User talk:Wildnox/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Welcome

Hello 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:

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! 

Emmett5 22:34, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Cradle of Filth

Hey man - that's twice you've been helpful! Good to meet you - nice to have you on side! --Cardinal Wurzel 20:38, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


Unnecessary Edits

Please stop labeling or providing stereotype of what a ball hog is. Allen Iverson is such a ball hog that he has 7 assists per game? Does that make sense?

Do not put Iverson or Kobe's name in the citation. Just because some beat writers from ESPN or MSNBC say such and such are ballhog doesn't make it true. ESPN and MSNBC are "opinion" columns. The writers intentionally pick those players so they can gain more readers which translate to money.

WARNING: Any citation of any player will be reverted and deleted.

Re:Why

Sorry, I might of haphazardly RV it whilst trying to fix the vandalism of [[user:Cerpin taxt|Cerpin taxt]. :-p. Sorry If it wasn't vandalism --ShadowJester07 04:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I also have Asperger's Syndrome

Its funny to be judged by a fellow person, heh. --Eiyuu Kou 22:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Well that's a neat little coincidence. But what exactly do you mean by : "Its funny to be judged by a fellow person"? --Wildnox


MACEDONIA edit

You edited

These are valid links for the article. They are from a Macedonian point of view and are listed under that category. Why were these removed?


Thanks for the explaination

Ya, no problem :) Sorry about labeling it vandalism. I am just tired of the MK point of view being ignored and erased.

User talk:Jasper23

Please don't intimidate users with scary templates without policy basis. Also note that you deleted Jasper23's own message here. That's not good. For you to remove a good faith message from his page is a much bigger no-no than for him to remove a warning. Compare this discussion on the admin noticeboard, and see also this post of mine (which has been deleted from the page by User:American Patriot 1776). Bishonen | talk 11:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC).

Ignatius Vandal

Thank you for the advice. I would have reported him there had I known it existed. The message was in hope that a recent changes patroller would be an admin. Again, thanks-Hornandsoccer 04:01, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Snooker

Sorry about that. Is there anyway to safeguard against doing that? Should I just refresh the page before I revert? Tips on fighting vandals would be helpful. Enjoyhats 06:00, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Loose Change (video)

If the issue of the "Supporting Opinion" section/OR synthpaper gets out of hand again in Loose Change (video), should somebody get an advocate or arbitration? Or would there be another course of action? I have no idea since I have no experience with advocates or arbitration. --Wildnox 20:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I believe the official preferred first step for content disputes of this nature is to petition the Mediation Cabal, but I'm uncertain how effective that would be unless we can get all parties involved posting on the article's talk page first.--Rosicrucian 20:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
The Cabal may have a chance. Demosfoni did at least respond to stuff on his talk page before, even if his response was all attacks. So I think he would at least communicate. Even if he does just ignore mediation, I would like to at least try. --20:10, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I've taken the time to visit his talkpage leave some friendly tips on what is and isn't okay to cite (as he was citing things like SourceWatch and a few blogs). I hope he takes it in the spirit it is intended, and it eases his frustration in editing.--Rosicrucian 00:06, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Need Some Help

I would very much appreciate your help. The ongoing anonymous attacks on the Rod D. Martin bio have stepped up a new notch, with a whole group of "candidate for deletion" boxes and similar at the top of the page. I am unsure as to what to do about this: the claim is that he isn't notable (he's obviously notable enough to start an edit war), but that seems pretty obviously false. Do you have any suggestions? I'm very sorry to bother you with this. Samdmd 02:46, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I see you've already been asked about this. I am not violating 3rr, which explicitly does not apply to biographies of living persons. The person I've reverted has repeatedly asserted negative information about the subject without citation, and deleted cited, NPOV facts. Why are you after me? DelosHarriman 18:04, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

If you are involved in the Rod Martin page, please make sure that the rule is followed that content must be verifiable. Some users are inserting matters into the Rod D. Martin biography that is plainly not verifiable. In your opinion, does recycling content from an autobiographical website count as verifiable? If so, this just seems like an invitation for any political wannabe to set up his own website, place false claims within it, and (voila!) any content is verified.

69.15.59.130 has just blown way past three reverts on both the Rod D. Martin article and TheVanguard.Org (that last one making no sense I can see at all). He is also removing sourced material right and left. I apologize for bothering you: its just that I have a real life and I can't be the Rod Martin police constantly. If it's this easy to mess around with articles, I don't see how anyone can keep anything useful on here at all without legions of people duking it out all the time. It's crazy. Anyway, thank you. DelosHarriman 05:06, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Fabrangen Fiddlers

You voted to delete Fabrangen Fiddlers. I'd ask you to take another look. I believe that notability has now been established. - Jmabel | Talk 01:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Rod D. Martin

Please note the following Wikirule in WP:BIO:

Editors should remove any negative material that is either unsourced or relies upon sources that do not meet standards specified in Wikipedia:Reliable sources from any page, including those concerning living persons and related talk pages, without discussion; this is also listed as an exception to the three-revert rule.

Thus, it is not improper to repeatedly revert when unreliable sources are used in a biography.

You misread the item above, (re)read really carefully. ;)--Wildnox 04:28, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I would like to apologize also

This is for the revert war that we had on my talk page. The whole issue started out as my fault and I do apologize for any ill feelings that you may have felt at anytime. Your apology is fully accepted but was not really necessary. I have absolutely no ill feelings toward you and am sure that we will be on the same side of issues in the future. Jasper23 02:09, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

1

No sweat, I saw that one coming. hahaha.--The Judge 04:25, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

2

THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP LET US TRY TO MAKE A CONVERT OUT OF YOU ALL THE BEST PIOTREK BLASS


Block Evasion

I've blocked him for 31 hours for his pattern of editing and sockpuppetry. That should suffice until the other block expires, or we receive results from CheckUser. alphaChimp(talk) 14:21, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: LUCPOL sock accusation

Thanks for letting me know. Even a quick look at my contributions ought to solve it. maxcap 23:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

yes, I think you did the right thing. I'm going to check over the contribs right now. I think I kight just be able to block them as obvious throwaway accounts. alphaChimp(talk) 23:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

They are NOT my sockpuppets

This is absolutely false. 85.18.14.4 was my old IP, when I still could not register myself - but even in that case, I refused to commit any vandalism. Instead, Malfunction, Maxcap and Babubhatt are the usernames for other users, which are also very little involved in the article about Rapcore, Limp Bizkit and Fred Durst. -- Egr (talk), 9/8/2006

Thanks for informing me, Wildnox. Now I'm trying to discuss seriously with Lucpol. -- Egr (talk), 9/8/2006

Rapcore intro

I totally agree with your proposal, Wildnox. I accept both the removal of "of", in fact "...sometimes of funk" seems to be redundant and can make some readers confusing. -- Egr (talk), 9/11/2006

Intro is OK. This intro is compromise and end edit war. LUCPOL 19:44, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
OK. After this agreement about the most relevant/evident genre in rapcore, I will wait for the unblock, also because spamlinks should be removed. -- Egr, 9/12/2006
Unprotected. Good discussion thus far. Remember, discuss, not revert. alphaChimp(talk) 01:59, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


Vandalism revert

You're welcome, the user concerned is now taking a 48 hour wikibreak. Let me know should you have further problems when he returns. Best, Gwernol 00:23, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Tom Harrison Talk 01:01, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

plz help me.

hello. i beg you for help... i want to link some stuff on the him page and i dont understand the instrucions on how to do it. see the him dicussion for detatils. if ypou would tell me i would be extreamly grateful.Razor romance 13:22, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

i wanted to know how to link the words in the singles section of the him page that do not allready have a (what im assuming to be) a sub page. if i am wrong in my assumption plz tell me where i am wrong and how to creat what it is i am talking about. thank you. sorry it took me so long to respondRazor romance 13:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

YES!!! thanks man it did help out.Razor romance 16:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Trivium

I would never call them Thrash either, but I'll allow it if it's cited. Removal of "metalcore" under any circumstance however, is blasphemy. I hate this band and I'm just making sure the article is not butched with "Heavy Metal" "Thrash Metal" "Death Metal" and etc.

Thanks for the reverts though --Ryouga 05:30, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Dawn of Relic

I was not vandalising the site as you put it... they are an established black metal band, although not massive they are quite well known. I have just wasted half an hour of my time, as you just stopped all my creation. If you would be kind enough to remake Dawn of Relic page with the full details it would be much obliged. Here is proof they are not made up/ rubbish. http://cc.oulu.fi/~roininen/dor/dorindex.html (official site) http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=5250 (metal archives page)

btw I think they are more Black metal than Dark.

Many Thanks,

Asics —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Asics (talk • contribs) 23:32, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

Please help

Something has gone wrong with the page that I have created, I was hoping you could help me seeing as though you are an experienced wikipedian who deals with a lot of metal bands etc ... All the information is there, just something has gone wrong with the album box.

Asics

p.s. I appologise for the Samual Clayton thing, it was my friend messing around when he was at my house, and I was logged on but busy elsewhere.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by asics (talk • contribs).

Thanks

Yeah, it was that one, i forgot to say! Thanks again, I will try and do the others now without messing them up!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by asics (talk • contribs).

Slipknot

I've used only much older edits. This is the reason. --Baxtaba 20:36, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

re: Just a question

Thank you for setting up that redirect. I've no problem with 9/11 alternative theories or any other version or wording for that matter, just so long as it doesn't come with the kind of baggage that conspiracy theory carries. Ireneshusband 01:35, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I have just been taking a look at my own talk page, now that I have managed to disentangle myself somewhat from that appalling excuse for a debate. You didn't like the way I called you a "debunker" and I think you had good reason to take me to task for that. I am sorry. I had other people in mind, but because I was sloppy in my language, you got caught in the crossfire. It is quite obvious to me that you acted in good faith throughout.

I have no excuse. Simply an explanation. During that debate my assumption of good faith was tested to breaking point. After you dropped out of things it degenerated to unwarranted threats against me and all kinds of other dirty tricks. I suspect sock-puppetry was involved. I have little doubt that one of the things they were trying to do was to provoke me into saying things that could be used as evidence in proceedings against me at some point in the future. To be honest, I had expected to find people with ulterior motives operating in certain areas of Wikipedia. Nevertheless I was truly shocked by the ferocity and shamelessness of the tactics used. Once you, Snorkel etc had dropped out of things I felt as if I was dealing not with honest editors (such as you and Snorkel) who were, by and large, committed to the principles upon which Wikipedia was founded, but with psychopaths. It has been, as they say, a "learning experience".

I often say to people that investigating big conspiracies is like sticking your head down a toilet. I'm very sorry that I dragged you down there with me. Ireneshusband 05:29, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

911 Conspiracy Theories/Alternative Theories

Why dont we focus on identifying individual points of objection at Talk:9/11_conspiracy_theories#Why_dont_the_Oppose_and_Agree_camps.3F instead of having long winded debates that cover 2 or 3 subjects The we we know everyones objections either way, we can work out a compromise on each point with a view to reaching a consensus. "Snorkel | Talk" 09:45, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Curious Re:

When you reverted Leyasu you reverted to page versions that had been vandalised. Even though Leyasu is commonly known as a vandal his edits are not always of that nature. That is why I reverted them back to Leyasus's edits, because that way you have no obligation to remove them. So then the vandalism that was originally done is removed and there is no continued vandalism from anybody.

I don't necessarily agree with all of his edits however, and if I removed contstructive edits in the process of removing the vandalism that started the edit warring in the first place I apologise, as my intention was to preserve the articles integrity rather than to damage it. If you could show me the edits I removed and the information lost, then it wouldn't be a problem for me to restore it.

Also have a merry Christmas and a happy new year. Crono 16:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Who is Ymous and why should I mediate with him?

I am stunned. Who is this person? --Filll 23:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Stunned? for censoring discussion, reverting edits that you have no right to do? Violating the very rules of Wikipedia by censoring discussion of facts?

This is not your site. This is not your article. You must allow all facts into evidence, even if they disagree with your beliefs.

Ymous 00:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Suggestions/requests

1. I would suggest actually entering the discussion on the talkpage before requesting mediation. It is highly suspicious when a new user places a request for mediation before any other edits. 2. please use the correct terms, as you filed a request for mediation, not arbitration which are different processes on wikipedia. 3. Don't say you did something that you did not. I'm referring to when you claimed you reported users for personal attacks but did no such thing --Wildnox(talk) 23:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

1. That's the whole point. I cannot enter documented facts into discussion, because they delete (aka "archive" everything that does not comply with their POV.
2. Yeah, I'm new.
3. Still figuring out how to report them for personal attacks. Their hatred and bias, snide comments and outright censorship is disgusting.


I am mystified.

  • I personally have never deleted discussions from the talk page, although I have seen parties on both sides of the evolution/creationist controversy delete material.
  • I have on a couple of occasions agreed with the talk page policy of deleting creationist trolling on sight. I have seen regulars on the talk page do it many times, and there is a notice/warning at the top of the page that this will happen.
  • I have no idea who Ymous is.
  • I have personally gone out of my way to save several discussions to the archive which otherwise would have been just deleted by others.
  • This talk page in particular is a target of people who do not want to improve the article, but basically debate the editors endlessly and engage in the standard creationist circular arguments, cutting and pasting material from creationist websites, not listening to polite responses by the other side, etc. Eventually people become frustrated at being badgered. It is hard enough trying to lobby for an accurate by readable article.--Filll 00:25, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Clearing

I am wondering if I can have permission to clear my talk page except for the copyright warning. This is because I am doing some cleaning-up. Eiyuu Kou 15:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Go away

Wildnox, I asked to held on from me from far. Go away from me! Understand. Go away from me. Out. LUCPOL 01:23, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

OUT. LUCPOL 01:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Report

Well I was going to when Jadger showed me it, but LUCPOL was watching my talk page so he made a report before I had a chance to,being he saw it before i did, but before that i felt that talking to an expierienced administrator would clear it up.-- Hrödberäht 02:28, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, did you mean i can also make a separate report?-- Hrödberäht 02:30, 29 December 2006 (UTC) Oh, ok thanks, i will.-- Hrödberäht 02:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Yew

2 reasons:

1: My daughter is young and she says Yew instead of You, i find it cute and its become a family in-joke.

2: I use it so other non-me ips on my range arent blamed for what i do.

Re: Cronodevir

I don't think it's really going to make much of a difference, he knows he has the ability to create new names, troll/disrupt articles, try to bother other editors, and (for now) enjoy very soft enforcement of his "ban" from Wikipedia. I do know now that the IP range he's editing from is either a trade school or small private college in the U.K., I just don't know the name of it. After the New Year - when the worklife is less taxing - I'm going to see to it that I find this out and let the officials over there know what someone is abusing their internet network for very noneducational purposes. That seems to be the best option. Because in the long run, it's just going to be additional WP:SSP, Admin Noticeboard Reports, IP blocks, neverending. He'll be wasting other editor's time, and in turn "win" his games. --Danteferno 01:16, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Would you please ask Curtis to stop? Please? Jance 01:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

WHAT???

Have you followed what Curtis has done??? I have opened an An/I on him, here [1]. He has been abusive, has already been warned about reverting on NCAHF, has been told to be more respectful...Now he has followed me to Breast Implant and has vandalized that. And yes, under these circumstances, it is not good-faith. HE refuses to discuss it on the talk page. His comments are factually wrong, and i have explained this to him. Now, after all this, you only give me a warning? Are you serious? Or am I in Kafka-land?Jance 01:24, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Would you give Curtis a warning? I can't believe this is happening. I have never seen anyone like this, and I thought I had seen some bad editors.Jance 01:25, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Somebody already gave Curtis a warning. He needs to be banned.Jance 01:50, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
The copyright violation occurred today. He has edited the article since then, adding more from the websites. I do not see the point in adding my own complaint on 3RR, since it looks like 'tit for tat'. This is all exhausting. Surely admins can take a look and see what happened. I dont recall if it was you or someone else that removed the comment he added to Barrett v. Rosenthal. It was stunning. Whether you agree with IR or not (and I frequently have not), to make a bald statement that she libeled Barrett, after courts specifically found that she did not -- well, gee, it is pretty astonishing. I am an attorney, and I can tell you that his statement was libel. And his comment was his own (and not a republication), so the holding in Barrett v. Rosenthal would not help him. Someone wisely deleted it.Jance 02:26, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Curtis is still reverting

Please see NCAHF. He continues to insult, ignores consensus and reverts at will. Nobody can stop him. If I revert again, I will be blocked. Will someone tell me please why he is allowed to be so abusive and revert to WP:OWN despite every single editor disagreeing with him?Jance 20:04, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Have you had a look at what Curtis wanted to add? Copyright violation aside, do you really think this is appropriate for Wikipedia? And do you think that his continued insults of me are appropriate? Jance 22:28, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Would you please then mention on the talk page that you are not addressing the appropriateness of the content in the article, other than the possible copyright? Copyright was never my issue. I was more concerned with excessively lengthy quotes. And of course, his refusal to accept anyone's input, insistence on his own version of 'rules', and repeated personal attacks. He has now disrupted a third article. I decided to leave it alone - the article that is solely about a lawsuit is now misleading. Frankly, I don't care about these articles anymore. I am just livid that someone like this continues to insult, and is not stopped. I don't think WP:PAIN will get me anywhere. If someone hasn't stopped him by now, they wont.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/l/User_talk%7EWildnox_Archive_1_a5b3.html"