User talk:Piecraft
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I just noticed that there's nothing on your talk page yet, so I decided to welcome you here! Welcome!
Hello, Piecraft, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Idont Havaname 02:23, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Cyberpunk works
Thanks for your edits on the List of cyberpunk works. Though I'm sure I would disagree on particular items (one of the top perks of SF is arguing about it), I'm glad to see people working on the article.
I put the main Cyberpunk article up for peer review a while ago. So far, the only comment it's attracted has been about fair use rationales for the images, which I went through and provided. You might want to see if anything in that article merits further work.
Thanks. Anville 07:41, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Take it down a notch
Hi there Piecraft. I'm closing out AfDs from September 4th, and I've come across Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nigger rich. You should probably considering toning down your rhetoric when you address other users, even anonymous ones. There are a score of Wikipedia policies to this effect (ex. WP:CIVIL, WP:AGF, WP:BITE, to name but a few), so please try to avoid inflammatory language in the future. Thanks, Fernando Rizo T/C 00:48, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
- I hardly think referring to an anonymous user as a troglodyte in defense is anymore worse than them naming me a dumbass without reason, but I guess that is open to opinion in the end. Piecraft 23:10, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Public school (UK)
Request for comment re Talk:Public school (UK). There is strong resistance to acknowledging Scottish linguistic differences.--Mais oui! 08:58, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Nazi moon base
Hey Piecraft, I think it would be helpful in the Nazi mysticism article and urge you to put the content there. Wyss 19:20, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
- Hi, thanks for your suggestion. I was thinking the same thing seeing as it perhaps does not have enough verifiable information for it's own article, I just took advantage of the red-link for Nazi moon base. I will edit those links from the original articles and add a more concise version of the article within the Nazi mysticism article. Piecraft 19:23, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
Try starting a new article called Nazi moon base myth. Wyss 07:20, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Public school
Hi. Heads-up re vote on name change at public school. A couple of us have switched our vote to back the new consensus: a merge with Independent school. I wondered if you would consider reviewing that Talk page and maybe switching support too, so that we can wrap this debate up and move on to improving new article?--Mais oui! 06:43, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Dieselpunk
Why are you adding the Dieselpunk category to things that apparently have nothing to do with Dieselpunk? Adam Bishop 21:42, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
I am not simply adding the category to that which is "apparently nothing to do with Dieselpunk", I have added certain articles to the category because through research and relevant elements on the WWW it is noted that those subjects upon the article are relevant in that category. If you believe otherwise then feel free to disagree or argue about it on the discussion page of the category of Dieselpunk. Otherwise I wouldn't state that my actions are wrong when in fact they are in tune with the overall definition of what Dieselpunk is - being a primary contributor to the article itself. Thanks. Piecraft 21:48, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
- Does this research consist of the one random blog post that shows up with these names in it? Adam Bishop 01:09, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
- No, although it would appear to - it does consist of of other notable references regarding Dieselpunk from individuals who have posted in other forums relating to the movie Sky Captain and Children of the Sun, as well as the relation those particular articles have to Retro-Futurism and Futurism/dynamism. Anyway I see your point as to it being wrongful to purposefully add them to the category - so with respect to your argument I will detract to argue my case, seeing as there isn't enough to source it at this moment in time. Thank you for its consideration in any case.Piecraft 01:58, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
- Piecraft, I too have noticed the Dieselpunk category. And I have to disagree with some of the items you've added to the category. I'm not a diselpunk fan by any means, so I'm just going by what is written in the Dieselpunk article. But things like Rammstein, Batman, and Dick Tracy are just some of which I have issue with. I mean, I don't think Diesel cycle belongs in the category any more as cybernetics belongs in the cyberpunk category, which is not at all. I'd be happy to discuss this here. - Hahnchen 21:03, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
- I understand your concern regarding certain elements in the dieselpunk category - however I do clearly give examples as to why they are recognizable as being categorised as "dieselpunk" within the arrticle itself. For example RAMMSTEIN, as a band possess many characteristics that resemble the dieselpunk world, not only in their appearance, but also in their style of music which echoes a semblance of the post-WW2 (but in our world post-Cold War) environment, not to mention the imagery they depict within their songs and their videos which are very similar to those visualised and depicted in the dieselpunk world. As for Batman and Dick Tracey the reason I stated them was mainly due to their world, once again I am not trying to state they are dieselpunk, but they do possess elements such as their worlds which are and can be seen as a dystopic post-WW2 environment that is surrounded by nuclear or atomic-based technology which can be observed in both films, especially Tim Burton's Batman and Batman Returns. Not to mention the architecture of Gotham and the overall look and fashion of the times reflects a world that is still trapped within the 1930s-1950s (as is the same with Dick Tracey the film). I mean other than this, these were the reasons I placed them within the category. I am by no means trying to state they are dieselpunk, but that they are in fact reflecting elements and ideas that are within the realm of the dieselpunk world. Piecraft 21:11, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, but whereas you could argue that rammstein and batman have dieselpunk influences, I wouldn't go as far as categorising them as such. - Hahnchen 22:10, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
- Well the same could be said for most articles placed within the Steampunk category - the fact that such articles are even listed in such categories are simply because they obtain or possess elements or themes which are recognizable and particular to the genre, otherwise one should really consider the articles in the Steampunk category such as Bride of Frankenstein or Howl's Moving Castle. Piecraft 23:10, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
I added my two cents on the punk genres page as per your request. If there's any other points you want me to address let me know. Jackdavinci 17:17, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] MTV Generation
Hello, I did get your message on my Talk page. I haven't really had a chance to look seriously at the MTV generation page yet, but I think it's a good idea for a page. (Though calling it a "generation" makes me cringe -- it's definitely a sub-cohort of its own.) I'll try to look at it more thoroughly later. ManekiNeko | Talk 12:09, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
I got your message about the ruckus on the Gen X Talk page. I have the flu so I can't respond much -- (got slammed with the flu symptoms this evening) but I did post a response and pointed him at WP:NPA. I still haven't had a change to look at the MTV Gen page but I hope to do that at some point soon. Depending on the flu, I guess. :) ManekiNeko | Talk 06:33, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
- Thank you, finally! I knew it took you a lot of work but it is obviously worth it. A lot of people are ignorant about us. So, you listed it out for them. Good. People didn't do it before because they thought they could just rely on memory. Then, it became hard with all these outsiders describing us by their own biases or by some stereotype through associating us with the wrong crowd. Finally, we are defined by true experiences we actually went through and by someone who went through it. So, as it turns out, we can't rely on collective memory to void off ignorance. The winner is the one who writes it down! Because of that, no other article comes closer to yours in describing us.
- There may seem like there are many differences between us to justify a boundary, but compared to the differences with neighboring generations and their ignorance/apathy about who we are, differences between us seem like nothing important. Diversity is a good thing because it is freedom of choice. And because some of us are a combination of both, it's hard to say anything bad about neighboring generations. This is a good thing because we keep our bridges with both sides. But we are a separate generation because no matter what we turned out to be, we still have common influences and background.
- But it would be ok if later the article changes. I'd understand if later on you might change your mind and some years become part of X or Y. Right now, most of Gen Y is still too young to really make an impression on you, but later on, as they grow older, they may do things that inspire you and gain your admiration. That's fine, it's your choice, but at least for now, please continue this page because there is truth to it. r430nb Dec 11, 2005
[edit] Obscurami Article
- This is an article about a group called the "Obscurami" which might or might not be completely factual.
The Obscurami (or Obscurati) is latin for the definition of darkness or that which is hidden or "obscure", it is believed to be a secret collective of individuals who are in constant disarray against the Illuminati. They were founded since the very early conception of the first Illuminati - but their history goes further back, since the early Babylonian mystery religions and Luciferanist cults. It is presumed that there is some form of affiliation between the idea of the Obscurami, and those of the cult of darkness which is linked to the belief that the true path is through Darkness and not Light and that a God of Darkness or "hidden" God will emerge eventually to save those persecuted by the demonic forces of the light.
Roots of origin In popular culture as well as conspiracy theories, it is considered that the Illuminati set out to be the "enlightened ones" or "light bearers" thus the symbolism involved with the Sun, Light and Lucifer - all referring to Illumination. Ever since the time of the Great Deluge when civil]sation was broken into several factions which followed their own belief systems (which in turn had its own gods that were relative to the natural elements and the surrounding environment) - it is believed that man began to walk away from God and move towards the Light, which would equate to the field of magic, the sciences, philosophy, and materialism. Each of these factors would slowly drive man away from the belief in God, thus making it more difficult for God to once again regain authority over its creation. Aspects that support this theory would involve the idea of light to be referenced throughout great and radical movements that would evolve and progress society and the way man would think such as: the creation of manmade fire, Plato's allegory of the cave in The Republic, the Age of Enlightenment - the founding of the Illuminati by Adam Weishaupt, the discovery of electricity by Benjamin Franklin - a member of the Freemasons.
Speculation The Obscurami is known to be comparatively different from other secret societies in that it is considered to follow the path of darkness, meaning: only through total chaos/darkness can one emerge enlightened. It is believed that light is shrouding the Truth around mankind, and that the Illuminati falsely promotes this concept so as mankind stays living in fear of the dark. This also echoes the ancient traditions involved with the fear of the unknown and the dark - examplified with fairy tales and stories depicting anywhere that is dark or the darkness as a place of unsettling trouble or evil. The Obscurami are those who discourage this concept of fear, by embracing the dark unknown in order to progress to a further level of understanding.
It is unclear what the motives or aims of the Obscurami are - seeing as it is a secret society which does not have as much publicity as the Illuminati and its counterparts. However it could be conceived that they work against the goals of the Illuminati and their plans for a New World Order, in order to shed peace and the truth amongst mankind. This of course is debatable and open to discussion, seeing as conspiracy theorists reserve their own opinions on the true bearing of the Obscurami and where it stands.
The Obscurami has often been referred to and even compared to the Illuminus society, who are in opposition to the Illuminati, or at the very and attempt to expose their activities.
See also
- Illuminus
External links
- God of Darkness - an article relating to a particular component of Obscurami myth.
- Secret Societies and Thoth - presenting material and information relating to secret societies related to Thoth, relevant towards the further understanding of Obscurami.
- The Darkness of God - a Bible excerpt of Exodus 24:12-18 equating the God of goodness to the dark.
- God's Superluminous Darkness - another article explaining the importance of the darkness in shedding the truth upon the true God.
- Above Top Secret - a site that comprises in debating and researching conspiracy theories, especially those relating to secret societies such as the Obscurami.
[edit] Cypherpunk
If this is not a literary genre why is it listed under the List of punk genres? There are no examples of cypherpunk being nothing more than a term to define a group of individuals. I tried listing several examples of what is considered to be cryptography in fiction however was reprimanded, therefore I believe cypherpunk should be eliminated from the Punk literature list. What do you think? Piecraft 22:28, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
- Sorry, Piecraft, if it came across as a "reprimand"; I just disagreed with your edit. It seems cypherpunk isn't a literature subgenre as opposed to, e.g, cyberpunk/steampunk etc. At least, this is the definition given in the Wikipedia cypherpunk article. I recommend you be bold and try removing it from the List of punk genres, possibly dropping a note on the associated talk page. — Matt Crypto 22:34, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Literary Punk genres
Hi, just got your message. Sure, I would like to contribute to the stubs....I love literary punk. It's obviously not enough to start a WikiProject but I'll definitely help....this week is a bit full for me but I'll start gathering information next week and then I'll start adding stuff. We should get other people to join as well...maybe put it on some talk pages? --NorkNork 22:30, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Re: your message
I remember you. :-) There are definitely a lot of things that can stress users here. I'll be taking about a week off myself to see family out of state for Christmas and will probably not be editing during that time. It will probably come as a relief too, since I've had some conflicts lately. We've got a lot of people, including some admins, who do their editing in bursts. As for me, I usually make around 10 edits/day, though I sometimes take days or weekends off, and other days I'm just doing quick typo fixes for people, nothing substantial.
So maybe you should consider taking a Wikibreak, then coming back later to start fresh. I find that writing new articles or expanding neglected ones helps manage the stress pretty well. Maybe the other editors at Wikipedia:Esperanza can help you also. Thanks for your kind message; I hope you'll return when you feel like it and keep making valuable contributions to the project. --Idont Havaname 19:36, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] "User freespeech" template
Helloo.. Saw your free speech thing and thought you might be interested in this template (which is also linked from the WikiProject talk page: {{User:Feureau/UserBox/freespeech}}
A link so you can preview it: {{User:Feureau/UserBox/freespeech}}
Hope you like, it's pretty much the same but will also automatically add you to the Wikipedians against censorship category. :) --Mistress Selina Kyle 17:51, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Take a break
When one gets to the point where one makes personal attacks and are uncivil on other pages and especially on your own, it is time to step back. "Many people forget that criticizing an edit is easily conflated with insulting the person who made it—and so they are unnecessarily harsh on the giving end and unnecessarily sensitive on the receiving end." Good luck, and remember that having one's own article deleted is not the end of the world. Avogadro94 18:34, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- I could give a rat's ass anymore, go on with your ridiculous witch hunt and the purging of this project, which you all will be the ultimate end of it. Piecraft 18:57, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Is it lonely up there on your pedastle?
- Go fuck yourself, and your horse you rode in on. Piecraft 20:20, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Is it lonely up there on your pedastle?
[edit] Warnings
Calm down, man. If you don't care as much as you claim to then let the AfD process occur properly, don't add users to Stupidity and go blanking pages.
Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy: There is no excuse for personal attacks on other contributors. Do not make them. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that you may be blocked for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thanks,
Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content. It is considered vandalism. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --Ccranium 21:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- Take some worldly advice maestro - go fuck a plug, then tell me what it felt like. Piecraft 21:54, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Spacepunk blanking
Despite the fact Spacepunk is on AfD row that doesn't allow you to blank. Hence:
Please do not replace Wikipedia pages or sections with blank content. It is considered vandalism. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. ComputerJoe 21:35, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- I authored the article therefore I reserve the right to blank it, you got a problem with that? Piss on it. Piecraft 21:54, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
This place is surrounded by morons, makes me laugh - thank god for the occasional vandals.
I tracked the creation and eventual demise of the dieselpunk related articles. It is obvious you are interested in a number of intellectual movies. You're setting yourself up for a rather big intellectual let-down. I recommend that if you are one day queried about bipolar disorder, that you do not mention this epsiode, which although amusing, is very troubling that it is at your expense. You'll thank me later, whatever spew you decide to level at me now, not for the way you might think, but rather for your freedoms. Next time try creating a personal web-page instead of forcing intellectualism on people you consider morons, then you will be able to claim copyright and delete it when you want. Jok2000 02:47, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Final warning
Ok, you've ignored the blanking warning, and you've made personal attacks on talk pages. It's quite clear that you aren't going to listen to any advice, but regardless.. Next time you blank a page and/or make a personal attack, I'll (or another administrator), will block you. Thanks Hedley 03:42, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Blocked
You've been blocked for vandalizing punk articles by deleting categories. When you come back, please learn a little civility and discretion. User:Zoe|(talk) 03:57, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
- Thank you for doing a good job, Piecraft! r430nb 12/24
[edit] Don't give up
Just wanted you to know that there are people who appreciate the volume and thoughtfulness of your work, and who hope it's not too late for you to reconsider quitting. You can win out over the deletionists, but it will take calm, perseverance, and an eloquent defense. Hang in there. ScottHardie 02:59, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] UDUIW
I, Shell, Welcome you to join UDUIW. If you are interested, include yourself in our category and/or add our userbox. Thank you, Shell. (Shell 03:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC))
[edit] On sockpuppets
I understand that you are unsure what a sockpuppet is, so I shall give you an example from your own experience. In the MTV Generation VfD, you voted twice: once as Piecraft and once as 217.129.169.105. Usually, it is difficult for a non-admin to definitively prove that an anonymous user is a sockpuppet. However, since you were so kind as to provide an admission, it wasn't hard to make the connection. It also appears that this wasn't the only time that you voted twice on a AfD. Since it really isn't worth flaunting Wikipedia policy to get in a few extra votes, I heartily encourage you to stop editing with the other accounts and stick to this one, especially since you have built a lengthy edit history. Avogadro 18:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Seeing as you already have a history of being a complete liar on here I won't even dignify your bogus attempt to make me look like some sort of "sockpuppet" which I already know what one is, thank you very much moron! As for Zoe - she has already had run ins for vandalizing and screwing around with other users and editors here so personally I don't think using evidence related to some comment on her pathetic talk page that has my name on it hardly constitutes as any form of "evidence" for your scandalous and ridiculous insinuations. So LISTEN CLEARLY AVOCADO AND EUREKA - GO FUCK YOURSELVES AND DIE! Because it seems to me you enjoy your shit having your heads shoved up your tight asses, but I would rather not deal with it. So once again in case you both are dyslexic or just too simple to read words with more than four letter - PISS OFF and leave me out of your dumb blame games, no one gives a flying fuck except for the petty people you "belong" to. Piecraft 19:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the support. The key is "non-violent resistance." Don't give the admins a reason to ban you, I think there are some that really enjoy it. if you feel like posting a little more freely, please check out this site: http://wtfpedia.com is what I created from MY frustration...
[edit] Gross incivility and personal attacks
We have two policies on Wikipedia of which you do seem to have been made aware but are still ignoring:
We take them pretty seriously. I notice that recently your behavior has been grossly uncivil. Looking at recent user talk edits by you I note:
- "I have no fucking clue what crawled up this wadge's tight ass and died." in what appears to be some kind of personal attack on another editor
- You being a perfect example of what constitutes a true grade A moron" in another personal attack on a different editor.
Nor is this bad behavior new:
I'm placing you on notice. No more personal attacks, or go find some other free encyclopedia to edit. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 13:30, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- It's hilarious how one gets persecuted or crucified on here when they stand up for themselves, are all the egotistical editors and admins here completely hypocritical or are they blind? I have been attacked on all sides by individuals accusing me of being a sock-puppet and trying to put me in a bad light, so sure of course I am going to retort in an uncivil manner - I am sorry sir, but there is no way to be civil to the uncivilised, and there are far too many on here who seem to believe their opinion or belief is the word of God. I am all for debate and discussion, but when it resorts to simply bullying tactics or ganging up against and editor simply because his or her views do not coincide with those of an editor or admin then I believe there is something truly wrong here. Sure I could have perhaps minded my p's and q's and tried not to resort to insults, but sometimes it's best to express the truth as reality shows it. I am not saying I was correct in doing so - but I am naturally only human, just as you are - and when someone is continuously spyed on and attacked by certain users does not one scream out? I know this is only an encyclopedia, but I think others forget that sometimes. I think some people put too much importance upon their role as an editor here. I have always fought against bullying and those who think it is alright to "gang-up" and attack others. If you say I have a problem being uncivil please allow yourself to observe the actions of those who criticise me as well and notice the manner in which they have caused me to act out in the way I have. I think it only does justice to acknowledge that you can't accuse one with accusing the other - i.e. if people are complaining there must be a reason to it, just as people perhaps complained against me for being "uncivil" or "using foul language" you need to also ask yourself why I have done so. I am in no way trying to redeem myself infront of you Tony, even though I respect you being an editor who I've noticed has been fair and agreeable on here, but I truly questions the actions and technique of other editors on here.
Hope at least I have managaed to resolve some unanswered questions on here. I know I am quite tempermental and perhaps lash out - but believe me when I say I have tried to put up with this "abuse" for some time on here and tried to work with others in an agreeable manner, and I'm sure there are others who will vouch for me on this. Of course this is hardly an excuse for my behaviour, but I once again ask you to think what you would do if you feel you're attacked on all corners by individuals who simply wish to delete your efforts or push you to the edge of unreason. Yeah, I guess I could have placed a complaint to an admin, but I know for a fact there are also several admins who seem to take their "power" a little too seriously and also use it to their advantages for their "friends" on here. This is why I am hardly contributing to this encyclopedia lately, I do pop in and out every now and then, but I do not understand how people have pinned other users on me as being sockpuppets which I find ludicrous. Anyway enough of this I'm guessing you're probably fed up of reading this, however I do appreciate the fact that you at least took the courtesy of giving me a warning as I do realise what I did was wrong. Thanks anyway for listening, even though I doubt it has helped me change the balance of things on here. Good luck with the rest of it. Piecraft 18:35, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- I'd like to help you if you have been bullied or picked-on. No need to get defensive, I'll work with you as long as I think you're capable of working with other people to produce an encyclopedia. Could you reply on my talk page with some specific information on who is attacking you? Individual incidents and people is what I'm looking for, not need to give me the whole thing, we can deal with one incident at a time. Be patient, I'm not a miracle worker, but I promise that if you come to me and we discuss the problems I'll do my best to make things better for you. You should not be bullied and falsely accused; that isn't what Wikipedia is about. --Tony Sidaway 20:11, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I understand and respect your reasoning. Thanks for responding positively to my approach--something about your reply on my talk page told me that you felt that I was unjustifiably goading you, and I apologise if that was the impression I gave--to be associated with bullies and cowards is not my aim. I was very abrupt and firm because when things get to that stage usually the only thing to do is to cut off the source of for a while to give him a chance to ponder why he came to write an encyclopedia in the first place.
Wikipedia's community is feeling the strain and I fear that you may have been one of the victims. Please put a message on my talk page, or email me, if in future you think there is some way I can help. --Tony Sidaway 23:27, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Welcome Back
Piecraft, it's good you decided to come back, Welcome Back, man. Forget about what happened back then, it's all in the past. r430nb
[edit] Request for edit summary
Hi. I am a bot, and I am writing to you with a request. I would like to ask you, if possible, to use edit summaries a bit more often when you contribute. The reason an edit summary is important is because it allows your fellow contributors to understand what you changed; you can think of it as the "Subject:" line in an email. For your information, your current edit summary usage is 0% for major edits and 21% for minor edits. (Based on the last 150 major and 19 minor edits in the article namespace.)
This is just a suggestion, and I hope that I did not appear impolite. You do not need to reply to this message, but if you would like to give me feedback, you can do so at the feedback page. Thank you, and happy edits, Mathbot 13:04, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia_talk:Censorship
A watered-down version of the proposed policy against censorship is now open for voting. Will you knidly review the policy and make your opinions known? Thank you very much. Loom91 10:23, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wold Newton Characters
I have just spent the last 6 hours trying to get that list organized a bit, but now we may have to split it up because of the length. Believe it or not, the Who's Who in the Wold Newton Universe is not a complete listing either. There are gaps there. It will be a huge task to get things organized. I have tried to use formatting to show the official Farmer family, and after I get that done, I will work on the unofficial family.
About family trees, are you nuts?! :) I have tried to figure out how to do it, but right now the tree is so large that it is overwhelming. There are litereally hunderds if not thousands of people that belong to this family. The bibliography alone is a book by itself.
I will keep thinking on it for now, but if you come up with anything, add your thoughts to the talk page of the list, okay?
Lady Aleena 20:35, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
- Hello there...if you haven't noticed already, I have added quite a log to the Wold Newton list of characters. Go take a look and tell me what you think, please????
- Lady Aleena 02:09, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
- Are you currently working on the list?
- Lady Aleena 03:31, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- I know that I haven't added anything in the last few days. I am currently getting a large group of characters gathered to add. I am still working down from the Luthors and Wainwrights. You wouldn't believe how many descend from Paul Figlemore. ACK! Lady Aleena 08:50, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
- My source for the Frankenstein family was MONSTAAH. There is a lot there. Lady Aleena 10:11, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- I hope I didn't offend you with my comments. Lady Aleena 18:47, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
- The category is saved! Lady Aleena 09:45, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
- I hope I didn't offend you with my comments. Lady Aleena 18:47, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
- My source for the Frankenstein family was MONSTAAH. There is a lot there. Lady Aleena 10:11, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- I know that I haven't added anything in the last few days. I am currently getting a large group of characters gathered to add. I am still working down from the Luthors and Wainwrights. You wouldn't believe how many descend from Paul Figlemore. ACK! Lady Aleena 08:50, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Characters to be added
I have put together a list of characters that I will be adding some time soon, though I would like to go through another article or two that may be connected to those listed. Would you look through it and see which ones should have links? Believe it or not, the article that I was using revolves around Pokemon of all things, and I am not versed on the subject. Please click on the heading of this section and take a look. As an aside, Paul Figlemore's cousin James Noel Moriatry looks to give me as much trouble as Paul Figlemore. Their grandfather should have been shot. A lot of William Clayton's descendents have children all over the place. *sigh* Lady Aleena 10:07, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] On listing women
Use ONLY maiden names, please. Elizabeth Frankenstein is the woman's married name. She needs to be listed under her maiden name if known. If it is not known, just put her in her husbands listing and not list her. TIA!Lady Aleena 02:03, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] My next big addition
I am going to start working on the Porters, Lanes, and Gordons and the related smaller families. Lady Aleena 10:07, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
- This note is to let you know that I still intend to do the above families, but I am being pushed to move with the Xanth series of books by another user, so Wold Newton will be on the back burner for another week or so. So that we don't step on each other's toes, the Porters bring in the Van Helsings, and the Lanes bring in the Jekylls and the Kents. We may have to make some very big decisions about just how inclusive we will be with this list. Lady Aleena 09:22, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] References
Hello there...could you please start adding your references to the list at the bottom of the page? I am having a hard time figuring out where you are getting your listings from. TIA!
-- Lady Aleena talk/contribs 10:52, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
- PS. The Munsters are a very special case. By the time we arefinished, the Munsters will be in other areas of the list. Herman Munster is in actuality the monster created by Peter Frederick Frankenstein, Lily is Lilith (Elizabeth), Marilyn Munsters is Marilyn Krogh, the Grandfather is someone else (I will have to look at MONSTEAAH again to see.), and the boy is a foundling werewolf. -LA
- PPS. For the West/Silver/Henry families have you read The Wold Wold West? There are extensive articles there about those families. -LA
[edit] What doesn't belong section
I was just thinking that a What doesn't belong section really isn't needed on the list, but that is just my opinion.
-- Lady Aleena talk/contribs 14:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Category under attack again
The category is under attack again. Just FYI.
—Lady Aleena talk/contribs 15:21, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
With the characters already bolded on the list, and with the links attached to the characters, there is not much else we can do. I have a feeling that there will be people who will go up in flames if they see even a sentence of Wold Newton material on those character pages.
—Lady Aleena talk/contribs 13:40, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- Let me cogitate on that. Currently working on the film category. It is a mess.
—Lady Aleena talk/contribs 14:46, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, we tried...I am still thinking on the template. I have a feeling that the two behind it have something against me though. It seems anything that I suggest they are against, no matter what.
—Lady Aleena talk/contribs 14:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Template
As you said, it is a bit of a mess. Let me give it a good think. Okay?
—Lady Aleena talk/contribs 23:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] MTV icone
Hi I just want to thanks you for the message you send me about the MTV generation icon! DaliJim—The preceding unsigned comment was added by DaliJim (talk • contribs).
[edit] The "original" Little Shop of Horrors
In response to your comment on my talk page: The Little Shop of Horrors was NOT a horror film. It is a very funny black comedy. I don't know where some people get the impression that it's a horror film. It's far too silly to be categorized as such. (Ibaranoff24 21:17, 13 June 2006 (UTC))
-
- At the time it was still considered horror, even if by today's standards it is seen as comical. But the fact still remains that Audrey Jr. was a horrific creature, and even in the 1986 adaptation the scenes where Audrey II kills or in its case "eats" the victims, it is clearly constructed in a horror-stylized manner in order to "horrify" thus the reason those scenes embody the element of terror through music, lighting and the overall mise-en-scene. You may be a "cult film connoiseur", but I happen to also know a few things myself being invovled in film, especially related to the horror genre and having studied it as my main focus; and Roger Corman was and is a horror filmmaker. And even though Little Shop of Horrors is seen as a black comedy, it does not stray from the fact that it embodies strong elements from the horror genre which are as explained above, reflected once again in the later version. The same applies to King Kong which can now be considered as an action-drama or melodrama when in fact it was a horror film for it's time. In either case thanks for your input but I wouldn't try to pull off any superiorty with film because I do know enough about it myself not to have users like you give me their own opinions. Good day. Piecraft 22:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- Wrong, wrong, wrong. The original poster advertised the film as "the funniest picture this year!" It was NOT considered horror. Here's the image as proof: Image:LittleShop.jpg (Ibaranoff24 22:14, 13 June 2006 (UTC))
- Also, Roger Corman was associated with many genres besides horror, including science fiction and exploitation. To classify him as a "horror filmmaker" would be completely false. He is a B-movie director. It's as simple as that. (Ibaranoff24 22:19, 13 June 2006 (UTC))
-
- Look I'm not going to argue with you, there are a MULTITUDE of horror films where they have posters advertising the comedy, this is the reason it is a black comedy. But that still does not dis-engage it from the horror genre. Horror genre encompasses a large portion of films i.e. exploitation, mondo (to an extent), faux-snuff, horror-fantasy, sci-fi horror, black comedy such as Death Becomes Her, Beetlejuice, and even The Addams Family - because they possess elements of horror. Piecraft 22:19, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- But it's NOT a horror film advertised as comedy. It's a comedy film advertised as comedy. (Ibaranoff24 02:34, 18 June 2006 (UTC))
[edit] MTV Generation
Thanks a lot for telling me about the MTV icon. I'm trying to add it on. It seems like it will take a while to edit that list of cartoons, sorry about that. BTW you're doing a great job on that page!r430nb
[edit] Fair Use images are disallowed in user namespace
You have retained a copy of a deleted article in your user space. However, you may not retain Fair Use images due to restrictions on the use of such images. Please see Wikipedia:Fair Use. The page in question is User:Piecraft/Dieselpunk. If you have other pages in you user space this with Fair Use images this would apply to those as well. __meco 14:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Children of the Sun
The link doesn't work for me, but I can assure you that there is no mecha in the game. I own the original sourcebook (which I plan to upload pics from eventually), and I know from reading it to the point of memorization that while it does fall under the realm of steampunk, there is nothing that meets wikipedia's definition of mecha. --InShaneee 18:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- That image is of a creature called a Harvester, which is a construct made of farm equipment and scraps of metal and animated by magic. As I said, this doesn't seem to qualify by our definition of 'mecha'. --InShaneee 20:28, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- I see where you're coming from, but I still disagree (and for the record, Harvesters are approximatly 8 feet tall). If you'd like, you can always bring it up on the Mecha talk page to get some outside opinions on the matter. --InShaneee 20:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The Frosties Kid
Hi. I can see you are interested in this article, but please be very aware that removing tags placed by another editor is a serious offence. The article has been taken back to a verifiable state and, coincidentally, another editor locked shortly after. --AlisonW 12:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Proposal on Notability
Because you're a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians, I'm notifying you that the inclusionist proposa Wikipedia:Non-notabilityl is in progress to define the role of notability in articles. Please help us make this successful! Also note the proposal Wikipedia:Importance is a deletionist proposla that seeks to officially introduce notabiltiy for the first time. --Ephilei 04:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Portuguese Names
Olá Piecraft! I was just wondering, can you tell me what is my name in Portuguese, I began to be intersted in the Portugal region and the Portuguese language, and I was just asking can you translate my name which is Abdullah Geelah in Portuguese,and can you write it in my userpage where the section of my name in different languages is, I would be extremely grateful if you do!!! Abdullah Geelah 20:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
- If you look at my Spanish name that may give you some ideas. My first name is Abdullah (the Spanish version is Abdulá or Abdalá) and I don't thing you need to change my surname, and I foind out that Spanish and Portuguese names have two surnames one your mother's name and the other your father's name.--Abdullah Geelah 12:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The Frosties Kid
I do understand why you support a delete and have moved to your side on the AfD. 3 lines is certainly not an article. danny, i understand your position as a Realist, but Realism is just so "outta sight" for most editors. Mike33 15:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] MTV Generation
Piecraft, the section about crime in the 1990s has to be taken out for a while. It isn't right for your article. It's not helping. I have specific facts to prove this, but I won't explain any more unless you're interested.R430nb2 06:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wold Newton characters page
It looks like this page is about to be deleted. I can move it to my own Web page at Wetpaint.com This is also a wiki that can be edited at will. It might be a better home for it. Editing is welcome. The page is woldnewton.wetpaint.com--Bookworm857158367 23:26, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fascist Userbox
Hmmm you seemed to be mad that your fasict userbox was deleted.Do not dispare.Here's one:
This user identifies as a Fascist. |
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dermo69 (talk • contribs).
- Isn't it sort of ironic though that you're upset over the wikipedia "state" deleting your userbox? I mean, isn't fascism all about complete obedience to the state and bowing down to their will? If the state sees you (or in this case, your userbox) as harmful for the society, aren't they supposed to get rid of you? That's the way fascism usually works in the real world at least, although I can't claim to know a whole lot about fascist ideology. But wouldn't a good fascist just agree that the person in control knows more about what is good for society than an average editor? I'm serious here, I really want to know. I'm not trying to upset you or anything, it just seems strange. Ungovernable ForceGot something to say? 06:33, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] American Fascist Party
you should join [americanfascistmovement.com] [americanfascistparty.com](Dormantfascist 01:21, 30 September 2006 (UTC))
[edit] "THAT'S DEMOCRACY FOLKS!"
We've been doing the same to every political userbox template as we did to the fascism template. User socialist got deleted and I was thinking of using it - so I just recreated it on my userpage. If you'd like, you can recreate User fascist at User:Piecraft/User fascist and nobody will care. Thanks, 1ne 22:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fascism
Hey what's the problem on saying you're kind of fascist. Political userboxes must be totally permitted on the wikipedia. This is a place of freedom, and you're right to have that userbox. I'll do that too...--Walter Humala 21:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bad faith afd nomination
Hi. Empire of Atlantium has been nominated for afd - for the sixth time. The nomination has been made in bad faith by a suspected sockpuppet. You voted to retain this article in February. Thought you might be interested to know. If not, sorry to trouble you. --Gene_poole 09:06, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image tagging for Image:Gex_coverart.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Gex_coverart.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Template
First, if you were to look at the vote, only like 2 or 3 were ones that contributed to the template. Secondly, you really need to learn the different between "HORROR" and just "MONSTER". Godzilla is Science Fiction, The Toxic Avenger is no more an icon than he is a serious monster. You listed people that weren't even part of the Horror genre. But, if it makes you feel any better we are think of revamping the template to include other genres so as to not limit the list to just "horror" characters, because some Science Fiction/Fantasy characters have pulled in the same pop culture status on the same basis of scare as those in the Horror genre. Either way, if you'd like to contribute I'd suggest toning down your attitude and personal attacks because they'll get you banned from editing; mainly because you've been pretty adament about voicing them from the start and we've let most slide. Hope you had a good Thanksgiving, have a nice day. Bignole 22:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)