User talk:Sockatume/2005a
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] User:Hamidifar
Thanks for explaining the Wikirules to him. I know that we are not supposed to bit newbies, but the way he was acting on the VFD page, he was trying to circumvent VFD rules. I know the page is gone, but I will not be surprised if he keeps on doing what he is doing for the next few days. Most of us who voted delete are moving on, though I want to keep tabs on what is going on. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 02:07, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- No problem, to be honest, I saw that coming. The guy kind of waded in without knowing what was going on around him. Maybe we should make it procedure to have a "quick guide to Wiki policy" and link to that in the VfD template, or something. Sockatume
- Good idea. Plus, if we broke any rules, we would have been punished already. But, to me, it looks like we did not. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 14:29, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- Well, by checking the WP:VIP page, the user is still going at it. I wish to point out a few problems with his report. One, this user was begging for protection of the article. Rhobite, as an admin, did so. However, per VFD rules, Rhobite added the VFD template to the article before the lock was put on. The VFD template must stay on the article page until the vote was over. Six hours after the lock was placed on the article, the article was deleted by the admins, since the consensus was to delete. Now, Hamidifar is calling Rhobite a vandal, saying that "6) At time: 22:37 UTC Rhohite placed a vprotection above the (article + vfd) and mentioned that this page is not allowed for furthur edit until the discussion (a link to the discussion page of Iranian physics news) is in progress." Now, Hamidifar has brought in User:Jimbo Wales to settle the dispute. I knew things were going to Wiki-hell once the reporting started, but I think this is going a bit too far. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 20:00, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- This is getting increasingly surreal. I'm just going to sit it out and see what happens, I've stated my case succinctly enough on both the original VfD and on VIP. You say he's brought in the illustrious Mr. Wales to settle, but I don't see where he's done that. Could you point it out to me? Cheers. Sockatume 20:27, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- Here it is: "Obviously this network of admin/users decided to rule out a new user, whose first article was scientic, valid and absolutely notable. I request immediate re-creation of my first article and excuse of this network of admin/users from the author of these words. A copy of the official complain has been sent to the founder of Wikipedian Jimmy Donal Wales for furthur investigation. I'll be waiting for his and other administrators of wikipedia. A defender of wikipedia against networking -Hamidifar." Zscout370 (Sound Off) 20:28, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'm annoyed about his "I'm defending the wikipedia" attitude: his only edits have been to create an article about his blog, and then complain and make personal attacks when it was dubbed unnotable. I'd like to see a re-vote, perhaps by admins alone, just to prove to the guy that it's not some crazy conspiracy against him. Although if that didn't go in his favour, he'd probably set up his own version of "Wikipedia sucks.com". Sockatume 20:33, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
-
- Some admins voted, and it was an admin that had to make the determination to make the article go away. I believe the process was fair, and if Jimbo or others look at it, we should be in the clear. Plus, if someone one from Iran has came in and said this was not notable, even in his own country, that has to tell me something. Plus, I still do not think there is a conspiracy against him, though all other articles related to that one were also deleted or marked as a copyvio. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 20:41, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- It's a shame, really, the guy probably could've contributed to the wikipedia quite nicely. If he'd known the policies and rules of the place before he started making articles, this probably wouldn't have happened. I might see about knocking together an Quick Guide to Policy or something, for new users. Sockatume 20:44, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- I also think we should discourage new users from participating on VFD-like items until about 100 edits or so. Mainly, since after around 100 edits, the user will know how the Wiki works and is able to understand what will happen if he votes on a VFD. Plus, newbie/annon votes are usually not taken into account. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 21:00, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- reads VIP edit history He's accusing me of deleting points from his manifesto now, which I most certainly have not done. I'd go for a RFC, but that'd mean discussing the issue with him first, and I think I'd rather stab myself in the eye with a pair of compasses than wade into that discussion again. I've got my case down on text, again, and my rebuttals against his new accusations, so maybe if I leave things be they'll die down. Sockatume 21:23, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- No, I think he will keep on pilling shit on until he gets his way. He even threatened to bring in more people into this and will try to "expose us" somehow. I still do not like what is going on, but I want this whole mess to end now. Plus, I think he pissed off too many people, so a RfC is in order. Once you do make the RfC, make sure that everyone that he list as a vandal and User:Hamidifar are notified about it. Do not dicuss about how to vote, but just let them know the RfC is active. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 21:36, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- reads VIP edit history He's accusing me of deleting points from his manifesto now, which I most certainly have not done. I'd go for a RFC, but that'd mean discussing the issue with him first, and I think I'd rather stab myself in the eye with a pair of compasses than wade into that discussion again. I've got my case down on text, again, and my rebuttals against his new accusations, so maybe if I leave things be they'll die down. Sockatume 21:23, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- I also think we should discourage new users from participating on VFD-like items until about 100 edits or so. Mainly, since after around 100 edits, the user will know how the Wiki works and is able to understand what will happen if he votes on a VFD. Plus, newbie/annon votes are usually not taken into account. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 21:00, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- It's a shame, really, the guy probably could've contributed to the wikipedia quite nicely. If he'd known the policies and rules of the place before he started making articles, this probably wouldn't have happened. I might see about knocking together an Quick Guide to Policy or something, for new users. Sockatume 20:44, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- Some admins voted, and it was an admin that had to make the determination to make the article go away. I believe the process was fair, and if Jimbo or others look at it, we should be in the clear. Plus, if someone one from Iran has came in and said this was not notable, even in his own country, that has to tell me something. Plus, I still do not think there is a conspiracy against him, though all other articles related to that one were also deleted or marked as a copyvio. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 20:41, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
-
- Thanks. I'm annoyed about his "I'm defending the wikipedia" attitude: his only edits have been to create an article about his blog, and then complain and make personal attacks when it was dubbed unnotable. I'd like to see a re-vote, perhaps by admins alone, just to prove to the guy that it's not some crazy conspiracy against him. Although if that didn't go in his favour, he'd probably set up his own version of "Wikipedia sucks.com". Sockatume 20:33, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- Here it is: "Obviously this network of admin/users decided to rule out a new user, whose first article was scientic, valid and absolutely notable. I request immediate re-creation of my first article and excuse of this network of admin/users from the author of these words. A copy of the official complain has been sent to the founder of Wikipedian Jimmy Donal Wales for furthur investigation. I'll be waiting for his and other administrators of wikipedia. A defender of wikipedia against networking -Hamidifar." Zscout370 (Sound Off) 20:28, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- This is getting increasingly surreal. I'm just going to sit it out and see what happens, I've stated my case succinctly enough on both the original VfD and on VIP. You say he's brought in the illustrious Mr. Wales to settle, but I don't see where he's done that. Could you point it out to me? Cheers. Sockatume 20:27, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- Well, by checking the WP:VIP page, the user is still going at it. I wish to point out a few problems with his report. One, this user was begging for protection of the article. Rhobite, as an admin, did so. However, per VFD rules, Rhobite added the VFD template to the article before the lock was put on. The VFD template must stay on the article page until the vote was over. Six hours after the lock was placed on the article, the article was deleted by the admins, since the consensus was to delete. Now, Hamidifar is calling Rhobite a vandal, saying that "6) At time: 22:37 UTC Rhohite placed a vprotection above the (article + vfd) and mentioned that this page is not allowed for furthur edit until the discussion (a link to the discussion page of Iranian physics news) is in progress." Now, Hamidifar has brought in User:Jimbo Wales to settle the dispute. I knew things were going to Wiki-hell once the reporting started, but I think this is going a bit too far. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 20:00, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- Good idea. Plus, if we broke any rules, we would have been punished already. But, to me, it looks like we did not. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 14:29, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- I've gone for a Wikiquette alert in leu of a RfC for the moment, seeing as the RfC would lack the requisite two-user attempt to talk the subject down. This isn't a typical POV editing dispute, though Sockatume 21:50, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- It will not. You will have two days to find two people (or one) to agree with you, and that is not hard. Just make the evidence of the behavior clear and define what rules this person has broken. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 22:19, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- Okay, I'll give it a while for the wikiquette thing to age (to avoid accusations of improprietry, and give some outsiders a chance to comment) then punt the RfC off tomorrow afternoon. It's 23:21 here, I should be back from Uni by about 16:00 local (15:00 UTC) tomorrow to file the thing. It seems that the fellow's stopped rambling for the moment, and I need my shut-eye. Sockatume 22:24, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- It will not. You will have two days to find two people (or one) to agree with you, and that is not hard. Just make the evidence of the behavior clear and define what rules this person has broken. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 22:19, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes voice actors
Apparently you haven't read the game's talk page, so posting it here might get your attention faster:
Every single voice actor for the English MGS returned for The Twin Snakes (which was only recorded in English). Every single one. That's it. The fact that Greg Eagles was replaced by Rob Paulsen as the Ninja is irrelevant, since Eagles returned to voice th DARPA Chief (who he also voiced in MGS).
So please stop changing the Twin Snakes page to say the "majority" of the voice actors returned. That's just not true.
--DoubleCross 02:24, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
- If Rob Paulsen's not there, then surely that's not all of the original game's voice actors? I'll admit it's a minor point, but it's a fact anyway. "All but one (Rob Paulsen, original voice of the Cyborg Ninja)" sound okay? Sockatume 13:29, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
-
- I'm talking about the voice actors (as in the people), not the roles they played. Every voice actor that worked on MGS returned to work on The Twin Snakes. If all the members of a 2001 tour group return for a 2002 tour, but there are five new members on the 2002 tour, that doesn't mean all the 2001 members didn't return, does it?
-
- Saying "all the original voice actors returned" doesn't mean "all the voice actors that worked on this also worked on the original", which is what I think you're thinking. If anything, it should say that all the MGS voice actors returned, with some roles replaced, or something. --DoubleCross 14:07, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] =
Hey thanks for the compliment on my addition to the leetspeak article. Unfortunately some n00b deleted my bit! I'll have to add it in again, although delete wars piss me off. "Best. Comment. Evar "Leetspeak is however, extremely common in "gamr" groups in high schools. It is used for emphasis and is often considered "hot," or cool. It has simply become the gangsta-style black slang-to-the-izzo of the white/Asian-dominated gamr communiteh."
So much humour packed into that. Not very encyclopedic (my wiki gland was commanding me to edit it at first), but it's got to stay, surely? Sockatume, Talk 03:39, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)"
My comment was much appreciated by those azns from school that I mentioned, but wiki is dominated by edit-obsessed noobs so what can I do. ~chixor
- I guess it comes down to what people view as encyclopedia-friendly. On the upside, I guess my comment archives it for posterity on the talk page. Sockatume 01:34, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Carm edits
the point where you reverted to is factually incorrect. Thats why is gone. Falphin 16:49, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Oh, and the lord hath spoketh?
"This information is extraneous." Sez you. --ben dummett 09:16, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Well, yes. Sorry if it sounded rude, I've always seen "I think" or "in my opinion" as a bit redundant, and I'm used to keeping edit summaries as short as possible.
