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.

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Platoon video games. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 23:27, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey, do you have some time to review God of War (video game)? -- JDC808 ♫ 19:54, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate the fact that you came to me on this, but I've never done an FA review, and I'm not especially well-versed in the God of War series, so I may not ultimately be your best option. You might want to drop a line over at WP:VG and see if anyone can help you out. Sorry! Sergecross73 msg me 20:06, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Alright, thanks anyways. On a side-note, not being well-versed would actually be helpful because it could tell me if there's any confusing parts for someone who's not well-versed. I did drop a line at WP:VG (but it's only been about an hour since). -- JDC808 ♫ 20:14, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

You make a good point. I'll try to more casually look over it and give some feedback sometime soon. Sergecross73 msg me 20:18, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Alright, thank you. The opposition I've received has actually been based on people who are not familiar with God of War, or video games for that matter. -- JDC808 ♫ 20:26, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello. Just so you know, while a topic ban discussion concerning Niemti's involvement in the Anita Sarkeesian page is taking place, I have also put a notification on the RFC's talk page should we get more participants involved in this discussion. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 19:51, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I've been meaning to do this, but forgot. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 20:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem. By the way, should we consider asking previously uninvolved administrators and users to get involved in the topic ban discussion without canvassing? Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 00:01, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I think at this point, it may be best not to. The conversation still moving at an okay pace, and I don't want it to be misconstrued as CANVASSING (even if its really not) and then have the discussion go way off topic like most Niemti discussions tend to do anyways. I've also noticed that as time passes, the discussion will slowly float to the top due to other ones being archived, and as that happens, it tends to attract the attention of more editors as it rises. Sergecross73 msg me 00:23, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay, then. While this discussion is moving at an ongoing pace, I also do not want this discussion to go really off topic as well and I think it would be best not to ask uninvolved users/administrators to get involved at this point. Thanks for your observations and best wishes, Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 00:27, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Just so you are aware, I have asked Cuchullain here about continuing this discussion or just move forward with the proposal. What are your thoughts on the current discussion? I don't want to have this discussion to go off topic fast. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 23:15, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I agree, I wish someone would close it up too. (Although, I can't since I'm WP:INVOLVED in both the conversation and with dealing with the user in the past.) Not sure how to wrap it up though. I mean, in past similar situations, I've made a subsection along the lines of "awaiting closure from uninvolved admin" or something like that but it didn't especially seem to help wrap things up. While I still support the topic ban, at least it seems Niemti has lost interest in the article for the time being, and there's a pretty strong consensus against him left behind on the article's talk page should he decide to return in the future. Sergecross73 msg me 23:22, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I've posted a close request here. Hopefully, this should end the discussion. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 23:53, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I think this discussion has gone on long enough and despite my attempts to ask an administrator to close the discussion on both ANI as well as ANRFC, I think the close request on ANI is about to go off topic fast. So, would it be best to directly ask an uninvolved administrator to close this discussion? Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 19:45, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I was going to leave a talk page message to the editor who keeps bringing things off topic, and his page and edit history involves a lot of comments about now going on a Wiki-break. So hopefully this means it'll stop going off topic... Sergecross73 msg me 21:00, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I understand. On another note, I feel that a notification to ask uninvolved administrators and users to get involved and comment on the current situation would be appropriate as I feel that we really need uninvolved input to determine community exhaustion of patience for the topic ban. What are your thoughts about it? Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 22:15, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I do think it should be closed, but I'd rather it did independently of us, so we can't be accused of "pushing too hard". It's been on top of ANI for a while now, so it's got to be catching a lot of Admin's eyes. Hopefully one will close it soon. Sergecross73 msg me 14:55, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Why was my edit (11:27, 3 February 2013‎) for Monoltih Soft's X page reverted? HalberdStopCrashing ( talk) 21:13, 3 February 2013 (UTC)HalberdStopCrasihng

I apologize, I meant to leave an edit summary, but accidentally reverted without one. Anyways, my reason was that your source doesn't refer to a game by name. We don't know what Iwata was talking about, he didn't refer to anything by name. In theory, Monolith Soft could be working on two (or more) games at once. Sergecross73 msg me 21:38, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Just so you are aware, WhatamIdoing ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) has closed the RFC/U on Niemti, citing the topic ban discussion on Anita Sarkeesian. At this point, what would be the best possible solution? Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 00:52, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Boldly undone. :) · Salvidrim!·  ✉ 01:03, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I would have done the same thing, and/or asked for an explanation. That was a pretty poor move unless they were still working on writing up a rationale or something. Sergecross73 msg me 01:09, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Sergecross73. You have new messages at WhatamIdoing's talk page.
Message added 17:18, 6 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WhatamIdoing ( talk) 17:18, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I've replied again. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 18:19, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

		A beer on me!
		I was having a wee peek at your userpage and noticed you also enjoyed Snowboard Kids as a youngster. Unfortunately not enough people knew about this game and I don't know how many hours were spent with friends playing it. I always describe it to people as "Mario Kart on snowboards except better than Mario Kart" Cabe 6403 ( Talk• Sign) 16:37, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Haha, thanks! I loved them back when they first came out, and was reminded of that when I recently was finally able to play the Japanese-only PS1 version. I'm ashamed I haven't done anything to improve those articles since I added that comment to my User page, but I'll probably get around to it sometime. (I keep getting pulled in different directions, on and off Wiki.) Sergecross73 msg me 16:41, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Me too, I've had the original game article in my watchlist for years now always intending to get round to it. Perhaps some coordinated effort in the future. Cabe 6403 ^{( Talk• Sign)} 16:43, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good. I've added them to my watchlist too, so we'll see if/when the other starts working on it in the future. Sergecross73 msg me 16:49, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for starting the Mario Golf: World Tour! article! :) ~ satellizer ~ ~ talk ~ 21:28, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

No problem, I'd do it more often, but it seems like with more mainstream games someone always beats me to the punch, or I feel there's not enough known to warrant an article right away. Guess I got luck with that one. And thank you for always expanding out my refs. I really do appreciate it. I'd thank you more often but I feel like I'd sound like a broken record considering how frequently do it. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 21:35, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Haha, you people create the articles, I just make a bunch of redirects! :) · Salvidrim!·  ✉ 21:55, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Haha, thank you for the valid redirects. I've certainly searched for things using search terms like "Mario Golf 3DS" myself, so that is helpful too! :) Sergecross73 msg me 05:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Serge. Can you please take a look at Niemti's most recent comment on WT:VG? I not only feel that his comment towards me are disparaging and insulting, but it might effectively stop me from contributing to Wikipedia constructively and is giving me depression and trauma. I don't know what to do about this. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 00:33, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Sjones. I've given him a warning on his talk page. Please don't let his comments bother you. I do recommend trying to minimize your contact with him, not necessarily because of any wrong-doing on your part, but just because he is causing you stress. You're a good editor, so I wouldn't want you to leave. I'd recommend working on an article you'd enjoy that he'd be unlikely to contribute to. Sergecross73 msg me 00:50, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Many sincere thanks, and the suggestion to minimize contact with him as well as working on an article that I would enjoy that he would be unlikely to contribute to is helpful advice. This user has stressed me out with his abrasive editing style and poor communication skills (as stated in the user's RFC) as well as personal attacks, some of which were directed towards myself. as well as what I see as refusing to get to the point by bringing up that old dispute over at ANI (I have already moved on from that particular discussion, and according to administrator Thumperward ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), it was "inconclusive chat". None of that has to do with the present ongoing situation which is the clearing the the GAN backlog at WT:VG and at WT:GAN and considering that I follow the rules, a discussion was necessary to take care of that problem). Given the fact that I have participated in the user's ongoing RFC and the AN/ANI cases, I have been trying to ignore him due to his behavior, but if there are any problems, I will report any problems regarding issues with him at WT:VG, WP:AN or WP:ANI, or at whatever venue we should choose, as long as we don't cause too much drama. Having dealt with other disruptive users and sockpuppets in the past (i.e. Fragments of Jade, Yourname), I would never allow any disruptive comments or personal attacks get to me as I maintain a strict policy advising against all personal attacks. But for now, I will let it be. With that said, I think getting back to work on either the Final Fantasy, Sonic the Hedgehog or Super Mario articles would be the best option for now. Thanks again and best wishes, Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 00:53, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd recommend my approach to dealing with him, where you give your two cents when a discussion opens up, and then be on your way. It's far less stressful, and lets you be more constructive with editing. Again, no judgement on you, it's just what works for me. I don't personally feel Niemti needs to be monitored or anything because he literally seems to rub just about everyone he interacts with the wrong way.

If you need a project, we could always collaborate on Sonic R. I feel like the two of us could get it to GA status. (A vast majority of my experience is in getting articles to B status, which is where I feel it's pretty much at for the moment. So I'd appreciate you expertise in getting it to the next level. Just a thought. If you've got other stuff going on that's fine too.) Sergecross73 msg me 05:15, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

I'll chip in on Sonic R as well. Though my only experience with getting an article to A class was with And Yet It Moves, I think I have some useful skills to lend.-- ThomasO1989 ( talk) 05:50, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Much appreciated! As a side note, I really enjoyed working on that article, with it being from the era before Sonic series reputation took such a plunge, and yet it wasn't one of the games that are super mainstream either. It was interesting to research. I'm contemplating working on something similar, like Sonic 3D Blast, in the future... Sergecross73 msg me 15:53, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

• Serge, I'll e-mail you an idea tommorow on how I think this should be dealt with to seek your input before proceeding. Please ping me Monday if you've received nothing. :) · Salvidrim!·  ✉ 05:20, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good. (Also, I'll likely respond shortly after I get it if I do get it.) Sergecross73 msg me 05:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Sergecross73. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 06:42, 16 February 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{ You've got mail}} or {{ ygm}} template.

:) · Salvidrim!·  ✉ 06:42, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

• Have you had time to check it out before I post? :) · Salvidrim!·  ✉ 18:23, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
  • I still haven't found it.... u_u. Sergecross73 msg me 18:29, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
    • Look in my userspace (or contribs). ;) :) · Salvidrim!·  ✉ 18:50, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
      • Yeah, I'm not sure why I didn't think of that... Sergecross73 msg me 18:59, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello Sergecross73, I just want to let you know that I am really appreciative of your efforts to improve Fall Out Boy's Save Rock and Roll page. Keep up the good work! :) Noreplyhaha ( talk) 11:55, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm glad it's appreciated, I was afraid I'd run into opposition due to the amounts I was trimming out. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 18:10, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Excuse me!? What part of "Local interlanguage links are no longer needed and can normally be removed from articles" does not support removing interwiki links from articles? These links are now at Wikidata (Q1069059) and a local copy is not needed. 86.44.163.139 ( talk) 18:46, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Calm down, I misread it at first, and it's not very often people who don't even register an account know that sort of policy or do such tedious work, so it seemed unlikely. Feel free to continue on. Sergecross73 msg me 18:59, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I am calm. It was meant to express surprise not anger. Moving on... 86.44.163.139 ( talk) 19:03, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Alright then, I had read it as being rather upset. Why are you doing this though? I mean, even if it's not necessary to have on there, seems like a strange use of your time considering it being there is not hurting anything, and you said on your own talk page you have no interest in joining Wikipedia or editing beyond this... Sergecross73 msg me 19:06, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I only do edits on smartphone and its been glitching for a while and the most i can do is add info and refs but not the proper ref citation. I was wondering if you can do that for me for the refs that ive added. All of them were added during the same day, feb 18 2013. The articles i contributed are Final Fantasy Dimensions and Final Fantasy: All the Bravest. It would be a great help for me if you could. If not, let me know and i can find someone else. Lucia Black ( talk) 23:13, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't even usually format my own refs. I just usually use bare urls and let other people format them if they care that much. It's stuff like that, and images, that I leave to others. Sergecross73 msg me 03:44, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

( talk page stalker)  Done. ~ satellizer ~ ~ talk ~ 04:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

You, are awesome! Sergecross73 msg me 13:30, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't lecturing (I hate lecturing on Wikipedia). I was just noting what I've observed based on past behavior by user Cyberlink420. 118.21.142.128 ( talk) 00:17, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Serge, he's a sock of 67.183.80.158. Same edits to articles like Transformed and AKB48, same M.O. of starting trouble with other editors and trying to twist wiki policy in his favor. I've already filed the necessary reports; just let the system take its course and he'll be gone soon enough. -- Cyberlink420 ( talk) 00:28, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Hey, if possible, is there any way to revoke his talk page privileges too? He's still trying to out me using whatever means he's got. -- Cyberlink420 ( talk) 01:12, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. I don't wish to get involved in the recent dispute over at Talk:Wasteland 2 and I have already asked User:Salvidrim to look into this, but can you also please take a look into the discussions over at ANI, WT:VG and Talk:Wasteland 2#Game Camera View? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 23:07, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

I personally think that Niemti's comments that Frogacuda "needs to be forced to accept the very core polices of Wikipedia" and "simply can't be allowed to edit Wikipedia" is the final straw. If I didn't have any self-control I'd say some really nasty things right now. -- ThomasO1989 ( talk) 00:16, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't have much time tonight. I'm not especially interested in getting involved, it seems like Niemti is dong a fine job self-destructing on his own, but I will look into things later. Sergecross73 msg me 04:14, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Got it. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 04:21, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Since User:AnddoX won't read what I've been constantly linking to, I've put the situation in your hands. See User talk:AnddoX#WP:STOPCHANGINGIT. « Ryūkotsusei » 20:19, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

• I've already got eyes on it. He's been warned, and previously blocked for warring, so one can only assume he now understands 3RR and will not violate it. :) · Salvidrim!·  ✉ 20:24, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks, I didn't have that game under my watchlist. I gave him another warning as well. Sergecross73 msg me 20:53, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

At this point would you recommend leaving the image as is? Or use the previous without the ps3 banner? « Ryūkotsusei » 21:26, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

• • • Until there is discussion/consensus, I would think it should be whichever one it was first, but I'm not sure which one that is, and I personally don't want to change it myself as I don't want to be involved and unable to act as an Admin if I need to... Sergecross73 msg me 21:55, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi, you recently participated in this discussion about additions to the VGReviews template. Do you mind clarifying your opinion on the inclusion of Polygon (website) in the template? Polygon has been around for over a year now; they were provisionally called "Vox Games" when they were still a subsection of parent website The Verge (owned by Vox Media). Polygon was only separated into its own website four months ago but the editorial staff has been together for much longer, hence the confusion in the discussion about its "established-ness". Axem Titanium ( talk) 05:58, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I hadn't realized there was much of a debate, so I hadn't said much further. I've commented on it. Sergecross73 msg me 13:31, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Sergecross73. You have new messages at Mediran's talk page.
Message added 07:56, 1 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mediran ( t • c) 07:56, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

He got -52,so isnt THAT bad? Playstation 2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.126.214.219 ( talk) 17:39, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I haven no idea who this is, or what you're talking about... Sergecross73 msg me 17:42, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

FYI, referring the edit by ClueBot to Playstation 2 at 21:13 (UTC-5), 28 February 2013‎, which gives a size difference of -52, and which 24.126.* just reverted. :) · Salvidrim!·  ✉ 18:25, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I see. Well, that explains the "what" he's talking about, still not sure "why" he's telling me. I don't believe I interacted with this IP until I started giving warnings after this message on my talk page, since, in trying to figure out who it was, I saw all sorts of policies/guidelines being brokened/ignored... Sergecross73 msg me 18:32, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

It seems like to me that he thinks the numbers that show the amount of characters added/deleted for each edit is some sort of reputation system. TheStickMan ^[✆Talk] 00:30, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I give up. im not worth it :(! — Preceding unsigned comment added by PlaystationOfAEra ( talk • contribs) 20:16, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

You don't really need to "give up", you just need to stop threatening people. (Also, are you IP 24.126.214.219 ? You both write with random spaces between phrases, and threaten to "ban" people the same way...) Sergecross73 msg me 20:24, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mystic Chronicles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Natsume ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 18:32, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

How do you know my ip address? -- 24.126.214.219 ( talk) 16:45, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I didn't, for certain, but as I said above, I noticed specific similarities between the two, like wrongfully threatening to "ban" people. Sergecross73 msg me 16:50, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Just saying, but doesn't this kinda give you away? Zappa O Mati 14:42, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

It sure does. Additionally, I keep cleaning up both of their posts, so it's not clearly visible now, but both commonly would have excessive, random 4-5 blank lines between sentences. (As seen here.) That sort of weird writing stands out too. (I thought I'd answer on his behalf, since he's been given a short block due to continual disruptive editing.) Sergecross73 msg me 17:06, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Hypothetically if the exact same thing happened in reverse? And that includes the very sarcastic (if not sarcasm then i cannot accept that question a a serious one). I didnt start the convo, G-zay did, and you couldve easily voided my name considering that i didnt strt the discussion. Lucia Black ( talk) 21:29, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I can honestly say that I would not be offended. If there were personal attacks involved, or if someone, in clear bad-faith, mis-represented my argument, I would be offended. But I did neither of those things in this comment. I don't understand the problem. I didn't say you started the discussion. I didn't accuse you of anything. Nothing I said was false. Is there something inherently offensive about saying you're in an argument with someone or something that I'm not aware of? Sergecross73 msg me 21:37, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

You see, you miss the point entirely. You keep going with i never said that, but can you see the chain of action where someone else could have thought you implied that? You fail to see how loud the invisible implications shout.

Example: you didnt start the conversation, but i ask you borderline uncivil lets say say i ask "and where does it say we can be so subjective about it?" (Implying that i dont like subjectivity and not really looking for an answer) then canvass it off, despite you not starting it, i mention you by name and mention only a piece of your reasoning (that can imply that i want to show off only the bad example and not the other points) . This can easily happen to any other editor. Even if you cant see the issue, it can happen. Better word your questions so they dont sound sarcastic because it doesnt sound genuine at all. Either mention the one who started the convo or no one at all because mentioning someone not as relevant can show implications you wanted something out of it. Dont mention just one piece of the reasoning, give their entire view otherwise it looks like hiding. Lucia Black ( talk) 21:50, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I understand what you're saying with it, I just don't agree with it. When people take such a plain comment like that and find offense in it, I believe it's their shortcoming for misinterpreting it so badly, not mine. I can't account for every single possibly interpretation of my comments. Judging by the fact that you're the first one to be lecturing me on this, I don't believe I'm the problem here. Your interpretation is so far removed from how a typical person would take it, I'm just not not concerned about it.

Atleast know that regardless of your interpretations, no offense or malice was intended. Sergecross73 msg me 22:01, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Next time just be more sensitive. You saw my point, meaning you know you given an implication regardless of intent. Lucia Black ( talk) 23:03, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Nothing I said was insensitive. Stop going out of your way to take things in the worst possible manner. Sergecross73 msg me 23:21, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

yes there was. You just refus to admit it. Why did you ask me that question in that manner knowing there was a better way to ask? Why did you say i "cling" to something, and also as if the comment was referring to them about me when you couldve easily included me in that convo? Serge im not stupid. Lucia Black ( talk) 23:29, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Ive seen you argue with people a ton, myself included, but you usually seem to have a tough skin. Why are you so personally offended with my every comment today? Sergecross73 msg me 23:32, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Because your question implied i was being subjective and in no way was genuine, you mention me while im still discussing, for some reason that arent positive at all. Im not stupid.....so lets be honest here... Lucia Black ( talk) 23:43, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

( talk page stalker) Lucia, you can't honestly expect people to know what you're thinking and then pick the most "politically correct" way to express something every time. We're human. If anything, I see this as the same as being greeted with "Merry Christmas" instead of "Happy Holidays" and then being offended because you don't celebrate Christmas. It's silly because no malice was ever intended. Nothing in Serge's comment suggested that he was trying to put you down, and if there is, you really have to twist it to order to interpret it that way. -- ThomasO1989 ( talk) 23:47, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for an outside view, Thomas. Appreciated. Sergecross73 msg me 03:35, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Its simple "targetting" and can easily be interpretted as such. You dont see it simply because that specific chain of action has not came onto you. Politically correct? Is that such a bad thing in wikipedia? Pointing out how "human" is like saying, "yeah we screw up once in a while". But its like sergecross intentionally wont have a second look or rather he will not go the extra mile (or in this case "inch") to be more sensitive. Throughout the discussion ive been offended. Im tired of everyone belittling me. It ends...from now on anyone who offends will be informed and will be advised to think twice (and if you claim you then thrice) before commenting. The whole christmas/holiday is completely irrelevant. Youre only bringing a broad example that can be detoured if we go by the specifics. Example: if one person makes it absolutely clear they dont celebrate christmas specifically, and gets several "christmas" cards, will the editor say "well im not going to double check it, so deal with it". I came back to inform you, it is uncivil to make "discussions" about vote count such as pointing out that no one had agreed with me yet and thats a valid point to not see it my way. It also shows signs of belittling and you continued to do so throughout the discussion. You dont have to say "im going to discuss this until someone else agrees with you". If other editor read that, they will assume my reputation is that no one agrees with me. Im not stupid, i know when one has ill intent or when one wants to offend. Dont be so indifferent. The intention of offense has become more and more obvious. Lucia Black ( talk) 09:50, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

• How are you still talking about this? It was an argument about capitalization from half a month ago, and we haven't interacted in at least a week and a half. Would you get over it? Judging by the fact that several other editors have also stated that what I said was not offensive, and the way you said "Im tired of everyone belittling me.", I'm thinking there's a bigger issue here than my comments. If you are unhappy with how you are treated, perhaps you need to take a look at how you present yourself on Wikipedia. People may treat your a certain way based off of how you treat them. I don't know about other people, but every discussion/argument I've had with you on Wikipedia has rubbed me the wrong way. You're very difficult to work with, with being overly stubborn, unwilling to compromise, and always insisting on "having the last word", even when there's nothing left to be said. Additionally, many of your comments are riddled with typos, and lacking capitalization or punctuation. It looks very sloppy. Perhaps if you worked on these things, you'd start to feel the respect you feel you deserve. Whatever it is, you need to start looking at the bigger picture, and stop projecting your problems into our relatively "vanilla" discussions. Sergecross73 msg me 14:04, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Finally were getting at the truth or at least your version of it. If you see punctuation issues, its mostly due to this all being done on smartphone and my priority isnt punctuation for comments as long as the message goes across.. I "rub you the wrong way" is how i feel about you recently, but this time im the one confronting. If i didnt, it will just be an endless cycle of passive agressive attitude between discussions that other editors wont really grasp but both of us know theres Inner termoil. All your hidden comments you probably dont notice are openly offensive but you refuse to see it especially when they add up. It upsets you that i dont compromise? Your practically describing every wikipedia editor out there. Sometimes theres no room for compromise, and you know that more than anyone. You dont feel respected on your own Serge, you feel respected by others. Fixinng typos and such isnt going to get me anywhere. No, im fighting this to the core. I could care less if consensus is against it, its how the discussion is treated in which you were the first to call it an argument. Lucia Black ( talk) 15:16, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

The only time we had a major disagreement was in the tails argument. I deserve respect regardless of how you feel of me.

Lucia, if you keep insisting that people on Wikipedia are out to get you, then it's obvious you're assuming bad faith. Serge has said repeatedly he had no intention of offending you, and you simply ignore it. You trying to argue this over and over and demanding people to apologize because they "offended you" in a way that they could not have possibly foreseen is "hurting your reputation" far more than any of Serge's remarks. People will refuse to work with someone who is this blatantly over-sensitive for fear that they will have to deal with your whining if they say anything at all. This isn't constructive and does not improve Wikipedia in the slightest. If the offense was actually intentional, then you have to be the stronger person and get over it. Seriously, find better things to do with your time than over-analyze side remarks and then hounding people until they say what you want them to say. -- ThomasO1989 ( talk) 15:26, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

BTW, you if are going to "fight this to the core" then you are holding Wikipedia as a battleground. If you continue this argument you are only breaking Wikipedia policies even further. -- ThomasO1989 ( talk) 15:30, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Im fighting the roots is a more accurate term. As in im not going to let people diminish anymore. I dont believe everyone is "out to get me". Thomas, just dont get involved....youre already assuming so much on your part.

And youre doing it too by how you describe me. We just had a breakthrough and you want to stop it? I dont think so. Serge just revealed vital info. Info that changed the whole perspective. What previously looked like a minor honest mistake (with a large number of passive agressive remarks) now look like subconscious attacking. Im not saying Serge is the sole person hurting my reputation, im saying its those subtle comments that start. I know when someone is being passive aggressive.

You dont get it. The problem here, is no one has the ehart to admit and say "i wont let it happen again", because by refusing that is saying "i will do it again regardless of your feelings". Wikipedia shouldnt allow "side remarks". Lucia Black ( talk) 15:41, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Lucia, it's exactly as Thomas said. My commentary was in regards to why you feel you may be "belittled on Wikipedia", not in regards to our argument. Your approach to interacting with others will cause you far more trouble than my constructive arguments with you. You're free to continue with your failure to assume good faith and battleground mentality, but I'm about done here. Let's wrap this up. I'll give you a response or two more, but beyond that I'm going to start reverting your additions to my talk page and/or ignoring you. This isn't getting us anywhere. Sergecross73 msg me 15:45, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Thomas is just talkpage stalking. Nevermind him. For now, you admit it. I rub you the wrong way in which is your reasoning on belittling me. Heres my proposal: I will do my absolute best not to "rub you the wrong way" in turn you do the same. And that means if i do unintentionally, you let me know. Lucia Black ( talk) 15:52, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Regarding me as "only a talk page stalker" reveals your disregard for other people's opinions and advice. Quit it with the harassment on Serge and grow up. Find better ways to be constructive on Wikipedia. -- ThomasO1989 ( talk) 15:59, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate Thomas's talk page stalking. (I appreciate everyone who does that for me, or I guess everyone I know who does it.) You're proposal is what I'm already doing. I've never intended on belittling you, let alone had I planned on it in the future. Can't stress that enough. (Since you keep pushing the issue, I'll just say it: It's possible to not like working with someone, but still treat them civilly. I feel I'm doing that just fine.) Beyond that, we don't even interact with each other all that often. You've blown this all out of proportion. Even if we were "mortal enemies", we don't cross paths very often. Unless you start butting heads with me all the time over my main areas these days, obscure PSP RPGS or obscure rock albums, we're fine anyways. Sergecross73 msg me 16:04, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey Serge, I think it might be time to disengage. There's clearly no consensus to make a change at FF:ATB so any more words typed is a waste of effort. At some point, when communicating with certain kinds of people, it's ok to let them have the last word. Rational historians of the future looking back at the conversation will understand where the consensus lies. Axem Titanium ( talk) 22:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. I almost already stopped today, but instead resorted to very brief responses. Just wanted to make sure "a new consensus" spin wasn't given amongst the two remaining editors on the other side of the argument. But yeah, you're right, we're probably good now. Sergecross73 msg me 23:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

This is not about having the last word. Historians of the future will continue to see these type of consensus of inconsiderates who leave others short handed who allow vote count over reason.. I dont continue to discuss because i want to win, but to help the editor see my view, and if they agree great, if not then oh well. But theres still room to discuss about it. If anyone stops to discuss is because anymore discussing and theyll hurt their own cause.

Discussing helps also to avoid future discussions of the same issue among the same editors. Lucia Black ( talk) 23:17, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that is exactly the kind of nonsense I was talking about. The ridiculous notion that if I stopped arguing circles with you, you'd assume it was "hurting my argument" or that I had given up or something. Yikes. Sergecross73 msg me 00:38, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I didnt say that it was a sign of giving up, it was a sign of easy win with the expense of leaving others short handed. Some editors believe if they stay quiet and their point has been made, any attempt to counter the others would hurt them by saying something that will hurt their cause. So obviously staying quiet and leaving the vote as a vote wins. Its not "nonsense". Serge, you claim you are doing your best to not be rub the wrong way. I dont think your doing your "best" if you call other opinions nonsense. Lucia Black ( talk) 00:51, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I gotcha. Glad we're on the same page. Anyway, talk page watchers, amirite? :P Axem Titanium ( talk) 00:46, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Okay, gotcha. Yeah, I wish there was a way to tell who was watching your talkpage. I checked once and there were like 30 people watching mine, though I could probably only name about five of them... Sergecross73 msg me ,

Yeesh, and again with the bm ninja response. I can barely tell who's talking to who already and I only started this conversation a few hours ago! I'm glad I'm not popular. Axem Titanium ( talk) 01:34, 9 March 2013 (UTC)