User talk:J Greb
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] unblock
Hopefully I've got this correct.
It seems I've been blocked under an autoblock as follows:
Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by Bobet for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Robot ambulance". The reason given for Robot ambulance's block is: "sockpuppet of indef blocked user". Your IP address is 24.66.94.140.
Evidently this occured sometime after the 25th of August, 2006, as this was the last date of an actual edit I made.
I have only accessed Wikipedia as an anonymous user (to read/search only) and under this account to edit.
Is it possible to get this account unblocked?
Thanks,
-J Greb-
[edit] Nuklon
J Greb,
Indeed Nuklon is not a member of the JSA...thank you for correcting that categorization. :) NetK 00:02, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Gotham City
Both are valid. I'm fine with you finding another labelling system for differentiating the two media versions. I'll unlink the second link myself. ThuranX 04:00, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
No, I blanket reverted because you did a metric assload in one single edit, thus forcing me to either cut and paste left right north and south, or just revert nd thus make you edit one section at a time, so that others CAN revert and work with you. doing one massive edit and then complaining is about as bad as doing four or five bad edits and then covering it with one or two good edits, which many editors are known to do. I liked the police force add a lot. I'm glad you even took the time to section by 'other media' and it was great. I'd like to see it added back. However, you've conflated 'other residents' with 'other heros of gotham'. perhap the section needs a better title, but ultimately that's what the section's wuite clearly about. The two are clearly different. Honestly, while I like a lot of what you're doing, your actions in 'being bold' are going to provoke reactions. Try using the talk page instead of revamping the entire article, especially since the article jsut went through a huge revision from in-universe to -out-of-universe. ThuranX 17:45, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
- Exactly, now you've got it. If you made 3 edits, and a subsequent editor liked edits 1 and 3 but not 2, he could've cut and pasted the 'offending' section back in, using edit 1 as a source, and after edit 3 as his target, thus leaving an article with 2/3rds of your improvements and one section to bring up on the talk pages. Major revisions aren't bad sometimes, and are occasionally needed. I've done some myself. but I think that checking the talk page and the recent edit history can help you figure out if a page needs or doesn't need, a major revision. I like your style, though, and your editorial behavior (I.E. talking not freaking) so I hope we'll get to work together more. ThuranX 20:02, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re:Comic book team categories marked CfD
Well, I think so. I think we can add them all in there as the subject is DC Comics group members. Cheers —Lesfer (t/c/@) 20:31, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re Spectre
Y'know I first got the impression of two separate individuals in All Star Comics, when Corrigan mentioned he was now alone as Spectre travelled to Earth-One or some such. And then the Adventure Comics run seems highly ambiguous. That said, I agree with your assessment of where the character is now. NetK 23:50, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Shadowpact=
Yo man the only reason why I did that was because all the others had links in that section. It looked nicer in my opinion. Brian Boru is awesome 01:33, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] DC Comics
Hi! Thanks for writing to get my input; that's civilized editing!
Not sure I follow about the link box. The only change I made was to bring up a widow in the Action Comics #1 caption. No image sizing will be consistent with every screen resolution at every text size, of course. The one thing that we can consistently affect (other than making sure image subjects aren't looking off the screen!) is images' relative sizes. Making all images the same size in this or other articles isn't really communicating in the best way possible — an historically significant or groundbreaking issue-image loses "weight" and it connotes inadequately if it's the same size as every other image.
I actually didn't edit the other image-captions, but just that of Action #1. I wasn't able to find anything in Wiki MoS that indicates all images in an article need to be the same size, and I'm sure, given the above (which is standard publishing design/editorial "agenda-setting," they call it) that you'd agree about that comic's importance. What do you think? I guess we could ask for other editors' opinions on whether the image of Action #1 should be bigger than other comics' images on the page.
In any event, I'm kinda knocked out by all the effort you made testing out those resolutions, etc. You are the kind of serious, no-nonense Wiki editor I wish more people were. --Tenebrae 04:42, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- Ohhhh, the "link box" is the enlarge icon! Y'know, I hadn't even thought to wonder what that little symbol was, since whenever I wanted to link to the larger image's page I just clicked on the image itself. Thanks for pointing that out!
- I'm using Firefox on a PC laptop at 1024x768. I've just now looked at the DC Comics article in IE, and the Action Comics #1 image and caption look the same, with a three-line caption. If it's OK with you, what do you think about leaving the other three images as you had them and leaving Action #1 (which really is the Ur-comic as far as superheroes go) at the size it is?
- It's nice discussing this like two professionals! -- Tenebrae 22:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Beetle
Good question, I don't recall anything specific. Most of those appearances outside of comics were made at the time when there were no other Marvel characters named the Beetle. It seems to be a safe bet that we are supposed to assume that it is Jenkins in the armour. Stephen Day 02:25, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hmm...
It seems this edit was inadvertently placed in the wrong section, based on the content of your comment. I think the section edit link works relative to its position from the top, so that when someone adds a new section before you've reloaded the page it causes the link to open the one prior to the section you were aiming for. Cheers, Postdlf 00:14, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bludhaven
Can I ask why you fixed the links to lots of things, but dropped Atlantic City and DC Universe? ThuranX 20:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me. I was just wondering why the choice was made. Thanks for the reply. ThuranX 21:17, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ghost Rider and Spectre
Please stop removing the section on the Spectre as it relates to the Ghost Rider. This information is accurate and counts as a part of the character's information. And it is getting annoying seeing this information constantly removed, when it should not be.
Warwolf 19:47, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wonder Woman
Yeah, I put a note on the person's talk page and he seems to have stopped. If he does it again, you can report him for too many revisions in too short a time. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 04:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Already commented. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 01:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
