Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:38, 24 July 2011

Welcome!

Hello, Starcade, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --A Nobody 19:04, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Please Stop

Please stop vandalizing this page, what you are doing is intentionally removing information which compromises the neutrality and integrity of Misplaced Pages. You are currently in the minority of users on your opinion of the topic.

• The majority do not determine fact, unless you wish to be one or more of the growing number of people in our society who do not believe in the concept of a singular truth. That said, unfortunately, a 1-hour discussion with some of the Misplaced Pages helpers does appear to be on your side, as Misplaced Pages does not believe in damnatio memoriae. I openly do, as I believe it as dishonest for an encyclopedia to represent fraudulent events such as the 2004 and 2005 seasons of USC as historical and encyclopedic fact. As a result, I am compelled by this decision to restore, as repugnant as it is, Ben Johnson to have won the footrace of the 100 meter dash at the 1988 Olympics, with the proper denotations of what happened afterward. --Starcade (talk) 23:37, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Misplaced Pages, as you did at BCS_National_Championship_Game, you may be blocked from editing. 173.76.109.232 (talk) 18:17, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

• Why don't you just tell me to stop editing at all? --Starcade (talk) 03:40, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Misplaced Pages's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, you may be blocked from editing. Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 06:37, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

• Excuse me, but you're going to have to tell me which of a number of articles I've updated tonight is the subject of this before I can go ahead and actually discern what it is you are talking about. --Starcade (talk) 06:39, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Either article related to Final Fantasy. I know your edits were in good faith, but almost all those page are featured or good articles, and reliable sources are needed, even when the information is factual and correct. Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 06:50, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm. How does one attribute content from actually having played the game, then? And is it not important, therefore, to state the distinct differences in player-elimination/Game Over conditions between the various versions of Final Fantasy (as well as the necessary expansions for the jobs in XI). You are effectively, at this point, asking me to delete references to VII, IX, XI, XII, and XIII, then. --Starcade (talk) 06:52, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

People can remove unsourced content at any moment, the difference between Who Wants and FF are many. The very first is that, again, Final Fantasy articles are featured content and needs to adhere to this policy more than other articles. Also, you can use the videogame as a source, see {{Cite video game}} for further information. Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 07:02, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I do not know if you are understanding or not, but when you are going to edit a page a message appears: "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable." This means that, regardless your opinion or if it is "the truth", it must have a reliable source. Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 07:13, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Please do not add unsourced content, as you did to Money_in_the_Bank_(2011). This contravenes Misplaced Pages's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Do not give your own guess as to what will happen. You must source content. Gorlack36 (talk) 03:13, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• There is no "guesswork" here, sir. Punk won, left the arena with the title, Cena is fired, Punk is not with the company per se. Once things clear up on RAW, they can change it again. --Starcade (talk) 03:17, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Money in the Bank (2011). ℥ 03:20, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• Then block me. I gave you two different sources as to the events of that night. You want a Wiki War, you got one. --Starcade (talk) 03:23, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• Let's not do this. Both of you, try to take a breather. Starcade, it wasn't vandalism. I let the other user know. Ending-start, I already just left a message on your talk page. Gorlack36 (talk) 03:25, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• • The only real Wiki War was what I was about to do and that was to revert it back to what I put on there and dare Ending-start to have me blocked. You got your sources, and I put them in my edit after your call. As I said below, I disagree with your belief that this is "aftermath", since it is a direct result of the stipulations (and the specific stipulations) of this particular match. I fear what we have is a very sad John Cena mark over there. --Starcade (talk) 03:28, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• • • Okay, sure. That could be considered part of the PPV (though I would disagree). But still... we have the background section for that which doesn't exist yet for that specific article. Do not get into an edit war, it's not worth it. I don't think it's a Cena fan at all. I think he's just trying to keep the article like other PPVs which is what should be done. I agree with you that it should be edited in but in the appropiate section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorlack36 (talk • contribs) 03:30, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• • • • Hmmm... You see, that's where I get into discussion with you. With this specific stipulation and the confusion I noted below, where do we put it? It isn't a straight up Loser Leaves Town match, more has to happen. The other question one might have to ask is if the cash-in actually happened. (The Wrestling Pulse site lists a match attempting to start between ADR and Punk, no such reference is made on the WWE site.)

• • • • • Far as I know the cash in never happened. No bell was rung. If it was, CM Punk would still be the champion due to a count out (he ran out of the ring far more than a ten count). BTW, that site is more of a blogger kind of thing. I wouldn't use it as a valid source at all.

Regardless though... you can't actually put the aftermath/background in the results box. Gorlack36 (talk) 03:36, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Your edits to Money in the Bank (2011)

Look, I know you linked to the source, good. But the problem is, we don't do it that way. Look at the other PPV articles for WWE. You have the aftermath in the aftermath section. Just wait till someone makes one or make it yourself; you don't add the aftermath to the match results. Gorlack36 (talk) 03:22, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• It's not "aftermath". Unless you want to say the entire del Rio episode during the PPV was "aftermath", and remember the SPECIFIC stipulations of the match. Punk winning is NOT sufficient for Cena to be fired, and WWE's own article on the match now lists him as "fired". --Starcade (talk) 03:25, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• You're kinda mixing it all up. I get exactly where you're coming from, as in I understand what you mean. :)

But the thing is, it's just after the PPV. So, we have to put in the aftermath and the match section. Look at any other PPV and you'll see what I mean. But the results are just the that... results. The thing with ADR would go in the match descriptions. Gorlack36 (talk) 03:27, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• • I'm not angry with you, but it seems like we'd have a real problem going forward if we didn't have that in the match result, since the stipulation of the match is not satisfied with Punk's win alone. I'm not disputing "how you guys do it", I just think we have (in this specific case) enough confusion in the IWC regarding whether Cena's firing comes from Punk's win or his fleeing the arena. See where we are here? --Starcade (talk) 03:30, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• • • Technically speaking... Cena is fired. If you really want to put it like that then you could say "Punk won and left the arena with the title and Cena was fired as a result". It doesn't specify what the exact reason was (as is your complaint just regarding that, I believe) so there should be no problem. Apart from the fact that it should be in the Aftermath/Background section and not the results.Gorlack36 (talk) 03:32, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• • • • That's essentially what I tried to do with explaining about del Rio, but the problem is that, since the match stipulations continued outside the match, would that not mean the failed attempt by del Rio is also part of the match and it's stipulation? I can agree that anything which will happen on the 7/18 Raw is most certainly aftermath, but, as is evidenced in the discussion and edits before the card, there was significant confusion regarding the stipulation. That's my issue. Simply saying "Punk defeats Cena" and leaving the "fired" stip on the other side might have confusion that Punk defeating Cena was all that is necessary. --Starcade (talk) 03:35, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• • • • • Well the problem is, that you still can't put it in the results section. First you need to decide it's aftermath or else background (it'd be background I'd wager).Gorlack36 (talk) 03:38, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Misplaced Pages, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Money in the Bank (2011), did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Look, I already tried explaining it to you. Look at any other WWE PPV article and you'll see how it's done. I'm removing the edit you made do not edit it back. Gorlack36 (talk) 03:46, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• If we're going to do that, then only a very select number of people should be allowed to edit a given type of article such as you suggest for WWE PPVs. I've seen several different WWE PPV articles, and they appear to be somewhat inconsistent in such quality. Some give match details in an "Event" section, many do not. But if we are going to strive for that degree of consistency, then the general public should NOT be allowed to edit such articles. Just MHO. I tried to add an Aftermath section with the whole del Rio thing (sourced), you bounce that. I tried to source it within the match listing, you bounce that. At this point, the best thing might be to disqualify me from future editing of WWE PPV posts, since I'm not going to be able to satisfy you at all, because the way it's listed now, at least IMHO, is extremely confusing to an uninitated reader.--Starcade (talk) 03:53, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

It's not confusing in the slightest. You have the background. This gives background information. An example would be describing the fued that led up to the matches. The event is a description of the matches. Usually in a bit of detail. The aftermath is what happened after the event... as in on the next shows. I don't have a problem with it but as of now, there isn't anything really sourced. I mean sure, you can use the wwe.com one but we still don't know exactly what will happen. So it's best to just wait. Gorlack36 (talk) 03:57, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• Were you around before the card, as there was significant discussion as to what to put into the match listing, and I finally just put in the exact words of Vince McMahon from the July 4 promo -- "if he leaves Chicago with the title"? The problem is, the match result does not go that far, and may imply that the confused who believed that all Punk had to do to get Cena fired was win the match were actually correct in the first place! As of right now, WWE has Cena kayfabe fired after Punk fled the arena. If that changes later, someone can edit it later, but it's encyclopedically verifiable (as of right now) that WWE has declared Cena fired (again).

By your listing, it would have to be in an "event" section which, right now, does not exist. It does not go in Background nor in Aftermath (what happens Monday obviously goes in the latter)...--Starcade (talk) 04:04, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Then make an event section or wait for someone to do it. Just because you're impaitent does not mean you can edit articles so you can put things in faster. Gorlack36 (talk) 04:09, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Stop it. Now.

I have neither knowledge nor interest in wrestling. However I have both knowledge and interest in the Misplaced Pages code of conduct regarding civility. Please desist immediately from leaving edit summaries such as this and more especially this. Please do remember that civility extends to edit summaries. WP:COOL might be a good page to read when you start to suspect that editing WP is some sort of contest. Regards, Tonywalton  23:29, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

AN/I

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - SudoGhost 23:38, 24 July 2011 (UTC)