Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ryulong (talk | contribs) at 04:55, 22 October 2008 (→User:Negabandit86). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

When I find that the conversations or issues discussed here have either ended or resolved, they will be inserted into my archives at my own discretion.—Ryūlóng

Dark Kiva, week 2

Dark Kiva is appearing at episode 38 of Kamen Rider Kiva. If he appears, can I be the first one to createe the article and Fractyl and helping me edit it?

Negabandit86 (talk) 20:44, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

We will see.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, do you think I forgot? Besides October 19 is wher kamen rider dark kiv a appears. And who putted the king section in list of kamen rider kiva characters section? Negabandit86 (talk) 20:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

The King of the Checkmate Four is a character who has appeared in the show. Dark Kiva is not, yet.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:22, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I think I found a something. The episode came out at Japan but not here, because Asia is always a day ahead of us, right?

Negabandit86 (talk) 23:52, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Kiva 37 aired half an hour ago. Kiva 38's preview has no sign of Dark Kiva. Go do something else.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:00, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually it was at the end of preview we ge two image shots of King as Kiva. Fractyl (talk) 04:47, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

There's no mention of him at all in any textual preview.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:56, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

No text, but there is the images of him as Kiva and his mentioning the name of his partner. Besides, since 1986 Kiva has actually appeared in the promo. It's pointless not to add that info as of that moment. Fractyl (talk) 09:53, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

User:CDOS lives

Hello. It's only fair to make sure that you know of this. Cheers, ~ Troy (talk) 19:56, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Dealt with. I also had to revert an edit he made to another page.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:05, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Who are these people?

• Historian of the arab people (talk · contribs)
• Persian tiger (talk · contribs)
• Arab lion (talk · contribs)
• السلام عليكم (talk · contribs)

I stumbled across this users creating vandalism pages related Lawrence of Arabia but have no idea what the fuck is going on. Noticing السلام عليكم reverted you repeatedly at some point I thought I'd look to you to find some answers. –– Lid 06:50, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

The last one is the only one that could possibly be a match to another sockpuppet case mentioned on this page.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:23, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

That may be true but it seems like too much of a coincidence that all four created and edited articles specifically on the idea of being hoaxes related to Lawrence of Arabia. –– Lid 08:49, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

The last one is the only one who I can remotely identify from contributions. The others could be him, I don't know.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:53, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Negabandit86

I've reduced the block on this user to 48 hours. When I was looking into things, it seemed like a block was in order, however certainly not an indefinite one, and certainly not one placed by an administrator who was clearly involved in the dispute. Next time something like this happens, please post at WP:ANI to get another administrator to look into things. I know you're experienced enough to know when you're too into things to make a clear judgement. I'm not going to take this to ANI to spare us both massive dramaz, but please keep an eye on yourself in the future. This is the sort of thing that makes the three-page-long ANI reports, and we all hate those. Hersfold 04:12, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I had warned this user multiple times concerning his edits, and frankly he did not understand anything about what I said. This was the last straw for me. He does not edit constructively at all, and he did not understand any of my warnings and requests to him.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Then you needed to have contacted a uninvolved administrator or started a ANI thread. Tiptoety 04:24, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

ANI is a black hole these days.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:26, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Even if ANI is indeed a block hole, it does not justify a involved administrator handing out a indef block to a user whom they have a disagreement with. Even if you had to email another admin to request they take action would be a better course to take. Tiptoety 04:49, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Black hole. And this was not a disagreement. It was application of policy.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:55, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I know you gave him several warnings, but from what I saw they didn't completely understand what you were warning them about, and you weren't exactly helping to explain it. I agree ANI does at times get a bit nasty, but generally the sanity-check type threads wrap up rather nicely and quickly with positive feedback. Not liking to do something that needs to be done isn't an excuse - that's why we're administrators. Hersfold 04:46, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I explained it many times to him. He just blanked his talk page at one point and seemed to ignore all of my explanations. I clearly warned him that if he continued with his activities, he'd be blocked, and I cannot find any constructive edits from him.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:49, 22 October 2008 (UTC)