Jump to content

User talk:DangerousJXD/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Favour

Hey friend! Can you do us a favour? If you live in Eastern Australia; you might know about this fish. Can you click a photo of it and upload it at Commons? This fish is called Ambassis jacksoniensis. Try to find it in a pet shop. Please confirm that this is not any other species. Your help would be really appreciated!
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 13:29, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, aGastya! I would like to help, but I can't. I don't have any knowledge in things like that (meaning I don't know how to upload pictures). I don't even have a camera! With the little I know about Wikipedia's uploading policy, I would assume that you could get one uploaded without having to take it yourself. I think it has something to do with the picture being a way to identity the subject of an article. If you look at any video game article picture (this one as an example), you'll see what I'm saying. Good luck! —DangerousJXD (talk) 21:53, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
It is not the question of uploading. But this species, it is found in the Eastern Australia. And as it is endemic, it isn't found anywhere here around. So a person from that location could help. At least try it once.
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 00:57, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, that's just not my area of expertise. —DangerousJXD (talk) 03:49, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
aGastya, this website has a picture of it. It says there "Contact us if you would like to use our photos". Maybe that helps? —DangerousJXD (talk) 03:58, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 10 May

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:31, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

You committed a copyright violation with this edit. You included a non-free image in your edit to a user talk page. Please note for the future: that the use of non-free images is not permitted outside of articlespace (per WP:NFCCP#9). This was discivered because there was no non-free use rationale for the use of the image (which you could not have justified anyway). DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 12:44, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

I understand, DieSwartzPunkt. That's interesting. Thanks for explaining that clearly. I'll add this to my pile of knowledge. :) —DangerousJXD (talk) 02:29, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
That's good. This means that it was not an intentional copyright violation which Wikipedia takes very seriously. Even I still learn something new about the way things are done around here, and I've been at it for a few years. Keep up the good work. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 11:26, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Changes about Hassan Whiteside

Hello I want to let you know that you had a better sentence about Hassan Whiteside finishing third in the NBA Most Improved Player Voting. I know Bulls Shooting Guard Jimmy Butler won the award but who was behind Hassan Whiteside in second place? I try to find it at nba.com or you can tell me via texting at 407-538-0705 or via email at mirandatdiaz@gmail.com

NBA President In Wikipedia Hoffman Jameson Backup:Brian Diaz NBAPresident (talk) 21:16, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey, NBAPresident. Draymond Green finished second (link). It doesn't really matter who Whiteside finished behind (at least it doesn't need mentioning in the article). Look at Anthony Davis (he doesn't have who he finished behind). :) –DangerousJXD (talk) 21:22, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
I Thought Draymond Green was the Runner-Up for the NBA Defensive Player Of The Year and what happened to Anthony Davis? NBAPresident (talk) 21:49, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
If you look at that link you'll see that Green finished second in Most Improved Player voting and Davis finished sixth. Green also finished second in Defensive Player of the Year voting. —DangerousJXD (talk) 21:54, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Whiteside actually finished fourth beyond Butler, Green and Rudy Gobert. I have fixed this in the article. —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:10, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Bloodborne reference

Try this, it's pretty comprehensive and listed as reliable source: VG247 guide. Should be able to cite most of the gameplay section with it. --The1337gamer (talk) 09:53, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Why, thank you! I'm not the best at finding references... —DangerousJXD (talk) 09:58, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

What Happened

Hey Did Omri Casspi got waived by the Kings and what happened to Monty Williams? NBAPresident (talk) 23:56, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, NBAPresident. I don't see any sources saying that Omri Casspi has been waived. Monty Williams was fired. —DangerousJXD (talk) 01:03, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Image caption

Hi DangerousJXD,

I've noticed you've undone my edit, mentioning Injustice: Gods Among Us as a comparison (by the way, Lego Batman: The Video Game and Lego Batman 2: DC Super Heroes do not mention the characters on the cover either). WP:VGIMAGES states "Video game covers are generally used for identification of the game in its infobox but may be also used to identify characters", so that's optional, not a requirement. WP:CAPTION states that "Captions should be succinct". Right now, it mentions twelve characters, I wouldn't call that succinct. WP:LINKSTYLE mentions "Beware of linking to an article without first confirming that it is helpful in context". Just because the reader knows which characters are in the game, providing links to the characters on the cover is too much. The Lego Batman characters are based upon the DC Comics characters, they take inspiration from them, but because of the child-friendly nature of the Lego Batman games, I don't think it is helpful to link to these articles, at least not in the infobox. Let me know what you think. --Soetermans. T / C 11:58, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Soetermans. I have changed it back. I think both captions are fine and that either one will do. Also I don't want to sound impolite but I know all that ;). You could have changed it back yourself and I wouldn't have minded. I'm not one who edit wars. —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:20, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
I've just noticed your reply, sorry about the late reply. I don't like edit warring either, thanks for understanding. And good luck with "quotes," and "commas," and such! --Soetermans. T / C 12:09, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

MOSLQ

Hi DangerousJXD,

I gave that up a long time ago. It does have its own guideline bit: WP:MOSLQ. Good luck! --Soetermans. T / C 12:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for that. That'll come in handy. —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:38, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Do you know why people commonly do this? —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:06, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Wish I did. Have you been running a lot into it lately? --Soetermans. T / C 06:37, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
They just recently started jumping out at me. I see and fix at least one every time I'm on Wikipedia. It's odd that so many people would think the comma goes in the quote marks. —DangerousJXD (talk) 06:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
If you start noticing them, it's hard to turn off. My best bet would be to send messages to other frequent video game article editors as feedback, or maybe leave a message at WT:VG. --Soetermans. T / C 08:23, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
I do enjoy fixing them though. The more things I have to do on Wikipedia the better. —DangerousJXD (talk) 10:38, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, DangerousJXD/Archive 2. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Happy Squirrel (talk) 01:52, 28 May 2015 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, DangerousJXD/Archive 2. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Yunshui 雲水 09:56, 1 June 2015 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Batman

Sorry about reverting the commas and periods into the parenthesis. I didn't see the article's history with your edits. Thanks for your help in the comics pages. Cheers. JosephSpiral (talk) 02:40, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

It's all good. :) —DangerousJXD (talk) 02:45, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you has this

Rubbish computer haz givn u Cheezburgr! Cheezburgrs promot WikiLovez and hoapfuly thiz one haz made yore day bettr. Spreadd teh WikiLovez by givin sumone else Cheezburgr, whethr it be sumeone youz hav had disagreementz with in teh past or a gud frend. Hapy munchins!


Spredd teh goudnesz of Cheezburgerz to all lolcat buddiez by addin {{subst:Cheezburgr}} to their talk paj with friendly messuj to all.

Yum! —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:21, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Dark Souls series

Hi DangerousJXD, I'd like to thank you for your help and assistance on my recently created Dark Souls (series) page. I got a message that the article was "patrolled" by you, what does this mean? Osh33m (talk) 23:04, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Osh33m! I appreciate the thanks. Thank you for creating that page. When someone patrols a page, it means they think it is fine; it belongs. Pretty much approving the page. The page doesn't contain anything inappropriate like spam or profanity and things like that. Here's a page on patrolling, and another. —DangerousJXD (talk) 23:14, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
You're welcome DangerousJXD, I decided that since the series has a pretty considerable following, a page for the franchise was needed. So, can anyone do a patrol? Or only select wikipedia editors? Also, though the page now exists, I only filled in the bare minimum for it - I feel like a little more information could be used for each section of the game. If we could get some editors to work on it, that would be nice, seeing as how it looks very empty for now. But it can be a thing for over-time I suppose. Osh33m (talk) 23:33, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Anyone can patrol a page, Osh33m; you don't need special user rights. Read those two links. I created a talk page for Dark Souls (series). If you go to the bottom of it, you'll see a link saying "Mark this page as patrolled". If you click on it, you will patrol the page. Any page that hasn't been patrolled will have that link. If it's already been patrolled there won't be that link. If you want, you can post here asking if anybody wants to help in editing Dark Souls (series). —DangerousJXD (talk) 23:45, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
DangerousJXD OK, done. Osh33m (talk) 00:30, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the Barnstar. It's greatly appreciated to be appreciated. JosephSpiral (talk) 13:39, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Greetings

I like your user page. You list many good points about Wikipedia clearly and succintly. I am glad to see someone note that the welcome message was helpful and influential. I prefer to use a variation of a customized welcome message and should probably do so more often. Donner60 (talk) 21:29, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Your speedy deletion tag

Hi there. I noticed that you tagged the page ERTYUM,NVGCDFGTD for speedy deletion, but then removed it right after. Just so you know, you did it correctly -- I would indeed say that it was a test page, and the {{db-test}} tag is sufficient by itself. An admin will eventually come along and review it, and delete it if appropriate. —Darkwind (talk) 11:09, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Your edit summary...

...is stupid. See Wikipedia:IPs are human too. Drmies (talk) 16:59, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Drmies! I know IPs are human; they just don't act like all the registered humans here. I have encountered two, count em, 2, IPs that edit like productive registered users on a regular basis. Literally every other IP I've encountered is either a "ghost", "hopper", or an IP that is unproductive. I know that edit summary was harsh but judging by the fact the IP reverted again, I think the IP doesn't care. I dislike interacting with IPs because it's awkward. The unproductive IPs are annoying you know. One IP edited my sandbox (!?!?). One IP is making unproductive edits against consensus over and over at this page. IPs sometimes insist on removing "fictional" from the lead of fictional characters. I only get disgruntled at unproductive IPs. I treat IPs that are productive like any other user. I just don't encounter productive IPs as much as the vandals. IPs don't interact with other users too, that's annoying, especially when it is expected that the IP say something. It's refreshing to see an IP make a good edit. All my edit summaries, and everything else I say, are stupid. I struggle putting words together. So. To recap: I treat good IPs how I treat any user. I treat unproductive IPs how I treat any other unproductive user. The way I treat IPs is appropriate. Some users treat other users, IP or not, like dirt. I don't do that. That particular edit summary isn't a typical edit summary of mine. —DangerousJXD (talk) 21:56, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Hmm. Well, I hope that last statement is true. Behind every IP is a human, even if a vandal, and I know a couple of IP editors who have contributed much to Wikipedia. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 01:53, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Phil Jackson. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. —Bagumba (talk) 08:21, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

I wasn't edit warring. That user is not here to be a productive Wikipedia editor. Look at their contributions. —DangerousJXD (talk) 08:25, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Follow WP:DR, such as getting others involved at WT:NBA. This one would be quickly resolved, I imagine.—Bagumba (talk) 08:34, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
I briefly thought about going to the NBA WikiProject talk page but it's a stupid thing to draw attention to. There shouldn't be a dispute in the first place. This is the second absurd 'war' I've been involved in (the second was here if your curious). —DangerousJXD (talk) 08:42, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm not trying to be a 'WP:DICK' with the following but how could you think I was edit warring? Sure at a glance, but I'm sure you didn't just glance at the page history. It's clearly just a situation where one editor is being disruptive. It's pretty much just a vandal situation. I wouldn't even say the other user is edit warring. Their just editing disruptively. —DangerousJXD (talk) 09:07, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
I was intentionally not getting involved, which means that short of something obvious at WP:3RRNO, one should avoid constantly reverting. Not to say it was an advisable edit, but I would say to WP:AGF if something is sourced, even if it violates WP:NPOV. It become a content dispute at that point. Of course a pattern of these types of edits, though not vandalism per se, can be WP:DISRUPTIVE. Hope that (mostly) makes sense.—Bagumba (talk) 09:50, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
It's worth noting that after my last edit in the above section and my last edit at Phil Jackson, I was not going to edit or comment on this matter again. I've already wasted enough time on this and I do not wish to waste any more. —DangerousJXD (talk) 10:13, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Phillis Jackson

A point of contention of mine going back almost ten years now... Two sets of opinions, but somehow yours is correct? I have a source and so do you. Let's compromise and remove him being the greatest, and I'll stop changing to most overrated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheRealEricB207 (talk • contribs) 00:56, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Pretty sure you're just trolling but I'll explain anyway. Opinions don't belong on Wikipedia, only verifiable, factual information. The fact Phil Jackson is considered one of the best coaches in NBA history is easily verifiable. If it was deemed necessary, a lot more sources could be inserted after the statement in question to prove it even more. However, the information is factual, so therefore, doesn't necessarily need more references. Your claim is an opinion only and would not be properly verifiable. It isn't even factual. The opinion that Phil is one of the best happens to be factual. Regular Wikipedians like myself don't edit with opinions in mind. Phil Jackson being one of the best is a fact; just because that happens to be my opinion, doesn't mean anything, same with your opinion. All that matters is which opinions are the factual opinions. Somebody might think the Sun is cold. Their opinion is wrong because the Sun is hot. That's a fact. Your "source" appeared to be you just slightly altering the existing source anyway. The opinion that Phil Jackson is overrated cannot be properly sourced in accordance with Wikipedia's policies like the fact can. The information belongs in the article. —DangerousJXD (talk) 02:51, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

In some reality the sun might actually be cold, but that really has nothing to do with an opinion on ones ability to perform a task. Science can be proven. Red Auerbach might call Phil a shit coach that had the benefit of the greatest collections of talent on every single team he ever coached. Being overrated doesn't mean he isn't quality, since you seem to have a hard on for the guy. Who's the greatest basketball player? I'm sure you have "facts" for that too. As you said, opinions have no place on Wikipedia. There is no to verify either opinion as fact, unless the basketball hall of fame comes up with an award for greatest coach of all time, and then basketball, or time, stops.TheRealEricB207 (talk) 13:19, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Not wasting my time with unproductive editors who aren't here to build Wikipedia. I will however say I was strictly talking about our Sun (you know the one). Not some other Sun in some other reality. It was used as an example. I don't get offended by statements like "you seem to have a hard on for the guy"; I don't get offended by words. Your points are irrelevant. Happy editing! —DangerousJXD (talk) 21:49, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Your opinion is irrelevant, and has no place in the article. Especially in the intro. If you want to give him a reach around create a new section for opinions of his legacy. Kobe hated him, you love him. Neither really matters. TheRealEricB207 (talk) 23:58, 30 July 2015 (UTC) Furthermore, explain how removing one line of the article negatively impacts the quality or integrity? Removing an opinion that otherwise doesn't add value is appropriate. Your high horse must be beautiful. TheRealEricB207 (talk) 00:04, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Just stop it. I'm not explaining to you any further why the information belongs in the article. —DangerousJXD (talk) 06:31, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

You're not explaining because you can't. You're trying to justify an opinion being in an article. TheRealEricB207 (talk) 12:55, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Enough with the childish comments. The above statement is what I'm saying to you. I'm not explaining further as it's already been explained. Do everybody in the universe a favour and drop it. Please do not comment again. —DangerousJXD (talk) 21:57, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: The user has disputed this before. —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:46, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited NBA 2K9, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page High-definition. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:44, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Edge (wrestler), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hell's Gate. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 20 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Re: Mortal Kombat X revert

When reverting, if more than one submission is pending, you have no choice but to revert all pending submissions. Yours may have been the last but there's no way to just choose a starting and ending point. You're right, I should've provided commentary, based on the bulk of the revisions made, even though they were vandalism, it didn't add sustainability to the article Snickers2686 (talk) 02:26, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Just to be clear, I wasn't saying I disagreed with your revert (that's all fine), it was the way you reverted. I didn't revert all the pending revisions in the first place as I wasn't sure about the oldest pending revision; I am aware about the first sentence above. All I was saying is that the way you reverted wasn't the best way you could've reverted in that situation, as it 'counted' as a revert on me (and the others obviously), and sent an unneeded notification. You know what I mean? In that situation, editing the particular revision you want to restore, rather than rollbacking, is the best way to revert. Obviously it's still reverting. (I'm sure you know this but when you edit and save an old revision, it has the same effect as rollbacking and is a better suited way to revert in some situations. For example, 12 unproductive edits to an article in a row by 6 different users is a situation where reverting this way is better.) This is not a big deal at all and you're allowed to revert however you want. There's more than one way to revert to good revisions of articles; some ways are better than others in certain situations, even though they all produce the same result. —DangerousJXD (talk) 02:46, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Lead

Hi DangerousJXD. I saw your edit summary and I would like to say that the lead is a summary of the article. It should be precise and clear instead of going very in-depth. Why someone praise or criticize them is something for the reception section, not the lead. No one would read the rest of the article or other sections if the lead tells them everything they need to know. AdrianGamer (talk) 07:30, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello! If I had a problem with your edit, I would have reverted it. I didn't revert your edit, therefore, I don't have a problem with the way the lead is now. The above statements are right and I know that. There's a userbox that says "this user reserves the right to completely screw up their own edits". Think of this as one of those situations. I do know what the lead is for, you don't need to tell me. Until Dawn's lead sounds awkward just listing everything like that don't you think? The old version was also sounded awkward. Hmm. I don't really care though as the whole article (to me anyway) is a bit of a mess, and there's nothing necessarily wrong with the lead the way it is right now. —DangerousJXD (talk) 07:47, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
I am impressed with the article actually, since it was expanded seven-fold within five days. Anyway, I read your edit summary and I thought you were not happy with my edits. This explanation clears my concern up. AdrianGamer (talk) 08:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Well good! I seem to have a habit of confusing others. The rapid expansion of the article is very great to see. I'm talking about content. The plot section for instance was full of promotional, advert-like, confusing content (not to mention multiple instances of "you" and "your"). Any quality issues with the article will eventually be fixed as there's quite of lot of traffic at the moment. —DangerousJXD (talk) 08:23, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Until Dawn has been nominated for Did You Know

DYK for Until Dawn

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Xbox games, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ESPN NBA Basketball. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 14 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 20 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Removing non-breaking spaces from IncrediBuild

Why do you keep doing this [1] without explanation? -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 00:11, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello there, Consumed Crustacean. The main reason I was at the article was fixing a typo ("Playstation" → "PlayStation"). When fixing that typo, I saw that code for a space. I think they achieve nothing and a simple space is far better. Can you elaborate on why changing the code to a space is a problem? They both produce the same thing don't they? Why should that code be there? What's the point of that code? Also, I have only removed the code a few times recently and they were in edits in which I was doing something else. "Fixes" is an accurate edit summary in that particular diff as well; fixing a typo and removing pointless code. I do not go searching for instances of "non-breaking spaces". I couldn't care less about these "non-breaking spaces". —DangerousJXD (talk) 00:45, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
I have caused some confusion here. I was originally at the article fixing a typo. When fixing the typo, I removed the "non-breaking spaces". When you reverted my edit removing the spaces, you, obviously, reverted me fixing the typo as well because they were in the same edit. Now, I found that typo from a what links here page. Since you reverted the typo fix, the page reappeared in the what links here page I'm going through. I didn't remember fixing the typo originally as I didn't even see your revert. I went to the page a second time and fixed the typo again, thinking I haven't been to the page before, and removed the "pointless" spaces. So, I'm sorry for causing the confusion about typos and "non-breaking spaces". I now have a basic understanding of what these spaces do so you don't have to educate me. I'll never remove these again to avoid further confusion. Again, I'm sorry for the confusion. I have reinserted the spaces, the typo is fixed, the article is how it should be, and it is if I just fixed the typo in the one edit with causing confusion. —DangerousJXD (talk) 01:06, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Wendigo

I wanted to add something to the Wendigo page about where it appears in pop.culture, but it's protected from Vandalism.

So if you will could you please add that a Wendigo is in Graham Masterston's Book Edgewise. The Wemdigo in said book is technically the antagonist. The main antagonist is George Iron Walker. He and a woman summoned the Wendigo. It is very violent. oTimmydoop (talk) 18:08, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello Timmydoop! Even though I know little about the book, I added a brief mention of it into the article with this edit. Even though Graham Masterton has his own article and I know what you're saying is true, I couldn't find a good source. I added it anyway as there is another book mentioned in the article and the source there is the site I ended up using. If you would like me to change the wording of the statement or anything else, let me know. —DangerousJXD (talk) 21:18, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome

Yeah sure no problem, actually I've been working on getting the covers for 2K8, 2K7 and the other 2K installments but is not that easy because I need the covers with high resolution and sometimes is hard to find them in high resolution. By the way, did you created all the 2K articles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeison4real (talk • contribs) 23:37, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Jeison4real — Back in June, I converted NBA 2K9, NBA 2K8, NBA 2K7, NBA 2K6, and ESPN NBA Basketball from redirects into proper articles. (I also later did the same to NBA 2K16.) All others games in the series had already had an article created except for those, so I wanted to change that. The reason why they didn't have an article was pretty much because nobody had bothered to make them. All the games in the NBA 2K series warrant an article. I see you've uploaded 2K8's cover. Thank you. —DangerousJXD (talk) 01:21, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Alright, well now we can work together you make the articles and I get the covers. I'll be looking for the other 2K covers to finish the missing covers Jeison4real (talk) 06:37, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos Torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.


To give a Dobos Torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

G'day. Thanks for your help. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 23:06, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm not one to question Wikipedia treats but what did I help you with? —DangerousJXD (talk) 04:30, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
I apologize. It was a small but helpful edit. Apparently it is now 'covered up' on my watchlist by someone's later edit. Unfortunately, I can't recall what it was. This was my way of saying, 'keep up the good work.' We don't give strokes often enough (IMO), and I try to do my part in obviating that tendency. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:35, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
You don't need to apologize for anything. I appreciate the thanks and I enjoyed investigating what a Dobos Torte was. That edit was probably a punctuation fix or a redirect misspelling fix. I make many small edits fixing these things (other stuff too) so it could have been anywhere! It's not important what the edit was. I don't care. :) —DangerousJXD (talk) 21:00, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
These are very tasty! Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:50, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Eleanore Pettersen is your edit. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:31, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Australia

Hello, I noticed that you edited an article related to, or expressed interest in Australia, and I thought you may be interested in knowing that there is a WikiProject working to improve articles about this country. Your help would be greatly appreciated, so please consider joining the WikiProject Australia. Thank you! Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 09:51, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

I noticed that you joined. Nice! Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 21:01, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bendless Love, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New New York. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Treehouse of Horror XXVI, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cameo. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

(Annoyed Grunt)

I reverted the changes because I wished to restore the pre-vandal version, as the vandal had removed "(Annoyed Grunt)" from the article altogether. My revert of your edit was purely technical. Sorry. I had assumed that since the "D'oh!" version of the title redirects to the article that the alternative title might deserve mention as well, even if it is not official. So, how about the other Simpsons episodes with "(Annoyed Grunt)" in the title? Should their articles, insofar as they list the pronunciation as an alternative title, not be amended likewise? --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:44, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello there. It's alright about that revert. Don't worry about it. I have removed the statements spelling it with a "D'oh" from the articles. I have explained in the edits' edit summaries. The reason why it doesn't deserve a mention is essentially because it's wrong. Pretty much a typo, just like any other minor modification that's not a proper alternative spelling. (For example: M&M's (correct) and M&Ms (incorrect). Both are common but one is correct.) Each of these articles briefly explain the title in the "Cultural references" section as well. —DangerousJXD (talk) 21:36, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for being a smart editor

71.89.78.244 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Thanks for being a smart editor

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Um... Thanks! —DangerousJXD (talk) 21:24, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Hey! Thanks!

Kev.w.pri has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Hi! I'm taking a class this semester where one of our main assignments is to create a Wikipedia article. I wrote the article on Above Average Productions, and you were the first person from the Wikipedia community to edit it at all! So I just wanted to say thanks for making me feel like a part of the community by giving you a cookie, because who doesn't love a good cookie? Anyway, thanks again!

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Thanks! —DangerousJXD (talk) 21:35, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2015 newsletter

The WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter
Volume III, no. 3, September–November 2015

Note: To opt out from receiving future newsletters, please click here for instructions.                                      

Project News

  • Potential upcoming project page changes by WikiProject X. Category discussions at CfD. (more below)
— View by clicking [show] —


  • WikiProject X may begin pilot testing to refine WikiProject Food and Drink's project's pages. A recent discussion regarding this occurred at the project talk page here.
  • During September–October 2015, several food and drink categories have been discussed at Categories for discussion. Notices for these discussions are sometimes posted at the project's talk page. Notice about a new discussion was recently posted at the project talk page on 8 November 2015.
  • There are presently 3,658 unassessed Food and drink articles. Assistance in reducing this number would be appreciated.
  • Please see the project's Tasks and To do sections for project and article tasks, and please update the lists by adding new entries and removing resolved or outdated ones.

Article alerts

— View by clicking [show] —

Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Article alerts

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Curabitur pretium tincidunt lacus. Nulla gravida orci a odio. Nullam varius, turpis et commodo pharetra, est eros bibendum elit, nec luctus magna felis sollicitudin mauris. Integer in mauris eu nibh euismod gravida. Duis ac tellus et risus vulputate vehicula. Donec lobortis risus a elit. Etiam tempor. Ut ullamcorper, ligula eu tempor congue, eros est euismod turpis, id tincidunt sapien risus a quam. Maecenas fermentum consequat mi. Donec fermentum. Pellentesque malesuada nulla a mi. Duis sapien sem, aliquet nec, commodo eget, consequat quis, neque. Aliquam faucibus, elit ut dictum aliquet, felis nisl adipiscing sapien, sed malesuada diam lacus eget erat. Cras mollis scelerisque nunc. Nullam arcu. Aliquam consequat. Curabitur augue lorem, dapibus quis, laoreet et, pretium ac, nisi. Aenean magna nisl, mollis quis, molestie eu, feugiat in, orci. In hac habitasse platea dictumst.

Fusce convallis, mauris imperdiet gravida bibendum, nisl turpis suscipit mauris, sed placerat ipsum urna sed risus. In convallis tellus a mauris. Curabitur non elit ut libero tristique sodales. Mauris a lacus. Donec mattis semper leo. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Vivamus facilisis diam at odio. Mauris dictum, nisi eget consequat elementum, lacus ligula molestie metus, non feugiat orci magna ac sem. Donec turpis. Donec vitae metus. Morbi tristique neque eu mauris. Quisque gravida ipsum non sapien. Proin turpis lacus, scelerisque vitae, elementum at, lobortis ac, quam. Aliquam dictum eleifend risus. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Etiam sit amet diam. Suspendisse odio. Suspendisse nunc. In semper bibendum libero.

Proin nonummy, lacus eget pulvinar lacinia, pede felis dignissim leo, vitae tristique magna lacus sit amet eros. Nullam ornare. Praesent odio ligula, dapibus sed, tincidunt eget, dictum ac, nibh. Nam quis lacus. Nunc eleifend molestie velit. Morbi lobortis quam eu velit. Donec euismod vestibulum massa. Donec non lectus. Aliquam commodo lacus sit amet nulla. Cras dignissim elit et augue. Nullam non diam. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Aenean vestibulum. Sed lobortis elit quis lectus. Nunc sed lacus at augue bibendum dapibus.
  • Feel free to welcome the new members who have recently joined the project.
— View by clicking [show] —
Onel5969
Valoem
DangerousJXD
The project currently has 83 active members.
— View by clicking [show] —


Past newsletters

Food and drink articles by quality and importance

— View by clicking [show] —
Article statistics
Food and Drink WikiProject
article assessment
Food and drink articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
FA 7 15 31 53
FL 2 2 4
FM 140 140
GA 18 31 76 278 403
B 56 232 344 716 86 1,434
C 77 404 994 3,557 527 5,559
Start 22 329 1,672 12,020 3,898 17,941
Stub 17 545 9,027 4,955 14,544
List 12 71 115 539 23 274 1,034
Category 8,919 8,919
Disambig 218 218
File 3,022 3,022
Portal 811 811
Project 440 440
Redirect 10 72 640 2,868 3,590
Template 1,044 1,044
NA 8 8
Other 204 204
Assessed 185 1,103 3,833 26,810 17,697 9,740 59,368
Unassessed 14 1,964 1,978
Total 185 1,103 3,833 26,824 17,697 11,704 61,346
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 204,313 Ω = 5.12

  – Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on 23:45, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

I find this incredibly funny. I try my very best to not waste time on Wikipedia. Why would I even visit these links? I, without having been to the links above, guarantee you that those pages are really really really long. Just looking into this would be a big waste of my precious time. For... some reason, places like that are where lots of editors spend their time. Actually participating in this pointlessness would be painful. Wasting hours/days/weeks/months/years? Really? It's funny that I am asked to come participate. Trying to convert me into an ANI editor are we? Maybe you want me to spend all my time at users' talk pages? So yeah, it's stupid, I don't care. —DangerousJXD (talk) 20:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Can you please remove it? After testing, I am finding it unnecessarily confusing. That's the same reason why I don't use Twinkle. I see it as unnecessarily changing things and making everything just a little more complicated. I much prefer the old fashioned way of reverting unproductive pending changes and I would rather leave 'officially' approving changes to others. I thought it would be more simple. I suppose I could easily get used to it but I'd rather not have to worry about it. Just to be clear, I'm not requesting you remove the right because I didn't want it in the first place. I have been meaning to request it for a while. I just don't like actually having it. It's not because you just gave it to me. —DangerousJXD (talk) 07:30, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
I have removed it as requested. Of course you were under no obligation to use it if you kept the rights, but it shouldn't be a problem if you happen to change your mind in the future. Happy editing.—Bagumba (talk) 07:38, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Lego Batman 3: Beyond Gotham

"That in mind, Traveller's Tales probably made the right call in not going the full, open-world route with LEGO Batman 3: Beyond Gotham." -http://kotaku.com/lego-batman-3-beyond-gotham-the-kotaku-review-1660879029?trending_test_two_e&utm_expid=66866090-68.hhyw_lmCRuCTCg0I2RHHtw.4&utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F

"While not every game has to be open-world to be good, playing Lego Batman 3 made me long for the freedom of Lego Batman 2." -http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/11/22/lego-batman-3-beyond-gotham-review

"Dropping the open-world design seen in LEGO Batman 2 and the more recent Hobbit game, Batman 3 returns to a series of individual levels and a number of hubs and planets that can be explored." -http://www.videogamer.com/reviews/legobatman3_beyond_gotham_review.html

"As the name suggests, Traveller's Tales is leaving the second game's glorious open-world city behind for the most part. Instead, it's sending Batman and the Justice League up against Brainiac, who has a diabolical plan that will take our heroes out into space to visit the Lantern planets alongside other locations. An open-world approach simply wouldn't work here." -http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-05-27-lego-batman-3-beyond-gotham-blasts-its-heroes-into-space

"There are limited open-world options for the various Lantern planets, but those aren’t part of the main story and are generally small and pretty light on things to do. " -The IGN review also throws in this little tidbit, but open world options isn't the same as being a fully open world game.Dohvahkiin (talk) 10:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

I added it back to the category, so don't worry about it. While I don't agree with the YouTube video being supportive of it by itself, the Game Informer and IGN review (to some degree) support this. Sorry about that, but I'm trying to help keep the category clean as well as up to date with the latest info. Thanks for helping me @DangerousJXD, i appreciate itDohvahkiin (talk) 16:52, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Hey Dohvahkiin. I completely agree with what you are saying. I never disagreed. The game is not a full open world game but specific parts of it are open world focused. Even then, those parts aren't proper open world, just more so than the other parts. I don't work on categories so I don't care if this particular one is included or not. If I was to choose one, I'd say don't include it, but I don't think it matters much. In my revert of you, I restored the information in the gameplay section on the Lantern Planets but I didn't restore the category. The reason for adding the Lantern Planet information back was because those sections of the game warrant a mention. Any reliable source (not the YouTube one, I never should have added that, I added that a long time ago) is good enough to support the information on the Lantern Planets. —DangerousJXD (talk) 20:22, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Typos

Mate, dunno where I'd be without your assistance ay haha. I've made a few of those small mistakes, cheers for correcting them! DaHuzyBru (talk) 07:43, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

It's all good! —DangerousJXD (talk) 09:09, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Cabela's games

A big thank you for helping out with the Cabela's video game pages! I tried to keep it in check, but certain anonymous users went around all the games and added fancruft and made-up cancelled versions. So thank you again, your edits were much needed :) Kennyannydenny (talk) 10:10, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello Kennyannydenny. I appreciate the thanks. Those articles are a mess. Even now with all that unencyclopedic content removed they are still written poorly. The main reason for that is that the articles don't receive much traffic; these games don't set the world on fire. That's the trouble with Wikipedia. So many poorly written articles because nobody wants to actual clean them up. Anyway, if you see cruft like that being added into these few articles, or of course any other articles, I encourage you to remove it. Cite this in edit summaries if you so wish. :) —DangerousJXD (talk) 10:28, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
It was well deserved :) Yeah I noticed the exact same thing. A pity, since I really like Cabela's games. Unfortunately, most are not really released here in Europe and thus I would have to buy an American xbox 360, instead of my European one. They are still a mess indeed, unfortunately I haven't played most of them. I did play Alaskan Adventures and Dangerous Hunts. I'll do that in the future, thanks! Kennyannydenny (talk) 10:32, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Scarecrow

To answer your question here, I agree that it shouldn't be included. Since the fear gas made an appearance, that was just my attempt to compromise with a user known for adding trivial non-appearances. DarkKnight2149 14:39, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Hey Darkknight2149. I don't really have anything to add but I will say how stupid it is to mention non-appearances in articles. Ace the Bat-Hound once mentioned a dog bowl with his name on it that was a small easter egg in a video game. Yes, a dog bowl. It doesn't get much smaller than that. That's the most ludicrous one I've ever seen. Non-appearances like this Scarecrow one aren't uncommon in articles. —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:38, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
I just removed the dog bowl non-appearance again after discovering that it was readded. —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:44, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
I'll take that into account next time a situation like this occurs. Usually I don't compromise when it comes to stuff like this. The only reason I did it this time was, as previously mentioned, because of the fear gas. But you are correct about trivial non-appearances. Dog bowls and character names that appear on computer screens (such as the case with X-Men 2: X-Men United) are not notable. The only way I see a non-appearance as notable is if the character that doesn't appear somehow has a large effect on the material, which is rare. DarkKnight2149 22:48, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
That last sentence is pretty much non-appearances in a nutshell. Maybe something like that should be put in the guidelines if it isn't already so that editors can refer to it in the edit summary of reverts that remove non-appearances. Probably already something like it. —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:56, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Would you mind watching Gorilla Grodd? See the page history, non-appearances are being added. I don't like reverting 4 times unless it's vandalism. —DangerousJXD (talk) 06:32, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I'll watch the page. DarkKnight2149 00:44, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

I'd like to email you about No Man's Sky

I'm a reporter reaching out to Wikipedia contributors who have done the most on the No Man's Sky page. Email me if you'd like to offer me your insights on the game that you've gleaned from editing its Wikipedia page. bdale@observer.com (Obviously feel free to delete this once you've seen it) BradyDale (talk) 20:44, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year, DangerousJXD!

Happy New Year!

DangerousJXD,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. North America1000 01:34, 2 January 2016 (UTC)


Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Partizan Belgrade

Hi, sorry to revert you, but too often the link of Partizan Belgrade is refered to the FK Partizan football club s well as KK Partizan basket one, or any other sports Partizan competes, which in English ends up being "Partizan Belgrade" often, so better leave it to the general article about Partizan sport society and then each user can see logicaly to what sport the link in each case was refering to. Best regards, FkpCascais (talk) 08:56, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

You are absolutely right. When making that change, I stupidly assumed that it could only be referring to basketball. There's no need to apologize for reverting me. —DangerousJXD (talk) 09:07, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Giannis Antetokounmpo

Hey man. Regarding the user adding descent to Giannis Antetokounmpo's lead, I advise just leaving it. No point getting into an edit war with a stubborn new user. It's not that big of a deal. If the user can't be reasoned with, just leave it for now. Down the track, perhaps remove it once the user no longer has business here. DaHuzyBru (talk) 10:30, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Stubborn editors are my favourite. —DangerousJXD (talk) 11:35, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
I also advise don't keep arguing with that IP. The person is clearly inept, so don't belittle yourself ay. Just let it slide for now, and down the track, we can remove it perhaps. This guy won't stick around for the long-term, he's here on a blinded mission. DaHuzyBru (talk) 13:35, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
I appreciate the comments but believe me, having been in a few of these types of conversations, I know. (A great one once: somebody really hated Phil Jackson and had to ensure that the article reflected their opinion. Need I say more? If you want, you can read more about this in my second talk page archive. It's the definition of this type of conversation.) I have said everything I have to say about this crap at the talk page and it should now be "over". —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:20, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

DVD cites on South Park

Hey, just wanted to say thanks for adding the nice Production sections with the DVD commentary notes on some of the South Park articles from Season 18. Those tidbits are good stuff. But just as an FYI, there is a format method for citing information from DVDs. Check out Template: cite serial and/or Template: cite episode. Either one works with what you're doing. I went ahead and fixed the ones you've added, this is just something to help you in the future. Keep up the good work though! - SanAnMan (talk) 20:44, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks SanAnMan. The reason I didn't use templates originally is because I hate reference templates overall. Because this one is simple, I'll probably use the template for the rest of the episodes in the season, and probably any other episodes I do this for in the future. I do hate templates though so don't bet on it. Feel free to "fix" any references I add that don't use a template if you want. Just don't make mistakes. The reference should also say that it's from the DVD audio commentary; it's pretty important. It's not exactly wrong to not use a reference template. It's just the preferred method. This is especially true if what an editor writes produces the same thing as a template. Of course my references for these pages is just a simple sentence so that doesn't apply here. The point remains though. Anyway, I plan on adding production sections for several more seasons' episodes, including 17 and 10, in the near future. —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:23, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Fat Head

Sorry but you don't understand my edit. I did not want to change the red-linked Fat Head that the editors were discussing, because they were discussing that it was not an article, and because I don't change other editor's words on a talk page, but the italicized, ''Fat Head'' , actually is an article. That is why I put it there.2601:80:4003:7416:6550:FE8:9E50:AFFC (talk) 06:20, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Inserting a link and nothing else without any explanation into a small, WP:FORUM-like discussion from years ago is highly questionable and your comments here make little sense. —DangerousJXD (talk) 06:57, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
The main point was to save another editor from clicking the RL in the discussion, and creating a new article. JFTR I find it odd that it bothers you so much.2601:80:4003:7416:D161:DA83:3B38:6034 (talk) 14:13, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
That's still odd but I really don't care and I don't see why you think I'm incredibly annoyed by this. It's standard practice for editors to remove inappropriate or pointless comments from a talk page. Here's an example of somebody else doing this. If some IP adds "Hippopotamus" and nothing else to a talk page discussion from 2003 without an edit summary you can bet a more experienced editor who watches the page will think it's inappropriate and remove it. I think I have confused you with my blunt tone and lengthy posts. I don't care for adding smiley faces after every sentence to make sure there are no misunderstandings to what I'm trying to say and I like to say everything in one post. I prefer to get right to the point in an attempt to not waste anybody's time. That hasn't worked here as you've come to my talk page. Nothing further needs to be said because there isn't actually any type of dispute. —DangerousJXD (talk) 20:57, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
I'm not understanding much of what you are talking-about here. I think that too many assumptions have been made, starting with my edit, where I assumed incorrectly in your case at least, that I needed no edit summary because of how it made perfect sense to myself in the context of the discussion. I took other editor's intelligence for granted. Sorry. You are incorrectly assuming that you are a more experienced editor than I am and whatever other problems you have with my relatively mn edit that you mentioned here and in your reversions. Oh well. 2601:80:4003:7416:4BC:C56A:D04:FBE2 (talk) 21:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
And on that lovely note, I say goodbye. Happy editing! —DangerousJXD (talk) 21:36, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DangerousJXD/Archive_2&oldid=1142954781"