User talk:CrystalB4

Please do not add the phrase "vast superhuman strength" to the Superman article. We've decided it's an unnecessary and kind of clunky modifier; I would really appreciate seeing you add your talents to the article in another way. Thanks. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 18:55, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected sockpuppet. CovenantD 21:58, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I know. I realized right after I left my message. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 21:59, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make unneeded changes to the Hyperion page. He has other sensing powers other than flash vision and hearing, and his regeneration is a side effect of his body absoring the suns energy, Superman does the same thing. T-1000 06:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase "multiple extrasensory and vision powers" is more accurate than "flash vision and Super-hearing" because Hyperion has other vision powers as well, such as the ability to see into the EM spectrum and X-ray vision. As for his regeneration, its a side effect of his body absorbing solar energy. Superman can do the same, read "Dark Knight Returns". Until you can provide vaild reasons for your changes, I am reverting them. T-1000 21:03, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just because two character share the same description of Powers in the Superhero box does not mean that their powers are exactly the same. Precisely because the difference between Hyperion and Superman's powers are already explained in the Power and abilities section, this information is redunant in the Superhero Box. The phrase "multiple extrasensory and vision powers" is still more accurate than "flash vision and Super-hearing". Regeneration is already mentioned in the Eternals article, the info is redunant in Hyperion's Superhero box. meanwhile, the descripation of "Superhuman strength, super speed, stamina and invulnerability, freezing breath, super hearing, multiple extrasensory and vision powers, longevity, flight" is perfectly accuarate for Hyperion. T-1000 08:00, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From Http://www.marvel.com, Hyperion's flash vision is "in which his eyes emit as yet unknown radiation which can see through solid objects and generate intense heat capable of vaporizing organic matter. " As you can see, same thing as Heat and X-ray vision. Superman's regeneration is shown in the comics Dark Knight Returns. He is also on the healing factor page. T-1000 02:42, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have already included his regeneration. It is derived from his Eternal heritage. As for Superman's regeneration, Superman regenerate from being reduced to a skeleton by a nuke in DKR. You should learn about Superman and Hyperion's powers before editing. The term "flash vision" is also inacurate, because not all versions of Hyperion use this term to refer to their vision powers. As I have said before, the difference between Hyperion and Superman's power are already explained, in the Powers and abilties section. T-1000 10:24, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide rationale for your last revert. T-1000 20:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First, read the Hyperion page carefully. Hyperion is an Eternal, so he powers are from his heritage. The phrase "similar" is actually a mistake on the Hyperion Page. I will change this on the page. As for Superman's healing factor, I will update it as well, since we have a verifable source. T-1000 21:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, the Hyperion are from Different Earths, but they are only different versions of the same person, and they are all Eternals And Please exaplain your changes to the Superman article.T-1000 02:27, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperion

I strongly suggest you check SHB template. Next time you vandalize the page, I'll report you to an administrator. —Lesfer ^(t/c/@) 03:41, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CrystalB4, please note this editor's history of uncivility has been reported to an administrator. NetK 03:48, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You insist in editing SHB to an older version, despite the fact I've already told I've updated it. If you insist, you are vandalizing the page. Feel free, though, to report me for that. —Lesfer ^(t/c/@) 04:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperion

There is only one character to bear the Hyperion name. Like I said, the other Hyperions are different version of the same character. As for Superman regeneration, There is the canonical reference of him regenerated from havig he throat slit by Wonder Women. Also, DKR is in AN alt, universe, but we are talking about Superman as a fictional character in the real world, so the DKR example still apply. T-1000 04:09, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crystalb4

Crystalb4, read this page carefully [1]. T-1000 03:57, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crystalb4, read NPOV, we are not allowed to use our opinion here. I provide a source, you did not. Simple as that. Keep this up and you will be banned. Superman has a healing factor shown in Infinite Crisis #1. This is a fact. You cannot change this even if you don't like it. From WP:OR,

"However, original research is more than just no personal crank theories. It also excludes editors' personal views, political opinions, their personal analysis or interpretation of published material, as well as any unpublished synthesis of published material, where such a synthesis appears to advance a position or opinion an editor may hold, or to support an argument or definition s/he may be trying to propose. That is, any facts, opinions, interpretations, definitions, and arguments published by Wikipedia must already have been published by a reliable publication in relation to the topic of the article."

As you see can, your personal opinion is not allowed here. T-1000 04:20, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then please provide a source stating that Superman does not have a healing factor. T-1000 04:21, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CrystalB4, the Marvel page is by no means an exhaustive resource link towards a character's entire history. Within the Quaasar series there are several references towards Hyperion's Eternal heritage, and the second Hyperion is fundamentally based on the original's template. In addition, there are multiple references of Superman's regenerative abilities throughout his entire published history, the Infinite Crisis simply being the most substantive as it is recent. NetK 04:33, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thor

Please don't keep adding "God blast" to the SHB. Even User:Asgardian, who initiated that phrase there, understands that it's disallowed jargon. Thanks. --Tenebrae 14:42, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

July 2007

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Wonder Woman. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Gscshoyru 02:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Wonder Woman. 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 which gains a consensus among editors. Gscshoyru 03:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May I remind you that you also are guilty of the 3 revert rule as well in your efforts to undo my edits. You can also be blocked for this as well. --CrystalB4 03:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have done two edits to the page in the last 24 hours. It takes four to violate the WP:3RR, which you have done. Revert again, and you will be reported, it'd be much better if this was discussed on the talk page, first... Gscshoyru 03:17, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've done four and I've stopped, however you're making non-consensus based edits. PLEASE talk on the WW talk page about this, rather than engage in needless edit warring. -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 03:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User notice: temporary 3RR block

Regarding reversions[2] made on July 16 2007 to Wonder Woman

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

The duration of the block is 24 hours. William M. Connolley 08:51, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Sentry (Robert Reynolds), you will be blocked from editing. Please discuss your edits, which completely change that section of the article, on the talk page first. Thanks! Gscshoyru 12:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You and User:JJonz

You and User:JJonz aren't the same person, are you? I think you may be... your edits are very much alike, and you have both started editing at the same time twice now. Keep in mind this is in violation of WP:SOCK so if you are, I suggest you use only one account to do your editing. If it's just a coincidence, then sorry. Oh, and incedentally, please try talking on the talk page before you make all these somewhat POV'd edits... thanks! Gscshoyru 17:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know who JJonz is, nor do I care what this person is doing to to your articles. All I know is that you need to really stop reverting every single one of my edits. Do you have something against me or what? Stop reverting my edits.

I don't have something against you... I do think your edits are seriously POV'd. But since I really don't know enough... I'm gonna stop, and let others who know better revert your edits. Your join dates are 3 days apart as well, you realize... a bit odd. Gscshoyru 17:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Give it a rest. Your edits are always POV, biased and problematic. you're being banned over and over for your actions. Stop being an ass on wikipedia, and learn to do it right. ThuranX 17:28, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]