Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lucia Black (talk | contribs) at 23:15, 29 May 2013 (→Yip sock). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to my talk page!

• Please use the Reply button to reply to a message, or add topic (+) to start a new section.
• If I have left a message on your talk page, please DO NOT post a reply here, instead, reply there.
  • Mention me using the "Mention a user" button in the Reply box or type out {{ping|Lucia Black}}.
  • I will have your talk page on watch and will note when you have replied.
• If you prefer to manually edit the page to post:
  • Use an accurate and appropriate heading.
  • Indent your comment by using an appropriate number of colons ':'.
  • Sign your post with four tildes (~~~~) at the end.

Archives

2009 2010 2011 2012

hello

Hello Lucia forgives the bother but I am new in wikipedia I want to ask him as I can join the WikiProject Anime and manga Greetings --RLR123 (talk) 18:44, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

You dont need to ask to Join, its open to everyone. You can identify yourself as a member by pasting this {{User WP Anime}} onto your user page.Lucia Black (talk) 18:51, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Your removal at Ghost in the Shell

Please do not revert productive and constructive edits as you did at Ghost in the Shell, I am in the process of updating it, and if you must take issue with the content itself please discuss it on the talk page. This page is for the media franchise, not the manga. They are different subjects and are to be treated as such. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 20:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I put back the manga page... I was wondering why it was absent... ChrisGualtieri (talk) 20:37, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

ChrisGualtieri (talk) 20:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Again. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 21:02, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Again. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 21:17, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I do not need notifications.Lucia Black (talk) 21:25, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Ghost in the Shell

Hello, I undid you revert of ChrisGualitieri for the under construction tag removal. If a user wants to identify that they have the intentions to improve an article, it a best to assume faith and leave the tag present. Now secondly I advised Chris on the actions to take upon moving the nominator from on hold to failed as the article is not near a good quality for that status. Thirdly your opening of a RfC was inappropriate and the first cause of action should have been an actual discussion with Chris or getting a third party to review. John F. Lewis (talk) 23:17, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

January 2013

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Ghost in the Shell/GA1, you may be blocked from editing. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:25, 4 January 2013 (UTC) - Removed, it appears accidental on second view. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 06:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

The discussion was posted in the talkage of the main article, not GAN. I was merely going to move it there. I will not be blocked for a misunderstanding.Lucia Black (talk) 23:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

You removed my post, it was proper there. You should not remove other people's posts. Oh and it was at the GA the whole time. So I don't know why you are moving it anyways.ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:30, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

The diff here shows it. You removed my comment from the review page.ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:36, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

This matter is starting to get out of hand. Chris has the intention to work on the article, no consensus is needed nor is a specific number of editors. Please leave the tag in place until Chris as finished as it serves as a source of information to other editors. John F. Lewis (talk) 00:00, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Narutolovehinata5 01:20, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

FLCL merge

Do me a favor and post this to the Anime page, I can't believe this merge proposal has sat on an FL for this long. Your reasoning is right, so it won't be canvassing to discuss this at the relevant wikiproject. I can't close it as no consensus, but I just made a case for what should be done instead. That banner is an eyesore to me... ChrisGualtieri (talk) 06:33, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Ghost in the Shell". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 14 January 2013.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 21:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Universe continuity

Alright, seriously, explain YOUR version of the continuity because it is completely different from mine then. The manga has the SAC cast in it, it also takes place before SAC and while much can be said of artistic interpretation the canon material from the manga to the SAC flows pretty easily. Even more so that Motoko's behavior and abilities compliment her 'marriage' and merge with the 2501. It actually put Oshii-san's interpretation with the movie out by focusing on the case, and the rest has members of the Section 9 featured. And Section 9 disbanded in 2029 after Motoko's little stunt in the manga, but the rest is as your know. How about explaining your deal with it, because you deny all day, but you don't support anything. SAC is based on the manga after all. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:05, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

To put it simply: Manga=Fuchikomas, SAC= Tachikomas, Film series= No fuchikoma nor Tachikoma.

But to be more complex:, SAC series has an established timeline, just because each episode is different plot, doesnt mean its not linear. The established timeline for SAC is 1st=2030, 2nd season=2032, TV-film=2034. Within that timeframe Motoko Kusagani leaves section9 in 2032 and returns in the TV film but not completely. In which the manga she left in 2030 and she merged with the Puppeteer (making it obvious that the manga and the SAC series are not one in the same because by 2030, Motoko wouldnt be in the series). The interpretations differ even further: Characters such as Yano, and Azuma, they appear alonside eachother as rookies in SAC 2nd Gig but the manga shows Yano in the first manga and died before they even showed him alive, and Azuma appears almost as Motoko's replacement in Ghost in the Shell 1.5 manga.

Mamoru Oshii's condensed the series not only on the case but the timeline. In the manga, each chapter has a date and the events of "Robot Rondo" (and you can tell by the date in the chapter being 2029 and the Puppeteer merger in 2030) happened before the merge of Kusanagi and the Puppeteer, however that story happened after the merge in the film sequal: Ghost in the Shell 2: Innocence and adds further differentiations with Motoko/puppeteer together. Plus fuchikoma dont exist in the film series.

I can go on about every single difference but these are the ones that make it obvious.

I'm sensing a lot of Oshii issues, that's exactly what I point out. Though SAC is also based on it, but the universe is still basically the same.. and Yano's death is a good difference, but its not really that major when you compare it to Gundam. If you want to go with the whole timeline style spin, then why not, but SAC itself could be split up as well if you wanted to be all super precise, multiple authors and such. It is still, by all accounts, the same 'universe' when compared to others. Even Tengen did an alt ending, Evangelion manga and anime and movies... need I say more? Those are all the same Universe. Different tellings, but really, if you want to split hairs I guess you can split hairs. Neon Genesis Evangelion is also the media franchise. So its not helping your argument about media franchises, (we can say that it stays by this point, right?), but for the point of wording... I'll let you word it as you wish. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:05, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Alternate endings are different from alternate storylines. What I'm saying whatever is introduced in SAC stays in SAC, for example: World War III and IV. That was only in Stand Alone Complex. look at character articles of NGE, they each separate the continuities because each one is different. Neon Genesis Evangelion is a poor article that needs an overhaul. SAC is based on Ghost in the shell manga, and the same for the films but not in the sense that the story. Tenchi muyo is also a poor article and deserves an overhaul aswell. Ghost in the Shell is different in the sense each series has its own article.Lucia Black (talk) 04:18, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Activeanime discussion

FYI, I have opened up a discussion regarding the use of ActiveAnime as a reliable source at WT:ANIME#Is ActiveAnime considered a reliable source?. Also, just so you are aware, there's an RfC on Niemti here. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

WikiWomen's Collaborative: Come join us (and check out our new website)!

WikiWomen - We need you!

Hi Lucia Black! The WikiWomen's Collaborative is a group of women from around the world who edit Misplaced Pages, contribute to its sister projects, and support the mission of free knowledge. We recently updated our website, created new volunteer positions, and more! Get involved by: Visiting our website for resources, events, and more Meet other women and share your story in our profile space Participate at and "like" our Facebook group Join the conversation on our Twitter feed Reading and writing for our blog channel Volunteer to write for our blog, recruit blog writers, translate content, and co-run our Facebook and receive perks for volunteering Already participating? Take our survey and share your experience! Thanks for editing Misplaced Pages, and we look forward to you being a part of the Collaborative! -- EdwardsBot (talk) 00:49, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Adventure Time

I just resurrected the articles for Finn and Jake. Any chance that you would like to help me make them into proper articles like I did with Marceline? It does seem weird only having a character article for her. Anyway, the articles are really just stubs right now, but that could soon change.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 06:25, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Ghost in the Shell, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, AGK 21:39, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

It might take a while to get good replies

But I did post at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Editor Retention. Best wishes to you. If you have specific questions you could ask me at my talk page. Biosthmors (talk) 22:21, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I'm dealing with a discussion now where I think reason isn't being applied well! So I know how you feel. Biosthmors (talk) 22:24, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh ok thanks. What gets me the most is i habe potential to make GA-class articles but i have to constantly drop personal projects.Lucia Black (talk) 22:28, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

So you think the bar is too high? Biosthmors (talk) 22:42, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

The issues just never get enough attention is what im saying.Lucia Black (talk) 00:16, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

We are definitely a work in progress! So there's always something not getting enough attention... I'm trying to do my best to further us along, while I can. =) I'm sorry if it's gotten to the point where things are unenjoyable. It's your choice to quit, take an extended break, or whatever you want to do. I don't know much about the content area you work in, or anything specific that's been troubling you. Do you care to share more details? Biosthmors (talk) 01:55, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Its clear that it could get enough attention but it doesnt. Im working on Ghost in the Shell. I posted the issue at WP:ANIME. It needs review on those who are an expert on the subject:Ghost in the Shell. The massive changes were due to a fan claiming to be an expert but suddenly proved nothing as claiming to have hundred of sources but provided none, splitting the original media away from the main article and disappeared after he got what he wanted, which was to merge all media (regardless if its secondary media) onto the main article making it overly redundant and somewhat closer to WP:SYNTHESIS.

The problem is in WP:ANIME is that there is a simple vote count and they dont attemptnto reason or discuss and i take it personally because i KNOW their actice and other discussions get an instant view. Making my work even harder.Lucia Black (talk) 22:56, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Your recent changes to Ghost in the Shell appear to have been accepted so far! I'm guessing WP:SPLIT might be the issue of most contention, at this point? Biosthmors (talk) 20:34, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Until the same editor claiming to be well experienced returns. Thats the problem, i can easily rearrange this to the way i want but i wantmy contributions to stick. If i do any more editing that goes further into my goal, then itlk be considered WP:POINT.Lucia Black (talk) 21:44, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Tables

In this article yu-gi-oh I made a table and it seems that you have deleted it. Is there a reason why can't it be there? --Oskars Čaikovskis (talk) 23:13, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

You mean the 3 separate ones? --Oskars Čaikovskis (talk) 23:45, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

It's not a big deal, but when you go on wikipedia, almost every page about a franchise has a table like that. Why is this an exception? --Oskars Čaikovskis (talk) 16:36, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Your post

I read your post on the Anime project's page, and I'm sorry that you don't feel welcomed. It sounds like you're feeling very frustrated right now. I hope you feel better. Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 19:48, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

You also have my deepest sympathies, Lucia. I hope you feel better. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 06:33, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. It really means alot to me. For now, im just going to focus on other articles and see how it goes.Lucia Black (talk) 06:41, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I guess that's fair enough. Best wishes, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 06:45, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: Award for you

You have my thanks. I will continue the good work, and I hope we can work together on many other pages. --ProtoDrake (talk) 20:17, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Youre welcome. And yeah sounds good.Lucia Black (talk) 20:20, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

FYI

Hello. Just so you are aware, I've started an RfC subpage on Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Niemti at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Niemti/Additional Evidence. If you have the time, can you provide some evidence there? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 15:34, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Motion to close RFC/U

You have previously commented on Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_comment/Niemti.

As an outside editor, I have moved that this RFC/U be closed. If you wish to comment on the Motion to close, please do so here. Fladrif (talk) 14:42, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Warning

No consensus was reached. An agreement between only two people is not a consensus. If you have issue with my edits than start a discussion on it rather than blindly reverting them. Consider this a warning before I report you for inappropriate behaviour. This is not the first time I've witnessd you stubbornly reverting on this page. --G-Zay (talk) 20:38, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Re: a different focus

I will take your advice, for the time being. By the way, can you describe more clearly what you would like done with Final Fantasy Dimensions? I know I've done a lot of plot fixes and additions over the past few months (I think), but I can't clearly see what's wrong with this one. Unless it's the fact that it seems to tail off rather abruptly. --ProtoDrake (talk) 07:29, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Looking at it and reading through it, yes. I see what you mean. I will do my best, but portable games aren't really my strong point. to be frank, I'm best with the Fabula Nova Crystallis series. But never mind. I will at least do copy-editing on this article. The grammar is quite bad (and if you were the one who wrote it, no offense meant, it was just a fact from my POV). --ProtoDrake (talk) 07:39, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Calm Down

Would you calm down a bit? I hadn't been on Misplaced Pages since I reverted you, so I hadn't even realized there was a discussion. (Come on, what was it, like 10 hours ago only?) Furthermore, I left a pretty clear edit summary, so its not like I didn't discuss at all either. Now, I'll respond on the Sonic series template talk page, but yikes, tone it down some... Sergecross73 msg me 10:42, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

So, don't worry, I have no intention of continuing our discussion other than notifying you that I am an admin, since the things you were saying before sounded like you thought I wasn't. That's all. Sergecross73 msg me 23:56, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Izno and GITS template

Would you please make a statement on the formatting on the template to Izno? He believes that because you edited the template in the form that he preferred that it is your opinion that you also prefer that form because you did not revert the edit that he made (he took the SAC episode list link out of the parentheses).—Ryulong (琉竜) 02:30, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to you let you know of a discussion at the Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You do not need to participate however, you are invited to help find a resolution. The thread is "Ghost in the Shell, Talk:Ghost in the Shell". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot  15:26, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Notification

Hi, Lucia. I know you are understandably upset over the Misplaced Pages-related situation with the GITS article and issues with other users. I am so sorry if I have caused you or any other users any trouble, and I know you don't want to be blocked for this matter, so please don't get stressed out when dealing with difficult users. Per our no personal attack policy. "Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack regardless of the manner in which it is done. When in doubt, comment on the article's content without referring to its contributor at all." Also, per this policy, "serious accusations require serious evidence". Also, please note that when someone has asked you not to post on their talk page, you really shouldn't unless you have to. Continuing to post on others talk page after being asked not to violates the Misplaced Pages policy of harassment, see WP:HUSH. If you have concerns about a user's behavior, take it up to a noticeboard like WP:ANI or WP:AN and provide your evidence (i.e. diffs) there, or discuss things constructively (but do watch out for the WP:BOOMERANG effect). If you want to let off some steam, please take a step back from the computer and come back when you feel refreshed. Also, remain civil in discussion. Discuss changes on the talk page if one reverts you. Otherwise, you will end up being blocked for edit warring and worst of all, you don't want to be violating WP:3RR. Since Misplaced Pages works by consensus, discussion is necessary between other users and consensus can change. Just calm down. Okay? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:00, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Hey Lucia, noticed people are being troublesome. I have had many contentious arguments with other users over the years, and Sjones is right, we need to keep cool. Also, if users are bothering you, remember they are usually bothering other people too, and a point will come where they have annoyed too many people to ignore and will be dealt with. You don't have to shoulder the burden of getting ride of them, or fixing their mistakes alone. I bide my time, and am usually able to fix mistakes others make, but it takes some time and some laying low. I need you here also to help with Wikiproject Square Enix, so out of the boxing ring with you! :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:36, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Final Fantasy Adventure

I put it up at GA nomination. We should add the Nintendo Power stuff, and can we cut the Japanese links we used from the talk page to do? I don't know which ones were used, my Japanese is rusty! And finally, I have a link to a 1993 famitsu scan, and the author says its a top ten best gameboy games list with FFA listed in it, do you know Japanese? Does it say that? If we could site famitsu, we will be golden for GA. Here's the link. FamitsuJudgesurreal777 (talk) 01:24, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

No I don't know japanese. I recognize the characters, find them in the katakana or hiragana article and manually find the characters to put in google translate. I usually ask for help if its a video page for translations because it provides no letters. I'm unsure, but if a blogsite provides actual magazine, I doubt their lying. I see the purple sectioning mention both 5 and GBA. So I could look them up but I don't think its an innacurate translation. Both blog seems consistent on the top 5 GBA games.Lucia Black (talk) 01:33, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I'd appreciate it if you could just give it a cursory check, I don't want to be wrong about this :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 01:50, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok. Ill get back to you ASAP.Lucia Black (talk) 02:48, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Farewell

I am sending this message to the users who I have closely collaborated with. I will be taking a temporary Wikibreak for at least 5-7 days to let off some steam and get myself reenergized. Some of the stress has got to me, so I think it's best if I should take a couple of days off. I also have final exams coming up as well, so I have more important things to worry about. I, however, will be here to contribute to some articles that I have worked on. Until then, farewell. With my very best and warmest regards, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:37, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Anime and manga Project

Would you consider coming back to help out? It has almost been two months now and I feel that your input has been useful on the articles. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:48, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I've been mainly discussing to reech consensus and non controversial edits but nowhere near full expansion just to test the waters. What do you need help with?Lucia Black (talk) 22:50, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Oda Mari (talk) 07:31, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

SAC

What are your thoughts on merging Ghost in the Shell: S.A.C. 2nd GIG to Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex and then just having the 2nd GIG episode list at the 2nd GIG article?—Ryulong (琉竜) 05:56, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

The main SAC article is really packed. I doubt we can merge them both together considering that their length and how distinct the plots and reception.Lucia Black (talk) 06:03, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't seem there's that much on the 2nd GIG page though.—Ryulong (琉竜) 17:13, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm all for the merge if we don't have to cut info and the article won't be so heavy. But right now I can't imagine a good cosise article without cutting a lot of info. That would have to relate to the plot, and then related media. Ill support the merge, but only because the S.A.C. 2nd Gig isn't the most grounded articles of Gits. But if more info can be found for 2nd Gig, then we can attempt to split (with consensus of course).Lucia Black (talk) 19:31, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Cease your merging efforts for now, the matter is at DRN and I treat all topics, broadly, under GITS to be related. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 20:55, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Did I ask for your opinion?—Ryulong (琉竜) 23:07, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

You treat them too broadly. And I have no plans to merge anything.Lucia Black (talk) 21:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

"THE GHOST IN THE SHELL" is the Japanese subtitle for part 1.—Ryulong (琉竜) 15:48, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Your only proof is cover art. The cover also has masamune shirow in english and Japanese, should we say masamune was considered as "Masamune Shirow 士郎 正宗"? Here's an example, Eureka Seven in Japan has its english title as "Psalm of Planets: Eureka seveN" despite the kanji being read differently. Detective Conan is also one. Same thing for Sailor Moon. Its not known as "Pretty Gaurdian 美少女戦士セーラー ムーン" and Fullmetal Alchemist in japan isn't known as " 美少女戦士セーラー ムーン Fullmetal Alchemist" (except for FMA:Brotherhood but that's sourced).Lucia Black (talk) 15:59, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

It's also all these results in Google, the Japanese Misplaced Pages entry, every cover for part 1. It's not the translation of "Kokaku Kidotai" and it's not harming anything by leaving it in the damn article. You are being as bad as Chris right now.—Ryulong (琉竜) 16:25, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Of course its not the translation, but its the english intended title, not part of the Japanese one. Japanese wiki isn't a reliable source. And the harm is innacuracy. You only have cover art.Lucia Black (talk) 17:10, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

As bad as me? I see how it is. Considering neither of you seem to be able to read Kanji and clearly do not understand the multiple readings, why do you continue on? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:07, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry but there's no way in hell that 攻殻機動隊 literally translates as "The Ghost in the Shell". And Lucia, if both the Japanese and English forms are given in regards to the Japanese release (note that 2 and 1.5 only have "MANMACHINE INTERFACE" and "HUMAN-ERROR PROCESSER" on their covers and not "THE GHOST IN THE SHELL" it stands to reason that the subtitle of the first volume is "THE GHOST IN THE SHELL".—Ryulong (琉竜) 19:28, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I didn't say that; check with your dictionary on the multiple meanings and interpretations, its clever ain't it? I won't tell you what they specifically mean, because the only way you'll find out is by learning for yourself. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:38, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Look, I'm not going to determine what the kanji says (some sources state Kokaku can also be translated as "Ghost Shell" but I'm not going to verify that). And that's not really the issue Chris. What is the issue is what is considered part of the Japanese title. Just because its on the cover doesn't mean its part of the Japanese title. And sometimes japanese sites add the intended english title but its not officially part of the Japanese one. I have not found a single first party/second party source mentioning "The Ghost in the Shell" as part of the Japanese. these things have to be verified thoroughly. Many Japanese covers use english titles intended for english release, example: Detective Conan/Case closed situation.

These things have to be verified. Here's an example: Kodansha nor any retail site has it with "the Ghost in the Shell". The "cover" doesn't prove anything.Lucia Black (talk) 20:27, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I swear... even when I agree with you, you still argue with me. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 20:38, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

What????? I'm not even saying anything against you.Lucia Black (talk) 20:44, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

A friendly warning to you about Versus XIII

I just thought you aught to know, Final Fantasy Versus XIII is under threat. It's one of the user IP numbers that seems to be G-Zay. This one is 92.18.158.199: he/she put in a whole lot of unnecessary info about Versus XIII in there. Sound familiar? I've reverted it, and done a little extra editing alongside that, but I thought you aught to know. --ProtoDrake (talk) 08:26, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll look into it.Lucia Black (talk) 08:29, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

GITS

A focused and clean discussion of the future of the article is underway, because you made comments on Ghost in the Shell I am notifying you for your input in the debate. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:54, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Differences aside, we need to work together! Here's to cooperation in the future. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:23, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I will remember this.Lucia Black (talk) 05:26, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:49, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Look under: User:ChrisGualtieri

Disambiguation link notification for May 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Appleseed (manga), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ONA (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) 19:26, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Versus: What's going on here now?

I don't want to appear critical or hostile, but why did you delete that whole raft of referenced material that had been cut down to the bone by a user who only wants to help? On top of that, you did not seem to see that someone had put in stuff about VGleaks and used fansite Nova Crystallis as a reference again (not a G-Zay puppet, I checked). Orphaned refs have needed to be salvaged and it looks more like something that has had a hatchet taken to it in a wild rage than anything carefully thought out. You didn't even give your reason. I'm not siding with anything G-Zay did in saying this, but your actions do not seem to add up to me. So...why? --ProtoDrake (talk) 20:13, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Okay, that was me being churlish. Sorry if I'm sounding offensive. Just was a bit of a shock. I guess you must have had your reasons and it's not really for me to inquire in the tone I used. --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:31, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

I took a nap. Sorry abiut tht. Didnt see the orphaned refs. Anyways. Sorry if it was too much of a nuesance.

Harassment

Read WP:HARRASS. I am notifying you that your reversion of my removal of your off-topic comments on my talk page is harassment and I will not tolerate it. Talk pages are quite suitable for discussing editor behaviour, but not for debating issues that properly belong on the talk page of the relevant article or template. Keep your unwanted and irrelevant comments off my talk page in future. --RexxS (talk) 01:16, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Why do you have these.odd ideas of wikipedia. Stop calling people troll and keep.your personal ideas to yourself. I informed you for a misunderstanding. Dont bother.Lucia Black (talk) 02:49, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

In this edit to Template talk:Track listing, you altered the meaning of my talk page comment. There is a clear injunction at WP:TPO "Never edit or move someone's comment to change its meaning, even on your own talk page." I now request that you revert yourself immediately, or I shall seek to have you topic-banned from that page for disruptive editing. --RexxS (talk) 07:08, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

its a typo. Caused by smartphones, i recently upgraded and it messes with what im typing. Calm down. Stop assuming others are trolls (especialy when youre arguing over subjective personal preferences over necesities).Lucia Black (talk) 09:53, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Final Fantasy Dimensions Battle.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Final Fantasy Dimensions Battle.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Misplaced Pages may not meet the criteria required by Misplaced Pages:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Misplaced Pages:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:49, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Before Crisis gameplay.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Before Crisis gameplay.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Misplaced Pages may not meet the criteria required by Misplaced Pages:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Misplaced Pages:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:49, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Final Fantasy Adventure Screenshot.png

Thank you for uploading File:Final Fantasy Adventure Screenshot.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Misplaced Pages may not meet the criteria required by Misplaced Pages:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Misplaced Pages:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:50, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Appleseed1-cover.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Appleseed1-cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Misplaced Pages may not meet the criteria required by Misplaced Pages:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Misplaced Pages:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:50, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:42, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. You haven't said the nicest things to User:ChrisGualtieri. You claim he attacked you, well prove it! He provided several examples, you didn't. Please don't attack. Thanks. WorldTraveller101 20:02, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Yip sock

I've removed the sock template from this page. Was confirmed as WP:LTA Jonathan Yip who has a repeated problem of actual trolling. The bad English, the claims, Lucia - like others before her - was targeted unfairly for the sake of drama. While I may be involved in a bit of a dispute with Lucia, she is clearly not a troll and would not stoop to blatant meatpuppetry or sockpuppeteering. Please do not reinsert the template; because this little 'episode' only serves to feed JY. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:24, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

• It should have been clear to you that aspects of your editing are deemed disruptive; this is just another example: you blatantly change the meaning of someone else's comment, and you can't do that. Drmies (talk) 05:34, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Lucia Black (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Just because Chris gualtieri wont accept that smartphone issues causes accidental autocorrect, doesnt mean it warrants a block. editing is incredibly difficult when it comes to smartphone, especially with multiple tags. Often time the cursor would jump at a random spot in the talkpage and have to rewrite everything because I just realized my comment is being written in the middle of someone elses. Another issue is that sometimes autocorrect wont function and I have to move my cursor back to the typo and then move it back to where I left off. And trust me just making this comment is a hassle. Thats why half the time I dont even bother with manually correcting typos. Also, that one sentence, is incredibly minor, anyone with common sense would see it as an accident. Theres no need for blocking. Just tell me the issue and I can fix it. I didnt fix the last one because RexxS warned me, I fixed it because it was an accidental error. Lets stop getting trigger happy just because some of you dont like me.Lucia Black (talk) 07:23, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Suggesting that you were blocked because "some of you dont like me" is pretty much the opposite of how the guideline for appealing blocks suggest you should handle an unblock request. In addition, if you are aware that editing with your Smartphone causes disruption, is difficult to control, and creates confusion for other editors, why would you continue to do so? You need to take responsibility for your edits, and that includes the technology you use to make your edits. Jezebel'sPonyo 17:55, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Lucia Black (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=The occurance is Rare. And I believe this goes against the blocking process as its obvious it could have been avoided. The disruption is incredibly minor, rare, and reversable, and accidental. Its not constant, its not intentional, and could have been avoided altogether. ChrisGualtieri knowing full well he could have simply told me I edited his comment, couldve avoided this. Taking responsibility for my edits doesnt mean blocking. I do take responsibility for mine, I fix the accident in the first place. The claims of "persistent" disruptive editing is false. And the disruption is minor too to even call it "disruptive editing".] (]) 20:41, 29 May 2013 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=The occurance is Rare. And I believe this goes against the blocking process as its obvious it could have been avoided. The disruption is incredibly minor, rare, and reversable, and accidental. Its not constant, its not intentional, and could have been avoided altogether. ChrisGualtieri knowing full well he could have simply told me I edited his comment, couldve avoided this. Taking responsibility for my edits doesnt mean blocking. I do take responsibility for mine, I fix the accident in the first place. The claims of "persistent" disruptive editing is false. And the disruption is minor too to even call it "disruptive editing".] (]) 20:41, 29 May 2013 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=The occurance is Rare. And I believe this goes against the blocking process as its obvious it could have been avoided. The disruption is incredibly minor, rare, and reversable, and accidental. Its not constant, its not intentional, and could have been avoided altogether. ChrisGualtieri knowing full well he could have simply told me I edited his comment, couldve avoided this. Taking responsibility for my edits doesnt mean blocking. I do take responsibility for mine, I fix the accident in the first place. The claims of "persistent" disruptive editing is false. And the disruption is minor too to even call it "disruptive editing".] (]) 20:41, 29 May 2013 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

• You note in your new unblock request that "the occurrence is rare", yet in the unblock request I declined you stated:

"smartphone issues causes accidental autocorrect"

"editing is incredibly difficult when it comes to smartphone"

"Often time the cursor would jump at a random spot in the talkpage" (emphasis mine)

• In addition, that was only one part of my unblock decline. The other reason reason was that you were blaming others for your mistakes and insinuated that you were being blocked simply because editors have some sort of vendetta against you. --Jezebel'sPonyo 20:55, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

What I said, doesn't contradict what I'm saying now. Often times the cursor will jump at a random spot. But I've been having a close eye on my edits whenever it does. Also I blamed editors for being trigger happy with blocking and added reasoning behind it. It does not mean I blame them for my mistakes, I blame them fir turning a minor accident into something else. And I never called it a vendetta, Drmies in recent ANI attempted to make a bigger situation out of a discussion in which other admins didnt see any disruptive editing and I refused to address the situation. Your "decline" is based on my comment, not the situation. Its like a police man who wrongfully gives a ticket to an angry and the Judge only sees the angry side and declines.

Fact is, this happens so rare, and im being blocked for 1 single minor edit. Theres something obviously wrong here. Do we block editors simply because they made a mistake when editing an article? So why here? It was a simple, reversable accident. The blocking system in this situation is all wrong.Lucia Black (talk) 21:11, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not saying you cannot be unblocked, or that an admin should decline your current unblock. I was merely explaining why I declined your previous unblock request. It would be helpful if you could demonstrate an understanding of why you were blocked and explain the steps you are taking to help ensure you avoid similar situations in the future in your unblock requests. The one I declined just pointed fingers at other editors and blamed technical glitches. --Jezebel'sPonyo 21:42, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Youre not listening. The block was done per "persistent" disruptive editing. Ive already been taking those steps, but I will forever defend my point and that this block was incredibly premature. The disruption is not persistent. I dont have a PC, so I cant edit wikipedia without a smartphone. I cant be the humble popper and say 'oh I understand why I got blocked, and I taken measures to avoid it' This is based off one or two edits. AND as long as I can fix the comment, it doesnt have to be taken toward ANI or even block. I cant just lie or bite my tongue just so I get unblocked for the WRONG reasons. Basically if I fight this block, even ifti never get unblocked, ill be defending the fact that this block was premature.

I want other admins to know this block was done wrongfully. I can understand if the issue is PERSISTENT but its not 1 out of 50 times it will happen. And thats just giving a realistic number, I would personally say 1 out of 1000 considering out of all the times (roughly 2 years) ive editing by smartphone, there have only been 3 times.

Im not backing down on this. I know how the system works, the only possible reason why a block was done prematurely was so that the next time, a longer block or even ban can take place. And I know theres no room for conspiracy, but considering the situation has been with the same editors Drmies, and Chrisgualtieri, you can understand, theres no other way I cant see this as one.Lucia Black (talk) 23:15, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

• Requests for unblock