Talk:Beadull
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Beadull? That's pretty bad. Please tell me that's not the final romanization.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.247.21.119 (talk) 19:15, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yes it is. Beadull's name is derived from the English word beaver and "dull", referring to its simple minded and relaxed manner.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mitsumasa (talk • contribs) 14:49, 13 January 2007 (UTC).
... it's still insulting.X_X68.51.223.198 01:35, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bibarel
I actually do a proof on some the Sinnoh Pokemon names. Here, look at this site: http://www.pokejungle.net/?id=games/listdpengpoke -- Naruto134 6:33, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Read WP:RS, as has been linked in warnings to you. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 01:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- You guys are really strict you know that? Oo it's against the stupid rules just because I put a link, well hey, you wanted stinkin' proof, I gave you stinkin' proof. I have never been to any website that's been this strict and stubborn. All you people are rude and you never give a good reason why you delete stuff! You just say "Oo that sucks, Oo that's stupid and it doesn't belong here" thoses are good enough reasons! You people need to be more polite instead of giving rude reasons why you don't accept this stuff! And don't even think about blocking me because I tell you guys are giving rude reasons why you don't accept stuff and you and you have strict rules that are no fair at all You people need to be more polite! -- Naruto134 6:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- We tried being polite a while ago. Serebii et al are not reliable sources, and their own sources are unattributable as well. You notice how this encyclopedia can be edited by anyone? That makes strict credibility and sourcable information more important. (I also find it strange that being polite is such an issue. You're the ones who insist on repeatedly breaking rules.)—ウルタプ 02:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- I gave you legitimate reasons as calmly as I could. You're citing something that has anonymous input, and thus, something that automatically fails WP:RS. That was the main gist of the unsourced warning, not that you were citing Serebii or YouTube (as you originally did). -Jeske (v^_^v) 02:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- We tried being polite a while ago. Serebii et al are not reliable sources, and their own sources are unattributable as well. You notice how this encyclopedia can be edited by anyone? That makes strict credibility and sourcable information more important. (I also find it strange that being polite is such an issue. You're the ones who insist on repeatedly breaking rules.)—ウルタプ 02:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- You guys are really strict you know that? Oo it's against the stupid rules just because I put a link, well hey, you wanted stinkin' proof, I gave you stinkin' proof. I have never been to any website that's been this strict and stubborn. All you people are rude and you never give a good reason why you delete stuff! You just say "Oo that sucks, Oo that's stupid and it doesn't belong here" thoses are good enough reasons! You people need to be more polite instead of giving rude reasons why you don't accept this stuff! And don't even think about blocking me because I tell you guys are giving rude reasons why you don't accept stuff and you and you have strict rules that are no fair at all You people need to be more polite! -- Naruto134 6:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC)