User talk:DietLimeCola/Archive 2

List of characters in Ed, Edd n Eddy

I do not believe that forums are reliable sources information. Squirepants101 22:43, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose, I'll try to get a more reliable source later on. DietLimeCola

You're it

You've just pulled the short straw and have been given the honour of being called "second-in-command" over at the CN Wikiproject, The reason you've been given this position is beyond me but your name was put forwards twice and beggars can't be choosers. The real and much larger reason is down to Driveus leaving Wikipedia to go tend to his field of crummy video clips over at YouTube and as such needing another person to control the general direction of a boat with no rudders or sails also known as the project.

Congratulations, your tenure will be a fruitful and successful one if you cut back the EEnE diet and move onto different articles as you're now playing with the slightly larger boys now. If of course you can't fill the size 8 house pumps left by the previous tenant then tell me because really, you're the last hope for the project having two people to manuver the project back upstream instead of one who'd rather jump overboard and let the beast fall over the waterfall given everyone else has gone AWOL anyway.

Once again, a presumptuous greetings to the world of ill-though out plans and strategies for an increasingly apathetic editorial staff. --treelo _talk 15:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to the Fred Fredburger article

Black rhino ranger: Why did you delete the appearances?

Read the edit summary! Its already mentioned what episodes he appeared in. All the other information there was flat out cruft. DietLimeCola 23:35, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Snakezilla: Please stop redirecting the articles or your blocked

Article open

THere is an article in season 5 of Ed,Edd n Eddy waiting to be edited. User:M.Naff

I'm still not editing that...

The project has eerily gone quiet... again. Something seems to be wrong and once again I'm losing interest in the whole thing. I may be co-ordinator but I certainly am not the only one attached. I think Driveus may have misread the need for a wikiproject based on such a subject predominantly edited by IP editors and the odd Naruto fan. --treelo _talk 21:18, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well we just have to keep trying and fighting against those 12 year old kids on making a good article. Just because theres more bad CN editors than good ones does not mean that the pages should suffer with nothing but crap. We just have to keep trying. I hope nobody else leaves, however if they do then we need to get more people to keep this project alive. DietLimeCola 21:20, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing is it's own little side-issue and heck, I like reprimanding slightly devious editors who get all the stuff I took out back in. It isn't that, I do generally hate Naruto fans because more often than not they're complete dolts but there's a lot of fanism that just needs to be cut out. Currently a new article came up for Storm Hawks, nothing wrong with the edits (some are still suspect and needs generalising further) but it's just that somehow they deigned it right that there be the lists for various elements to the show (locations, characters and episodes extrapolated from 2 shows) way before most of it has even aired. Don't know if to congratulate the kid who kicked it all of or split them one for jumping the gun.

Ain't any of that though, the project has stopped and it's odd because I have so many ideas that when I put them forward nobody comments, adds anything to them or even writes again. I think I'm cursed, just want more input or new blood so it doesn't feel like the project has sloped off into inactivity besides one person holding it up and improving on it. Nobody plays ball and it just isn't fun playing on your lonesome. --treelo _talk 00:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I read the comments, I just didn't comment on them, doesn't mean im not interested. DietLimeCola 03:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never figured you're disinterested, can't understand why nobody will say something. Only time someone did say something is to tell me they're leaving! Sure it's not just a two=person project? You can understand my general feelings for the project as it does feel like it's gradually being deserted as nobody is maintaining the project but still editing as they would otherwise. I may have lost the meaning of the project, one moment. --treelo _talk 10:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we just have to find people who are interested. I understand your feelings, and I feel this group is necessary. Just don't give up on this, we just need to work hard on finding more members. DietLimeCola 12:12, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Danny Daniel

I don't know if you noticed or not, but in April, I made a subpage that includes information about Danny Daniel, including likely sockpuppets. An admin told me to do it. If you see a Danny Daniel sockpuppet, add it to the likely sockpuppet heading and report it to WP:AIV (if the sockpuppet is very obvious) or WP:ANI. Pants^(T) 22:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright thanks. I'm pretty certain the one I reverted (the Inuyasha Gym Partner crossover crap) is him, since hes done that on an alt before. DietLimeCola 23:50, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:66.11.249.9

Seeing as you are the goto guy for all vandals and the like (feel a bit left out now), consider giving warnings to this user as you did have to revert one of their more blatant useless edits from a few days earlier. I missed it as it occured the day after I warned them and sideswiped the 3RR so I'm figuring this one's a little savvy or just lucky. Thing is, it's a dynamic IP but not too much so otherwise I wouldn't be watching them so intently, bit hard to block them just like that. I'm using TW for my general "you screwed up" warning messages, give it a try if you're finding you do need to give off warnings and such regularly. --treelo _talk 01:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And who told you to get rid of the B&M minor characters?

And who told you to get rid of the B&M minor characters? No one, and I mean no told you to do that. Back off!! --Naruto134 00:00, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-Sigh- It's cruft. No characters that have been in more than one episode are allowed. End of discussion, I won't tolerate your behavior. DietLimeCola 23:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Give it back, Traitor. This is Unacceptible. Black Rhino Ranger 09:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because maintaining character articles is just that hard...

Someone reinserted every damn one shot again into List of characters from My Gym Partner's a Monkey, it was 2 days ago so I don't feel I can revert without damaging some constructive edits. Seeing as people do like to edit it so much and much of the guff in the article comes through via IP editors it's come to a point where there's only two solutions to stop this odd edit war.

The article needs splitting off if people are determined to get minors back in, one shot or otherwise. Some may even appear twice but here's the bottom line as I see it, for a character to exist in the article (or articles) they should have around 3 appearances and have spoken in each of them in order to justify notability criteria otherwise it's a long list of minor characters to have appeared in a couple of episodes and never reappeared. If you can't write more than their species, what episode(s) they appeared in and what they did then they have little to no personality ergo non-notable. Writing up a basic episode synopsis doesn't count either. The strictest I'd go is for characters who have some recurring role and appear in most episodes, the core essentially, anyone else can go whistle.
Lock the damn thing, soft lock though. Not exactly ideal but I know one EEnE article has got one so there's little reason why not. Detritus is added constantly and the minor characters keep returning which I'd say is some form of wrongdoing by adding non-essential fancruft. Lock it down and edits will be easier to track and warn wily editors should they not maintain it correctly.

There's also the idea of coming to a unilateral consensus on what goes in but these are IP editors here, let's be real. There's only 3 signed up editors who edit the damn thing regularly so I dunno, let the rot set in or cut it right out. Your input is totally appreciated. --treelo _talk 03:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean, however I don't even watch that show, the only two shows I watch on Cartoon Network are Billy and Mandy and the Ed's, so I wouldn't actually know which characters appeared more than once. DietLimeCola 17:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know and I don't watch much of it either, only because I can't and not because I don't want to. Nonetheless, even if we don't watch it it's fairly easy to maintain who stays in and who doesn't otherwise we'll just end up going back and forth with them re-entering and use deleting it later once it's caught. I'd rather not let the article just fill up with crap because we can't maintain it fully so I'm thinking semi-protection with a commented guideline specifying inclusion details even though it wouldn't fly on the principle that it's a content dispute between registered users and anonymous users, with the intention to lock out the anonymous users. This is difficult, any suggestions?--treelo _talk 01:23, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Others" section (List of characters from My Gym Partner's a Monkey)

I believe some of the characters in the "Others" section are not one-shot. They're articles perhaps just need to be expanded. So, I don't think they should removed. FoxLad 06:29, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well then only add the ones that are not one shot. DietLimeCola 15:38, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um.

OK, remember the discussion we had on this article? Someone suggest we put a semi-lock on it to prevent certain users and knowing that it's unlikely it'd be any good I said it wouldn't fly but couldn't say for sure. Went and did it anyway just to find out and was sick of the vandalism that had started to creep in and now find that there's a full lock on the article for 3 days which seems bizarre and probably leads right back to that particular admin being a bit of a jackass. Eitherway it's confirmed, we can't have any type of lock on the article and need to target the editors themselves even though they'll move onto a new IP address and continue this daft dispute. --treelo _talk 01:54, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a followup as I haven't seen much of you recently so this could all be academic to you, I've decided to just give in on the article. Idiots will edit it anyway and revert it to that old scraggy edit they particlarly like so why bother? They want the bloat, the cruft and the uneccesary, badly written garbage being "true fans", let them have it. --treelo _talk 03:11, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you got the article locked to unregistered types and newbies for 2 weeks, nice. It will start up again, if not the first edit available to them will be the big revert and we will have to go once more to RPP. Think a 3-strike rule applies here? --treelo _talk 16:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some are major and some are minor

Hoss, Eris, Dracula, Jeff, Fred, and skarr are not minor characters, they are major characters, If they were minor, then they wouldn't have made more then 2 appearances and Boogie and Lord pain will make a thrid appearance in the second billy and mandy movie (Wrath of the Spider Queen). Chocolate Rhino 15:00, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So? They're still minor. And "Thrid"? No such word. CBFan 15:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I never removed those characters. DietLimeCola 15:54, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:MaxieLogoFan

Sorry about the Fred Fredburger article. To me, he's a major minor character because of the many big appearances he's in, but it is a merge so I will never do it again. I'm a little upset now <=(

Just a shoutout

Wondering what you have been doing. EEnE sure needs a few vigilant editors. Shoutout to DLC. You are missed. -- Elaich ^talk 04:40, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apology

It is Rosh Hashana, and I am here to give you a long-overdue apology forwhat happened about a year ago. I may have been a bit to harsh to you (as well as to quick to jump to conclusions) when you returned to Wikipedia with better intentions. I am also sorry for not apoligizing sooner, as you turned out to be a great editor on the Ed, Edd n Eddy-related articles.

I hope you except this long-overdue apology. --Wack'd ^{Talk to me! • Admire my handiwork!} 19:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wack'd, DLC's last contribution to Wikipedia was on July 26. Last edit summary was only the single word "gone." I think he/she got tired of all the continual posting of fancruft on cartoon articles, since DLC's edit summaries over the past months got more and more terse and annoyed. Too bad, became an excellent editor. Maybe DLC decided to leave this identity and begin again with a new one. It's not always easy, and sometimes you have to get very strict (which many people read as "angry") to preserve the encyclopedic nature of Wikipedia. DLC, if you ever read this, we both appreciate your efforts and would like to see you return. -- Elaich ^talk 03:14, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Eenekids.PNG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Eenekids.PNG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:30, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Nexustklogo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Nexustklogo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstarred!

		The Editor's Barnstar
		I wasn't about to go edit the rolling tarball of junk and cruft that is the B&M list and not through lack of knowledge either. As the huge swathes of good edits you made won't last for too long and you'll be called turncoat and traitor once more as soon as someone notices some 14Kb has been clipped unceremoniously from their article, here's your first barnstar to commemorate this small yet historic event. treelo _talk 13:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It feels good to be back.

Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Komodo_lover#Komodo_lover

See results, esp my last clerknote. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:55, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that observation, it makes more sense now. DietLimeCola (talk) 03:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See new post there. Let us know if you see more, I've taken a personal interest in KL. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:EdEddnEddy.png

Thanks for uploading Image:EdEddnEddy.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Stopswop.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:Stopswop.PNG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the well wishes. I'm OK. It was just a period of being driven to distraction by the drive by editors, and especially those who insist on adding rumor and speculation as if it is fact. I am REALLY not looking forward to the release of this movie - NOT because I don't want to see it, but because of the mayhem it is going to unleash on this article. I am already stating to work on trying to get these pages completely protected during that time, so that the hubbub over the movie has time to die down before editing is allowed. Don't know if I can or not, but I'm trying. Thanks for being here to help. -- Elaich ^talk 18:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it's going to be a disaster. The other Cartoon Network movie articles had things like a poorly written essay of everything that happened, quotes and trivia. It's going to get messy, but we should think of a plan so we're prepared when that happens. Theres a few things that I question though. 1. Does it deserve it's own article? 2. A rumor states (and I'm not 100% either) that we'll see whats under Double D's hat, and Eddy's Brother will appear. Would these warrant mention on the characters page, or in the article/section of the movie itself, as well as any other big parts of character development? DietLimeCola (talk) 18:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm up for the sockpuppet thing. Get it started. I don't have much time during the week to go digging for proof, but this weekend, I will. -- Elaich ^talk 05:26, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way for me to get a private message to you? I found something you'll be interested in, but I don't want to advertise it here. A throwaway email address or something? If you don't have one, I can get one. -- Elaich ^talk 15:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]