User talk:Some guy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome, from Journalist

[edit] WP:CIVIL

Hey, no need to be so harsh over at Talk:Golden Sun; be civil and don't bite the newbies, eh? Looks like what we have here is a major case of clueless newbie syndrome on the part of a couple of anons. The article needs some work in any case, and I was trying to figure out what was going on before doing any major restructuring. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 18:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, 80.225.1.131 has (according to another user) vandalised the page several times by removing large sections of the article, which seems consistent with the fact that he did it again to my edit (see comparison). Then someone filled it back in, but didn't do a very good job of it. Some guy 18:56, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
I'm not sure why you just reverted User:CyberSkull's changes, but I've reverted back. He removed a lot of the small, overspecific headers and specific game mechanic info to put it in a Wikibook, but your revert replaced unnecessary underscores in the image links and restored a lot of...well, junk, with no explanation. Please explain why you're reverting on the talk page before doing that again. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 20:57, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
Nobody else complained about it at all, and I don't think the article should be devoid of any information on gameplay. If that's too specific, then the publisher, characters, story, and locations are too specific... along with everything else.Some guy 22:23, 5 November 2005 (UTC)


I would like to agree with the above request that you behave civilly, Some Guy. I received a message from you today accusing me of vandalizing the page for the film Death Proof. I am an award-winning journalist and former newspaper editor, and I do not appreciate it. If you feel an edit was made in error, correct it and state why on the Discuss page. Let's have no more of this grade-school name calling. --DOHC Holiday (talk) 19:01, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
And I'm the emperor of the world. Changing the names of characters in the plot summary to induce factual inaccuracy counts as vandalism. Some guy (talk) 20:23, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
You need to get your facts straight:
"Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not considered vandalism. " --DOHC Holiday (talk) 18:34, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
I need to get my facts straight? You're the one intentionally changing fact to fiction in articles. Some guy (talk) 02:16, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re : Articles for Deletion/Golden Sun Password

Hi Some guy,

A reminder should do fine. Unless it's blantant attempt of vandalism or to alter the outcome of the VFD.

- Cheers, Mailer Diablo 08:13, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. , SqueakBox 16:30, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Mind telling me what the hell you're talking about? Some guy 18:20, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
You removed Jeremy Clarkson from the request for page protection here, SqueakBox 18:59, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
It took me a long time to piece together what happened, but I figured it out. After User: 212.205.76.134 erased the old entry for Thumbshots when he added some information to the Democracy and Nature section, I was following his edits through his contribution list to see if he vandalised/accidentally deleted anything else from the page. It appears that when I finished checking his edits, I decided to nominate thumbshots again, but I forgot to switch from his last edit to the most recent version of the page. The version I edited can be found here. As you probably know, making changes to an old version of a page erases all changes since then. You can see that the parts of the page that were removed or moved around during my edit are all of the parts moved or added after the version I've linked above. I'm extremely sorry about this mistake on my part - it was an accident, but it was stupid and it shouldn't have happened. My apologies. Some guy 05:33, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

I figured it was an accident from your reaction yeterday. No problem, thanks for the explanation, SqueakBox 15:44, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

See Wikipedia talk:Requests for page protection#Vandalism, SqueakBox 20:03, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Article move

Thanks for moving my Fitzgerald article - beat me by 2 mins.--shtove 23:30, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Shootout

I just now found your comment at Shootout (only six weeks later). See my reply there. •DanMS 21:26, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Becoming bilingual

I think it is some sort of advertisement, or possibly original research. Check out Jim Cummin. Hell, check out ALL of that editor's contributions. There's something hinky going on. Tom Lillis 05:10, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. But, er, I've already made something like five AfD nominations tonight, including Jim Cummin. I'll gladly argue the point and vote when it gets to it, but I don't think it would be appropriate for me to go ahead and nominate ALL of that stuff myself. Tom Lillis 05:20, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Medal of Honor: Allied Assault Page

Hey, Someguy, nice page you got here. I just wanted to bring something up about the MOH:AA page. I was writing the articles on the mission overiviews. I realize that they were making the page MUCH too long, but I was going to move them to another page on my next update anyway. I know Wikipedia is free to edit by anyone, but please discuss it next time. I would have been glad to get it off of the page anyway, but I don't appreciate it when my work gets deleted like that.

No hard feelings dude, next time just notify me, okay?

Huh. It never told me I had a new message and I just noticed. Anyway, my edit summary should have been sufficient. Sorry anyway. Please sign your comments. Some guy 04:39, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] copyright violations

Hello,

I was under the impression that public biographies were promotional material to be shared. My intention was not to violate copyright, but simply to share the information. In a few cases, I wrote the material on the source pages. I designed some of the web pages and wrote the information. I didn't think that my sharing someone's biography was an attempt to lead people to believe I myself had written it rather than them.

Awelker 05:07, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Burhan Öcal

Hello, Some guy. I think it would be good to remove the wikify template, and other templates, from articles that are suspected copyright violations, like Burhan Öcal. That way they won't show up in Category:Articles that need to be wikified, which those who do wikification use to find articles to work on. If the article is found not to be a copyright violation, the template will be restored when the article is reverted anyway. Thanks, Kjkolb 08:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Money note

thanks for making some additions to my second/third created-myself article (i forget)! --Manboobies 02:59, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Highschools

I don't think most of these pages are notable, but people are going to create them... so i don't want them to mess up the links.--Rayc 05:38, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] speedy deletions

G'day there Some guy,

it's good to see that you're making the effort to keep Wikipedia clean of rubbish. That's an important goal. But please, please don't tag any more articles for speedy deletion until you have read the speedy deletion criteria. Thanks, fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 06:38, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment. It's not quite true that I won't speedy a band if it's "released anything", but you're not far off. It's all to do with what speedy deletion is for: band A7 exists to get rid of the obvious crap so that AfD doesn't get clogged up with garage bands and the like. Articles that don't even contain an assertion of some kind of notability should be shot on sight.
However, the standard for an "assertion of notability" is very low. It's enough for a band to have several releases, or to have toured extensively, or to have some other claim to being more popular than your average bunch of blokes with guitars for them to avoid the chop. This doesn't mean an article can't be deleted; it just means that it shouldn't be deleted on first view by some random admin (like myself) without any research. If there's an article that you feel shouldn't be there, take it to Articles for Deletion and propose it there, listing the reasons why you think the article should be deleted, any steps you've taken to verify the truth and notability of the article's subject, and so on. In theory, if an article's worth saving, someone on AfD will take the time to refute your arguments ... otherwise, it'll just sail through to be deleted a week later. The idea is to avoid accidentally deleting something valuable.
You mentioned WP:MUSIC. That's a guideline that people can point to on AfD; if a band fails WP:MUSIC, it's a powerful (but refutable) reason for deletion right there. WP:MUSIC, however, has nothing to do with whether or not an article can be speedied — it's utterly irrelevant to that process. Cheers, fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 00:05, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ghosts of Libertatia

Hi Some guy,

I noticed your quite trigger happy with marking pages for deletion. Instead of repeatedly removing your mark for deletion on the UVA student group, I'm wondering what exactly might convince you of its legitimacy. Thanks, $mashkan.

Well I'll see what I can find in terms of activities in the school paper and other schools, though most UVA secret societies are exclusively UVA and it wouldn't be very secret if major acitivities were publicized. As far as this new AfD deletion method, what's it mean? Sorry, I'm relatively new. Thanks, $mashkan.

Thanks for the info. Last thing, and feel free to ignore this, but what brought you to the page? I'm kinda curious. Thanks again, $mashkan.

I noticed you had published some video game related stuff and I thought maybe you had done a search for Command and Conquer's GLA. I have a copy of Earthsiege, but the floppies are completely ruined. Au revior, $mashkan.

[edit] Elder Scrolls (IV) skills

Okay, thanks for your advice, although I can't tell whether you're tone is a little bit rude or not. I have good intentions, and am in the process of creating centralized page due to yours & the others guy’s responses. At least the pages I made will be helpful as reference materials, speeding up the creation of the main page, and when I'm done I'll figure out how to get them deleted or simply change them into redirect pages. JovBlackheart 20:41, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Check it out (WIP): The Elder Scrolls skills

JovBlackheart 22:00, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Catman

While the original article was deleted, the sub-articles are still floating around. I AfD them again [1] to see if they will get removed this time. Just thought I would let you know as you nominated them first. IrishGuy 21:14, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cowboy Bebop

Cowboy bebop and cowboy bebop will automatically redirect to Cowboy Bebop. A redirect page just adds unnecessary overhead and an ugly "redirect from" link. Please don't create redirect pages unless you're sure they're necessary. Elvrum 08:12, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You might be interested to know

that an anon vandal is impersonating you on talk pages. This is a blockable offense. I thought you might like to know. Kasreyn 21:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, go to Wikipedia:Administrator's Noticeboard/Incidents, and add a new section to the bottom of the reports page. Add links to diffs from the anon's contributions, showing proof of his impersonation. (If you need help with this, just ask.) If necessary, I'll post to support you, but I doubt it'll be necessary... the page history is pretty incontrovertible. There's already enough evidence to convince any admin. He'll probably only get a short block for a first offense, though. Kasreyn 21:39, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SWAT picture

If you've got some documentation the photo is a fake, please let me know. I don't know how to evaluate your delete on the basis of "looks". Tychocat 08:20, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Age of Kings

Some quick suggestions- remove the bulleted lists, turn them into prose, talk more about the gameplay itself, and the reception of the game, and most of all, put in citations. Look at Empires: Dawn of the Modern World for some ideas, as it's a GA class RTS game article. --PresN 18:22, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:No_barnstars.png

Thanks for uploading Image:No_barnstars.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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. 06:48, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 7,62mm Mauser

...none of the other weapon caliber pages use commas. This was a really foolish page move which created many redirect problems. Some guy 01:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Answer:I understand that some people can be upset by this correction. But the cartridge in question was never called 7.62 x 57 mm Mauser by anyone before. From it’s inception it was called 7,92x57 mm Mauser, and that’s how the article should be called logically. My experience, professional and otherwise, is also that most Americans are unaware or disbelieving that comma is the preferred ISO decimal separator, even if the decimal point is understandably tolerated for the time being under the weight of American and Japanese economical interest – see ISO31-0. Also, names should not be changed, and substituting points for commas is not acceptable if commas were in the designation from the beginning. As stupid as it would be to call an article about the .308 Winchester 0,308 Winchester, for example! So, somebody has to take the bull by the horns, and by doing so, someone will inevitably get upset, and it won’t necessarily make only friends!

Dutchguy 07:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Battletech wikiproject

I've noticed that you are active in the BattleTech articles here at Wikipedia. I've started a proposal for a Battletech Wikiproject. If you are interested please check out my proposal at the Battletech main article's talk page. Thanks alot. NeoFreak 05:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I was about to get involved, but it looks like from your talk page that you're at least partially a vandal. Some guy 21:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Grindhouse (film)

I saw that a recent change said "correct me if I'm wrong, but I think she kicked his neck.", and immediately thought, "Yep, you're wrong". Just as I was going to check the history to see if the article had been changed yet, I immediately laughed after seeing that you wrote in your edit summary the exact thing I thought. Just thought I should let you know, now get out of my mind! Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 01:57, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hey Michael

How goes it, Michael? --Bolonium 14:17, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Think you've got me mixed up with someone else. Some guy 18:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
What's Poppin', Kalsi? --Staka2ont 19:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
No, I'm pretty sure you're the Michael I wanted to talk to... Not just some guy. --Bolonium 20:37, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh, you guys are funny. Some guy 05:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm also sure that you're the Kalsi I wanted to talk to... Not just Michael. --Staka2ont 15:04, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
It's not my fault you can't figure out how to use a web search. Continue to harass me and I'll pull in an admin. Some guy 06:12, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] why the hell you pm me???

why the hell you pm me??? I assume you're a fan of those low power Nintendo systems, as specially DS because you for some reasons couldn't afford a psp. but thats not the point. this isn't a forum, so please don't go around peoples pages and write offensive PM's to people you don't know.

[edit] Categorization

Read the Categorization guide.

"In the "vertical" dimension, Wikipedia has traditionally been more frugal, placing articles only in the most specific categories they reasonably fit in. Thus, if there is a Category:American film actors, John Wayne would go there and not in Category:Film actors or Category:American actors. However, there is a school of thought that argues that, because different users may be interested in different categories, and because placing articles in multiple categories takes up minimal additional space, in some cases one should place articles in all the categories that apply."

What I did was follow the traditional guidelines. We don't usually use redundant categories because otherwise it can include everything on the upper hierarchy. Oberiko 11:13, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

No I removed the redundant ones. Check Category:Call of Duty series and you'll see that the entire series is listed as first-person shooters, hence it includes it by inheritance (vertical categorization) Oberiko 19:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
True, due to WP:BOLD. I was actually making many, many changes that night to various categories in making them more vertical, especially after I saw that the FPS category was mostly useless as a navigation tool due to the massive number of articles placed directly in it. Oberiko 22:54, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Using your quote "This is because category changes – and even more so template changes – can affect a large number of pages with a single edit. Templates, moreover, may have complex source code that can easily be broken by untested changes. Because of these concerns, many heavily used templates are indefinitely protected from editing. Before editing templates or categories, consider proposing any changes on the associated talk pages and announcing the proposed change on pages of appropriate WikiProjects."
Can you point out exactly what far reaching changes or pages were affected?
Ultimately, it's irrelevant though. I've done categorization maintenance for a few years and, so far as I can recall, I've had very few protests; usually its just a job that gets neglected. If you're against the changes, that's fine, we can simply take it to the appropriate wikiproject for their opinion. Oberiko 23:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Why draw the line at Category:First-person shooters then? Why not include Category:Shooter video games, or Category:Video games, Category:Games? It's also in the Category:World War II video games, why not also put it in Category:World War II games, Category:Video games with historical settings etc. You're argument is just as applicable for doing so. Oberiko 22:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Truthiness

Good call on the removal of that irrelevant talk section. Thanks. Robert K S 03:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Andrew Michael Dasburg

If 12 internal links, and an obituary in the New York Times doesn't make you notable, what does? Please perform the minimal amount of due diligence before using Speedy. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 03:36, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I am using due dilligence. That's an absoluely pathetic assertion of notability. See WP:BIO. Some guy 03:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "This user thinks Barnstars are a disgrace to Wikipedia."

Might I ask why? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 13:04, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Anyone can give a barnstar for anything. It's absurd. I created my usertag after seeing a user give another user a barnstar as a reward for his diligence in giving barnstars. I don't believe in ridiculous over-use of awards. It's like the modern American school system, rewarding people for mediocrity and trying to make everyone feel special. I'm apparently not the only person with this view - I've seen another user who said he would consider being given a barnstar an act of vandalism. Some guy (talk) 18:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Worms Armageddon revamp

I just thought I'd say well done for the work you did on this article. I remembered how poor it was when I fixed some minor thing in it a while back, so I was pleasantly surprised when I saw it again today. — blobglob talk 07:12, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Some guy (talk) 07:58, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Starsiege Box Cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Starsiege Box Cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Incidentally, thanks for making the Cyberstorm page into a disambiguation. I'm logged out now because I have an essay on the ethical impact of killer robots to finish (did I mention that this is an awesome university? I haven't even gone into xenobiology yet) but I had misread the game as being a real-time strategy, which would have meant fast and thorough eclipsement and likely nigh-zero popularity now (Total Annihilation aside). Turn-based strategies are another beast altogether. --130.232.115.177 (talk) 13:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
That seems a bit biased, but, thanks. Some guy (talk) 03:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)