User talk:Doczilla

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also User:Doczooky (formerly DoczBot before the obvious name hit me) set up for bots.

Contents 1 Daredevil 2 Thank you for your response and for the link 3 My RfA 4 Cover Browser 5 Anti-heroes 6 Basilisk 7 Peer review 8 Pyrokinesis in fiction 9 Joker Categories 10 Re: Asgardian

[edit] Daredevil

I very much appreciate your efforts on the Daredevil article. I put a comment in the talk page about the plot summary detail so I could possibly cut it off before it got out of hand. If you want to add anything to a discussion on it, please do so. --Newt ΨΦ 15:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you for your response and for the link

I've reviewed the link your provided regarding some copyedit parameters relating to the comicbook project, and it gives more clearer insight into the perspective here on this site as opposed to other database projects. I also appreciate your kind response, you assumed the best from my edits which is a good standard for all of us to follow. Regards. NetK 04:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

[edit] Cover Browser

Glad you and your son liked CoverBrowser.com Doczilla! -Philwiki 15:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anti-heroes

Thanks. I'm glad you raised the issue. --TM 01:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Basilisk

The first sentence can be tweeked to say: "Basil Elks was a petty thief who BREAKS into a museum to steal what he BELIEVES IS an ordinary emerald - but is in fact a Kree artifact called the Alpha Stone."

However, to say "Basil Elks IS..." is incorrect as he's dead. As for a double "was", what of it? Anyone can take that out.

Asgardian 22:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

HalfShadow 06:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Just pointing out that I'm not making stuff up; anything I post is verifiable. HalfShadow 16:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review

A request for a peer review of New Universe has been made at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Peer review/New Universe. I'd appreciate your comments on the article, hopefully it will kickstart the comics project's peer review process. To comment, please add a new section (using ==== [[User:Your name|Your name]] ====) for your comments, in order to keep multiple responses legible. Steve block Talk 22:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pyrokinesis in fiction

Please go through this entry and do to it EXACTLY what you did to Electrokinesis. For example, please delete all references to characters who are not explicitly described as being Pyrokinetic in their own media, particularly those in Anime and Manga, where the word could only possibly have been included as an Americanization(if at all), because the word Pyrokinesis is not a Japanese word. Please also visit reality warping and the pages regarding shapshifters etc and delete all character who are not explicitly named as having these powers in their own media. Also, fictional immortals where immortal is not used, or is used as an adjective rather than a noun.

perfectblue 08:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

"Even the science channels set straight thinking to one side for the sake of ratings! "

At least we can agree on something. Maybe there's hope yet

perfectblue 16:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Joker Categories

I reverted your edit to Joker. one was a redlink, the other is less appropriate per the requirements for each. please read the lists on each cat, and see. ThuranX 06:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, first off, I'm just trying to keep a good article good. I generally respect your editing, so I'm going to try to enumerate my thinking on this. (Though I suspect I'll probably have to repost it on the Articel talk, LOL) I'm not going to debate the two, as they'e very different illnesses. at a glance, though, at the criteria for inclusion in each category - for fic. psychopaths, he clearly fails on 1( his "death in the family" planning to use the diplomatic immunities), 2 - irrational thinking's a hallmark of his, 8 (he's claimed to learn from mistakes many times, batman credits his disease with being his downfall, not his lack of planning), 11 - He's quite perceptive at times, esp. about the motivations and feelings inside others, 12 - most of his 'relationships' aren't impersonal, but radically bombastic; 13-15 i can't reply to affirmatively OR negatively, because of the CCA and the editors... so out of 16, he loses on 5, and i dropped three, so... 8 of 13.

For Sociopath, though not numbered, he's all about #1. #2) He's used aliases a bit ,deciet and double-crosses more, even to the point where we saw in the build to the Infinite Crisis that Joker was repeatedly told or heard, or it was said about him, that no other villian trusts him or feels at all safe around him. #3) His impulsive trends to violence have ruined his plans by distracting him to cheap violence, #4 he flips out. that's WHY no villain trusts him. he might shoot any henchman or co-conspirator at any time. #5) see the whole no one feels safe thing.#6 is a write off, he's a villain, so I'll drop that one. #7 he's all over tht qualifier. He never seems to regret anything, and there have been stories in which Martian Manhunter or some magic user have temporarily 'fixed' Joker's mind, and we see im overwhelmed with guilt. so that gives us 6 out of 7, and 6 out of 6 when I disregard a qualifier which is sort of irrelevant in the comics. that's a 61% on psycho- to at least a 85% for socio-... Anyways, that's my thinking. If you can support a rewrite of the Psychopath article to support a change to the cat, so Joker fits, well, you're a better man than I... I think there's ametaphor for that sort of thing, but it's late, and robot chicken is a rerun. so i'm out isntead. peace.ThuranX 07:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Asgardian

Hiya, Doc. Tenebae here. I've seen some of your comments at User talk:Asgardian, a page he keeps commenting out. If you choose to lend your support to a request for Admin help regarding that editor, please see this to Admin Noticeboard entry, which I wrote on behalf of several editors whose criticism of him he has deleted. I hope this does some good....--Tenebrae 21:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

He's taken if off his Talk page, but I gave him a warning in a post there (it'll be in History) that I would take it to an Admin if he continued, and when he ignored that and made the same wholesale reversion at Awesome Android, I wrote in the edit summary that I would now contact an Admin. He was warned on his Talk page — after several attempts at working with him on this — and everybody was notified at Awesome Android. I didn't mention User:Grey Shadow in my Admin request since I've never corresponded with him. Gee, I hope this does some good. Keep up the good editing that you do! --Tenebrae 01:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)