User talk:Scottie theNerd

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here!  Perfecto 23:41, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Cite sources

Hello, and thank you for your contributions. When contributing material to Wikipedia, please cite your sources so others can verify your work. For example, citing book, print, or reliable web resources demonstrates that the material is verifiable and is not the editor's opinion. Please see Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Reliable sources for more information, or contact me on my talk page. -- Perfecto 23:41, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

-) Foreigner 13
18, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dfrg.msc

I've removed your notice on AIAV (twice now) because with users that have more than 50 edits or so, your best bet is to go the administrator noticeboard or the requests for investigation page or even the requests for CheckUser page if you think that this might be a sockpuppet of someone else. AIAV is really designed for new accounts or IPs that are only here to vandalize. It's a bit murkier with someone like this who has over 100 edits. And also, before posting to AIAV, more than one warning needs to be on the user's talk page. All I see here is one and it's several weeks old. The places I mentioned are simply better for cases like dfrg. --Woohookitty(meow) 10:46, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Scottie! Stop busting my hump man! What is it that I have done? We can resolve it, becase as the saying goes: We can work it out! We can work it oooouuut! We can work it out! We can work it ooouuut!

Yours, in Song, Dfrg.msc 07:52, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

How am i a bloody sock puppet? you have no evidence? have i vandilised? just leave me alone and let me edit scottie.

No scottie no........ no scottie no no scottie no!

yours in absolute contempt F 22 10:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)


  • Hello again Scottie! Man, you don't get much traffic through here do you? Ah, the life of a good editor! Anyway, the "Be getting out of my house (Scottie)" means nothing mate! Feel free to roam around my page and do what you do. Who's house is it anyway?

User:Dfrg.msc 02:31, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Fine Scottster, be that way. Dfrg.msc 06:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Yo Scottie! What's shakin'? Dfrg.msc 1 . 2 . 3 06:34, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Scottie? Dfrg.msc 1 . 2 . 3 07:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


  • Ok, let's try this again: It's called Civility Scottie. Hello Scottie, how are you? I ask because it is important to care about the people behind the project. Are you happy about the reaching of over 1,500,000 articles on English Wikipedia, I am. Did you have a nice Thanksgiving? I am currently fighting Vandalism, through VandalProof and other devices. I find it amusing that you once tried to get me blocked through WP:AIAV, and now I am doing this to vandals, how things change eh? What are you currently working on? Do you require assistance with any task? Looking forward to hearing from you, Dfrg.msc 1 . 2 . 3 22:32, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't celebrate Thanksgiving, though I am doing rather well. I'm just cleaning up random video game articles, but I don't foresee any need for your assistance at this time. Thank you for asking. --Scottie theNerd 02:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I know you from GameFAQs!

You may know me as SpideyVenom101, who is constantly warned for supposed TOS violations(darn RaptorLC). BTW Spielberg did direct the series(MOH). In the back of the allied assault manual, it says so.Ollie the Magic Skater 03:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah it's been that way since the original Medal of Honor on PSX. (My personal favorete). Just cheack IMDB. Alex 1991 19:32, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] It's not a fan league

The MRL is a actual tournament for all of the clans in the game. and It's part of the Allied Assualt game now whether you like it or not. And quit saying there isn't any scores and advertising on wikipedia. I see it all the goddamn time. Alex 1991 21:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

If the MRL is a major or official part of the game, please provide references. If it's a third-party site organising tournaments for clans, it's not automatically significant. Wikipedia does not look highly on scoreboard-style sections, and just because you "see it all the goddamn time" does not mean that you should include one for Allied Assault. Until you provide proper referencing regarding the MRL and its significance, it will be reverted whether you "like it all not". --Scottie theNerd 23:12, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Wow your horrible at quoting ya know. anyways. who really gives a damn. It's not like I'm posting all the scores that have happened. So it's not really a score board because I only post about who's in the lead not who's in 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc. etc. So get this. Loosen up.Alex 1991 19:30, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hi, clearly I'm New

I began posting a weapons page on the Gears of War page, and it seems that you deleted it. Under the explanation you said to view weapons page. There isn't one I can find. So, the reason I'm posting this is because I have a question and a suggestion. Why don't you or I post a link to said weapons page on the topic and why did you delete my work? You could've informed me and then moved it to a weapons page. I don't mean to be rude, but I put a lot of effort into the first part of that page. Well, thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kea vader (talk • contribs) 20:07, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

See Talk:Gears_of_War#Weapons. Countless people have written up Weapons sections (including me), but Wikipedia does not encourage technical lists that are not significant in themselves. There is no "weapons" page, and the main Gears of War article is not the place to elaborate on weapons. They're not important as far as the article is concerned. --Scottie theNerd 21:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you I appreciate the answer —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kea vader (talk • contribs).

[edit] Call of Duty 2 edits

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Noclip 03:18, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I see that you're not the undisputed ruler of all gaming articles. --Far Beyond 08:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Never said I was, and I'm not the one in the wrong. This notice was a friendly reminder about WP:3RR. You might want to actually see the Call of Duty 2 article before making a snide comment, and perhaps acknowledge the revert rules yourself. --Scottie theNerd 08:30, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't think I violted the 3 reverts rule, and I don't think Noclip was being very friendly. Oh wait, that's an automated template. Anyway, I see that that Call of Duty 2 article has a ton of information which people who have never played the game would not be interested in. A long discussion of single player maps and strategies, and even a list of multiplayer maps. I would honestly say that it violates those rules you showed me. Were those links you showed me Official policy for this site? And we're all really friendly here. After all, we are all on the same team, right?--Far Beyond 08:41, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
I didn't say you did violate the 3RR; I am pointing out that you should discuss major changes to the page before reverting them in order to avert an edit war. The Call of Duty 2 article is a poor article, hence the cleanup tag at the top. I am referring to the removal of the weapons section and the respective section in its Talk page, which is more relevant to what you and I just went through. --Scottie theNerd 08:44, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
If you're looking for another article to slice up, check out Call of Duty 2: Big Red One. --Far Beyond 08:52, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
What the F- that was one scary list. --Scottie theNerd 08:57, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Christmas Card

Merry Christmas!
Wishing you a happy and safe Christmas season, and a blessed new year. Enjoy where you are, and who your with. Merry Christmas! From, Defrag and Jilly.

[edit] Xbox Handheld

You participated in an AfD for Xbox Handheld. I re-wrote the article as a stub and provided sources. Please take a look at the re-written article Xbox Handheld and comment at the AfD discussion [1] Alan Shatte 22:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Hi! I'm Ace Fighter, and I'm trying to meet new people on wikipedia and I stumbled across you, and good for you that communicate through Userboxes. Ace Fighter 03:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] War Rock

Please refrain from editing this article until you read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_2.Planb11 03:38, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Most of Battlefield 2's content is also against WP:NOT. Please read WP:INN before violating other Wikipedia policies. --Scottie theNerd 09:10, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I recommend that you read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:POINT. When you just completly remade the article you did not wait until you had everyones feedback and approvel for this. Planb11 06:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I did not remake the entire article; I removed sections in clear violation of WP:NOT according to Wikipedia's recommendation of being bold. I did not consider the removal of extensive non-encyclopedic lists as being a controversial issue. If other editors disagreed, they are free to revert or discuss the major change on the Talk page and work from there. Rather than wait days for a response on a relatively inactive article, I took it upon myself to do a quick cleanup as well as leaving a courtesy notice of the removal and its justification on the talk page. No one has responded to the comment nor evidently disagreed with the cleanup.
I do not see your point in dragging this to my talk page. First you're comparing what War Rock was in comparison to Battlefield 2 (which, for your information, has been delisted as a good article). Now you're accusing me of not gathering feedback when I did open the discussion on Talk:War Rock, and finally bringing this up a month after the cleanup. --Scottie theNerd 15:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BrickFlim.gif

Congratulations! You are in the credits of our movie. Good job Scottie. And wow, how has traffic picked on your page? You may need to archinve soon. Cheers, Dfrg.msc 1 . 2 . Editor Review 05:20, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alright, Buddy

Look, I was not saying I'm opposed to every and all arguments, or that they arn't part of the afd process. I was opposed to getting into an indepth debate with someone who keeps putting words in my mouth about an article that is probably going to be deleted anyway. I do know the policies of this encyclopedia. I do know how afd works. You crossed the line with that last comment. I respect you trying to keep Wikipedia free from nonsense, but I have the right to fight for what I believe meets policy. I know that may confuse you, so I'll repeat that. I know the policy, and this, in my opinion (that thing that helps form consensus...which runs Wikipedia), meets it. I know I shouldn't takee things personally, so I will get over this insult. After all, you're experience isn't overwhelming and I see you're just starting to get involved with Wiki discussions. Keep up the...work. Ganfon 23:19, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

For someone with your experience, I expected clearer arguments that what you put forward. If that was not your intention, I apologise for my oversight and retract my statements towards you. --Scottie theNerd 23:52, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your revert on Battlefield 1942

I had added the server side modding section before I registered here at Wikipedia. Just wondering why you reverted it. Many servers use this modding technique, and the website linked to has been in place for nearly three years now. Should I not have started a new section and just added this content under the general Modding header? WhyTwoKay 05:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

That would have been more appropriate. However, be wary of using credible sources; one website on server modding does not automatically make it the authoritative reference on what you write. Also be careful of using weasel words. --Scottie theNerd 05:12, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
I will say that I am new at adding editing wikipedia, but I have been reading it for quite some time now. Call it a hobby if you will. Could you possibly help me come up with the proper way to phrase it? I feel that it is something to include, even if the website linked doesn't matter. It's the same as adding links to the other mods (or even BFTracks) under the modding section. WhyTwoKay 05:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
You can start off by reading the guidelines I have already posted. Try to avoid words such as "Many people", "some people think" and so on; use clear statements that reflect the information presented from your source. I think the material you want to post is encyclopedic and can be properly referenced, although forum posts should never be used as a source. The main thing you need to be wary of is that you should phrase your addition based what the source says, not what you know of the subject. --Scottie theNerd 05:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Maybe I just started off a little too big with editing. WhyTwoKay 05:29, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
We all start from somewhere, and one of the pillars of Wikipedia is to be bold. Eventually, you'll start to develop a sense as to what is needed in a Wikipedia article and how you can improve it further. Many of the guidelines may be confusing to the new editor at first, but time and experience will allow you to rattle off guidelines off the top of your head. Don't feel restricted by what Wikipedia is, but also be aware of what it isn't. --Scottie theNerd 10:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bugs in Rise_of_Nations

i have seen on bug in this game why not to add this category in artilce?. why not writing About wonders,nations in (Just one or two lines over view). will be waiting for positive response. Khalidkhoso 09:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not the place to report bugs and glitches in a game, unless they are notable and verified by credible sources. While the bugs may be important to people who play the game, they are of minimal value to readers who do not play the game, and as such is considered to be unencyclopedic. --Scottie theNerd 10:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BF:V

I felt the IPs removal was good as 'possibly the most famous jet fighter of all time, the F-4 Phantom II' isn't really NPOV at all. BJTalk 12:40, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Frequency

Thanks, that was the word I was trying to think of :-) --Calair 03:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/c/o/User_talk%7EScottie_theNerd_f476.html"