User talk:JohnBWatt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please both of you cool off. The edit history is too crazy to say who is at fault but it looks like you're both as bad as each other. Take a break from Wikipedia, have a nice cold shower, and come back and try and work together to improve an article on an interesting band! --kingboyk 07:20, 8 March 2006 (UTC) (admin)

Contents 1 Mucky Pup 2 Reunion Rumors 3 Revolting Cocks 4 Article re Teterboro 5 Orphaned fair use image (Image:Gwarfiji.jpg) 6 Wikipedia:Wikiproject Horror/Collaboration of the month 7 Halloween Comics 8 Witchfinder General

[edit] Mucky Pup

Having dropped in to see what was going on with this recently AfD'd article, I took a look at the article history, and I'd like to suggest that you take a break from editing this article for a couple of days. Let it be, find something else to work on, let the Wikistress levels die down. I know that you want to make Wikipedia a better encyclopedia, and I am certain that you will continue to do so.

I've left a similar suggestion to MikeWazowski, because I think it's a good idea for him to take a brief break, too. Not being much of a music fan, or Bloom County fan, I am just sort of looking at this from a distance, and I believe that a few days of benign neglect might improve perspectives all round.

• That's an understandable solution. My problem is the fact that he feels the need to be 100% right or not at all. While I haven't agreed with every deletion he's made, I've accepted most of them and moved on. In fact, I'm not even deleting his line, which I agree was a good point. I'm simply moving it to the appropriate section. Before the incident, he removed one my opening sentences, claiming redundancy. After thinking it over, I agreed with his deletion but realized the previous line was also redundant. This is the line that he's throwing a hissyfit over. As far as putting the line in, in order to make it interesting to people, if they're visiting the entry, they already had an interest, or found it interesting enough to follow a link from another entry. All a introduction, for a band, needs, is a lineup (original or current works), a formation year and the location a band came from. Unless there are some extraordinary events, that the band were resposible for or part of, there's no need for some minor accomplishment, like winning a writing contest for a cartoon strip.

He then removes a factual line about the first bass player, not being an official member, because there's no specific reference listed. Not every band entry is going to have a reference regarding the official status of each member that passes through. Most of the information, that I've supplied in the entry, comes from a mixture of information off of the band's site and my own personal knowledge resulting from my friendship with the members.

Lastly, the fact that a person may have suggested an entry, that I submitted, be undeleted, does not mean I'm going to just accept the person poor changes.

I just wanted to state my case and make my point. Thanks. User:JohnBWatt 02:58, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

and I am back, not much more enlightened than before. I will unblock, please be nice, avoid revert warring, and if you have a problem with another user there are many venues, such as Rfc, mediation, or just asking someone to come in as a third party. The situation on Kingboyk's page has, to the best of my knowledge, been taken care of by Kingboyk, so let it drop. Please be civil, regardless of what the "other guy" does. thanks - KillerChihuahua^?!? 23:23, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I deleted that comment from my talk page. I suggest you both stay away from the Mucky Pup article for a while. Make your next edit on that subject be to Talk:Mucky Pup where you'll discuss the problems with the article, and the good points of the article as you see it, and work out how you are going to go forward. You can always ask for outside help such as mediation. I'll be keeping an eye on both of you tonight, any repeats of edit warring or incivility from either of you will result in a ban (and it will be longer than 24 hours). See you around and happy editing! --kingboyk 23:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

You are now unblocked, go forth and edit. Please note: I will block again if hostilities and revert wars commence again. KillerChihuahua^?!? 23:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Now if I have to come back to block you after all that hassle, you know it's gonna be a big one don't ya? :P --kingboyk 00:43, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Rofl, I was thinking how nice and patient he's been through all this, but you're right - if John responds by edit warring and conflict, no WAY I'm going to unblock whatever you receive! And thanks again to Bunch and Kingboyk. My unblock experience is seriously lacking, but I learned a good bit today. The good news is that this is the first block I've ever done that was reversed. KillerChihuahua^?!? 00:47, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey now! I'm generally very patient and nice to people. The two incidents, on here, happen to be rare happenings. My responses, in the two incidents, were based on, what I felt, were improper procedures or lack thereof. I don't feel the need to prove anything to anyone, but you'll see, in talking to me, that I'm pretty easy to talk to and get along with. =) --JohnBWatt

Hi John. I'm in full agreement with what you posted on my talk page. Are you OK with the thread remaining on view, or do you want certain parts blanked? --kingboyk 04:34, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Your Halloween 9 edit is fine by me, by the way. --kingboyk 04:36, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Don't delete my warning OK? When your page is full you can archive it. Until then, removing warnings from admins is considered vandalism. That said, I'm happy with your edits and you seem like a nice guy to me. I'll remove your page from my watch list now, so if you need to contact me you know where to find me. Cheers and happy editing! --kingboyk 04:44, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I've blanked the whole thing. It's not normal practice but I agree that your private life is your concern. Hope that's OK. --kingboyk 05:29, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Perfect and thanks! --JohnBWatt

[edit] Reunion Rumors

Nice change, it fits better.Jacknife737 05:23, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Makes more sense, I think. John

[edit] Revolting Cocks

Thanks for the edit to the RevCo article. Looks minor, but since everything was in past tense before it implied that the band had broken up which is obviously not true. Anyway, it was helpful.  :) GeorgeBills 04:38, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Yeah, I was reading it and wondered why it was written in the past tense, especially since I have the new album. John

[edit] Article re Teterboro

I had seen the article in the Record, and I realized that the jump in the nuimber of registered voters is indicative of the "growth" in the number of residents. I also noticed a typo in your father's name. Best of luck on Tuesday! Alansohn 22:04, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Gwarfiji.jpg)

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Gwarfiji.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that your image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If your image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why your image was deleted. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 14:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Wikiproject Horror/Collaboration of the month

Hi! I noticed your name on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Horror membership list and am writing to all members who have not voted for the Collaboration of the month. Today is the designated selection day to choose the collaboration, but we currently have a tie between the two articles receiving the most votes, John Carpenter and Dario Argento. I am hoping to remedy this by drumming up a few more votes. Note that by voting for any nominated article (not limited to these two) you are indicating your "commitment to support and aid in collaborating on that specific article if it is chosen," so please feel absolutely free to ignore this message if for any reason you don't wish or would not be able to participate.--Fuhghettaboutit 22:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Halloween Comics

Hi John, I just wanted to ask you something regarding the alteration of the Halloween comics entry.

I have been involved in the publishing of the "One Good Scare" comic, the 25 years of terror DVD release, and the latest comic called "Autopsis". As such, I've recently added information about them to the existing page which covers the Chaos issues as well. Much of that which was entered has been altered and I just wanted to ask why. I didn't ammend any of the information you already had there, just added on the material about the newer stories. Also the information you had edited on One Good Scare was incorrect, as that was not what the story was at all about.

I much like yourself I'm sure am a fan, and just want to let others know of all the stuff that's out there.

Thanks, and please respond when you can.

[edit] Witchfinder General

Hal Raglan has requested a peer review of the Witchfinder General article but has not received any comments. I reviewed the article for him shortly before he nominated it as a Good Article. He posted a message at the Horror Wikiproject talk page, but to no avail. Would you mind critiquing the article for him if you have the time? I'm sure he would appreciate it. Dmoon1 17:58, 6 September 2006 (UTC)