User talk:Bloodshedder

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi there, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page or how to format them visit our manual of style. Experiment at Wikipedia:Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump or my talk page. Have fun! -- Schnee 18:22, 10 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Hey, I know you. You've posted at Doomworld before right? As Schneelocke. I was intrigued by Wikipedia when I stumbled over it a couple of weeks ago or so. I originally joined just to mess with the Doom article a bit, but this place quickly got me hooked on editing. Thanks for the welcome. Bloodshedder 00:32, 11 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Yes, you're right, that would be me. ^_~ Schneelocke and/or arcticwolf in the doomworld and zdoom forums and on doom connector. Good to have you onboard at Wikipedia, and I'm glad we got you hooked! :) -- Schnee 00:40, 11 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Haha, you suck! --Lament

Lament, you jerk store. heh Bloodshedder 22:17, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Classes of IP addresses

Thanks for you contribution to Classes of IP addresses! I could use some more help with it if you are willing. —Noldoaran (Talk) 22:49, Dec 9, 2003 (UTC)

[edit] Hurricade

I've removed our little misunderstanding from Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Hurricade so as to not waste other people's time. Feel free to add an actual vote. -- Cyrius|✎ 03:01, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry about that. I feel pretty stupid about what I did now. Checking a dictionary or the creator's talk page hadn't occurred to me. Bloodshedder 01:48, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] template:main

Please see the talk page template talk:main:Two separate templates. Thete is a push to make it obsolete. Some of editors actually going around replacing {{main}} by {{main article}}, i.e., opposite to what you've done in New Rome article. mikka (t) 00:19, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

It's odd why that discussion took place, because under comparison with related templates, the way I'm using it (and soooo many other people) is exactly as it is prescribed. Also, the "misuse of main" discussion seems to be pretty old, so is it still relevant? Regardless, I'll continue changing instances of {{main article}} to {{main}} unless someone starts yelling at me to stop. Bloodshedder 03:26, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Extinctioners

Hey, thanks for the edit on Nightcrawler in the Extinctioners page, listen check out the Extinctioners page in history and check out 02:06, 11 May 2006 RVDDP2501 (Phenixinflight003.jpg changed to Phenix.jpg) and tell me if you prefer the current version or the version in history I just mentioned, some guy called Pathoschild editied my page horribly and said I had too many pics, what do you think? please let me know —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RVDDP2501 (talk • contribs) 12:28, 11 May 2006.

I don't see the problem with his edit - using the gallery tags makes that section look better, in my opinion. I do think the article may have a few too many images, though. Bloodshedder 20:49, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] USB flash drive

Hi! In USB flash drive, you note that they usually use the FAT filesystem, which is prone to fragmentation. Is there any reason why fragmentation is a liability in a solid-state drive, which does not have to seek like the heads of a hard disk? -- Coneslayer 20:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I looked around and found this link, and even though it deals with Pocket PC devices, it's still relevant to USB flash drives. The lack of comparitively long seek times, as with hard drives, apparently doesn't make flash unsusceptible to performance impacts caused by fragmentation. Bloodshedder 21:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the interesting link--the results certainly surprised me. I wonder why the slowdown occurs! -- Coneslayer 21:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Firing pin

Thanks for the S&W firing pin image. Maybe it will motivate me to tear down my 1911 and one of my Ruger rimfires to get pictures of their firing pins... scot 14:04, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Doom revision

Hey. Just as a heads-up, you may have been a little harsh with this edit. It may be that the anonymous contributor whose edit you (rightfully) reverted was trying to spellcheck while ignoring context; I know that some editors who are on the autistic spectrum or who are just plain tired often miss that sort of thing. I've made the mistake of not assuming good faith; with the number of vandals that run around the place patience can run thin. Anyway, thanks for keeping an eye out on Doom. Vandalism may be a permanent problem with Wikipedia, but people like you who watch over articles are the reason why it hasn't crossed over into the territory of a rampant conflagration consuming everything useful. Captainktainer * Talk 08:48, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I figured the "spellchecking" edit was in good faith, but apparently some people don't know what (sic) means. The "frivolous" part in the summary was in reference to the comment someone inserted in the engine technology section referring to modifications made by users later on; it's pretty obvious, to me at least, that section was meant to describe the original engine and not modifications. Bloodshedder 19:02, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Gotcha. You'd be surprised how many people don't know what sic means, especially younger contributors - I had to tutor this one kid who thought it was the expression "psych!" Hadn't occurred to me that by frivolous you were talking about the engine mods. Captainktainer * Talk 19:51, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AMD K6-III

I reverted your edit because the K6-2+ is essentially a K6-III core with less L2-Cache. It's only in the AMD K6-2 article because of the name AMD chose. --Denniss 21:15, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rims and revolvers

The edit you made was at least partially incorrect. While SA and DA revolvers tend to chambered be in rimmed cartridges, it's the DA extractor that requires rims, or moon clips, or a special spring-loaded extraction mechansim (the latter can be seen in the Medusa revolver, whose oversized chambers and spring-loaded extractor would handle just about any .355-357 cartridge from .380 ACP to .357 Mag). Traditional Colt-derived SA revolvers, with their ejector rods, have no problems ejecting rimless rounds, and can be found in 9mm, .45 ACP, 10mm (as convertables for .357 Mag, .45 Colt, and .38-40 respectively), and .30 Carbine. I think maybe that needs to be split into two sentences, to point out that most revolvers are chambered for rimmed cartridges, but DA revolvers are what really need the rim. scot 13:57, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Take the Nagant M1895. It is double-action, but does not have a swing-out cylinder, and uses a loading gate like the Colt Peacemaker. My point was that double-action and single-action aren't always related to swing-out and fixed cylinders. Thus, there's an ambiguity if you use "DA" to mean "swing-out" and "SA" to mean "fixed cylinder". (I will admit that I've never heard of a single-action with a swing-out cylinder, however.) Bloodshedder 21:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flash Drive

Look, we can't deny that the overwhelming majority of flash drives are made with USB interfaces. FireWire Flash Drives are simply not notable enough to warrent a separate article, especially when the internal specs are similar, except the FireWire interface. Couldn't we just add a small mention in the article about teh existence of flash drives with FireWire interfaces? Arbiteroftruth 07:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Of course you could. But my opinion is that they're rare enough to not warrant mentioning in the first paragraph of the article. This is why I reverted the edit; it would do better to be placed somewhere further inside the article. Bloodshedder 11:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quarter on flash drive image

Letting you know, I've reverted your edit to USB flash drive. It looks like the quarter was removed from the image (I can't see it!) though its probable you were seeing a cached image? (See the recent history of the image])

I see. There definitely used to be a quarter. My mistake. Thanks for letting me know. Bloodshedder 07:28, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lola Bunny and unilateral revision of the work of others

Actually, considering that the article in question was placed within the Category:Fictional hares and rabbits, not only does the banner "make sense for the article", but it is in fact specifically and clearly within the scope of the project for which it was tagged. This is particularly relevant considering the new project, which has yet to be moved from the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals page, will help to maintain the lists on which the character is included, which may be some of the most important links to the article. It also would have been added to the projects article list, so that it could be checked for recent changes, vandalism, etc. Of course, other projects could add their banners as well. I cannot see why they haven't, but you should ask them, not me. I also note that you removed the only assessment data the article has, which you presumably don't think relevant. Who needs improvement anyway, right? :) In any event, I regret to say that I have no particular fondness for seeing WP:OWN tendencies, and will ensure that only those articles where the tag remains in place will be monitored by the new project. After all, we wouldn't want anyone to be offended by seeing a tag they don't like, would we? John Carter 23:46, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rio Carbon Firmware

You may guess that I am utterly new to editing Wikipedia (though I have been using it for a long time!). I don't know how to reply to you yet - but I am hoping that this is the way! Thanks for that download - it did the trick for me. Of course the wiki article still has a non-working link & that driver is nowhere on the internet (I know - I spent today looking for it!) :-( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flybynight13 (talk • contribs) 21:20, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh - & now I have conquered sending you a message, I don't think that I was grateful enough for the file. Thank you thank you thank you

I've put it on the article now as well. Bloodshedder (talk) 21:25, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Episode articles

Please do not bring episodes back unless you can add real world information to assert notability. You are free to work on the episode list to make it into a featured list, which would be much better for everyone. Two good places for specific episode information are tv.com and Wikia. TTN (talk) 18:35, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi - User TTN is a notorious Deletionist who removes huge amounts of information claiming consensus, but actually doing so without consensus from the other users on the talk pages. TTN has eliminated all the episode descriptions for Scrubs and Malcolm in the Middle, and who knows what else. It's a shame, TTN tears down the body of knowledge claiming tv.com is the proper place for that. However, tv.com is not a Wiki, so the argument makes no sense. Geĸrίtz (talk)
Yes, I've realized that by now, but I won't be reverting anything done by him until the RfA is over and the situation is resolved. I won't be participating in any more edit warring. Bloodshedder (talk) 22:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, that's a real drag. "Contributors" like TTN really make it no fun to add to Wikipedia. And some really great TV episode articles have been removed - a bummer. Take care... Geĸrίtz (talk) 23:18, 22 January 2008 (UTC)