User talk:RobJ1981/Archive 11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

Contents

Another annoying thing with the PPV articles

Apparently, it's custom to remove the poster images, and replace them with the DVD cover images (see the Backlash history). The reason given is "that's how the other events are shown." Seriously, shouldn't it be the other way around? Mshake3 02:03, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

June 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter

The June 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Please also, if you have not already, add your name to the Member List. Nehrams2020 08:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

American films

Please please!!! help fill in List of American films. Even if it is just a few details it all helps -any contribution you can make will be more than appreciated!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 17:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I did post it on the project page several days ago but no one appeared to care less. I don't usually go around asking for things -its just I really need help on them. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 20:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

TNA Victory Road

It's not a match type, and listing it there gives that impression. It is misleading in it's current form. It's a regular match, there is no such match type as a "match of champions". I think you are just doing this because I cam up with a compromise you don't like. Plus, you know it's not gonna stay like that, so why waste time listing it there now? TJ Spyke 20:52, 8 July 2007 (UTC)


Thanks For The Help

I didn't know how to do that. Thanks for telling me--The Infamous Dr. Salvador 17:28, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

what?

What the blue hell are you talking about?BlueShrek 20:50, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Then let me make this clear stfu and mind ur business ill do what i want.BlueShrek 21:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Fuck you bro you commented on me first so dont start your bullshit. I havent broke no rules so STFUBlueShrek 15:14, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Queston

why are u getting back to me about what i put on tj spke's talk page. i asked him not u Dingv03 04:44, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

u still havent answerd my question, why were u snooping in tj spykes talk page. Are u his answering machine or something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dingv03 (talk • contribs)

well the last thing i want when im trying to get in touch with someone, is someone like u butting in and telling me i am saying bad word like idiot. Seriously, idiot is a ofencive word to u? Pathetic —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dingv03 (talk • contribs)

Re Question

Here's how it is done:

  1. Add {{subst:afdx|5th}} to the article
  2. Click on the AFD link, which would be Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Whatever (5th nomination)
  3. Add {{subst:afd3|pg=Whatever (5th nomination}} to the AFD log

Subsitute "5th" for whatever else there is. hbdragon88 21:23, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it was just an example, though I think it is on the fifth nomination now. hbdragon88 22:57, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

hey

why did you nominate Ultimate Spider-man story arcs for deletion? This article has already been nominated and it was decided to keep it.BlueShrek 21:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Double redirects

I'm only cleaning up what a bot left behind, theres only like 20 more, so you don't have to help if you don't want to. You can find them if you check under special pages, and look for double redirects. — Moe ε 05:09, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Marvel Ultimate Alliance

I've deleted a lot of the voice actors list on this article, removing, to the best of my ability, what appear to be non-main characters. I've used how often each one is mentioned in the article, and whether or not they're an initially playable character, and whether they just seem notable to me, as a guide. If you could give this a look, make sure I haven't messed up too bad, and make any corrections, that'd be great. I also added to the comment at the top of the list requesting that further additions be discussed on the talk page first. Not that it's likely to do any good whatsoever, but it's worth a try! Miremare 15:13, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, it was, but someone's re-added most of them already! It would really be better if that list were to go, and be replaced with a paragraph about the most notable of the voice actors or something. Miremare 19:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

TJ Spyke

How did you find that out? BTW, befoire this have you even heard of me?-- Kings bibby win 01:23, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Rob

Hey, I wanted to explain the page blanking at Icegems1's page.

Actually, it was my "bright" idea and something I apologize for. Her and I are constantly stalked by one editor both IRL and on here and blank her talk page so that he can't read it. I probably should not have recommended it but that's the context. I'm sorry if this has inconvenienced anyone or caused any trouble. Drumpler 16:53, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

In reality...

...TJ's gone now. Alkivar protected his talk page because he kept removing the sockpuppeteer template. He acted like a child, and by doing so he forfeited his right to request an unblock. If I offended you with my statements on ANI I sincerely apologize. I was just doing what I thought was right, and the person I was doing it for showed that he didn't deserve it. Peace, The Hybrid 05:07, 24 July 2007 (UTC)


The Hybrid has given you a coquí! Coquíes somehow promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing!

Gellert Grindelwald AfD

That AfD is getting a little out of control. I tagged the conversation with the "not a ballot" tag. Anyone can add those tags, so if you see an AfD going in that direction in the future, don't hestitate to add the tag. Natalie 17:02, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it's getting ridiculous. I'm even a fan of the series and I still don't care to read three paragraphs of speculation about Victoire Weasley or what Wilkes' first name is. I wish people would take this to the Harry Potter wiki. Natalie 17:13, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Video Game Cleanup

You could always make a Category:Video game articles requiring cleanup, and a {{Vgcleanup}} template that would add the articles to the category. You could use this - Image:Video Game Cleanup.svg. Just an idea. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 07:56, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Minor character lists

I just wanted to say that I appreciate what you're saying on the HP Wikiproject talk page. I definitely agree with you but many people in the project unfortunately don't I'm afraid. Wikipedia has become a repository for everything which I find unfortunate. User:Sandpiper has one of the worst views of how Wikipedia works in my opinion and I think it's these "turn everything into an article" mentalities that keeps Wikipedia looking much less professional and held down by users' personal favorite topics. All this detail certainly should go to a separate project; I'm partial to my Wikibook but there are of course others as well. In the end, I want to say "keep fighting" because it's this sort of thing that made me switch to Wikibooks but perhaps you'll actually change some opinions here. -withinfocus 12:10, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Far too much cruft?

Ah, yes, the pain of having to supply information that millions are interested in, in the invasive form that is a few lines at the bottom of an article. So much better to cover two thirds of the characters rather than all of the characters.--Prosfilaes 16:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Marking controversial edits minor and edit-warring instead of discussing things on the talk page are both against policy, and potentially bannable offenses. The fine details of what goes into an article, on the other hand, so long as they're verifiable, is not policy. Please don't waste more of my time by responding to this on my talk page; do so where it belongs, on the talk page of the article.--Prosfilaes 20:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
If you're edit-warring over it, it's a controversial edit. That's what controversial means.--Prosfilaes 12:32, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Re

"If you are going to remove tags, give a reason instead of just being sneaky and removing it. From recent deletion debates: many have been filled with single purpose accounts, as well as people that vote keep for no reason except for that they like Harry Potter."

If you are going to add tags, give a reason instead of just being sneaky and adding it. From recent deletion debates: many have been filled with single purpose accounts, as well as people that vote keep for no reason except for that they dislike Harry Potter. Dalejenkins | The Apprentice (UK)'s FA plea-please have your say! 18:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

And also, I always use edit summaries, and they are not compulsary anyway. Dalejenkins | The Apprentice (UK)'s FA plea-please have your say! 18:28, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not being childish at all, just pointing out some WP guidlines that you may need to learn/follow. Dalejenkins | The Apprentice (UK)'s FA plea-please have your say! 18:31, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
OK. You can hardly blame me for not knowing that you know policies "just fine". If you want users to know this infomation, maybe you could include it on your user page or talk page, or maybe in your signature? Dalejenkins | The Apprentice (UK)'s FA plea-please have your say! 18:38, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:Minor Hufflepuffs

This material has stayed there for quite a while without any objection before your edits. Sudden removal of valid information is "a big deal", which is why you have to bring the matter up on the talk page. Peacent 01:44, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Fiction refs tags

You wrote "Pretty soon I'm just going to watch all these pages, as these sections are clearly not better than when I added a tag a while ago." I'm curious...what do you expect to happen once the article is tagged? Captain Infinity 23:34, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Thank you for your response. I understand what the tags signify, but my question is, what do you expect to happen? The only thing I can predict is that you expect that by tagging the article, other people will come in and clean up the article for you. Is that it? If so, why not do it yourself? I don't mean to sound hostile, I'm just curious as to what you hope the tags will accomplish. Thanks again for your reply. Captain Infinity 02:08, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Smile

Connell66 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I don't get the whole "listcruft" concept

I just don't see how you can objectively measure how notable or not a cultural reference or parody is. You can make a claim that a reference in Shakespeare is more important than a reference in Metal Gear Solid 3, but without resorting to cultural elitism I don't see how you could justify it.

I'll take your lack of response as agreement. The flags are down. Serendipodous 16:30, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

"I donh't spend my life online." Tough. Wikipedia is a dictatorship of the dedicated, and if you're not willing to make that kind of commitment then you shouldn't edit Wikipedia at all, and you certainly shouldn't be lording over others. Is taking the tags down any more vandalism than putting them up without discussion with the person who has been breaking his back trying to find sources for this bloody article for the last three months? You don't appear to be an admin, so I don't think your interpretation of this page is any more authoritative than my own. Wikipedia is littered with lists. If you want to start complaining about the very existence of lists, take that up on a more general page, don't start attacking every list in particular. And you didn't answer my objection. Serendipodous 07:12, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Minor Hufflepuffs "Other" section

We're discussing this at Talk:List of minor Hufflepuff characters#The "others" section. I neither disagree nor agree with your decision to remove that section, but I do believe that a clear consensus should be arrived at there before you remove that section again. =David(talk)(contribs) 21:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Previous roles and new characters section

Hello RobJ, it would be great if you could participate in the ongoing discussion pertaining to the sections you deleted. Best, Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 13:58, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Wizarding World

Hey there. You would be correct in that I believed there was no need for a separate article on the island. I think there might be room for one later, when there is more specific information about it. Right now, it's too early in the game to elevate WW to Fantasyland or Tomorrowland status. Maybe later, yes. But not now. I'll keep an eye on it as well. As I said in discussion, the most likely scenario come late '09 or early '10 is a re-balancing of the park. Now the majority of traffic goes to Marvel Super Hero Island. Then, it'll probably be more evenly divided.

I did want to at least give the Potter community a chance to defend it, and even give them some avenues to pursue on how to make it a notable article. Unfortunately, it seems like it's fanboy-driven.

McDoobAU93 03:50, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

July 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter

The July 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This is an automated delivery by BrownBot 19:42, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

wrestling games

as the result was no consensus before (only one person commented), I'm sure it wouldn't be a problem to reopen the debate, or just put a db template on them after they've been empty for four days. (excuse the lack of capital letters, I'm writing from my phone) ~ JohnnyMrNinja 21:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I removed the tags again

Please see: WP:POINT Serendipodous 05:59, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually I do, since it's the only way to get you to discuss this issue. You're the one who started this, yet you accuse me of vandalism? How exactly could this list be cleaned up? What secondary sources could there possibly be? If you can find some, I'd be happy to include them, but you're not willing to go the whole hog, don't stamp on others' work and then expect them to do your job for you. Do you actually do anything constructive? Or do you just go around slapping tags on other people's articles? Serendipodous 06:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I read what you wrote, I just didn't understand it. There are plenty of lists on Wikipedia. There are even featured lists. None of those lists are arranged in paragraphs, none of those lists make any kind of point. Last I checked, no one was slapping cleanup tags on every single list on this site. Why target this list? The only reason I can think of is that you deem this material to be less worthy of inclusion than material in other lists. And if you think that I'm going to let you pass value judgements on the "worthiness" of sourced material, you are mistaken. And yes, I do use the phrase "other people's articles" especially when others' work consists of weeks of research and writing whereas your work consists of five seconds of tagging. Serendipodous 06:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Well I'm not done. What is wrong with pop culture? Why is it less notable than any other form of culture? What criteria do you use to judge which cultural impacts are notable and which aren't? The entire process is compeltely subjective and smacks at least of snobbery and at most of bigotry. Serendipodous 06:59, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Other teacher of Hogwarts

Just because you don't find it notable, doesn't mean other won't. You seem to have done this at least twice. If only you have a problem, deal with it, please. Therequiembellishere 03:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Do you want to open a discussion on the page? Therequiembellishere 05:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Ah, see now, I'm not the only one. Therequiembellishere 19:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Minor Edits

Help:Minor_edit says "A check to the minor edit box signifies that only superficial differences exist between the current and previous version: typo corrections, formatting and presentational changes, rearranging of text without modifying content, et cetera. A minor edit is a version that the editor believes [...] could never be the subject of a dispute. [...] any change that affects the meaning of an article is not minor, even if the edit is a single word." Please stop marking edits that clearly violate those rules minor.--Prosfilaes 13:23, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

So basically, policy means exactly what you want it to mean? If it's no big deal, then why do you keep deleting it?--Prosfilaes 14:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Minor Hufflepuff Characters

No consensus has emerged in the discussion about the deletion of the "Others" section, and you haven't commented on it in a week, despite deleting the section three times since then. Again, I reiterate: I have no opinion in this discussion. I'm just trying to facilitate open dialogue. Nonetheless, deleting the section without continuing the discussion violates the consensus guidelines. If you still believe that this section should be deleted, please comment on the talk page again. Thanks! =David(talk)(contribs) 21:20, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Trivia

You can call my sarcastic entry vandalism if you like, and I'll call your little project what it is: pedantry and nannyism. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 01:30, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

About your recent revert to Need for Speed: ProStreet

Please assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not on Need for Speed: ProStreet. I would prefer if you didn't call me a vandal without a reason. Thank you. --MrStalker talk 08:50, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Image request for A. n. rungweensis

Hi RobJ1981! I saw your request for an image regarding the Atheris nitschei rungweensis, but that one's not going to be easy to fulfill. So far we're 95 images short and counting for the viper series alone. Why? Well, except for a few images that come from the US Government, all of the images present were donated by amateurs, which means the selection is limited. I've tried begging for images from herpetologists (the only people who can definitely help), but it seems they're somewhat allergic to releasing their photographic material into the public domain. I find that ironic, because although the academic community are obviously happy to expand the bounds of human knowledge, they seem to care rather less about pushing back the bounds of human ignorance. Unless, perhaps, if they can sell a book in the process. --Jwinius 13:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

TJ Spyke

WP:AN#User:TJ_Spyke is where Moe Epsilon started up the new discussion. Peace, The Hybrid 21:24, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

List of fictional.....

If you're feeling extremely brave, there's a lot of potential listcruft linked from Lists of fictional topics. Dbromage [Talk] 06:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Redirection of Potter parodies

I reverted your redirect here, for the moment, until we see how the AFD goes. Personally I'm not sure what's best done with it, but that redirect destroyed a lot of material - particularly the Tanya Grotter stuff - that is not duplicated at List of Harry Potter parodies. Gordonofcartoon 13:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

August 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter

The August 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by BrownBot 13:07, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

TJ has just been unblocked.

The Hybrid 20:59, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

3 Monkeys in Culture - AFD nomination

Rob, please return to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The three wise monkeys in popular culture and justify your allegation that this article is cluttered or unsourced. It seems structured and neatly-edited to me; and the stated media are accessible primary sources, legitimately referred to without breaching WP:OR. It's somewhat trivial, yes, but in my view you have weakened your nomination by adding unjustified criteria. - Fayenatic (talk) 09:18, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Where are you then?

So far your only contribution to the issues regarding Parodies of Harry Potter has been a needless and rather vindictive attempt at deletion. If you feel the article requires a cleanup, then say WHY. Which bits should be cleaned up, which bits should be kept? So far the only thing you've said is that everything should go, which was voted down (twice) by other Wikipedia users. So unless you're willing to contribute something constructive, stay out of this. Serendipodous 07:30, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

HEY!!!

excuse me, i was'nt the one who did that edit! some stupid vandal is shareing my ip iddress, as for me i only edit images because i am not very good on finding good info and i rarely make miner edits. AND don't you dare post a bossy comment like that again because i cannot stand them alright? thank you and happy editing. 82.33.160.8 03:40, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Am afraid i cannot sign in as a user because i don't have a password so i just hope that shithead will not carry on vandalizing. 82.33.160.8 04:12, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Films roll call

Hey fellow Wikipedian! Your username is listed on the WikiProject Films participants list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active on the project. If you still consider yourself an active WP:FILM editor, please add your name to the Active Members list. You may also wish to add {{User WikiProject Films}} to your userpage, if you haven't done so already. We also have several task forces that you may be interested in joining as well.


Also, elections for Project Coordinators are currently in sign-up phase. If you would be interested in running, or would like to ask questions of the candidates, please take a look. You can see more information on the positions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Coordinators. Thanks and happy editing!

An automatic notification by BrownBot 01:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Wii Points edit war

I know this is quite late but, thanks for helping breaking up the edit war on the Wii Points article ;). I added the link because Microsoft Points are identical to Wii Points in almost every way. I find it unusual that the MP article had a link to Wii Points and there was no confict.

Any comments? 208.138.31.76 19:34, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the Heroic Moments Section in Eric Cartman's Article.

I'm sure you meant well, but that trivia tag wasn't needed at all. It's only a trivia section if the name of the section says, is, or mentions "trivia". "Heroic Moments" has nothing to do with trivia whatsoever, therefore, I'll be removing the trivia tag, and I hope you have a happy day! Cheers! Wilhelmina Will 02:52, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Deleltion Of Car List On Gran Turismo 5 Prologue

That list was official, relevant, and throughly checked by users and Wikipedia. You had no right to delete it because it was factual and relevenat to the article. Car lists are needed in computer game articles to inform users that pictures are legitimate and also tell of cars included in the game so no false asumptions are made. If you do not give me a legitimate enough reason why you deleted the car list, I will be forced to report you. (You have until 1st October 2007). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvins48 (talk • contribs) 20:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Car Lists

It's been discussed that's all. It doesn't mean you can just go round deleting car lists off of everywhere. And it wasn't a "threat". Why would I threaten someone? I don't want to start a petty argument over this. It's stupid. It's just an article on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvins48 (talk • contribs) 10:41, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Two articles

Hi RobJ,

I was wondering whether you could make comments on both One Night Stand (2005) and December to Dismember (2006) as both are up for peer review. If you do, can you make them respectively here and here Davnel03 19:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Eyes of an Angel Plot

Hi. You tagged the plot section of Eyes of an Angel (film) as being too long. Can you offer any suggestions for how I should shorten it? Collectonian 00:51, 30 September 2007 (UTC)