User talk:Dreaded Walrus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notice
If you leave a message for me: I will respond here. Either add this page to your watchlist or ask me to notify you of a response on your talk page.

If I leave a message for you: Please respond on your talk page. I will add it to my watchlist, so you don't need to notify me, unless I don't respond when a response is expected.

This prevents the same discussion occurring in multiple stages on multiple pages.


Contents

[edit] Message from Shadowpower187

SOCK PUPPETS OF SHADOW187 I CANT FIND THAT PAGE ITS VERY IMPORTANT I FIND IT! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shadowpower187 (talk • contribs) - moved in all its capital glory from user page by Onorem♠Dil 18:39, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi. There is no Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Shadow187, and Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Shadow187 was deleted. Bear in mind that block evasion is not allowed. Dreaded Walrus t c 18:50, 15 May 2008 (UTC) After responding to the user, I notified User:Nakon, who deleted the category mere hours earlier, that Shadowpower187 is most likely a sockpuppet of Shadow187. User was then blocked by Nakon. Dreaded Walrus t c 18:57, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re. User:70.186.172.75's edits to Silberbauer

Thank you for reporting this. This user's second edit appeared to be vandalism to the {{disambig}} template. Now I know that {{hndisambig}} is an actual template. I've rolled back my rollback. Regards, Húsönd 19:11, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for helping me, btw. :) 70.186.172.75 (talk) 00:54, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding Shenmue edit

It was speculation of things currently happening and cited in articles and such; editing for the better is okay of course (I agree it was speculative), but I have to disagree with erasing it all together, just like rumors of celebrities having done something lead to references afterwards in wikipedia because of the impact they had in their biographies (as rumors, even if they were untrue), and right now for Shenmue this is what is going on, and thus should be there; if it never materializes it'll have to be reduced, of course.

I agree it's incomplete, but the magazine game reactor is claiming that the game is coming, a printed magazine no less.

Skies of Arcadia also makes mention of that for example, in the header, that a sequel is rumored, and could be expanded for explaining that the planning stages were done previously, etc etc; should it be erased if it was done? hell no (and in SoA2 case, it was a website! not a printed magazine like this one is), just like the genuine rumor this is, which is completely different from a guy coming out and saying "a friend of a friend of a friend knows a guy who works at sega and he told me"

I request that the section of the article is brought back, or at leat, let someone put it back without taking it off completely; edit it if you want, to make more informative than speculative, but I ask that the information of the likeliness/rumor of a port is included, at least until we know it's not happening. that, or go around erasing the other cases I've stated doing the same thing (skies of arcadia for example)

I also disagree with crystal ball statement since no one was saying it was coming for sure, only saying there are rumors for it. (just like skies of arcadia page doesn't say soa2 is coming)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.181.11.19 (talk) 21:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User: Ripe

Generally, Ripe's alterations of my posting to the article Self-replicating machine are the issue. Frankly, I find nothing COI, POV, or vain about inclusion of discussion of a mechanism. I don't even include my name in the references of the post - only in the listing of references. Further, partial construction is fully described in the conference proceedings for Automata 2008, which is searchable (and readable) on Amazon. Simply look at the section titled Modes of Self-Replication and the Comments section. Ripe simply refuses to become knowledgeable about the facts, preferring to assume that a violation of WP policy exists. I claim his removal of material which I placed in the article Self-replicating machines is a blatant example of vandalism. Partial construction is fully discussed in a paper that is available to the general public, and is described formally in a paper which is accepted by the journal Biological Theory, and is referenced in the Automata 2008 paper. Ripe wants to act as an editor without doing the necessary work of an editor, which is unconscionable. William R. Buckley (talk) 17:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Meek

Hey, disregard any of that new account stuff that showed up. I'm working on getting down to the bottom of who did it.-CamT|C 06:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Aladdin (disambiguation)

Actually, Abtract is just making those edits to harass me. Could you revert back to my revision? It is a disambiguation page after all, and the Egyptian surname cat was legit. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. You might want to add the page to your watchlist, as that editor has a history of stalking and other disruptiveness, I'm afraid it's far from over. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 21:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
(after edit conflict) I reverted to your version. Regardless of whether he was doing the edits to harrass you or not (which I think I'd possibly agree with), and regardless of whether this warrants an automatic revert regardless of the merits of the actual edit (on this issue I imagine you are much more well-versed on policy than I, being an admin and everything), I looked over the edit I made more closely. Originally I removed {{disambig}} because it was made redundant by the other disambig tag, but in retrospect the former probably applies more fully. In addition, I agree with your other reasoning, I think. Again, I largely trust you to know more about style guidelines on this than me.
Thanks for not just reverting me, even after I took so long to reply. :) Dreaded Walrus t c 21:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
You might like to know that Sess is not an admin ... and has a history of making less than valid edits ... please judge edits on their merits. Abtract (talk) 21:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Apologies. I know it's a cliché, but I was genuinely sure that Sess was an admin. Regardless, in my original response I do say that I reverted based on the merits of the edit itself, and upon more thoroughly inspecting my first edit, I decided that overall I prefer Sess' version (for the reasons stated in the edit summary, and above).
I will admit that both of you know more about disambiguation pages than me - perhaps it would be worth asking for outside input from other knowledgeable people, on WT:MOSDAB or something? Dreaded Walrus t c 21:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
If it's of any concern, I have filed a report on Abtract for violating 3RR on Aladdin (disambiguation). Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 21:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you...

...for defending my user page. I'm sure the red-link meant well. I'm sure. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 15:57, 8 June 2008 (UTC)