User talk:Oni Ookami Alfador/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.

Contents

Welcome

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

Good luck!

Meelar (talk) 05:45, 10 November 2005 (UTC)


Username change

Your request has been completed. — Dan | Talk 07:28, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Image placement vote

Hello, it's MegamanZero, and I've gotten into a conflict with the Orgy over his needless image placement and excessive quotes on the Iori Yagami page. So, I've decided to hold a vote (like on the Ryu charaacter page) concerning which version should be used. The vote can be found here. Please vote your opinion on the matter and thanks for your time! -MegamanZero 18:03, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Voted. I see your point too. The article with all those pictures and quotes has so many problems with it, that if a trimmed down earlier version didn't already exist then it might as well be blank and started from the beginning. The only thing that will save it is a previous revision.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 19:23, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Mentorship

If you ever need help or advice, just ask on my talk page. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 09:34, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Will Do, thanks a lot.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 17:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Thesis MK- II

Mind looking at this, and telling me what you r opinion on the talkpage..? Thanks..! -MegamanZero 16:39, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Feedback provided. You really dont need to let me know what happens with the article anymore. I watch almost every article I get involved in and stay pretty up to date on them, come to think of that, I should note that on this page.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 17:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Okay, please look at the talkpage and make a respone-I'm itching to start wikifying this article, and we need to reach concensus before anyone starts editing. -MegamanZero |transerver 19:28, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Informal Mentorship

User:MegamanZero assigned me as your mentor. While I feel honored to be look up to for guidance (by him), he has no official status to assign random people for me to mentor. However if you want I can be your mentor.

This will be a gentleman's agreement and will not have any offical or binding value. Hence it will be informal. --Cool CatTalk|@ 21:29, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm good with that. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 21:38, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Ok, feel free to ask anything on my takl page. :) --Cool CatTalk|@ 21:09, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: Protecting Leet

I think, for now, I'll leave it as such. If things get further out of hand I'll protect it. NSLE (T+C+CVU) 00:09, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok, thanks a bunch for your time.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 02:24, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Overhall

Felt I needed a change, so I went crazy and did this. Cool, neh..? -MegamanZero|Talk 16:12, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Vanity at its finest. Not bad I must say, but you have to realize that you aren't going to need anywhere close to that much space for awards.  :) --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 16:47, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
  • True. But when I formatted the javascript, the only way I could make a sidebar was to make it match the space of the comment bar. Oh well, I'll just put other stuff in there as well; its not like I labled that space "awards". -MegamanZero|Talk 16:59, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I think we both know what your true agendas were eh? Personal advice though: While JavaScript is awesome, extremely so, you may want to caution yourself in its use, as some browsers still dont support it correctly. Now that normally doesn't matter but on wikipedia it might. I'm not sure of the statistics on who uses what to come here.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 17:00, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Don't know what you're thinking, but I did it because I finally had to archive my comments on my talkpage, and I thought "Why not just overhall the whole thing..?" I think the end product turned out quite well. Now I just need to learn how to make a javascript box that will make my userpage design match my talkpage (you know, make it envelop in gray). -MegamanZero|Talk 17:06, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Megatokyo

Thanks for cleaning up my Changes section on the Megatokyo article. To respond to your comment about its importance I think its just as important as the switch from cideogame humor to different humor. -- Psi edit

No problem. And about importance, I dont see any reason to get rid of it but others might, so you may just want to be ready to defend that point.----

Fighting Game Developer List

I recently browsed the website and found this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fighting_game_developers

It has a plethora of information, but it is missing at least one important developer. Knowing that you are an enthusiast of DOA, I am sure you have better knowledge of its developer and franchise history than I do. DaDoc540 05:08, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. I added what I could, but I'm in a tough situation right now editing with my keyboard on my lap and my mouse on top of my monitor (don't ask), so I cant make long edits as it takes20 friggin minutes to spellcheck my current ones. I'll try to make a more in depth edit later.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 05:03, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

re:Category:Wikipedians by D&D Alignment

I noticed you are categorized as a Wikipedian by alignment. If you are in to userboxes, there are now infoboxes available using a standard template. See the alignment category page for details. This is a copied announcement, please reply on My Talk Page or in the category talk if you have any questions. xaosflux Talk/CVU 18:51, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Sileighty page

Added my two cents to the name change, and the IP you mentioned is not me. My last IP's went up to Limousine for the first one and then the second one was in Japan Cup before I registered due to the whole libel lawsuit Wikipedia had.

Ah, well I hope that other person does surface again so I can discuss some of the article's points with them. Either way, thanks for your contributions to the article.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 08:05, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Counter Un-civility Unit

Wikipedia:Counter Un-civility Unit is a new wiki-project I have thought up. I was wondering if you thought it was a good idea and if you wanted to join up. I need some users backing me before I construct a wikiproject, and you seem to share my views on subjects such as concensus, civilty, etc. Reply on my talkpage if you're interested. Thanks, -MegamanZero|Talk 16:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I left a response to the project in its section on your talk page.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 08:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

References

I think these are not properly "References" since they aren't formatted as references, nor is there any indication (footnotes) to show that they were actually used in the writing of the article. -- Netoholic @ 21:37, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Probably true. I'm going to look up the references and cross-reference them with the article to find information that is either identical or supported, and I'm going to try and do the same with a few more sources.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 05:21, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Template:D&D-stub image

Hi. I noticed you removed the D&D icon from Template:D&D-stub, with the note that its use in a template is counter to Wikipedia policy. Can you refer me to the policy? Thanks, GRuban 16:46, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

IFD

I have placed most of the new images (and the old) from the Dead or Alive articles up for deletion. You may wish to contribute on the ensuing discussion which can be found here. -ZeroTalk 16:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

DOA images

The following is an archived discussion from MegamanZero's talk page, copied over on 16:03, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

You seem to be cleaning a lot of these out. I dont think this is necessary. A couple are orphaned, but as for others, you seem to want to keep all articles down to one image (I may be mistaken but thats how it seems). It can be of interest to include multiple images of a character, specifically if they are game art. Whenever available, it is a good idea to include 1 game screenshot of a character, and at least 1 portrait or low resolution example of an artistic render. Specifically as in Image:Tina Armstrong DOA.jpg and Image:Ayane DOA.jpg. At the very least, this images should have been removed from the article in question and a note of this should have been made there before nominating them for deletion.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 21:09, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I'll remove said images after their deletion. And you echo my thoughts on the image capacity for each respective article. However, some uploaders are getting carried away, aand I'm simply cleaning up the unneeded pictures. An encylopedia should be extensive, not exhaustive. -ZeroTalk 21:12, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I see no reason for Image:Kasumi_DOA4.jpg or Image:Tina Armstrong DOA.jpg to be deleted. Two images on each article is adequate, and it is not necessarily enough to have just the infobox portrait.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 21:15, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

The Kasumi image is redundant in comparison to the DOAU image that was present previously. The TIna image is unencyclopediac and informs the reader of little. I plan to replace that with a more suitable Bodyshot image in the near future. -ZeroTalk 21:19, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
In which case I would urge you to leave it until that time. As for removing them after a deletion goes through, unless I am mistaken it is policy, or at least standard practice, not to nominate an image while it is still in the article unless it is a CV. AS for the kasumi image, something can only be redundant if another simmilar item is present (which is not currently) and a high quality shot that is more than a head shot certainly adds to the article.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 21:36, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I cannot possibly refrain from leaving them alone. Could you please tell me why I should...? I'm utterly baffled. There's no reason to have a oudated pic of Tina that provides nothing to the article and two images of Kasumi which depict the same posisition. Not to worry however, I'm searching for an updated pic as of now. -ZeroTalk 21:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
My point is that you might as well just take it off the article. And especially on the Kasumi imgages, the headshot up for deletion seems way better than the one already there, and what two depicting the same position? There's only that one besides the head shot in the article.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 22:11, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
How right you are. I'll remove it right now. And I am refering to these imags concerning the Kasumi article:
  • Image:Kasumi DOA.jpg
  • Image:Kasumi DOA4.jpg

They both depict bodyshots and the first image is more preferable due to her ninja attire (her "canon" outfit) and larger view of the character in question. -ZeroTalk 02:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I take that back, I forgot about that image. As for the headshot though, I think the one up for deletion is more suited for the article. The current attire choice seems just slightly unnecessary and the other one seems like a better angle but that might be personal preference. Should I crop it and replace the existing version with it to see how it looks?--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 03:11, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I suspect you know better than I. So go for it; I'll swith the image for deletion and delete the DOAU image instead. -ZeroTalk 03:16, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I resized the newer headshot image (for purely space concerns) as there was not much cropping I could see to be done, but per discussion I replaced the existing image with it. You may want to withdraw the nomination for deletion, but I leave that up to you as it is more or less improper for anyone else to actually withdraw a nomination other than the one who did it. I love it when a dispute comes together to make things work eh?--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 16:03, 27 January 2006 (UTC) (Note: I am archiving a copy of this discussion on my talk page for future reference).



Hey people. Im also with the images issue (along with Zero). I think we need to prevent this by asking one request of the Wiki policy to include requests not to remove images from pages. -- Psi edit 18:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure what you mean.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 19:08, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

We should have some notice on a Wiki Official page about how images shouldnt go unused. Like we have some images that have been removed from pages but remain in existence on Wikipedia. Those images should be

  • used
  • deleted

-- Psi edit 21:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Not a bad idea, have you raised this with Zero yet? I think the best idea is to start a Wiki-Project:Image improvement or something simmilar, because this will require a lot of discussion, and probably an RFC before it can be made policy.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 21:34, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

A wiki project,...? Sounds like an exellent idea. Please indulge me furthur on what you two have in mind. Also, Oni, I have replaced the Tina image in the lower right hand corner of her article; thus the previous unockable bikini image is now classified as OP. -ZeroTalk 10:57, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Well I tried sending somehting here earlier, no response. Probably should forward that to a Wiki official. However if you 2 can reword our point better then perhaps you should do that. P.S. Zero whats OP. -- Psi edit 19:44, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do about rewording the explanatory thesis regarding the Wiki-policy. And OP is an abbreviation for "orphaned", as the previous Tina image is no longer in use. -ZeroTalk 20:11, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Template:D&D-stub image: take 2

Hi. This is my second attempt at asking this question, since Jan 26. I noticed you removed the D&D icon from Template:D&D-stub, with the note that its use in a template is counter to Wikipedia policy. Can you refer me to the specific policy that you're referring to? Thanks, GRuban 17:06, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed the previous entry. Anyways, its really rather simle, and is layed out in Template:Logo itself. When the image still existed (it doesn't anymore) it was tagged as a logo. As such it is only to be used in the terms outlined on the template used to tag it. Logos get misused a lot, and the most frequent use of this is in templates and userboxes. The only pages the logo would appropriately be used on are the Dungeons and Dragons page itself and perhaps the page for the creators or developers if it made enough note of it on the page. But otherwise, no. Not only is there no need to have the icon in the template, but it violates Wikipedia's image copyright policy. Jimbo himself has expressed how important it is to make sure these policies are upheld.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 18:58, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Will try to find or make a better one. GRuban 14:22, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

My internet connection was yo-yo'ing and SSH was crashing when I was sending the KILL command to the server whereUser:Tawkerbot was operating, sorry about the issue, it was another long term admin who suggested subst'ing unsigned. Tawker 16:04, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Ah,I see. It may be something to go back and sub in the future, but for now this is probably best.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 20:41, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Lol, both your usernames started with an "s" - I think thats how I got confused :) -- Tawker 07:08, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
"Huh? an "s"? --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 07:10, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikibreak

Welcome back. -ZeroTalk 20:46, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Looks like I got caught pretending to be asleep no? I am still not going to be 100% active though.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 20:52, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
I can't afford to enforce the luxary of an break. I'm working on an new project, whilst still copyeditting on my previous one. I'm doing intensive research, and in the process of creating even more articles from scratch. Perhaps an wikibreak is warrented after I've completed this. -ZeroTalk 21:22, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
If you're at all like me, (and I'd hope for your sake not) you might want to use the Template:Attempting_wikibreak. Because its hard to enforce a definite one, you know you'll drop by to check on things. My only real project, which entails cleaning up and updating the Category: Initial D related articles, has been going reasonably smoothely with the exception of one fancruft incident in which the revertee got somewhat irate, but its not my problem since I told him it was something for everyone to talk about together and he did the ever classic "fine then I dont care, its not worth my time, etc." Aw who am I kidding?? I never even went on break... haha--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 22:05, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Wikibreak seems to be out of the question. I've found an new batch of articles to expand here. I've also encountered an bit of an irritation while doing my projects, and It's difficult to swallow. Frequently users will construct blank articles, and then not bother to write anything for the character [1]. Then I must go after them and do all the work [2]. This has happened on an great deal of articles, and it needs to stop. -ZeroTalk 19:25, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Rfc

Hello Oni. Forgive me, but I'm not quite sure what happens in the RFC process. I understand I should probably just RTFM here but I'd like some pointers. Should I just follow the instructions at WP:RFC? Should I hold off for a while or just do it now? I'm new to using RFC so your help is appreciated. Thanks! Isopropyl 06:56, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, it would more than likely go in the Language and linguistics section. a Brief explanation of the issue at hand (whether or not the article should be merged) followed by a datestamp ( ~~~~~ ) is all thats needed. No user signature. I would hold off on this though. Give it about a week to reach consensus. I think we'll have concluded something by then. This is not a last resort per se, but it is something to save for after a serious attempt to discuss the issue and reach a consensus. I dont think we'll even need an RFC, but its good to keep the option open. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 15:56, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you. Hopefully we can work something out. Isopropyl 21:16, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
What I would reccoment for now is to get input from specific people in which you have interacted with in the past, and respect the opinion of. I already did that by speaking to User:Brian0918 since he has worked on the article before. I may ask a couple more people. As well. I find this to be a nice step to take before an Rfc. No better or worse, but it does offer the chance to get a more relevant opinion, although the added neutrality of an RfC is great as well. I also found the link that illustrates my beef with straw polls, and why I think they are devil work.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 21:25, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, yes, polls are not terribly effective. Kinda wish Brian wasn't so quick to jump all over me about it though. Isopropyl 21:30, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
He kinda does that. But we all have our quirks, and if you ask me, thats what makes Wikipedia so great. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 21:38, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Initial D

I will happily leave it under plain old "film stub". Someone else put it in the category "Japanese films" so I was trying to tidy it away into a sub-stub. Perhaps you should propose a Chinese film stub. Cheers, Her Pegship 02:14, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Since you had added it a second time I figured the edit summary got buried beneath the edits after it, and that I should mention it directly in case it happened again.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 02:29, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

DOA articles

Good news. I finally finished inserting gameplay sections into each and every Dead or Alive character article. I can now move on to other things. :) -ZeroTalk 02:32, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Good luck with that. I made a note on the main DOA game article's page about the apparent NPOV removal you may have an interest in.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 02:38, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I noticed that. Good point. I suggest you insert whatever you feel is valid back into the article. -ZeroTalk 02:49, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

240SX Performance Modification Wikibook

hey I did some work on the 240SX page with you and I just started a wikibook I think you might be interested with helping out on: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Nissan_240SX_Performance_Modification I'm diving in head first to get some stuff on there but your help is welcome Sean1978 00:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Consider me involved. Wikibooks account is same name.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 04:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

aqua teen hunger force

hello, i found you from the athf page, do you know anything about the movie or interesting information about the show, i am a new fan of this halarious show. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.25.138.211 (talk • contribs)

Pretty much all of the existing verified information is in the article. Other than that all I can really tell you is that wikipedia isn't a fansite. Not to be harsh but any discussion on user talk pages should probably stay wikipedia related, and respectively, discussion on article talk pages should really remain related to the development of the article.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 04:00, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Religion-X's teaching on marriage

Hi, thanks for your attention at the religions' teaching on marriage move request. Would you be so kind as to vote in the survey? No pressure. Zargulon 17:32, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

User:65.6.4.143

Hi. I understand how you feel, but please cool down. There's no logical reason to stoop to another person's unacceptable behavior outbursts[3]. Rest assured this chap will be dealt with shortly. -ZeroTalk 17:45, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Does this sastify you..? -ZeroTalk 17:47, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
First off my response to his actions was in no way stooping to his level of outburst. I told him to expect a block, which should be delivered due to a combination of personal attacks and vandalism [4].--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 18:28, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
You're right. I was mistaken; I thought you responded with that comment he changed of yours earlier. This situation seems to have taken care of itself now nonetheless. -ZeroTalk 04:41, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Spoiler tag

[5]Okay. But only until Dead or Alive 5 is released. :) On another note, see this and this for my reasonng why I use spoiler tags sparingly. -ZeroTalk 18:57, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the tag is an unsightly mess but until Wikipedia:Spoiler warning isn't a guideline anymore it seems to me that it would be best to follow it when in doubt.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 20:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm not in doubt in the least. I do what's apropriate for the encyclopedia. Its as said, if a person what's to avoid "spoilers", they shouldn't be anywhere near the vicinity of an encyclopedia. -ZeroTalk 23:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Probably true. The only thing is that the best way to change it would be to approach it directly via the guideline. While its not policy, its still to be followed for the most part.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 00:22, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
You're right. I'll do it soon enough. Also, I've placed myself on WP:ER. If there's anything you feel like saying, feel free to post over there. -ZeroTalk 04:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


Leet

Sorry if I mess this up, I'm not quite sure how to use it. Anyway, to clear up my Magic the Gathering reference on the Leet page, both cards are in leet Niv-Mizzet is just written sideways on the flavor text (you must rotate it clockwise 90 degrees and it reads "Niv-Mizzet=1" and despite not being a legal card Magical Hacker was made as a real card by Wizards of the Coast as part of an expansion and constitutes a pop culture reference. Also I know that the term pwn started on Startcraft, not counter-strike. The location is debatable and I can understand you removing it. Let me know whether or not I can put the card examples back up. I do not have an account so just message me however you did it the first time, I expect to hear back. Also it may be a good idea to message people before deleting submitted info, that way people can clarify misunderstandings before having to repost submissions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.219.224.159 (talk • contribs)

If thats true go ahead and add it back in I guess. As for the pwn thing though, there has been a long and tedious debate on the pwn page. It is most certainly not starcraft of counterstrike, as it is shown to be older than either, and without sources its moot either way. Seeing as how wikipedia is a constantly references source that is frequently edited with false data, it is important to correct apparent falsehoods immediately, and talking it out may not always be a timely solution since it can be done later. If you plan on discussion edits in depth in the future, it may be prudent to create a user name.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 04:41, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Hey Oni, I found this, (→Origins of Leet - please write sentences, real ones, with real punctuation. "--" is not punctuation.) as one of your edit summaries and I felt I might want to tell you. An emDash is acceptable punctutation used primarily in bradcast journalism it indicates a longer pause then a comma and is used to add extra information — and content — to an article. I think the technical name is an extended dash (Update its an emDash), but I'm not certain. I do know that wiki software, however is different from MS word — a dash dash in MS word comes out as one long dash — and can cause confusion. Your version is still better written though, so I'm not going to change anything, just thought you might to know. Peace -- Dragoonmac - If there was a problem yo I'll solve it 23:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
For the purpose of wiring a presentable document, -- does not represent any kind of grammatically correct punctuation. It is only acceptable in something that is intended to be spoken, as audible markup like you said. I'm just sick of people using dashes and parenthesis, even quotes and boldface and so on where they definitely dont belong in articles. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 23:20, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: User talk:72.161.208.238

If you spent less energy on being beurocratic and more energy on being constructive then it would work to everyone's benefit. You've apparently gone to considerable effort and typing over this, but to what end? - To make sure nobody is helped? Does it give you some sort of satisfaction to know that you enforced your interpretation of some arbitrary rule about what should and shouldn't be on a Wikipedia talk-page?... The text-zoom issue is something which affects every Firefox user who likes to browse at a bigger text size, and particuarly those who use Wikipedia. If answers are found this could help improve and expand the Wikipedia articles on Firefox so that they're more helpful to readers. It could also end up helping to improve the MediaWiki software and the Wikipedia experience for everyone. If you're gonna go to all that effort and do all that typing then why not offer a solution to this problem. Or if you don't have one then just leave it alone, or better yet, if you were gonna be going to all this effort, you could have text-zoomed yourself to verify the problem and then (assuming you're more farmiliar with Wikipedia than I am), you could have referred the issue to the apropriate Wikipedia tech people. And doing all of that would have been less effort and typing on your part and would have accomplished a lot more...Wikipedia is supposed to be a community where everyone works together to improve things for everyone! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.208.238 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is a community in which everyone works to improve the encyclopedia for everyone, not life as we know it or some other sweeping generalization. Please dont cite generalized talking points out of context. If you can find citeable 3rd party reference to this as an issue, it may be warranted in the article. Otherwise, its uselss to wikipedia, and the article, and as a result does not belong on the talk page. Its really that simple. If its a problem with wikipedia software there is a more relevant place for that. If it is a firefox zooming problem as a whole, it may belong on the article as long as, as I've already stated, you can cite a source per WP:CITE and WP:NOR. Also, if you had continued to read the header of my page, you would have noticed that I expect replies where the original message left. There is no need to fragment the conversation. Just because you dont like the way things work on wikipedia doesn't mean you can circumvent the rules.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 16:05, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

The Depot (citation)

Yeah, I didn't check my messages until after I ad already replied there so if you prefer it might as well be kept there, so everyone can see it without having to look for it.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 05:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

IP vandal/content dispute

I feel obligated to point out that according to WP:VANDAL spamming links is considered vandalism. You misinterpreted my report as a content dispute. Adding unrelated links, presumably for personal gain is considered vandalism and is instructed to be treated as such. This user has gone through the appropriate warnings, and the appropriate action was taken up to the point of the intervention page [6]. Please reconsider taking the appropriate anti-vandalism action against this user since their actions most certainly qualify as vandalism, and my actions constitute attempts to deal with that vandalism, not a content dispute. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 19:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I agree that repeated spamming is vandalism. But this was not a clear-cut case of spamming. When I followed the link, it appears that it is at least related to the topic at hand. Given this, I do not believe that there was sufficient warning to the user of inappropriate behaviour to warrant blocking. For example:
  • There is no discussion on the cited article talk page about external link being inappropriate.
  • The IP's talk page only has see generic vandalism warnings. (e.g. if the {{spam}}, {{spam2}} & {{spam3}} warnings were used, that would be much clearer)
-- JamesTeterenko 20:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Response from Porsche997SBS

Hello Oni Ookami Alfador, to answer your question I took your advice. Thank you for pointing out the discussion in Wii's Talk section. Next time I'll be sure to check the talk page if this situation comes up again. And it's okay to put your information in the wrong section, I'm happy to fix it. I don't think it's unlikely to keep up my format; I don't get too many edits and I have plenty of time on my hands. Thanks for the helpful critisism and advice!--Porsche997SBS 21:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Doom127

About User:Doom127 and suspect sockpuppet User:Joe_Muz, you need know that this guy created tons of comproved others sockpuppets: just look at the category: [7] --Jason Five 22:14, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but any particular reason none of these had showed up on the sockpuppetteer page?--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 02:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

NCIS

I don't see my mistake in editing the article. Agent Gibbs left the show in the season finale after all. YankeeDoodle14

  • Ok

Sig colour

<Edit to view, something in it broke the rest of my talk page and I really didn't feel like figuring it out.>

Thanks!!

Thanks for reverting the vandalism at my talk page! Kim van der Linde at venus 00:56, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Jason Five

You ARE aware that "Jason Five" is a sockpuppet too right? --—Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.243.57.243 (talk • contribs)

I dont know who you are, and I dont know who this jason five character is other than they are getting involved in matters that don't seem to concern them. In either case I have no interest in what he has to say considering that all he serves to do is point out the obvious. I am more interested in addressing issues with evidence and such behind them.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 05:09, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Jason is Brazil4Linux

Oni, I believe I have been misrepresented thus far. As you know, sockpuppets aren't against Wiki policy, only use of them to violate the 3RR. Joe was actually created because of a banned user named Brazil4Linux. Since last September, this individual has been stalking me both on Wikipedia and off, creating dozens of sockpuppets that he used to vandalize my pages (and pages I've edited) and he even went so far as to create derogatory MySpace accounts with my personal information and phone number on them.

"All those" sockpuppets you saw (with the exception of Joe) were the result of one crazy night fight weeks ago between me, Cyde and CambridgeBayWeather, and I was already duly blocked for them. The matter was closed and I put it behind me.

But Brazil, on the other hand, has not ceased to harass me since September. He continually watches my contrib sheets, leaping upon anything he thinks he can use to attack me with. Thus, you notice his Jason Five account's ONLY contribution to Wiki has been to personally attack me.

I intended to use Joe not as a 3RR support, but as a springboard account so that I could continue editing the pages I enjoyed while getting away from B4L, then I could eventually merge the two accounts. That was one of the reasons why I quickly put the Wii page back in order, despite a disagreement- but that kinda got mucked up, as you very well know.

So now you know the truth about the situation, about Joe and your "ally" here. Hope this clears up a few misunderstandings that have been tossed around. -- Daniel Davis 16:59, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I am sure Joe is your account according to what appears to be your own admittance however, and it does appear to have been used (purpose aside) in use of the 3RR. These other accounts are not of real interest to me, as I have not been made privy to relevant edits, edit histories, and account histories. Also, I am not an administrator, and while it is something I have thought about, I am not what I consider to be active enough at the time to warrant becoming one when someone who spends more time on wikipedia could take a shot at the position. This jason five affair would seem to be nothing I have no business in, and I would like to keep it that way, as from my experience, when non-administrative 3rd parties get involved in conflicts between users serious problems have shown to arise (take a look at the user talk and history of one User:Dschor if you want to see a prime example of this).
As personal advice from one wikipedian to another, if you in the future wish to keep a sockpuppet account to avoid conflicts with certain users, and you do not wish to declare it a sockpuppett, it would be in your best interest to keep it off of pages in which any other account of yours is currently active. After all, if your primary username is already active on the page, so you aren't effectively hiding behind the new account anyways, really defeating any purpose of using it. As a result I am disinclined to believe that you were using it with pure intentions in the Wii dispute, but, at this point it is of no interest to press the issue any further. This conflict with another user would best be taken up with the arbitration comitee, or at least an administrator. If you check atop my page on my navbar there is an item entitled "user links". A couple of those users are administrators whom I have found to be extremely cool headed and have settled matters (both agreeing and disagreeing with my position, but almost always to my satisfaction) countless times. If you do not wish to take it up with the arbitration comitee, perhaps one of them may advise you. Just make sure first that the user you are consulting is an administrator. If you have any other concerns do not hesitate to contact me. If it is urgent I do repond to wikipedia email or AIM.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 04:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice- it is well spoken. As for Jason (that Brazil4Linux sock), administrators such as Alkivar and Nandesuka have already banned him multiple times (at least 15 not counting innumerable traced IPs), to no avail. As I previously mentioned, B4L's been systematically attacking me, my userspace and pages I edit since last September. Basically, he creates a sock, watches my user contribs for anything he can use to attack me with, then gets found out and the sock gets banned. Lather, rinse, repeat. Warnings, blocks, bans all don't seem to be able to instill within his mind the fact that his behavior is out of line. Essentially, as long as I have this account, he will continue to stalk me, and when I DO leave Wiki for any period of time, he has a tendency to try to provoke me by creating MySpace pages containing.. erm.. offensive.. things relating to me in them. So.. it's my cross to bear. -- Daniel Davis 05:24, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Some possible advice... I'm not sure as to the viability of this notion, but given the circumstances, you may be able to have your current account shifted. Try to contact a bureaucrat, as they have the power to move usernames. I dont know if you have too many edits, or if they would be willing to do it, but you might be able to go around the normal public request process and have the move conducted to a somewhat undisclosed name. This may discourage the user, then again it may just provide him the satisfaction, so its your call. If you want my support/input on dealing with this fool in the future, drop me a line.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 05:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Galleries for Consoles

I started a discussion in the talk page of you proposal. Please check it out--DivineShadow218 23:36, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

The only thing is it hasn't become an issue. It was re-added once by an anon. IP that I suspect was a user active on the page who did not want to make their position known. I also suspect this was only done because the relevant talk discussion was removed. Since no real opposition has surfaced there or on any other console talk page I see no reason to make an issue of it. I also stated that if it were to become a relevant issue, the page I created would be moved as an extension of the Computer and videogames project namespace. If I or any other editor reasonably involved editor sees a real debate forming around this (which at the time is not happening) I will not hesitate to move it to that namespace. Until then it is really a dormant issue and doesn't need consideration, nor will the comments present on it be seen my many editors, and they will probably be considered by less than that.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 04:09, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the userbox help

Thanks for putting the userbox back up on the discussion page. I didn't want to be the one to put it back up since I figured I would look pretty stupid doing so. I too believe that the discussion page does not really need to be encyclopedic, and that is why I put the userbox there. I see you made a more appropriate userbox for the movie, I guess I just have some weird fascination with Samuel L. Jackson so I had to include it in the box. Thanks again. --Nehrams2020 06:25, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

That wasn't me that made the new one, in fact I wholeheartedly dissaprove of the affair. I just put it back because I don't feel talk pages should be cut without archival unless there is a very good reason to do so. As for talk pages being encyclopedic... Talk pages, especially in mainspace and wiki namespaces, need to remain related to the article to which they are attatched. I have enforced this policy with an iron fist in the past with mixed results, but I after input from another user, I am probably going back to it.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 06:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

External links in S-chassis articles

I've been trying to beat back the linkspam, but I wonder if we're not being aggressive enough. WP:EL is pretty cut and dry that forums, commercial links, and just about anything that isn't a reference or an official site for the topic are to be avoided. I thought I'd let you know what's up before I start just hacking away at External links sections. — AKADriver ☎ 16:38, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, forums exclusively aren't so good, but in a few cases they are. Also, a lot of the external links you refer to are highly misrepresented. Nico, KA-T both have a large selection of technical articles although KA-T may be a little specialistic. 240sx Convertible is a relatively important resource as well, as I did feel like verifying their claim, and they do seem to be the only real site with any specific dedication to the convertible models, and they host a large quantity of tech articles and such on the matter. As a result I would be disinclined to remove it but if both it and 240sx.org remain I suppose Nico really isn't needed as they are in association with it. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 23:26, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Proposed deletions

I have proposed two redirects in which you have edits and appear to have created for deletion: Uchuu Keiji Tamashii and Uchū Keiji Tamashī. I figured it was prudent to let you know, and if there are any issues, I have no objections bringing the issue to WP:AFD. I have posted explanation on the pages.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 10:00, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi, sorry mate but I didn't found your explanations. Searched in redirect pages discussion (the two of them and in the article too) and also in the VFD discussion, but nothing. Do you have a wiki link maybe?. Also I can't figure out why you want to remove these redirects since there are exact romanizations (both Japanese and English versions, i'm not fond of the Enligh one but people use it here, so I had to do it too) of the "宇宙刑事魂" title. Actually the full title is "宇宙刑事魂 The Space Sheriff Sprits" but I've reduced it to the English tagline to make easier searches. The series wiki link is different since it's 宇宙刑事魂, Uchuu Keiji and Uchū Keiji.EnthusiastFRANCE 12:02, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Citation found

You should know that I found the citation that says that the Stalkers are run on a saline solution. I looked through Rasing the Bar and confirmed it. Thunderbrand 02:34, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Never hurts to be overzealous though. Too many fans speculate on what sounds like a good backstory and want their "brilliance" showcased...--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 07:24, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

SSP

Ahoy Oni, just like to let you know that the suspected sock puppet case you started has finally closed(!) It was closed with no result becuase you stated that the user has left Wikipedia. If you have any quesitons or anything like that, feel free to contact me. Thanks, Iolakana|(talk) 17:38, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Dead or Alive (video game series)

I noticed the main article was severely lacking in information. As such, I taken the liberty of expanding the article. Details here. Comments..? -ZeroTalk 22:14, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

User:Randall Brackett/Test

I've made a slight redesign on the uniform Template:General CVG character. I've stated reasoning on the WP:CVG talkpage. Any comments on the new design would be appreciated. -Randall Brackett 07:54, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Jerky (food) article dispute

Hello. If you get a chance, could you please stop by the Jerky article and help resolve a dispute regarding proper WP:External links. The relevant discussion is at Talk:Jerky (food)#Recipes, and I am seeking third party opinions since another user and I seem to be at an impasse. I am sending this to all editors who have recently edited the article or its talk page. Thanks so much for your time, Satori Son 17:29, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

In regards to your edit on Simulacrum (definition of 'Prequel')

I'm not disagreeing with your assessment of the Marathon games (I was never aware of their existance) as not being related to Halo. What I am here to bug you about is of far less consequence.

"Marathon was not a prequel, it has never been shown to actually SHARE a timeline, nevermind that it was made first, (if anything making halo a sequel)"

The term prequel is: "A literary, dramatic, or cinematic work whose narrative takes place before that of a preexisting work or a sequel.". It does not matter when the work was released, it is a prequel only if the timeline takes place before the sequel. The reverse is also true.

Again, I'm not concerned with Marathon relating to Halo, I trust that you are correct, I just wanted to clarify the term prequel as your edit note seemed to imply you misunderstood it. Also, this is not meant as an attack, and I'm not trying to be a condescending jerk, I just want to make sure that there's no confusion on the term in the future. Feel free to delete this after you read it. Also, if you think I've been unfair you know where to contact me. --Thaddius 18:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate your efforts to clarify confusion with regards to the word prequel. I just want to make it clear that the overriding point was my objection to Marathon being compared on the same line of Halo. There have been massive spats both here and elsewhere over whether Marathon and Halo are in the same universe, and as far as Wikipedia is concerned, until Bungie or a notable well published critic makes the same assertion we really shouldn't even be making comparison. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 18:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I completely understand. This was simply about the word prequel. --Thaddius 18:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Jeffrey Coho

Yes, I saw the episode you're referring to. You don't get to draw conclusions or interpret things that are "likely" to happen because of what you think is "implied" in an episode of a tv show. That's the whole point of Wikipedia: No original research. Rray 16:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Please don't rant on my talk page, and also don't imply that I'm "abusing" Wikipedia policies. I'm not interested in what you're "sick and tired of". Rray 22:23, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
This is all well and good with me. If you don't want to discuss edits, you probably don't want to be making them, especially not more than once.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 22:40, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm happy to discuss edits. I asked you not to rant about what you're "sick and tired of" on my talk page, and I also asked you to not accuse me of abusing Wikipedia policies. Try to understand the difference.
You might try to keep in mind that being civil is a community standard here, and working toward a consensus is also a good thing to do. Your combative tone on my talk page was neither civil nor helpful toward building consensus. Rray 06:43, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Regarding the message you left on my talk page, thanks for the heads-up; I agree with you 100%. I just installed a new version of VandalProof, and my customized buttons were lost in the upgrade, so I was unaware that I was sending test-4's as first warnings. Thanks. Jerry 17:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Nicole_(DOA).gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Nicole_(DOA).gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Deadoralive_leon.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Deadoralive_leon.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

360 technical problems

Allo.
The article actually did have a single reference for the heatsink, but the IP (presumably wageslave) removed it. (If memory serves, it was a good-faith edit. I think he was removing a few things that happened to include the link. Anyways, check the history if it actually matters)
I don't know if the link is good enough, mind you. [8] On the one hand, they actually include pictures that certainly don't seem to be photoshopped. On the other hand, not being a 360 person, I don't recognize the source at all. Bladestorm 17:30, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree but the link itself seems dubious to me. Personally I'd like to see multiple examples, and at least one from an independent journalistic article. There's nothing really to show that the heat sink was not attatched by an end-user or some other party besides microsoft. Personally I'd like to leave the tag for now and see what response it gets while I look into it a little further myself.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 17:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Allo. I was too lazy to create a new section. :D
With this edit, did you achieve what you were trying to? Because, from the edit summary, it sounded like you were trying to restore the mention of an error message (which I'd already restored), but you actually deleted a comment that I'd just restored but flagged to be cited. Bladestorm 20:55, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Your assumption is correct, I was just looking at that in bewilderment myself for a second. Sometimes that happens with direct reverts. Considering that, I do think that the phrase doesn't belong there, and concurrent with the WP:CITE, when statement needs a source, and "is potentially harmful" which I believe this one is, due to its nature of claiming a statistic of sorts, would be if it were false. So until it is backed up with a reliable source it, in my opinion, should really be gone or at least moved to the talk page to be sorted out.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 20:59, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Really no harm done then I suppose. :) Bladestorm 21:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Nope. Thanks for keeping an eye on the edits too. Certain people make generally productive edits but can tend to overreach just a little bit sometimes and keeping that in check is noble work indeed.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 21:05, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


Ok lets talk about that censor

see headline.Oh, nd i can delete those warnings. I have alredy heeded them.  ATROCITY1313 

All that is needed is the following... take a look at WP:NOT which clearly indicates that wikipedia is not censored. Also please take a look at WP:TALK which states that user's comments on talk pages are not to be edited or removed, and that discussion is to be kept relevant to the article content specifically. Also, would you care to explain your use of {{db-attack}}? --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 22:13, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Take it to my talk page, o and English please!  ATROCITY1313 

Just a quick note, Oni (And I hope I'm not butting in). At WP:TALK#Editing_comments, it says, "On your own user talk page, you may remove comments from others, although archiving is generally preferred. The text of another user's comment, however, may never be directly edited to misrepresent the person or change the meaning of the comment." Even though it isn't nice, he's allowed to delete whatever he wants from his talk page. Bladestorm 22:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
True, in most cases. That is my mistake, what I should have pointed out was the fact that users are NOT allowed to remove vandalism warnings, suspected sockpuppet templates, and similar warnings (be them templated or not) until a matter is closed. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 22:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I'm pretty sure they can do that as well. If you look here, it says, "Policy does not prohibit users from removing comments from their own talk pages, although archiving is preferred. The removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user. Deleted warnings can still be found in the page history."
(For reference, I don't say this because I'm taking sides. Heck, I don't even know what the original dispute is about. I just know that a lot of people still think you aren't allowed to delete those things-since I think the rules used to forbid doing so-so I inform people whenever possible of the new rules) Bladestorm 22:29, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, I could be wrong. I do know that some procedures (such as that regarding sockpuppets) specifically state otherwise. Vandalism USED to be one of them, but perhaps it is not anymore. In either case, the user has been blocked for an temporarily and his/her contributions will be watched with exacting scrutiny in the next couple days upon the lifting of the block.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 22:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Near as I can tell, several policy pages used to be pretty specific in very clearly forbidding that you delete comments instead of archiving. Like I said, a lot of people don't know that's changed. (I've actually seen admins block users because they didn't know about the change) You'd think that they'd do a better job advertising that sort of change, eh? :) Ah well. Bladestorm 22:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

my point, Bladestorm. My talk page, i have heeded these warnings, i delete them  ATROCITY1313 

Halo, spoilers, personal attacks

Fair call mate, I guess it was an ill-concieved attempt at humour in a silly edit war. Sorry. My reasons for reverting were that the consensus is far from clear on the talk page at the moment, and to claim that "the debate is over" is simply wrong. Let's let a few more editors have their say. And I will engage brain before typing in future.--Yeti Hunter 23:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:CVU status

The Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 16:40, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Kudos!

Good clarification on the CVU page. :) --Moonriddengirl 15:35, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

My reasons

I apologize if my Goku rename intentions seemed malicious, I lefted an explanation here and said quite a few things in regards to my behaviour at the Goku move request. Thanks, Lord Sesshomaru 02:16, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Talk page comments

Sorry for that whole semi-edit war. Removal of talk page comments without archiving them is just one of my strange Wikipedia quirks. For some reason it really bugs me to see stuff just purged, no matter how insignificant. Perhaps it's the wannabe historian in me. I apologize for making it an issue, and thanks for the compromise solution! :) — Brian (talk) 22:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem, I'm sure we both have better things to do than get bogged down on something like that. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 14:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Deadoralive leon.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Deadoralive leon.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:01, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Question on warning

Just curious, but why did you leave two more warnings ([9], [10]) for Riddick007 (talk · contribs)? This editor has not made any edits since I issued [11] the first link spam warning three days ago, and both of your warnings were for pages that I had already reverted before issuing the first warning. Thanks, --Kralizec! (talk) 12:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I make it a habit to issue warnings for each transgression. That way the user, and the rest of the community, are made aware of the situation more thoroughly. Anytime vandalism is reverted, honestly there should be a warning template used; this is especially true when it is a created account and not an IP. However, many people seem too lazy to do this so sometimes I pick up the slack.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 20:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
I share your frustration with people who cannot be bothered to leave warnings after they do a revert. However leaving multiple, escalated warnings for a new user when they have already been warned about a particular behavior seems to go -at the very least- against the spirit of WP:AGF. --Kralizec! (talk) 18:23, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
When a user is creating an account solely for the purpose of vandalism or spam (I believe the case you refer to was the latter of these), starting with escalated warnings is perfectly viable. In fact, if an account is shown to be created for solely such a purpose, it can be banned without warnings, as has been done in the past. This was not so much an attempt at escalation as my instituting the warnings at a level I feel they belong in the first place.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 18:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

AfD reverts

Secret (talk · contribs) was the closing administrator for the AfD, and he is only adding more to his original closing rationale (to make it easier for others to understand). Is that really something you need to edit war over? It's a trivial matter, and I don't see how you could possibly consider this "abuse". Nishkid64 (talk) 03:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

If he wants to add a strikethrough and correction, fine by me, but it is inappropriate to remove it outright. In fact, even in a talkpage that is not held to the restriction, it would generally be expected that the old comment remain.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 04:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

NOR Request for arbitration

Because of your participation in discussions relating to the "PSTS" model in the No original research article, I am notifying you that a request for arbitration has been opened here. I invite you to provide a statement encouraging the Arbcom to review this matter, so that we can settle it once and for all. COGDEN 00:05, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

In all honesty, I'd appreciate it that you leave me out of your petty retaliation from RfC. I don't even recall if I participated at all other than to tell a certain other user to stop harassing people.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 17:11, 13 December 2007 (UTC)