Have a nice day =) 83.157.24.224 ( talk) 16:31, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I've now warned him as well, though I don't understand where exactly you're getting 9 from, I only see 3, maybe 4 times, at the article I'm talking about. But that doesn't excuse your actions, it just means you're both in the wrong, when it comes to following policy. I did not warn them before because I didn't see he had reverted you as many as 3-4 times, I thought it was less, as there were multiple other editors there who were having problems with your edits.

Regardless, with that out of the way, discuss on the talk page, and only move forward if there is a consensus to do so, as I've instructed you many times in the past. Sergecross73 msg me 17:04, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Serge. It is a pity that you refused to explain your choices. The 2 pseudonyms did not open a discussion, just suddenly removed some true info. even assuming that THREE sums are an "excessive amount of statistics". LOL =) Anyway, once again, I will not insist. Some people remove some useful info. on WP what makes it poorer ? Too bad for WP and readers, they will read some other websites, that is all ! You could intervene in a good way, but if you don't want to, no problem. WP is penalized ! I did my best. You know the situation. You let do this. As to me, I already know these info. that I share. I don't mind if some people want to erase them in WP and do as if they did not exist. It is a pity obviously, but people will read the websites where they find some more complete info. !

Stats. are useful, so look : When one "stops" temporarily to revert, the other one continues. You noticed that too ;-)

IvanEurope :

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=2015_World_Touring_Car_Championship_season&diff=661007046&oldid=661003807
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=2015_World_Touring_Car_Championship_season&diff=661084488&oldid=661083803
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=2015_World_Touring_Car_Championship_season&diff=661084659&oldid=661084488
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=2015_World_Touring_Car_Championship_season&diff=661103236&oldid=661087819
5. adds "vandalism" tag ! Strong accusation... maybe you could warn him for that ? What is your opinion ? http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=2015_World_Touring_Car_Championship_season&diff=661172760&oldid=661103892

Cybervoron :

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=2015_World_Touring_Car_Championship_season&diff=660880820&oldid=660843335
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=2015_World_Touring_Car_Championship_season&diff=660926917&oldid=660926233
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=2015_World_Touring_Car_Championship_season&diff=660996637&oldid=660996024
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=2015_World_Touring_Car_Championship_season&diff=661362301&oldid=661314517

NINE reverts, by this couple of "pseudonyms"...

A user validated the relevance of my new "compensation weight" §. He transformed my text into a table. I did not think that this change of mu initial text was bad against me. I am not childish. A table can be good to see the info. in a more little space =) So I did not remove his modification. As to me I cooperate ! And it is extremely rare that I remove some info., yet some are FALSE, some other not really relevant. But I think that WP is there to represent different opinions, so maybe among readers, some people will be happy to read some less important info. Therefore, I don't remove the info., even if they seem poor.

Have a nice day =)

Stop arguing with me, and start discussing with them. You undeniably and objectively have been edit warring according to its very definition. So has Cybervoron, and he was warned as well. I have no interest in any of this other than eliminating the edit warring. If you keep doing it, you're blocked. There is literally nothing you need to be saying to me other than "Okay Serge, I'll stop edit warring and discuss on the talk page." I can't comment on the your comment about them tagging your edit as vandalism because I can't find the word vandalism present in the link's you've presented. But it doesn't matter, even if he put that somewhere, it doesn't excuse all the reverting of edits without talk page discussion. Sergecross73 msg me 18:40, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, yes, I've been implicitly accused of vandalism : here is the right link http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=2015_World_Touring_Car_Championship_season&diff=661172760&oldid=661103892 => {pp-vandalism|expiry=10 May 2016|small=yes}} word "VANDALISM" ! I added some true and relevant info. directly connected to this page : NO vandalism obviously. All my actions are relevant and honest. And you should support me, if you thought to WP interests, by the way. They began a "war". Suddenly they remove some true and relevant info., invent that THREE sums are "an excessive amount of statistics" and theyr created no discussion, before ERASING FIRST my true info. A poor content on WP is good for the other websites ! Too bad... Bye. 83.157.24.224 ( talk) 10:49, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Alright, I see the word vandalism now. His edit summaries said "trivia", but he did use the word vandalism once, which isn't right. That being said, as I just said, it doesn't give you the right to edit war. Additionally, he has even attempted to discuss on the talk page. You still have not responded it discussed anything, instead choosing to bicker over little details with me. I can't stress enough how you're arguing with the wrong person here. Discuss your content issues with the people you were edit warring with, not me. Sergecross73 msg me 12:34, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

So about 6 hours after you issued a final warning on AN/I that Subtropical-man would be blocked for any further personal attacks, he posted this snide remark "- in the USA they do not teach in schools about the European Union?" which I ignored. Then you repeated the block warning you posted at AN/I on Subtropical-man's talk page. The very next day, he posted this, "By the way, I know, the EU is a competitor of your country - USA but if you came here to fight with the European Union (I suspected this before), I report it to administrators according to the WP:BATTLEGROUND and few other rules. The rules say that Wikipedia is not a place to hold grudges, conflicts, carry on ideological battles, nurture prejudice, hatred, or political views. PS. (Yet) I not officially accuse you, just inform."

As if he deserved yet more warnings, BeenAroundAWhile tried again to warn him to cease personal attacks. And so he backhandedly strikes out some of the offensive comments, and justifies it because I described a map which literally includes two versions of the same view as "silly".

Note that just prior to this, at User talk:Subtropical-man#Friendly advice a sympathetic editor agreed that Subtropical-man is being on uncivil and should stop, and he responded as if he had no clue. If it 's not WP:COMPETENCE, it must be WP:IDHT, but either way, this guy is not going to stop his disruptive editing. A block is necessary, and I don't think he should be unblocked until he gives some evidence that he gets it. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 20:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Dennis_Bratland I'm the editor you're referring to (the one that left the note "Friendly Advice"). I don't think it's a competence problem, I really think it's IDT, sounds like he doesn't want to hear it. It would be sad to see him get blocked or worse, but if he won't listen, he'll have to learn some other way. KoshVorlon Rassekali ternii i mlechnye puti 21:15, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree with everything you both say, but I'm giving him one last chance because it's technically a little different than what I final warned him about. He's on the thinnest of ice though. Please keep me posted. Sergecross73 msg me 21:42, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

This has reached the point of disruptive editing. This guy has taken ownership of the Malta article and reverts even the tiniest improvement in the map. You can't talk to him. Can you make this stop? -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 14:46, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Again calling everything a "personal attack", because he doesn't understand what is an isn't a personal attack. Does this have to go back to AN/I for another round of bickering to deal with violations of WP:OWN? To me this is a simple case of disruptive editing in many forms: 3RR, personal attacks, AGF, and now OWN. Every time he gets told to stop violating one behavior norm, he switches to another. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 17:37, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

• You insulted me in his post, this is personal attack or/and slander. I explained in a courteous way [1].
• You wrote: "tiniest improvement in the map" - you entered a completely new map to infobox without discussion and consensus (ostensibly change of ring) [2]. This is completely new map (with Mercator projections; other colours, file extension, proportions etc). Please stop make changes to the maps without consensus.
• I corrected my behavior [3], no personal attacks. Please stop still trying to convince that I break the rules. I do not break any rule of Wikipedia.
• You breaking rules, you entered a completely new map to infobox without discussion and consensus! If I reverted this edition according to the rules, you accused me (own etc). Please stop. If you want change of map, discuss and consensus. Sergecross73, please help. Please mediation and block of article - in order that Dennis not can change map without consensus. Subtropical-man talk
  (en-2) 17:56, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

See what I mean? I've tried to reason with this person. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 18:19, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

It would not be a problem if you were not breaking the rules. You still trying to enter a new map to the article by your changes/your opinion. There must be consensus, it's not my invention. If there is consensus, your map will be introduced to the article. But you still trying, trying, trying enter a new map without consensus. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 18:27, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Maybe you guys should try WP:3O or mediation or something? Or work with a Maps/Geography Wikipeoject or something. I don't know enough about Wikipedias stance on these areas to make a good call content-wise. As far as conduct goes, Subtropical Man's actions do seem irritating, but I really can't block on those grounds. The frustrating part of Wikipedia policy is that if you keep things below a personal attack and don't violate WP:CIV, it's hard to block, and I think this is one of those times. STM may be at the end of the line when it comes to warnings about personal attacks, canvassing, and innappropriate tangents in discussions, but nothing's he's done violates any of that. Sergecross73 msg me 22:45, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey there, admin. Just one quick question. When I was searching for more reception lists for Ogre from Tekken, I have found some non-English (Spanish) articles in which he appears: https://elseisdegerardo.wordpress.com/2014/10/15/mexico-en-los-juegos-parte-1-los-personajes/ https://elseisdegerardo.wordpress.com/2014/10/15/mexico-en-los-juegos-parte-1-los-personajes/ Maybe I'll find later some more, but never mind. Is it allowable if I add those other-language lists in his (or in some other character) reception lists? And also, some guy posted on my page this:

(Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Disturbedasylum. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

   Introduction
   The five pillars of Wikipedia
   Contributing to Wikipedia
   How to edit a page
   Help pages
   How to write a great article
   Editor's index to Wikipedia

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( Disturbedasylum ( talk) 01:54, 10 May 2015 (UTC)); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{ helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.)

Was that what I think it means (nothing special :D) or was he trying to tell something more with that? He also posted some picture. You can see it on my talk page. Thanks. Disturbedasylum

( talk page stalker) @ Disturbedasylum: Non-English sources are acceptable if they're otherwise okay, but that Spanish page looks like a blog to me that isn't subject to editorial oversight and wouldn't be considered reliable. The message that was left on your talk page is a standard greeting with some links to pages you may find helpful and some general advice. For example, signing talk page messages with four tildes (~~~~), as that message suggests, is a good idea because it will make it much easier to tell who said what, and when, than manually adding your username to the bottom - the default signature cotains not just your username, but a link to your talk page and a timestamp too. Huon ( talk) 02:42, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Disturbedasylum - Hey there. Huon's response above is correct. Spanish-language sources are usable in theory, but those one's you've presented are not. A tip - anything with " Wordpress" in the link is generally not a usable/reliable source, just because any old person can start up a wordpress blog, and write whatever they want about a subject. I could go make a NFL Football Wordpress blog right now if I wanted to...and boy, I am not an authority on football. Huon, thanks for the assistance, I always appreciate it when a TPS helps people on my talk page, and I did not know you stalked my talk page. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 13:21, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Did you use a tool to generate the user box on your page with the number of CSD deleted articles? I am interested in having that as a user box on my page as well. Chris lk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:59, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Chrislk02 - I wish I had, or knew of one, but no, the way I figured it out was much more manual - I went to the deletion log and filtered it to only deletions done by my name, and then roughly gauged how many it looked like there were. I know that I rarely if ever close AFDs, so they're mostly CSD's by default. I just started working at CSD consistently, a month or two ago, so this works right now, though I recorgnize it may not really be a sustainable approach I suppose. So definitely tell me if you happen to find a better method. :) Sergecross73 msg me 14:08, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I used to patrol CSD heavily several years ago, then I took a break for a while and am just not getting back into it. It seemed like a cool user box to indicate that one worked in the CSD area. I will just do what you did, and maybe do a search for deletions with AFD in it to narrow down the ones from CSD. Thanks! Chris lk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:16, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

No problem. Glad I was able to help a fellow editor who likes statistics! Sergecross73 msg me 14:32, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

I created a rough templated version as User:Chrislk02/userbox/csdcount (I prefer to avoid raw template like content on my user page) Chris lk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:26, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Oh yeah, your version does look better. I'll use that too - thank you. Yeah, the rough version I had before was just taken from the AFD ones on my talk page that I created years ago back when I couldn't find any existing ones that covered what I was trying to express. I don't even know how I came across the raw version, I must have copied it from somewhere, as it was before I really knew much of the Wiki-markup like I do now. Regardless, yours looks better. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 14:32, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

As soon as I geolocated that IP at Talk:Sega Genesis, knew who it was. He's back to personal attacks. -- McDoob AU93 20:12, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Its that Technotopia guy, right? Did we indef block him? Sergecross73 msg me 20:14, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

His second personal attack is enough alone to block him even if he was new, though, like you, I don't believe he is. Sergecross73 msg me 20:21, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

May be in need of revocation of talk page access now ... -- McDoob AU93 20:24, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Yup. Just did it. (And he's back to his trademark insult "Yanks" so I'm sure it was him...) Sergecross73 msg me 20:27, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

As I recall, IP pages do not "belong" to the people who post on them; that privilege is reserved for users who create an account, right? -- McDoob AU93 20:30, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I believe that's right. I personally don't really care when IP's remove posts (as long as they're not doing it to misguide what happened in an unblock request), but every time he was reverting it to a version with personal attacks present, which is obviously a problem. Sergecross73 msg me 02:35, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey, do you think activity Call of Duty: Black Ops III warrants semi-protection? No substantial changes in the last 10 days with over 100 edits. Some background vandalism coupled with unsourced additions regarding platforms and zombies. Unsure if it would pass RPP muster though, since the clear vandalism isn't too high. -- ferret ( talk) 19:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Guess so. :P -- ferret ( talk) 19:25, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Ha, sorry, I acted first, and got pulled away before I could actually respond. I probably fall more on the lax side of page protection requirements, so I agree here that it's necessary here. I've protected it for a month, so that it runs through E3, and then we can take it from there. Sergecross73 msg me 19:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

How are the administrators who arbitrate these proposals chosen? Does participating in the discussion disqualify you from being the arbiter? I agree with you that it should be WP:SNOW, as evidenced by my Speedy keep, but I have enough experience to know not to look away when minority viewpoints are expressed as virulently as WV and Snuggums have done. You may think article's are protected, so you pay attention to other things, and wham, the article is gone because we were caught napping. So any way I can help, please ask. Thanks. MMetro ( talk) 07:39, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi there MMetro. Generally, it's any Admin who is WP:UNINVOLVED in the debates. Since I've been commenting in the AFD for it, yeah, I wouldn't be able to close it. Keeping an eye on things is a good idea, but I wouldn't worry too muchabout this. They've drawn a lot of attention to this debate, between the merge discussion and the AFD discussions. I think they realize that they'd be in all sorts of trouble if they acted against a consensus that had so much visibility on it. They may not be above badgering every person who disagrees with them, but I don't think they'd outright edit against consensus like that. Sergecross73 msg me 21:22, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

WTF? We're not idiots, we're not inexperienced editors -- acting against consensus is something neither I nor Snuggums would do even if there wasn't "visibility". Further, there is nothing wrong with trying to explain your case or state your side of the discussion in such a situation as this. No one is badgering anyone. Both of us are "above" doing so -- if you think otherwise, then you clearly haven't paid attention to how either of us defend what we believe in. You non-AGFA comments here are out of line and over the top. Especially for an administrator, Serge. Further, MMetro, I'm fairly certain claming both speedy keep and snow at the AfD is inappropriate, as there are two delete !votes at the proposal page. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 21:51, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

When people respond to every single !vote, saying pretty much the same thing over and over again, I feel it elevates from "arguing" to "badgering", but that's just my 2 cents. Sergecross73 msg me 22:03, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

It was speedy enough of a keep for me. Thanks. MMetro ( talk) 09:03, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

=> Hello. Thank you. They make so many personal accusations with no proofs... I am not "disruptive" at all, but the people who ask so many "citation needed", reverse yet the sources that I add to answer to that, and reverse everything that increase the quality of the content, are "disruptive". As an example of my good faith (again), I noticed that there were 2 errors in a table in an article, a van put in cars, and a car put in vans, so I made the change, but the man who thinks that he owns this article reversed. So I gave him some explanations, and gave up... So the article is still false... http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Mariordo&diff=prev&oldid=648177901 The 4 people who block all my relevant changes on the Renault, Citroen etc. articles, never contribute positively to the article, they are "watch dogs" to make that the article will continue to be denigrating, and the "cage à googoo" (box for gogo dancers) tabloid article put in first position is one of the proofs of this... Nothing to do with a car company. This source is even not in the first 200 entries from Google, so how finding such a specific" source, whereas hundreds of others are available and more directly connected...? Half of the characters in the article are "sources" and in the previous months 10 000 characters of text have disappeared from the Renault article... I added an independent study that has no interest to lie, as then they could not sell it to several carmakers, and they say that it is false yet... Have a nice day or evening. 83.157.24.224 ( talk) 19:16, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I think they're still a bit hung up on how many accusations you've thrown out at them in the past, you may have created some bad tension there. I'm trying to get them to discuss some more specific problems with your content. I really don't believe they're trying to do anything bad, I just think they don't see eye to eye with you. The tabloid source, for example, while not great, didn't actually introduce any bad content into the article... Sergecross73 msg me 19:25, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

=> As "no consensus exhibited to erase (my) relevant content and reliable sources", then they removed them !! Will you support this inconsistent behaviour ? In addition, they continue to erase, but the page is still blocked to some other improvements. So would you like to add this relevant content and sources to the "Renault in UK section", please ? Thank you.

Renault is known in the UK for its support to the British architecture and design innovations by hiring the young architect Norman Foster in 1980, in order to build the Renault Distribution Centre ^[1] in Swindon, UK. Therefore, the headquarters that Lord Norman Foster designed for Renault cars has been given Grade II*-listed status in 2013 by English Heritage, in order to "protect post-war architecture". ^[2] This Renault warehouse had some full glass walls, a metal structure -yellow steel "umbrella masts"-, a floor area of 24,000 m2 and was structured by twenty four square modules, which if needed could be extended to 30,000 m2. The yellow colour was chosen for this building, to fit the Renault's graphical identity. The Renault Distribution Centre was chosen for its innovative and futuristic shapes, ^[2] for some scenes of the 1985 James Bond film, " A View to a Kill", staring Roger Moore and Patrick MacNee.

If you aren't willing to take my advice (discussing with WikiProjects or starting up WP:RFCs), then I am unwilling to help you any further. I've told you the correct actions to take. Go do it. If you wish to add further info to the locked article, do an "edit request" on that article. For more information, see WP:EDITREQUEST. Sergecross73 msg me 14:25, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

=> I do obey you. And no progress is made. No consensus to erase, so it is removed yet ! I gave a MIT source in addition to the Oxford UP source, they are not take into account : article blocked ! If some people always deny, as you know, it is a "disruptive" behaviour. RfC ? If the community was balanced, then the Renault article would be like VW or Ford, not poor and non-representative of what is really this company. M.Choppers told himself that the VW article is very promoting, and VW is over-cited in the general articles, because there are many VW "fanboys". The same for GM or Ford by the way. But I will try to ask for an RfC. I bet already that no good result will come, as you know ;-) Some people say "when a lamb asks to the wolves judges, if it can be left alive, the answer is always : have a nice meal, buddies"... It comes from an old poetry that denounced the non-democratic society at the Lords times. If there is no consensus to erase, then it is erased ! And you told them that you agree with that. I will do an edit request, and you can read the source about "the headquarters that Lord Norman Foster designed for Renault cars has been given Grade II*-listed status in 2013 by English Heritage, in order to protect post-war architecture" =) Interesting input. But some people refuse to add such facts to some specific companies, for personal opinions. Thank you. 83.157.24.224 ( talk) 15:15, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

The fact that you're not making any progress with the current editors is the very reason why I keep recommending RFCs and WikiProjects. They bring in fresh faces and opinions. They may help get some progress or compromise. Conversely, if you're not making any progress with a larger group of editors, then it may be a sign that your changes were not meant to be, and that you chose a different approach. I guess you'll see once you try one of these other avenues. Sergecross73 msg me 15:40, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't know why I read this entire frustrating thing, but at least now I know what the constant "cage a goo-goo" quotes were about. Yikes.  Mr.choppers |  ✎  17:17, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, he wasn't all that clear about that. It didn't help my understanding either that initially my browser didn't load the entire article, so I didn't see that quote in there anywhere... Sergecross73 msg me 17:25, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

• Hi! I suspect I have been targeted by someone with a dynamic ISP: I have recently reverted a whole batch of random reversions of my edits by a bunch of different users all with ISPs starting with 151.20. I can't help but wonder if it may be related to an ongoing dispute on Elsa Schiaparelli where anonymous editor(s) aren't willing to accept that she had a rather unusual but pretty well-documented pronunciation of her name. The Schiaparelli editor was 151.20.80.160 - I suspect they may be the same person as 65.196.51.10 given the fact both ISPs made pretty much similar edits. The obvious revenge reversions were performed by the ISPS 151.20.106.171, 151.20.105.201, 151.20.104.221, 151.20.104.30, 151.20.96.229, and 151.20.89.202. Mabalu ( talk) 23:03, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

And MORE!! 195.31.24.186 is the most recent one, the others fit in with the 151.20 pattern: 151.20.82.26, 151.20.80.234, 151.20.79.118, 151.20.75.157, 151.20.19.76. Mabalu ( talk) 12:27, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Actually I don't think 195.31.24.186 is connected, it's just a coincidence. The others are almost definitely the same disruptive editor. Mabalu ( talk) 12:51, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

This has been resolved with a temporary ISP block on the range by the fabulous people over at Admin Noticeboard, so we'll wait and see if they come back after the block. Mabalu ( talk) 17:30, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mabalu. Sorry I wasn't able to help much. It's been a busy 24 hrs. I did protect the page you were talking about a little while ago, but hadn't had the chance to say anything about it here. Anyways, I'm glad AN worked for you. Sergecross73 msg me 17:56, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Rock Out with Your Socks Out Tour is being seriously vandalised by various users. Please protect it.— Supdiop ^talk 18:12, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Looks like another Admin beat me to it. I would have done the same though. Sergecross73 msg me 18:14, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I just spent an hour making Green Queen acceptable and now because I chose to review the page, all the content has been deleted. If you can recover it, that would be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msmarytalt ( talk • contribs) 19:13, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I've restored it at Draft: Green Queen to the draft area, though it is far from ready to be in Wikipedia proper. You need to write it according to what third party sources say about it. See WP:REFB for some beginners help, and check those links on your talk page about how Wikipedia works and whatnot. You'll need the approval of an Admin in order to take it out of the rough draft area. WP:AFC is a way to do this. Sergecross73 msg me 23:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Narikiri Dungeon was released for the Game Boy Color, but the game was backwards compatible with the original Game Boy. I believe that Game Boy should be displayed as a platform where people can play a game from this series on. The same could be said about Star Ocean Blue Sphere and Grand Theft Auto for their respective series. ThiagoSimoes ( talk) 20:10, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Its not wrong, but it just kind of strikes me as redundant, just the same that we don't list DSi or PSP Go even though Tales of Innocence and Tales of Vs. are playable on them... Sergecross73 msg me 20:15, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

GBA games were playable on DS, but we don't describe GBA games as released for both consoles. Cross-compatibility doesn't change what the intended/principal platform of release was: it's what's written on the box! ☺ ·  Salvidrim! ·  ✉ 20:24, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. Even the respective Star Ocean article given as an example doesn't use the suggested approach its supposed to exemplify... Sergecross73 msg me 20:27, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

But it IS clearly stated on the box that the game is playable on the original Game Boy. GBA games were playable on SOME models of the Nintendo DS, while Narikiri Dungeon is playable on ALL models of the original Game Boy. There is a huge difference. There are two types of GBC releases: games that were compatible with the Game Boy Color only and games that were compatible with the Game Boy Color and the original Game Boy. The Grand Theft Auto (series) follows this approach and it has not been contested by anybody so far. ThiagoSimoes ( talk) 14:21, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

We don't usually list "backwards compatible" systems in infoboxes though. GB/GBC are more closely related to the DS/DSi example, which we don't denote when its compatible with both. Nor do we in the actual GBC game articles, like Grand Theft Auto (video game) or Star Ocean: Blue Sphere. Sergecross73 msg me 14:34, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I respect this, but I insist that it is not valid to compare the GB/GBC issue with the way DS/DSi games are listed. DSi games have never been made with backwards compatibility in mind. If one happens to own an original Nintendo DS or a Nintendo DS Lite, there is no way a DSi game could work in one of these systems. Now, if one happens to buy Grand Theft Auto or Star Ocean: Blue Sphere, the games could be perfectly played on any previous version of the monochrome Game Boy. There are no limitations whatsoever. I find it interesting when you label this kind of information as redundant, since backwards compatibility is not true for most of the Game Boy Color releases. The GBC version of Tomb Raider does not work with the monochrome GB, for example. This is why I believe backwards compatibility should not be taken for granted. Also, should not we provide the information that ToP:ND also works on all the orginal GB models only because people should assume this could be a possibility? This information could hardly lead to some confusion, so I can see no reason for it to be removed other than "we don't do that", which so far has been applied to completely different systems under wildly different circumstances, anyway. Narikiri Dungeon was developed aiming for full compatibility for both Color and monochrome versions of the Game Boy system, and while I understand the reasons for people to debate over this issue, I still can not see any harm to add this information on the Wikipedia article. ThiagoSimoes ( talk) 02:11, 24 May 2015 (UTC)