User talk:Snake Liquid

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Thankyou

Thanks for your support on the Snake pic issue, just try to remain (what others would call) civil, otherwise people are going to have you reported. I personally don't think either of us were uncivil, but y'know different people have different opinions of what civil is

Anyway that's all BS, the main thing i wanted to say was cheers for all you help, this issue won't go away quickly

(The Bread 09:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Happycat

When you act like you're in sole control of an article, is when people point the finger and call you an elitist. Probably also why YTMNDers made a target of you. It's a problem with a lot of people here that act "my way or the highway" when it comes to article editing.--Snake Liquid 22:28, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

There have been at least three unrelated users defending British Shorthair against vandalism. Please try to be civil; Targetter has done nothing to indicate a sense of "ownership" over the article. —ptk★fgs 22:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

STFU with telling me to be civil, I was being civil. The way I'm acting right now isn't civil, cause I'm fed up with hearing that shit, but that's fine cause it's on my talk page. I don't care who else has been defending it, when at least one of them acts like they own it, I call them on it. A lot of people do it too, and it makes me sick, and THAT's how they indicate a sense of ownership. You know what else annoys the hell out of me? When people come saying things that make them sound like robots. "Please be civil,"? Condescending elitist bullshit. I'm starting to not even believe what you say, because your name is PTKFGS, the bizarro of YTMND, and it's starting to look like your standpoints in opposition of it are just an act for the fun of it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Snake Liquid (talk • contribs) .

Please do not make personal attacks. I've been around YTMND since Picard first went online. I enjoy both YTMND and Wikipedia and I don't want to see either one dragged down by a small minority of folks. I am bothered by the increasingly negative attitude toward YTMND from Wikipedians, and I only hope that YTMND'ers can find a way to encourage each other to respect Wikipedia's guidelines rather than merely taking every opportunity to start edit wars inserting fad references where they don't belong.

Personal attacks can get you blocked from Wikipedia. They don't bother me so much, but others on here will turn uncivil posts over to the admin board without even asking for an explanation. I'm sure YTMND and Wikipedia can learn to get along -- let's make sure they do. —ptk★fgs 23:00, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My Mission Statement

If you're like this guy:

"This isn't a vote. It's a debate. Even if YTMND gets a bunch of people together to support Happycat, the admins have the final say. --Targetter 02:30, 30 July 2006 (UTC)"

And let's rework that to apply to all. "This isn't a vote. It's a debate. Even if people on one side of the debate gather supporters, it doesn't matter how much support they have because the admins have the final say."

If you're like this guy in any way you act on here, if you bend and twist Wikipedia's rules with semantics so that they help you out, and then contradict or twist them around again to use in authority against other people, hello, I'd like to introduce myself. I'm Snake, and I'm your new problem.

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Also, personal attacks against another editor on your own talk page won't help your civility situation. --Targetter 17:51, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Nice job dropping cookie cutter policy on me there. If you hadn't noticed, I'm not too worried about my civility situation, especially when talking to people that ought to practice what they preach. Besides that, I was using you as an example, I don't see any sort of insult in what I put up there.--Snake Liquid 17:58, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Seriously, I'm not kidding. If an admin picks up on what you're doing, you're likely to get blocked. They will block you for incivility and personal attacks! Save yourself the trouble, move on to a different article, and just stay away from my talk page. That's all I'm asking, dude. --Targetter 18:20, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

He really isn't kidding. People have been blocked for less. Targetter's description of support/oppose debates (as opposed to votes) is accurate, and I think it would be beneficial to listen to what he's said, as opposed to posting hostile comments about it. —ptk★fgs 18:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Admins should focus on people who think they ride a high horse instead of the ones that try knocking them off the horse.--Snake Liquid 19:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Well this admin is focusing on the fact that you are acting an a very incivil way. Your posts on User:Targetter's talk page are inappropriate, as is your last post on your user page. Please calm down and try to act like a valued member of the community. If you continue you will get blocked from editing Wikipedia. We require that all users stay within the boundaries of civil behavior. Thanks, Gwernol 00:55, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, said admin is certainly talking from the inside looking out. It's difficult to act like a valued member of a community when you don't feel valued, when said community contains members that police articles and do not value the input of others. Don't be mistaken, I'm not looking to feel valued here, I'm looking for fairness that I have not yet seen. While you're requiring that all users stay withtin the boundries of "civil" behavior, you would be best to re-evaluate your definition of civil behavior and determine whether or not the elitist attitude and behavior that some users here display is included in that definition, because it's clear that people standing up to speak against it certainly is not.--Snake Liquid 01:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mission statement opening sentence

There's nothing personal about that opening sentence, no name is mentioned.

[edit] RfC

There is now an RfC posted regarding your conduct; you should comment on it when you get the opportunity. --Emufarmers^(T/C) 05:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Why'd you make that!? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Snake Liquid (talk • contribs) .

Because there've been so many conflicts on this page, and so many people trying to resolve this, I decided an RfC would be justified. You are free to post your feelings there, although you should try to remain civil, since doing otherwise may not reflect favorably upon you. ----Emufarmers^(T/C) 05:26, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

You've got all the help I can give you man

(The Bread 06:51, 1 August 2006 (UTC))

I think we should take the higher ground regarding MIB. The whole issue with your RFC was that you didn't desrve it without, Me and MIB getting one aswell.

If you're planning on doing it anyway despite what I said, i will comment for you.

As for you owing me one, i'll hold you to that

(The Bread 03:53, 3 August 2006 (UTC))

[edit] In Response

Snake Liquid, we are not biased or anything. You had an RfC out, which stands for "Request for Comment". Comments were requested, and comments are what they, along with you, got. You did something that was considered provocative or incivil in some people's eyes, and they are here to try to resolve this problem. I suggested on the page that they should give you a chance before you get banned for what you are doing. You may rail all you want against the "elitism" of Wikipedia, but please do it somewhere else. Like I said earlier, if you screw up this last chance that I got for you, you, and only you, are to blame, not me or the others.

You have your lifeline now, you may now use it on your own discretion, for good or bad. Screw this chance up, and I can pretty much guarantee that no one will be able to save you the next time around.

You may now enjoy the new lease on wiki-life. Arbiteroftruth 02:44, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

______

I am not being condescending, Snake Liquid. You have to understand that I bring a 3rd party view into this entire situation. It is very easy for you to get trapped in a rut because you were involved in the situation. A Chinese proverb says "those who are involved are not going to think rationally)". Now, my position on this matter is that I am not going to take sides (and I have not). What is obvious is that you did say something incivil on certain pages (including my talk page), and that is not beneficial to Wikipedia. Yes, there are those who are more sensitive than others, but surely, that's how humans are right? If everyone has the same tolerance level, wouldn't that make us droids instead of real people?

Humans are, by nature, sensitive to certain matters, and the level of sensitivity is subjective to many factors. We all have to just learn to get on with it.

If I were you, I would take a few days off, let the passions cool, and start editing again. The best thing to do sometimes is to walk away from it for a while. Just take a short vacation and when you come back, things will become more 20/20 for you. Arbiteroftruth 04:44, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] An Apology

The Purple Star, awarded to Snake Liquid for putting up persistant arguements from me, and never giving up to get his point across. --Targetter ^{(Lock On)} 00:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Snake, after spending a few days away, I looked back at the arguement over British Shorthair, and I've come to realize that my arguements against you were without merit. I will admit to a bit of policing on that page, more than I should have done. I felt the inclusion of NEDM was wrong, but I should have stopped when a consensus about it was reached, and my comment about the admins having the final say was poorly worded and completely wrong.

Honestly, you were right. I hope you will accept this apology. --Targetter ^{(Lock On)} 00:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

I hope our arguments earlier will have no bearing towards any future cooperation. Arbiteroftruth 03:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Naked Snake (MPO).jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Naked Snake (MPO).jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed 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. Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 16:27, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:MPOSnake.jpg is used in that article. Image:Naked Snake (MPO).jpg is orphaned. --Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 00:38, 27 November 2006 (UTC)