User talk:Xenocidic/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 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.
← Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 →

Contents

what?

The reason I saw the deletion nomination was because I saw the link on the project talk page. The catagory was for "Xbox Ambassadors"! I don't remember a Xbox United Nation. And the only reason I was looking at the talk page was to look for ways to help, just like thingg does for us. You act like I'm trying to destroy xbox stuff. BTW, the combine templates subject on the project talk page, that was copied from the playstation project! Don't act like this is a fanboy war and get your facts straight. This website is professional and not biased. --Playstationdude (talk) 03:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

meh. xenocidic (talk) 01:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

A long overdue apology

I wanted to apologize for my uncivil remarks towards you during the CFD for Category:Xbox Ambassadors. Happy editing and hope there's no hard feelings. xenocidic (talk) 19:21, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.--Playstationdude (talk) 19:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Warning vandals

We don't have to give people 'first, second, third and fourth level warnings'. Personally I don't warn people for a first offense as many of them disappear after one edit, so it's not really worth it. I prefer to use {{uw-bv}}, as it saves messing around with people who are obviously only here to mess around with us. Richard001 (talk) 04:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

I am a bit of a newb, I only joined in November! If you would like to join the Barnstar Batallion or find out what it is, talk to Swirlex, he is quite a fan of Barnstars and Userboxes :).--Editor510 (talk) 17:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Xbox 360 technical problems

I see you have been working on this article for long period of time. Do you feel that the article is clean, well-expanded, and full of correct information. I'm trying to remove articles that have been asked to be clean up. Please respond on the project talk page, I've added this question there too. Thanks DJS --DJS24 (talk) 16:38, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Looking for help to improve Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare

Hi, I noticed that you edited the article Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare recently and I am just letting you know that I plan on working on the article over the next few weeks in order to bring it up to Featured Article status. If you have time, please consider helping out with the article by improving the referencing, content, and other miscellaneous activities in order for the article to meet the standards set out at WP:WIAFA. Thanks for your time! Gary King (talk) 05:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Please check Talk:Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare#who put multyplayer before campaign/plot? Gary King (talk) 14:20, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Console Infobox order

Your fanboyism is showing! xenocidic (talk) 15:42, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Very much so. Stop with the unwarranted edits to put PlayStation 3 and Blu-Ray and all the other bias information first. As long as it is listed, that's all that is required for a Wikipedia entry. Save fanboy firestarting for Gamespot forums, NOT Wikipedia. Wrel (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 15:55, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
I am not a fanboy. If you look at my user page, you'll see there are no references to consoles, unlike yours, which has 33 Xbox references. According to the alphabet, "PlayStation" comes before "Xbox", "Blu-ray" comes before "DVD". See here for more logic. You'll see that everyone agrees with me. Much thanks! Fin©™ 15:58, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
-sigh- See your talk pages, and, y'know, the alphabet. Fin©™ 15:59, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't feel that everything should be alphabetized. Mass Effect : Xbox 360 version is *released* and the Windows version is *upcoming*. Shadowrun : the X360 is the primary platform - the Vista servers have been discontinued. and I still feel the press release order should be used especially when it's being used as a citation. xenocidic (talk) 16:03, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Press releases do not trump the alphabet. Again, check the GTA IV history for precedent. Please cease changing the order. Thanks. Fin©™ 16:02, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello yet again. Platforms and media are not used as a means to say when the game is coming out, or is still active, they are used to tell what platforms the game is out on. Hence, they should be alphabetical. Just because you like the 360 more doesn't mean it should go first. Fin©™ 16:05, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

meh. Leave Mass Effect and Shadowrun for the reasons above and do what you will do the rest, if you press release argument doesn't move you. xenocidic (talk) 16:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Doesn't have to do with what platform I "Like" it has to do with an article being informative and accurate. xenocidic (talk) 16:07, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Xeno, platforms are not indicators of whether a game is out, or how well it's doing. They are simply to display what platforms the game is on. Again, check out the GTA IV talk page (in which you're the only one arguing on your side), which I note, you put on the Xbox project talk page - why did you put it on the Xbox page specifically? Surely the issue of whether to use a press release or alphabetical order is a matter for the Video project talk page? Anyway, I'm going to continue having everything alphabetical. Fin©™ 16:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Just because I'm the only one arguing it doesn't mean I'm wrong. Not sure why being alphabetical is so important, especially when it makes little or no sense. If you have a bunch of books, on a bookshelf, do you put them alphabetically, or do you arrange them from largest to smallest book? xenocidic (talk) 16:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
As a final point, I'll just quote a bit from the GTA IV talk page: Alphabetical is the best way to avoid point of view issues.. So there you go, that's my rational. Thanks! Fin©™ 16:20, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Point of order: It's spelled rationale. xenocidic (talk) 16:21, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Of course it doesn't mean you're wrong, it means the consensus is against you. Your question about books is completely irrelevant - are you suggesting we should list consoles by their physical size? By sales numbers? (I myself have books alphabetical). See above why using alphabetical order is necessary (you say it makes "little or no sense"). Fin©™ 16:22, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah ok, so you're just obsessive-compulsive to a point. Anyways, have fun, I give up. xenocidic (talk) 16:23, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Again, please don't make personal attacks as you did on my talk page You've no idea what I'm like, please don't assume. Thanks! Fin©™ 16:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Stating a fact is not a personal attack. ("I myself have books alphabetical"). anyways, Like I said, I'm done. cheers. xenocidic (talk) 16:28, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
You should have a read of OCD (which I don't have). As you said, you're done, so I'll just leave with this - don't automatically assume someone who changes sections of pages you deem to be correct to be biased (a "fanboy", as you called me). Thanks. Laters. Fin©™ 16:32, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I didn't say you had OCD, I said you are obsessive compulsive to a point, i.e. fixation on alphabetization. Personally I am obsessive compulsive about things as well (my Xbox 360 gamercard for example) and I don't consider it to be an insult, per se. Sorry if you took it as such and please accept my sincere apologies if I mistook your love for alphabetization for fanboyism. xenocidic (talk) 16:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
No bothers man, talk cha again. Fin©™ 16:38, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
you guys are the best. i'm starting to like this place a lot —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emil Kastberg (talk • contribs) 01:02, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Why do you constantly revert edits so that XBOX 360 appears first and what does that have to do with the Manual of Style? The XBOX 360 is not the lead platform and there are two press releases - one lists the XBOX 360 as first and the other lists the PlayStation 3 as first. If you put them alphabetically, PlayStation 3 would appear first. You're really showing fanboyism. ~NeonFire372~ (talk) 01:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
I reverted it because you're typing "XBOX 360" when the manual of style dictates it should be spelled in sentence case ("Xbox 360"). Please do try to assume good faith. Cheers. xenocidic (talk) 02:30, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Ahh... sorry about that. ~NeonFire372~ (talk) 02:31, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Apology

Hello again. Just sorry for the way I acted yesterday (blindly alphabeticalising platforms). While I still disagree that press releases should be used for platform ordering, and your changing of "Windows" to "Microsoft Windows" was petty, I do agree that platforms should be first chronologically ordered, and then alphabetical (same day releases and such). Anyhow, sorry about all that. Fin©™ 11:50, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I'll admit I was being a little combative as well, so neither of us is without fault =). Take it easy. xenocidic (talk) 12:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Userboxes

I already am a member of WikiProject Userboxes but thanks anyway! ~RayLast «Talk!» 18:32, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Now I do. Sorry! ~RayLast «Talk!» 18:47, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Template:DJS24 message

I'm not trying to be uncivil, but it is my userpage and from what I can see, several users have the same type of template showing - "Leave a message". What's wrong with the one I used? DJS--DJS24 (talk) 19:38, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Blackwatch21 Userpage

First of all I have no idea what template namespace is. Second I don't understand why you are worried about my userpage. Third what does "Couldn't they be moved to your userspace and subst'd from there?" mean they are in my userspace because they're on my userpage?! BW21.--Blackwatch21 (talk) 19:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Now, I can't change the color or something like that if I want to, instead I have make a whole new template. BW21. --Blackwatch21 (talk) 23:58, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Day of Spring!

Happy First Day of Spring!

RROD

I have put it in again 'cause i think it is worthy of being there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BRTman666 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I copy edited it for grammar. Just FYI it's not the red rings of death because it's really just a partial ring (singular). xenocidic (talk) 18:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

A Barnstar!

The VG Barnstar
I hereby award you this Barnstar for doing a very good job on improving the Portal article! BRTman666 (talk) 08:45, 26 March 2008 (UTC)BRTman666

Thx

Thx 4 the :) hope to see you doing more good work! --BRTman666 (talk) 15:45, 26 March 2008 (UTC)BRTman666

My userpage

Hey there! Welcome to Wikipedia. Don't be discouraged your edit to Portal was reverted...It was a bit too in-depth. Just FYI, your talk page is where people are supposed to leave you messages, so the hidden comment <!-- Noone edit this page unless you message me first --> doesn't make much sense. The "About Me" section really belongs at User:Sneakkingsarge (your user page - which you'll have to create). Feel free to let me know if you have any further questions! xenocidic (talk) 17:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, I meant to put the about me in User:Sneakkingsarge. But I am although discouraged about my revert to my edit in the article for Portal. Quite Frankily, I felt that what I had made was well enough to put emphasis on just how "scary" or "demonic" GLaDOS was. But seeing that you guys have been here much longer than me, I'll take you're word over mine. Thanks.—Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Sneakkingsarge (talk) 16:30, March 26, 2008 (UTC)
I think the main reason they reverted the edit was because it was mostly original research and thus unverifiable. Regardless, I know how disheartening it is to have a piece of an article you worked hard on reverted without so much as a pat on the back. Anyhow, just some general advice, when making a new message on someone's talk page click the "+" at the top of the page and add a header, and don't forget to sign your posts with four tildes ( ~~~~~ ). Best of luck in the future and feel free to drop in if you ever need help or advice on anything! xenocidic (talk) 16:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Synopsis vs Plot

Def.- A condensed statement or outline; a brief summary of the major points of a written work, either as prose or as a table; an abridgment or condensation of a work. Synonyms: Abstract, Outline, Overview, Summary.

In good argument Xenocidic, which meaning do you take for synopsis? I would say that synopsis is better suited as a subsection of the plot, to which the character section is also a subsection. A synopsis would be a summary of the plot itself, since the word alone has no direct correlation in meaning to the word plot; synopsis does not imply what the section is about. You could say synopsis, but then I could ask "A synopsis of what?" Answer in this case: "Of the plot." Plot has to be the section header to define the synopsis, otherwise it could be a synopsis of anything. Your opinion on the matter? -- Comandante {Talk} 16:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I was taking the word 'synopsis' to mean synopsis of the story as a whole, subsections of which being plot and characters. To me it just seems strange to have Synopsis, below plot. We could probably find other vocabulary altogether, such as "Plot summary" followed by "Story" and "Characters" as in BioShock Hows that? xenocidic (talk) 17:09, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
A coincidence (or something; reverse-coincidence?): I find it strange to see synopsis above plot. Anyway, I support your idea, it clarifies things more than switching around the words. -- Comandante {Talk} 17:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Fire at will, my friend. xenocidic (talk) 17:17, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Your edit to Talk:Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas 2

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas 2. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --MrStalker (talk) 13:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

The rank glitch is unsuitable for inclusion based on WP:NOT#GUIDE. Per WP:FORUM and Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Editing_comments I removed the section as material not relevant to improving the article. xenocidic (talk) 14:04, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
In my opinion the material was very much relevant to improve the article. Also, follow the spirit of the rule, not the letter of it. There are much on variuos talk pages not directly relevant to improve the respective article. --MrStalker (talk) 14:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm of the school of thought that spreading knowledge on how to cheat is generally A Bad Thing™ . Teaching people to glitch is way too game-guidey for WP. But whatever. xenocidic (talk) 14:58, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I've redeleted the commentary. Per WP:FORUM and WP:TALK, talk pages should be used for collaboration on the articles. Since the rank glitch section was not a legitimate talk page comment, removing it was acceptable. ⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 19:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 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.
← Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 →