welcome to my talk page. feel free to do whatever you want here. vandalize it, comment on my edits, have an admin block me over a nonexistent edit war, whatever you want. or at least whatever isn't illegal enough to get you blocked lmao
Fun fact #1: Your signature contains pink and green text. Fun fact #2: I set my interwiki links to be pink and my redirects to be green Fun fact #3: I changed my global CSS so the links in your signature appear blue.
Hello. Here[1] you are guilty of exactly what everyone is warning and blocking that user for. You are exactly as much of a newbie as that guy is. Stop stalking other people's talk pages, stop giving terrible advice, stop contradicting the word of every single other person on the entire page, stop dogpiling on already handled situations. While admitting you're unqualified, you gave bad and needless advice anyway, purely for the sake of inserting yourself to hear your head rattle, and you worded it with gibberish about "bad vibes". Go back there and don't delete it but strike through it all with a tiny note of apology. Look up how to do strike through formatting. Users can be blocked for doing that. Thanks. — Smuckola(talk)19:43, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is not harsh whatsoever. It is merely direct. It's just basic and obvious info, and the minimum at that. It is simply not coddling, that's all. That is unlike all the other editors who helped enable and wind up that other arrogant editor until they too were forced to address him like I did from the start and then block him and lecture him ten times more than I ever did. All for nothing. If he ever changes, it will be 0% due to coddling or lecturing and 100% due to blocking. Unlike him though, you seem to be really nice! I'm sorry about your PC, and having computers is almost as terrible as not having computers! I'll go through your edit history and see if I can "thank" bomb you, and I thank you for being a positive and helpful person from what little I've seen at a glance! Let me know if I can help with anything. — Smuckola(talk)20:27, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
p.s. The real culprit is Wikipedia, which lures people in here, as if it's easy, with no real training or credentials, and set them (and thus all of us) up to get punished for it. Truly truly, one of the biggest scams online next to its fundraiser spam. ;) — Smuckola(talk)20:32, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
honestly, i don't feel like his situation is worth worrying about too much
his block will expire in 5 days, and i don't really think he'll go on a vandalizing rampage for revenge or anything
Okay. You're completely wrong about him, and about the Wikipedia concepts you're winding him up about, and you just won't stop. In addition to you aggressively contradicting all the experts including an admin handling a blocked abuser, a lot of what you said to him on his talk page was extremely incorrect and misguided. You called counter-vandalism a basic activity and even gave him a pointless dare of 3 minutes to be as fast as possible with it, when in reality counter-vandalism requires a training course and tons of discernment, after lots more experience than both of you combined. Every word you said about MelonDS's notability and sources is just absolutely hopelessly wrong, just like here so you need to read WP:RS another few thousand times because that is the worst cardinal sin against the very existence of the encyclopedia. Another editor was also forced to warn you on his talk page.
You are taking one of the worst problem editors I've seen in a long time and just winding him up. Even after multiple other editors (including one admin) had said "let me spell it out for you", you thought you were the first to say "let me spell it out for you". He said countless times and demonstrated exhaustively that he is explicitly committed to anti-encyclopedic principles, is at war against the encyclopedia, and loves doing wrong things and fighting right things. That's the definition of bad faith. And you haven't even bothered to catch up with that history anyway. Multiple editors have said he is blatantly incompetent, and one said he is the absolute height of clinically arrogant and oblivious incompetency as per the Dunning-Kruger effect (overvaluing self competency and devaluing everybody else's). By contrast, you're actually decent, on the other side of the Dunning-Kruger effect, of devaluing your own competency and overvaluing his. Think about it! That means he is literally dragging you down. No he is NOT more able or willing than you. You're more competent AND in good faith!
He accidentally said one correct thing, that your comment you struck is not uncivil, though of course he violated WP:OTHERSCOMMENTS in the process. And you left all your direct meddling and contradictions intact, but whatever. None of your comments to him are uncivil, just wrongly meddling with a severely problematic and fellow newbie user. Anyway, omg, c'mon. Stop. — Smuckola(talk)01:13, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
fine, even if i'll admit to disagreeing about him not being more able (that's not a matter of me being competent or not, it's a matter of the pc i use on weekdays blue screening at any given chance and having most reliable sources blocked)
either way, it's probably time for a self-imposed interaction ban and retraction of that time i said i wouldn't mind helping work on a draft
Greetings. I have noticed that my recent edit about Slaking has been reverted. I agreed that up to this point there's no individual article of Slaking, and I don't think I need to create one.
However, the current link directs readers to a disambiguation page, and my intention of adding Slaking (Pokémon) into the link is to disambiguate them and directs the readers to this page instead: List of generation III Pokémon (where more details about Slaking can be briefly found).
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alakhazam, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alakazam. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
I love that you have a pic of your cat at the bottom of your userpage. You are a funny guy and I appreciate you for that. Wiki is a serious place most of the time and I enjoyed going through your page, seeing all the little jokes and details throughout it. I should do more of that, to be honest.
(also, I Hate what Wiki is doing to my signature right now. sorry for the eye pain.) > Cellina Starfire:talk?20:14, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
that cat has caused me more pain than bills have caused me to be broke
I know this is a very late response to your edit in the Zelda CD-i games, but I wanted to say that the reason why parts of the plot were edited out because they are unnecessary and actually go over the 400-700 word limit. Anyway, I'm just saying that and hope you are doing fine. 🤗 2603:6010:8B00:44FF:E8E0:71B0:B229:3157 (talk) 18:25, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
will argue against that first part. the dinner blaster guy taking the triforce of courage was a decently-sized deal
the limit seems fair though, so that should probably be handled a bit better sometime
sorry for being gone for a few eternities, i got a little tangled up in a flood
while that source seems good enough for the standard pattern rate, it then makes the claim that it can have over 8 billion patterns because any of them can be shiny
in most normal situations, this claims seems to be wrong, as its shininess and patterns are both determined by its personality value
unless i looked into it wrong and the ot number and secret id have no bearing on personality values outside of shininess, in which case you'd need roughly 3 fucktillion trainers per spinda, and with that specific mechanic having been seemingly overhauled in gen 7 with no documentation i've found, and it being bugged in bdsp (and only bdsp), it's-
whoops, too much rambling
it might be a little confusing and potentially not correct, but it could maybe make running doom a little easier. i could use it for the 4.3b claim, but not the 8.5b one cogsan(nag me)(stalk me)14:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of generation IV Pokémon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aerodactyl.
Thanks for taking the time to nominate several video game-related redirects lately! I know that can be a bit of a cesspool with questionable redirects from almost 20 years ago; I tried that effort once, and ... it was a LOT. Keep up the good work! Steel1943 (talk) 20:48, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thanks, though there are still a lot that i'm torn between nominating and just letting slide. mostly unmentioned characters or settings that might still attract some eyes cogsan(nag me)(stalk me)20:54, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there! I'm a noob when it comes to editing Wiki pages, and I wasn't sure there was a method of getting a hold of anyone, nor did I know how to find out who else was editing the page... I just noticed the messages this evening and I do not recall seeing them before.
To explain my actions: it is irksome to see the word "theory" being misused all the time. I know the dictionary has been modified to include it as synonymous with any old idea someone has, but that is extremely disrespectful to and discredits science, something that the world doesn't need any more help with these days. At its core, a theory is supposed to have stemmed from a hypothesis and been tested numerous times to the point that it is almost universally accepted as true given the current obtained information.
It seems to be important, however, to continue using the word "theory" on this Wiki page for some reason, and I know the fight for the word's true meaning is and will forever be lost. I have considered giving up many times, and I think perhaps I might. Therefore, you can consider this note on your talk page my letter of resignation.
to the very last line of this, it's consensus, from its use in and out of wikipedia. "theory" (technically short for fan theory) is the term widely used for what you'd call a "hypothesis" or "conjecture" (though i'll say that, in this case, hypothesis is a synonym and conjecture is a whole different word), and when discussing media like games, has no relation with science (unless matpat shows up). it's the word used for speculation about other widely theor- uh, hypothesized about games with good or featured articles, like earthbound and undertale (wow how obscure). my pedantic ass happens to have a deep enough understanding of how this use of the word is discouraged there, but simply put, yume nikki isn't science. parts of it can be interacted with in scientific media like psychology and whatever area you want to force to study gobou's videos. but the game itself is not an area of science. it's a game. i think
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:35, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In this particular case, I think your edit added to the confusion because although The Cheesedealer mentioned the other editor's talk page, the link to their user page was actually to where the WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS material seems to be (not blaming you - just explaining my revert further). Cordless Larry (talk) 12:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Gorgeous cat; really want to stroke her fur, and scratch her behind the ears. Or, maybe it's a 'he'? You may know my pronouns, but I don't know its. Did you know that vile lazy feline anagrams to Felina leve ilha ? Mathglot (talk) 22:14, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, one that bothers me a lot is Tres Fronteras, which is in my opinion a largely overlooked instance of the possibly-global environmental problems in the Amazon. But if you live in Brazil and/or are a Brazilian citizen, some of that, and the articles about associated prison gangs, may not be safe for you to edit directly. I am unsure, but judges die in mysterious accidents and whatever happened to the charges against Bolsonaro? The email link on my account does work, but let me know to check it. The Odebrecht and JBS articles probably need updating, and I am just surfacing from months of immersion in a complex and fraught French-language topic and have something else I have promised to get to next.
If that all sounds a bit too heavy, I did a deep dive a while back in the history of São Paulo and found a lot of redlinks, especially about slave raids, missionaries and the Atlantic slave trade. Basically almost everything about the history and geography of the place could stand to be fleshed out. List of scandals in Brazil still needs work.
Then there are the articles about the legal system Mathglot has been working on. And I wasn't kidding about the machine translation. When I was working on Operation Carwash and Impeachment of Dilma Rousseff the name "Cunha" was consistently translated, as "wedge". I took care of that there, and machine translation has improved, but you'd be doing Wikipedia a favor just by reading over some of the more important topics, because I am certain that a lot of that still lingers.
tres fronteras (not to be confused with três fronteiras, or the triple frontier): check for info about all the crime there. if possible, see if someone mentioned the ecological implications of the place's drug smuggling, money laundering, and a third crime of your choice
for notes on its wp-pt counterpart: it's suspiciously empty. presumably because everyone who could have worked on them is currently dead
for notes on its wp-pt counterpart: find out which word they used for those things, since "escândalos" is not the one. should get back to this one in a while
for notes on its wp-pt counterpart: for legal reasons, yes, any instance of me conveniently forgetting who dilma is is also a joke, and possibly a meme, since her presence in brazilian society and politics vanished seconds after her impeachment. i wouldn't know, my exposure to brazilian memes begins and ends at social media platforms i had to learn to avoid. also, the latter is a featured article there, that's neat
that's a lot of work to go through, but probably not impossible
as for safety... eh, my social credit score is low enough already, it's just a matter of someone with a gun finding out where i live. and if someone decides to do that, please let me know, because i have no idea where i live either cogsan(nag me)(stalk me)19:47, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
note that this is not a homework assignment and you are free to ignore all of these suggestions. This is something I feel the need to point out, along with the possible dangers. These are just some knowledge deficits that I have noticed on en-wikipedia in the topic area and that probably would be easier for you to address than for me. I got to Operation Carwash from Panama Papers and it seemed important enough to claw my way up the learning curve. Areas for improvement are really thick on the ground in Brazil topics though. You could probably pick any city and do a lot of good just adding in local food items and musical styles. Please feel free to ask any questions that may arise. I suggest you avoid focusing inordinately on the area where you live, obviously.
On Tres Fronteras, another element in the mix is logging and mining, some of which was sanctioned by the Bolsonaro administration, and some of it being carried out by people who really don't care what the government says. Runoff from gold mines is an issue on the reserves. Also apparently a route is developing through there from Columbia to the the Caribbean, because guess why. I also forgot to mention policing in favelas, on which a lot of academic sources probably exist, as well as, come to think of it, about the Amazon and the regulatory capture and the ties to the international right wing of Lord Voldemort. Much of my work that you will come across was done in real time through cognates, a lot of Google searches, and sheer bloody-mindedness, so please do understand that I do not claim to more than sorta maybe kinda be able to read any type of Portuguese. Although I am interested enough to keep banging away, off and on. And my Spanish is better. My French is native but unlikely to come up in this context.Elinruby (talk) 20:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
too late, i already got myself into this, and i'll see it through to the end. or to my end. depends on whether or not my cat is in the tres fronteras drug smuggling ring
it's less "avoiding" and more "finding out which specific list is the direct equivalent of the english one", which... i doubt will happen. a wiki more focused on brazil would naturally have more content on it than a wiki that isn't that thing i just said, likely spread over multiple lists cogsan(nag me)(stalk me)12:40, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
there was some prior discussion about the word on the talk page, as I recall about one historic item in particular. Basically, is the scope items that we find scandalous or things that were described as scandalous at the time? Not sure if this is the same as your question, but I don't think this one ever got resolved. Elinruby (talk) 20:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding is that cogsan is talking only about what word to use at pt-wiki, and is doubtful about the word escândalo to translate English scandal. As we know is often the case, cognates are not always the right word to choose when translating; many are false friends. A juge d'instruction in France is not an "instruction judge", and a recurso in Brazil is not a "recourse". Mathglot (talk) 00:23, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and if you are working on English Wikipedia topics about Brazilian corruption or scandals, I should probably also mention the Brazil political and legal glossary, as a lot of terms from Brazilian law are minefields for translators, and the glossary might be of help. (Another one might help too for deep background or for side notes about the justice system, but is only a draft so far: Draft:Brazilian criminal justice.) Feel free to improve them. If you run across a Brazilian legal or investigative term that should be in there, but you don't know the English term for it, please add something to the Talk page there. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 21:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Side note on this aspect: one of the pitfalls on English Wikipedia for Brazilian law is that many well-intentioned and even well-educated English speakers have no clue whatsoever that civil law legal systems even exist and there was at one point a great deal of conflation. Mathglot has been chipping away at that problem but it is still probably true that there are many terms you may be familiar with from reading the newspapers that English Wikipedia does not fully understand. Incidentally, how is your Spanish? I have other suggestions for that if interested. Elinruby (talk) 00:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
nod, just asking. Spanish is lower priority anyway since there are more speakers of it on en-wikipedia. Although there are big gaps in coverage in Central and the rest of South America also.
Great, thank you very much. I do not know if it has been touched recently and am very interested in your opinion of its current condition. I strongly suspect it needs updating but LMK. Do not be shy about pinging; I have been working on something else and just threw up my hands in disgust and am looking around for stuff I have been meaning to get to. Will be tying up other loose ends elsewhere meanwhile unless you do. Appreciate you very much. Elinruby (talk) 07:46, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey I created the redirect for Baby oven because of how it's referred to by some non native English speakers including myself, I'm sorry it made you feel bad. That was the most amount of swears I saw in one comment on Wikipedia thus far. Zinderboff(talk) 21:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Cogsan! Please do not take administrative actions such as relisting or closing deletion discussions when you are involved. You had already participated in this discussion and left a !vote, so relisting was not within your hands at that point. If an uninvolved editor evaluated the discussion and felt that more conversation would be needed in order to reach a consensus, they would have relisted it themselves. I took a look at the conversation and evaluated a consensus to restore the article, so I have closed it with that result. As others mentioned in the discussion, you can take the article to AfD if you would like the community to evaluate the reliability of the sources or the notability of the subject, but those considerations are outside the scope of RfD. Let me know if you have any questions! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:44, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
fair
though i did think the bigger issue would have been the apparent existence of consensus, even if ignoring pre-existing consensus that there's no good reason to take something to afd when it could just as easily be done in rfd
I've been seeing you around a lot, and I appreciate your work, but I need to know the answer to this question. If you don't mind telling me, why do you always type in only lowercase? Thanks, QuicoleJR (talk) 20:21, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dang, there's less than 500 left. Never thought I'd see the day, and I've been working on them for a while. However, the reason why no new ones have been created recently is a very unfortunate reason that I wish did not happen, but ... yeah. (I miss my favorite edit history merger.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
from some looking, a good bit of those seem to be botched or unfinished round robins from anthony appleyard, usually with "get out of incoming" as the rationale (whatever that's supposed to mean)
) --QuickQuokka [talk • contribs] 23:26, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
.jpg)
Master of
Hedgehogs
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:35, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Did you know that vile lazy feline anagrams to Felina leve ilha ? Mathglot (talk) 22:14, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
