User talk:Booowooo

give it up. --Pwnage8 (talk) 16:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Let's be clear that I don't want any trouble. It may look silly to have a section on their nominations, but I can say the same thing about your "Album certification list", which truthfully, is redundant, as the content is already in the bio. I'll agree to put both nominations in the bio and retain the list, per your additions. What I find ridiculous is that you lump their EP into the same category as their albums, and that's not entirely accurate. You delete "Paralyzed" from the tracklist of Lies For The Liars for no reason either. And why do you like to omit all their genres? As for the associated acts, even by your logic, New Transit Direction has to be in there. If you are UsedFan1989, and you were banned, that's news to me, since I see no indication of it on your page. If you were in fact banned, it was not my intention. I can see how you would be though, since you can come off overbearing a lot of the time. Just end this foolishness. You don't own the page, I don't own the page, but we can both make good faith contributions. --Pwnage8 (talk) 16:48, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand why you like removing content from templates either. It took a while for me to put all that stuff in, for the sake of clarity. --Pwnage8 (talk) 16:49, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, just to clear things up, songs don't have to be singles to have articles on them. There's a special section in the infobox of the album for the singles. I'm not the one who said it was a single, in case you're wondering. But the article is there. Thus, it should be indicated in the track listing. If you have a good reason for not including "Paralyzed" other than "it's not a single" then let me know. For now, the link will be in the track listing. --Pwnage8 (talk) 17:05, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

To clear things up on associated acts, here is the guideline: [1] which states:

   Acts from which this act spun off; acts which spun off a group act; groups with which an artist performs; other acts with which the act is associated.

The first one covers Strange Itch, Dumb Luck, and 'Used'. The second hilighted one covers New Transit Direction and Rancid, because Dan performs with NTD, and Branden performs with Rancid now. It doesn't matter if he said he wants nothing to do with The Used, he was in the band. If you look at the Rancid page, you will find The Used in associated acts. Likewise, Rancid should be in the Used article. The final hilighted item covers Good Charlotte, because their drummer recorded on their album, thus they are associated with them. If you look up "associate" in wiktionary: [2] you will find: A person united with another or others in an act, enterprise, or business; a partner or colleague. Dean played drums on their album, and act of business/enterprise. He plays in a band, thus the band is associated with them. So based on these wiki guidelines, those bands should be included, so I will go add them, bringing the page back to how it should be. --Pwnage8 (talk) 17:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about getting you banned. I didn`t know that they check the edit summaries :S Good thing we're cool now. However, I disagree with you removing "On My Own" and "Paralyzed" from the template. Without those links, they become orphaned articles, with the exception of the tracklistings on the album pages. Indeed, I only came across the On My Own article recently, eventhough it`s been around since 2006. It was in horrible shape, but I fixed it up and put it in the template. What that did was attract more editors, and it has since been improved even more. Same thing for Paralyzed. That article sucks right now, so people have to see that it's there so it can be fixed. Also, if you look at other band templates, you will see that they have sections for songs that aren't singles that have articles. --Pwnage8 (talk) 19:23, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

January 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on The Used. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Funeral 16:22, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Shallow Believer

Thanks for letting me know. I'll be keeping an eye on it from now on. --Pwnage8 (talk) 17:53, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

b sides

That makes sense, as I had originally heard The Used recorded 19 songs for the album, not 20. --Pwnage8 (talk) 21:27, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

yeah i noticed that lol --Pwnage8 (talk) 21:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Edits to The Used and The Used discography

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Nouse4aname (talk) 18:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Nouse4aname (talk) 19:22, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

April 2008

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for edit warring at The Used. Discuss your proposed changes on the respective talk pages and gain consensus for your edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. seicer | talk | contribs 19:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/USEDfan for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Nouse4aname (talk) 08:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)