User talk:PrincessKirlia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, PrincessKirlia, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  Luksuh 21:11, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] List of Xs

Welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome your help to create new content, but your recent additions (such as List of Xs) are considered nonsense. Please refrain from creating nonsense articles. If you want to test things out, edit the sandbox instead. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. ~EnviroboyTalkContribs - 03:03, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

Just out of curiosity, what in Mew's name did I do to earn your ire? -Jeske (v^_^v) 21:47, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

You said Giratina wasn't a giraffe! --Riley the Kirlia 00:40, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

That's because it shows properties more aligned to a Basilisk or Dragon, not a giraffe. The closest Poke to a giraffe is the master of palindromes. -Jeske (v^_^v) 01:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

But Giratina has a long neck and a yellow head! --Riley the Kirlia 01:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

So does Girafarig. -Jeske (v^_^v) 01:44, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Giratina is close to a giraffe, like Charmeleon and Kecleon. --Riley the Kirlia 03:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

No, Giratina is too stocky, has six legs, has ephemereal wings, is classified as the Rebel[lion], and lacks horns. Think about it. A Girafarig is the appropriate build, has the correct amount of legs, lacks wings, is classified as the Long Neck Poke, and has the horns necessary. How can you call a basilisk with draconic looks a giraffe?
But before I go any farther, I would like to introduce you to someone. This is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyk - but is constantly referenced in American legal commentary! That does not make sense! Why would an eight-foot tall Wookiee, one of the hallmarks of the Star Wars series, be used by serious men in serious commentary about the law?
Look at me, I'm a Dungeon Master who uses Pokémon and Neopets in his campaigns and who has NEVER seen a Star Wars movie in my life, and I'm right here debating Chewbacca!! None of it makes sense! And so, to remember while you're in bed tonight thinking that a dragon is a giraffe... Does it make sense? No. PK, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca is used in legal commentary, you must use the Duck test! Thank you. -Jeske (v^_^v) 06:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


Meet the stocky, six-legged, winged, rebellion, hornless giraffe: Giratina! --Riley the Kirlia 23:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

That's like calling the Nimmo based off of the mosquito. -Jeske (v^_^v) 00:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

See the inner giraffe inside. --Riley the Kirlia 00:13, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

"Inner giraffe?" The inner something of anything cannot be used for a physical description. -Jeske (v^_^v) 00:37, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

How about, saying Giratina is a dragon is like saying Bulbasaur is a cat. --Riley the Kirlia 04:41, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Explain Giratina's Dragon typing, then. -Jeske (v^_^v) 08:46, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

It has black wings, and that's about it. --Riley the Kirlia 17:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Not all dragons have wings - Oriental-style dragons often do not. -Jeske (v^_^v) 17:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Rayquaza does have rudderlike wings! It is a flying type for Mew's sake. --Riley the Kirlia 17:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Strange... Latios and Latias have said wings, but neither are the Flying-type. Also, see Garchomp and tell me why he lacks any sort of wings if he's a dragon. Also, see Dragon#Dragons in world mythology. -Jeske (v^_^v) 17:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

The Lati [Latias and Latios] Duo share a hidden flying-type. And Dragonair is a dragon without wings! --Riley the Kirlia 21:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

..."hidden flying type"?! What does that mean?! The games don't call them flying-type, and they're certainly not weak to electric- and rock-types.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 18:46, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
They don't share a hidden flying type any more than Koffing and Chimecho share a hidden flying type. Levitate =/= Flying. -Jeske (v^_^v) 18:50, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Latios and Latias learn Fly, so they are Flying-types. --Riley the Kirlia 18:58, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Just because they learn Fly doesn't automatically make them Flying-types. See Flygon. -Jeske (v^_^v) 19:45, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Additionally, not all Pokemon that can fly know the move Fly (see Butterfree, Beedrill, Venomoth just to name a few. And some Pokemon that aren't Flying-type can use the move Fly, like the aforementioned Giratina and Mew. Mew can learn Fly, but is it a Flying-type Pokemon?... wait, didn't this discussion begin because there was a debate about whether or not Giratina was a giraffe? How did the "Dragons are Flying-type" discussion come about from that? Thank you, Chewbacca. ––Ksy92003(talk) 19:15, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

It came about from "Explain Giratina's Dragon-type, then." --Riley the Kirlia 19:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Allow me to remind you that Wikipedia is not a fansite or a place to post information irrelevant to the article(s) in question. As such, I reverted your reversions at Pokémon evolution. -Jeske (v^_^v) 01:19, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Pokémon evolution. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Please explain your changes on the talk page. -Jeske (v^_^v) 01:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Pokémon evolution, you will be blocked from editing. -Jeske (v^_^v) 01:56, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

That is information, not vandalism on Pokémon Evolution. --Riley the Kirlia 01:58, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I had stated three times that the information is irrelevant to the article (WP:NOT#IINFO), and you removed legitimate information (Oval stone is used for evolution). That can be construed as vandalism. -Jeske (v^_^v) 02:23, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

The Pokémon that do not evolve are good. That is still relevant to Pokémon Evolution. If you have a Pokédex, look at the evolution section! It will say something about not evolving. --Riley the Kirlia 13:55, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

What part of "That information is irrelevant to the article" do you not comprehend? The article is about how Pokémon evolve, and not what ones evolve or not. The list of Pokes that don't evolve adds nothing to the article that doesn't violate WP:NOT and that can't already be obtained at Bulbapedia. -Jéské (v^_^v) 17:15, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bulbasaur Potter and the Good Article Review

Mind explaining this edit to Talk:Bulbasaur? -Jeske (v^_^v) 01:18, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, Bulbasaur is a good article, so it should be! --Riley the Kirlia 19:01, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Apparantly you're unfamiliar with WP:GA. Read it and understand that Bulbasaur failed the criteria. -Jeske (v^_^v) 19:43, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Again, before you change article templates on talk pages, read WP:GA and understand it. Any more of what you did at Talk:Bulbasaur and Talk:Mudkip will result in vandalism warnings, because tagging failed articles as having passed is disruptive. -Jeske (v^_^v) 02:35, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:RFBOT

Your recent request has been remvoed from Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval, as it was malformed. If you want to request authroziation to operate a new bot, please follow the directions at the top of the page. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 16:53, 8 July 2007 (UTC)


Why is my bot request malformed? --Riley the Kirlia 00:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit here

Strangeness notwithstandaing, did you really have to make it look as if Ksy gave you a harsher warning than she originally did? -Jeske (v^_^v) 05:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to my user page

I blanked that page and removed the link to it because User:CBM said that it can be construed as an attack page; please do not readd it. -Jeske (v^_^v) 01:58, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pretty Pokemon

Per WP:FAIR, it's illegal–a term I will define by linking to this page since you don't seem to understand and keep reverting me–to use those images on your little page.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 01:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Per WP:FAIR, it's illegal–a term I will define by linking to this page since you don't seem to understand and keep reverting me–to use those images on your little page.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 01:59, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Zbtb7

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 17:23, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question

Why do you keep deleting the trivia tag to the Jorgen Von Strangle article? It -belongs- there. Lots42 17:22, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Trivia belongs there, too. --Riley the Kirlia 19:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
The point of the trivia tag is because Wikipedia is of the belief that trivia sections are unnecessary; the tag is telling editors to find a way to integrate it into the main article.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 19:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I am of the belief that trivia sections are interesting. --Riley the Kirlia 13:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

This discussion has confused me but if you find the facts in the Trivia section interesting, then please incorporate them into the -main- article. That -is- what the Trivia tag encourages people to do (incorporate -or- delete). Lots42 17:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


Do not delete the trivia! --Riley the Kirlia 00:02, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

The point of the trivia tag is to find a way to keep the information without deleting it are you listening.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 00:07, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Allow Trivia Sections! Allow Trivia Sections! Allow Trivia Sections! --Riley the Kirlia 13:03, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

(Cue broken record) The point of the trivia tag is to find a way to keep the information without deleting it. -Jéské (v^_^v) 14:22, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Don't try fixing the record either, we'll all keep scratching it back and forth. D:<—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 18:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


The way to keep it is in a trivia section.--Riley the Kirlia 22:52, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't mean to be mean, but you are in deep left field here. Wikipedia requests NO trivia sections, and consensus is against you. Just walk away. -Jéské (v^_^v) 22:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the trivia section of Jorgen Von Strangle, and put the trivia in somewhere else in the article. --Riley the Kirlia 22:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Way to go! You'll be a gentleman yet.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 23:04, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

The trivia section of Cosmo and Wanda is gone, and the facts in the body of the article. --Riley the Kirlia 00:42, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Note on UCFD

User categories for discussion/deletion is a system which operates on precedence. Popularity does not factor into whether or not a category should be kept, let alone SPEEDY kept. Typing your deletion opinion in allcaps is not considered good practice either. I might suggest that, if you are to participate in further UC discussions, you observe the archives, which will provide you information on previous deletions, and which keeps are invalid.--WaltCip 04:18, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding edits to Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 July 29

Please do not attempt to strike out all other comments in a discussion, as you did here. This is completely unacceptable, and has no effect on the discussion other than disruption. Please do not do it again. - auburnpilot talk 00:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

But people like you strike out stuff too! Riley the Kirlia

[edit] Giratina

Am I the only one who thinks Giratina is a Giraffe? Riley the Kirlia

[edit] December 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to User:Krimpet/Wikipe-tan sign, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --EoL talk 23:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Template:Peacock. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Matchups (talk)

16:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

But I like Peacock terms! --Pikachu of the [[Monopoly Game]] (talk) 03:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC) (it's me, PrincessKirlia. How do you like my new signature?)

[edit] Merry Christmas

Blessed editing, and...

Marlith T/C 00:39, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Goddard (Jimmy Neutron character)

An editor has nominated Goddard (Jimmy Neutron character), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Goddard (Jimmy Neutron character) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 08:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Three word story

  • mocks a vandalism thing* Hello, thank you for contributing to my Three Word Story page. However, the basic guidelines are to only post three words to the page each edit. You also cannot edit the page multiple times in a row, unless you are fixing a mistake in what you wrote. Please do not repeat these mistakes. Thank you. Kimera Kat (talk) 15:01, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but I didn't notice that! --Pikachu of the [[Monopoly Game]] (talk) 17:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC) (It's me, PrincessKirlia. How do you like my signature?)

[edit] Adventure stories on Wikipedia user pages

Normally, this type of stuff are things that we discourage users from doing here. I personally find it amusing, but someone else may object.

Someone pointed out that there's a Wikia project, the Choose your Own Adventure Wiki, (see http://cyoa.wikia.com/wiki/Getting_Started ) which may be a great place for you to take this if people object here.

Have a good weekend!

Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 08:00, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of experiments from Lilo & Stitch

Please do not make up descriptions for the various experiments whose functions are not known. While your creativity is appreciated, Wikipedia should contain only verifiable facts from reliable sources. For example, the Disney website. Please cite your sources when adding to experiment descriptions. Thank you. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 00:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Please stop adding in descriptions for the experiments unless you can provide an official source for them. Thanks. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)