Revision as of 12:05, 25 February 2006 editMoby Dick~enwiki (talk | contribs)767 edits bicycle award← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:10, 25 February 2006 edit undoRandall Brackett (talk | contribs)15,495 edits →bicycle award: -replyNext edit → | ||
Line 133: | Line 133: | ||
And I do agree with you that "Wards" fail you. --] 12:05, 25 February 2006 (UTC) | And I do agree with you that "Wards" fail you. --] 12:05, 25 February 2006 (UTC) | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
::Unbelievible. You neglected to even understand my proceeding post at all. I am not tranforming the bicycle award into an Exceptional newcomer award. Its simply there because I like the picture more, and I proceeded to change the caption to fit the image. You can't ride an butterfly. If you can find an better-looking image to swith it out with, I invite you to do so. The drab balck-and-white bicycle simply doesn't sit with me. -]<sup>]</sup> 12:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
== For the record == | == For the record == |
Revision as of 12:10, 25 February 2006
You should have been blocked for a lot longer than a month, my friend.--Jimbo Wales 17:13, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
We are not in the business of 'outing' people, and we must continue to have deep and profound respect for the subjects of our biographies. ---Jimbo Wales 14:33, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
User:MegamanZero/TopNav User:MegamanZero/Templates/TalkArchiveBar User:MegamanZero/Talk Template
Userboxes don't equal blogs
Describing your social or economic opinions or allowing others to acknowledge them isn’t bloging. This is, quite frankly, just being honest and exposing potential biases that we’d find out sooner or latter. Furthermore, Wikipedians have shown that political divide isn’t a factor. Republicans, Democrats, Conservatives, Socialists, and all the likes have came together in opposing your rouge, unilateral platform, based mainly on some statements Jimbo made. Self references certainly do not harm Misplaced Pages and are disconnected from the actual encyclopedia. Wiki isn’t a bureaucracy and self descriptive templates problems don’t match the hype administrators have been putting on them.
Furthermore, Wiki isn’t about a sole authority figure, even Jimbo, unilaterally directing things. Wiki is about a community and collaborative effort. A few Administrators shouldn’t have absolute power and Wiki must foster discussion to succeed.
Canadianism 10:32, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Saying you're an democrat, an republican, etc. is perfectly fine. The only problem with userboxes is when the community confuses the interests of the encyclopedia with the personification and sharing of their own interests. Go figure. That's not goining to fly. When userbox mania crosses into the realm of imfalmmatory and offensive, not to mention pure unadaterrated absurditty, then they must go. Additionally, users have begun to justify the prolonged longtivity of these boxes by using the constraint of process.
Concerning templates and self refernence, I think we'll have to agree to disagree here. The point of all the tools and options provided to us is to expand the encyclopedia. Mea Culpa. The community, admistrators, collaborative effort, its all for the encyclopedia. From your staement, it seems to me you're placing the community before the value of the site (Of course, I could be mistaken, however, your statement sounds akin to the thought through which it was conveyed). Good faith, hardworking admins deleted these imflammatory boxes, ussually with a valid comment about an troll out to make trouble. I see no harm in deleting them. Please get back to concetrating on the encyclopedia. -Zero 15:51, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Dschor
I do not think it helpful to suggest he discuss things with you! It will only extend his ban. The talk pages of banned users are not a great place to initiate conversation. -Splash 17:11, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Please see this and take note. Per the rfa page, User:Dschor is blocked for disruption. While I agree upon the concensus his probation is to be enforced, the fact that his contributions go waste are not. I constructed his articles he prepared, and I merely wish an comprimise he be allowed to his talkpage as long as his actions represent an effort to improve the encyclopedia. -Zero 17:30, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- ArbCom rulings are not subject to compromise, unless the Committee changes their ruling. There is no consensus on probation, since he is banned and committee rulings do not need consensus. I do not see anything in that link that I should take any notice of, since it is a banned user circumventing his ban. Enforcing an arbcom ruling is not, as you accuse below, thuggery. You should be careful of accusing people of such things, particularly the arbitrators. -Splash 18:04, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- I said as much in my comment to the talkspace. Why should we prevent users from making good-faith and productive edits..? That doesn't make sense. And, yes, I do indeed agree with the arbcom's criteria and rulings, I'm merely making an statement of discussion pertaining to the matter. Perhaps we should make an argument of allowing him to merely construct an sandbox. I'm not making an personal attack of thuggery, merely an citation to how we should give this some thought. I do apologize if I came off as so. I'm merely trying to come to an comprimise. Do not believe we have differning viewpoints on the matter, on the contaire, I'm in full agreement, just try to assume good faith. -Zero 18:14, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- The reason we do not allow any edits from banned users is that, if we did, we'd have to have long discussions over when to revert, when to extend bans, etc. That, in cases more serious than Dschor's, would be allowing the trolls to continue causing division even though they are banned. I don't know if you're familiar with the banned User:Skyring, but this is more or less exactly the way he behaves — he fixes a semicolon in amongst trolling and someone, somewhere, tries to say that means he should be allowed to edit. The ArbCom is there to put a final end to all the discussion which usually has followed months of bad-blood and to hand out a binding ruling with remedy. There are no exceptions to bans, unless the Committee makes one; they didn't do that this time. That said, you may be able to persuade the Committee to replace their remedy with another one. This is not something that can be decided among admins and/or other editors, however, hence the fact that the talk page message to Dschor isn't the place to start. -Splash 18:22, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Okay. I'm merely saying what I believe is good for encyclopedia. Allow edits for mainspace expansion and creation, and discussion regarding other areas of interest are to be ignored. You're completely correct, this situation had divulged into an probmatic area, and an ban was good. However, discussion regarding the striging of the good and bad is perfectly warrented. Thanks for your advice and consideration, and I'm gald to be on the same team. -Zero 18:31, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- The reason we do not allow any edits from banned users is that, if we did, we'd have to have long discussions over when to revert, when to extend bans, etc. That, in cases more serious than Dschor's, would be allowing the trolls to continue causing division even though they are banned. I don't know if you're familiar with the banned User:Skyring, but this is more or less exactly the way he behaves — he fixes a semicolon in amongst trolling and someone, somewhere, tries to say that means he should be allowed to edit. The ArbCom is there to put a final end to all the discussion which usually has followed months of bad-blood and to hand out a binding ruling with remedy. There are no exceptions to bans, unless the Committee makes one; they didn't do that this time. That said, you may be able to persuade the Committee to replace their remedy with another one. This is not something that can be decided among admins and/or other editors, however, hence the fact that the talk page message to Dschor isn't the place to start. -Splash 18:22, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- I said as much in my comment to the talkspace. Why should we prevent users from making good-faith and productive edits..? That doesn't make sense. And, yes, I do indeed agree with the arbcom's criteria and rulings, I'm merely making an statement of discussion pertaining to the matter. Perhaps we should make an argument of allowing him to merely construct an sandbox. I'm not making an personal attack of thuggery, merely an citation to how we should give this some thought. I do apologize if I came off as so. I'm merely trying to come to an comprimise. Do not believe we have differning viewpoints on the matter, on the contaire, I'm in full agreement, just try to assume good faith. -Zero 18:14, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- ArbCom rulings are not subject to compromise, unless the Committee changes their ruling. There is no consensus on probation, since he is banned and committee rulings do not need consensus. I do not see anything in that link that I should take any notice of, since it is a banned user circumventing his ban. Enforcing an arbcom ruling is not, as you accuse below, thuggery. You should be careful of accusing people of such things, particularly the arbitrators. -Splash 18:04, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Please see this and take note. Per the rfa page, User:Dschor is blocked for disruption. While I agree upon the concensus his probation is to be enforced, the fact that his contributions go waste are not. I constructed his articles he prepared, and I merely wish an comprimise he be allowed to his talkpage as long as his actions represent an effort to improve the encyclopedia. -Zero 17:30, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
edit count adjustment
I'd really rather not start adjusting user's edit counts. Other users have much larger "problems", in that they made several thousand edits under a different user (or IP) than they currently edit with. Also, edits (especially four edits) shouldn't really be that important... And per the Splash's comments on my talk page, Dschor is banned, not on probation. --Interiot 17:22, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- You're correct. And, per the rfar, he is banned (I was under the introspect they were the same thing in his situation and its what I meant). If you feel its not okay to insert the edits, that's fine, but when an user is prevented from making contributions in light of an lack of disruptive behavior, there's a problem. I'm sorry that you feel that way. Consorting with such outright thuggery will not make Misplaced Pages a better encyclopedia. There are policies and common distinction between good and bad faith, they work, when they're blatantly ignored with the sanction of the admistrator, it's not a good sign (I am not accusing anyone, however). -Zero 17:30, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Weapons list
Hey, Zero. Sorry, I kinda forgot about your query the first time you asked it. But I have reviewed the list and, I must say, I'm thoroughly impressed and commend you on a job well done. Unfortunately for me, I haven't be able to contribute work of such high calibur to the Mega Man articles lately. The FF Project and I have had some major issues to discuss and take care of the past few weeks. And I apologize for not really holding up my end of the bargain on cleaning up the MM articles. Quite frankly, I'm considering putting in a request to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Computer and video games for some major overhaul, because we need for manpower. Anyway, thanks again and great work! ~ Hibana 23:32, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. No problem, and I'm sorry if I tried to make the MM articles convey an sense of urgency; I'm glad we have our own little niches in the encyclopedia to work in, that's what's its all about. :) -Zero 23:38, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
hello
hello there! - i was just browsing around, and came across a link to this page from tony sidaway's page - i thought i'd just ask you a question.... your talk page says you've been a wikipedian for over a year now, but your first edits were only in june - did you used to have another account, and have you ever been an admin? - you seem to work hard here, and be a generally nice bloke, so i thought i'd say hi...... -— Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.178.133 (talk • contribs)
- Ahoy! Welcome to the S.S. Talkpage of Megaman Zero. Yes, indeed, I was editting from a number of IP's before my account construction, and I consider that timeframe and the length of my time as an registed wikipedian the sum of over an year. Very nice to meet you too. -Zero 12:34, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:P andy01.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:P andy01.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Misplaced Pages because of copyright law (see Misplaced Pages's Copyright policy).
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Misplaced Pages are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}
.
Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. CLW 15:30, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
- Taken care of. Yet another one of the images I missed from my newbie days. Thank you for the update. -Zero 18:35, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Link revert
You reverted without explanation? --Flipkin 18:08, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- They're Mexicans. Why would you remove links supported by factual edvidence without explanation..? -Zero 19:07, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Diff
My pleasure. (And google is love, btw, since wiki's internal engine is a complete asshole when looking for multiple words stringd) Circeus 17:04, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Template:Oh My Goddess Extlink
Please discuss at Talk:Oh My Goddess!. - Brian Kendig 20:39, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- I've been to all the fan-sites. They provide different aspects at different levels of quality. Gateway to the goddess provides in-depth coverage and over analysis, as well as trivia. Feather provides a broad information basis thinly expanded over general topics, etc. The point of the article is to provide as much coverage as possible, as well as regards to our own. The multiple sites possess different characteristics, and as such are valuble to the reader, not to mention appealing to an mainstream auidience. Its also of note they are very useful references.-Zero 21:06, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- I'm glad these valuable sites are out there, and I'm glad people have Dmoz and Yahoo and Google and other tools by which to find them. However, Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, not a web directory. Misplaced Pages policy specifically discourages what you're trying to do (see m:When should I link externally). - Brian Kendig 21:24, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Additionally, if you're going to link to information about (for example) Gan-chan, have it link specifically to a web page about Gan-chan, not to the top-level page of a web site about Ah My Goddess. There are many precedents for this in Misplaced Pages: for example, movie articles link to their IMDB entries instead of to the home page of IMDB.com, and individual Star Trek articles link to their corresponding entries on Memory Alpha instead of to the top level of Star Trek fan sites. I'm not aware of any other fandom which Misplaced Pages allows to link to the same exact site from every article pertaining to the fandom. - Brian Kendig 21:32, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- You seem to have your facts wrong my friend. Many other articles follow this method, and considering the popularity of the manga and series as an whole, its no wonder to realize the concensus for this.
- The thinly-veiled policy (which I've seen before) that you kindly directed me to prohibits agaisnt blogs, Forums, non-neutral links and links that have little to do with the source material, which is clearly not the case here. It also states External links are a very good way of pointing to authorative reference material that supports facts in the article, as well as Where one has written some wikipedia content by lifting facts from an external webpage then it is polite to reference that webpage and particularly now that the Misplaced Pages content is easily downloadable for offline or other use, it's convenient to have the material available "locally" and licensed for any use. which supports my previous thesis above. These links are perfectly constructive and expansive to the article. They assist in the task of engulfing the reader into informative analysis and expansion. And they are perfectly within policy, as well as within wikipedia's goals.
- However, I have given it an small discrestion of thought, and I hear what your're saying. I agree the number of sites could be trimmed down a tad in the respective section, and I'll do as such. But this does not justify your complete eviceration of all of the external links from the articles-Zero 21:37, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Tony Sidaway/Workshop
I have just done a massive refactoring of Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Tony Sidaway/Workshop, in order to
- remove personal attacks, irrelevant comments, and bickering
- make the page readable and usable for the arbcom, as at its previous size of 183KB, it was not.
As your words appear on that page, I'm letting you know so that you may review the changes. I have tried not to let any bias or POV I may have color my summaries; however, it's a wiki, so if you think I've misrepresented your words, please fix them. Wearily yours, Mindspillage (spill yours?) 08:16, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Oh My Goddess!
Yeah, i don't know any TV-series related sites of heart, though Belldandy angel feathers is a good all round fansite. I've got some time so i will do a search. -Dynamo_ace Talk
OK, i have got some sites but none of them are a "perfect" TV series fansite. Take a look for your self and see if they are any good.
http://www.1up-mushroom.net/oym/
http://www.goddess-project.net/
Sorry about that -Dynamo_ace Talk
Erwin Walsh
G'day Megaman Zero,
I discussed the issue with JoanneB (talk · contribs), who is actually an administrator herself, on IRC, and we decided to go with just Jo's warning. I'll be watching as best I can, and upon his next personal attack I'll block him for 24 hours or so. I'd appreciate it, if you see something I don't, if you brought it to my attention, if you don't mind. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 18:18, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Ultimate Armor
Hi, Zero. We meet again...
Yes, it's about the Ultimate Armor's info of X. I know I did it rather in a sudden. The info would be better depicted here, it is a page of X4 official site.
アルティメットアーマー is Ultimate Armor.
禁断のパーツ means forbidden part(s), but is not the nickname of the Armor anyway...
And please don't ask me how to unlock the first mode, I too have never heard that it is possible... ^_^;;;; ~ Polobird 07:06, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
bicycle award
It would seem that you've taken an inappropriate liberty with an award on your user page; the original award was of a bicycle, not an Exceptional newcomer award. As there is obviously a considerable difference, I have restored it. --Moby Dick 08:15, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- Considerable difference...? I was under the impression they were different awards utilized for the same purpose in regards for newcomers. Thank you for pointing that out, I changed it because the Butterfly was so much more visually appealling. -Zero 09:46, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- Upon furthur inspection, your first diff isn't inapporiate whatsoever. That statement is a little bit naughty. It was merely an conversion of my awards into an neater format, and you neglected to assume good faith. Note I omitted to say the award was an Newcomer award, I simply replaced it with butterfly image. As such, I've reverted. Please don't make assumptions such as this again without proper discussion, its utterly disgusting and violating of another's intregirty. Wards fail me. -Zero 11:44, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
You are, of course, free to use a gallery format. However, in that diff you also changed the image and the caption to the award. As to your view that the bicycle is an exceptional newcomer award... — well, that would appear to be your own view; one you should not assume to be that of another. I suggest that you restore the original form of the award. To not do so amounts to awarding yourself an "Exceptional Newcomer" award. You could always award it to yourself as long as you give yourself credit.
And I do agree with you that "Wards" fail you. --Moby Dick 12:05, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- Unbelievible. You neglected to even understand my proceeding post at all. I am not tranforming the bicycle award into an Exceptional newcomer award. Its simply there because I like the picture more, and I proceeded to change the caption to fit the image. You can't ride an butterfly. If you can find an better-looking image to swith it out with, I invite you to do so. The drab balck-and-white bicycle simply doesn't sit with me. -Zero 12:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
For the record
I would just like to state, for the record, that User:Dschor was banned for a particularly long time, for particularly harmless edits. No vandalism. No page blanking. No malicious article edits. No personal attacks. Simply for creating a template to describe an interest in an encyclopedic subject. If this is the way wikipedia intends to treat editors who act in good faith to improve the encyclopedia, the project will self-destruct. --67.168.241.139 04:42, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
I am very shocked by the behavior of certain parties towards Dschor. As you know I attempted to inquire if he could at the least prepare edits in his namespace for the expansion of the encyclopedia. I still feel that his actions were indefensible, but I think I could have worded my criticism in more temperate language, and he did not deserve such an block. Your phrase "creating a template to describe an interest in an encyclopedic subject" is pretty close to how I feel about the affair, with the exception that I don't believe that he did it in ignorance, nor do I completely believe he did it in good faith. I find this block on Dschor completely incomprehensible, and the fact he is unallowed to prepare constructive edits laughable. -Zero 10:02, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
SNK template
Lemme know if you need help turning it into a proper template. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 11:29, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- I do not know what you are talking about. -Zero 11:30, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- I leave it in my userspace so I can customize it and subst it to fit the situation as needed. It allows the template to operate on an varible basis in line with articles. Thanks for the offer. -Zero 11:58, 25 February 2006 (UTC)