User talk:Magnatyrannus/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Undeletion request

Anthony Bradbury, Ponyo, and Tamzin, may you please undelete the pages that were deleted? I haven't done any loutsocking ever since my tempblock, so could you undelete them? You did promise to vouch for me in the unblock appeal section. Furthermore, I would like User:Patachonica/sandbox1 to be undeleted and moved to my userspace? Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 20:36, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Are you saying that User:Patachonica is your alternate account? If so, you have not declared it as such, and this omission leaves you open to a charge of sockpuppetry. As to your question of your block, it was not I who did it. If you are saying that I deleted one or more of your pages, which may well be the case, you will need to say which pages you are talking about before I can assess the merits of the deletion(s). ----Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 21:39, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Neonematherium is one of the articles that were deleted by you. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 21:43, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Or you could just look at Special:Logs/Patachonica to see which pages were created. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 21:44, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it was my sock account. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 21:47, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Anthony Bradbury Paranisolambda is another one Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 21:49, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

And Albertatherium Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 21:52, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Periptychus Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 21:53, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

A complete list is here [1]. Magnatyrannus fully admitted to block evasion as Patachonica in their unblock request as they were checkuser blocked for using the account, so I don't see what's not above board here. Hemiauchenia (talk) 09:20, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

@Anthony Bradbury: So, given the reasons stated up and below, are you willing to undelete them? And yes, I fully admit to socking as Patachonica. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 23:53, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Question

@Tamzin What did you mean by the unproductive comments at WP:ANI? Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 01:32, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Magna. I'm mostly unavailable right now due to a medical emergency, but will respond when I can. Thanks for your patience. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 04:03, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I didn't know. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 04:10, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Have to talk otherwise it will archive... Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 20:49, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Also, what is Potentially Constructive Contributors Who Got Banned Because They Kept Making Sock Accounts Rather than Just Appeal Their Original Block? You said that on my sock's talk page, but I just don't know what it is. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 03:08, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

About the turtle Inaechelys pernambucensis

It was named in 2016 as a valid taxa by the original authors, but in contrast this (The tale of the headless turtle) regards it to be invalid, and it is a comment.

So by my view, The tale of the headless turtle is basically negligible so Inaechelys should be retained as valid. Huinculsaurus (talk) 07:02, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Huinculsaurus: What do you exactly mean? Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 23:56, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

The paper "The tale of the headless turtle" by Romano (2016) is it negligible? though it was published on Zootaxa, and can we treat Inaechelys as still valid following the original authors? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huinculsaurus (talk • contribs) 13:16, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Eopachyrucos has been accepted

Eopachyrucos, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Theroadislong (talk) 18:18, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Only warning

You were only shortly unblocked after Cullen328 had blocked you indefinitely for disruptive editing – among other things for failing to communicate with, and being uncivil towards, fellow editors. Edits like these [2][3][4][5][6][7][8] are a direct continuation of that problematic pattern. You are not allowed to remove other people's posts without a very good reason, and you are also not allowed to tell people to "fuck off" any chance you get. I would be less blunt if this was a first offence, but since it isn't, I feel the need to be as clear as I can be: If you continue to disruptively revert other people's talk page posts, fail to respond to legitimate queries about edits of yours, or behave uncivilly towards your fellow editors, you will be blocked again. --Blablubbs (talk) 19:36, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I promise not to do it ever again. And this time I mean it. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 19:38, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

The reason why I am sometimes unable to respond to queries about my edits is because I don't know what to say, so I just remove them. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 19:55, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Why are you vandalising random pages? FunkMonk (talk) 06:04, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I do NOT vandalize any pages for any matter. If you think I made a mistake then why not show me a diff of "those random pages"? Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 03:07, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

About Nuthetes and some taxonomic change of some taxa co-authored by the namers or the ones who found the diagnosis

Nuthetes is an enigmatic possible dromaeosaur from the early Cretaceous UK. For long it was classified as a nomen dubium but was recently declared as valid.

When I talk to Funkmonk about the status he said it was problematic. Milner (2002) classifies it as a dromaeosaur and found the diagnosis. Funkmonk says that a 2010 paper co-authored by Milner says this:

flattened and recurved teeth of Proceratosaurus are very similar to the teeth of some dromaeosaurids, such as Velociraptor, and thus caution is needed when referring isolated teeth from the Late Jurassic/Early Cretaceous to the Dromaeosauridae on the basis of general shape and denticle size difference, as has been done previously (e.g. Ruiz-Omeñaca, Canudo & Cuenca-Bescós, 1996; Zinke, 1998; Milner, 2002; Rauhut, 2002; Sweetman, 2004). Likewise, isolated theropod teeth from the Late Bathonian Forest Marble, described as ‘dromaeosaurid-like’ by Evans & Milner (1994: 316 and fig. 18.7), might represent this or a closely related taxon."

Funkmonk also says:

"We don't even know what family it belongs to or how it would be distinct. Part of Milner's 2002 diagnosis is that it's a dromaeosaur of that time, and even that is uncertain, as Milner conceded in the 2010 paper."

Also about the synonymy of Latenivenatrix, he suggested to merge the page with Stenonychosaurus because the paper suggesting the synonymy has one of the ones who named the genus. As the paper strongly supports, so I would approve it.Huinculsaurus (talk) 15:08, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Who suggested to merge the page? FunkMonk? Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 21:04, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

For Latenivenatrix, yes. But before I asked another user he said that American troodontid taxonomy is always in a flux, so it is more likely an opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huinculsaurus (talk • contribs) 01:57, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

For Nuthetes, even though Funkmonk insists it to be problematic, but we can follow Milner (2002) treating it to be a putative valid dromaeosaur, even the 2010 study of Proceratosaurus co-authored by Milner.

(edit conflict) Huinculsaurus What would you think about the Nomingia --> Elmisaurus merge proposal? In fact, it's been accepted in very few papers, and not just that last year paper, but some of this year's papers such as this one and this one comes to the same conclusion that Nomingia is a synonym of Elmisaurus. Also, please remember to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Thanks, Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 22:10, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Adding storyboard artists for Futurama.

Excuse me Magnatyrannus. Can you please add the storyboard artists back for the rest of Futurama (season 2-7)? I wasn't trying to start an edit war or mess around with wikipedia. At least you approved the change for season 1 since I mentioned that if you revert the change back to the way it was, mistakes could happen such as writers that didn't get their own pages (Evan Gore and Heather Lombard) and missing directors (Ashley Lenz and Chris Sauve co-directed Fear of a Bot Planet, the same episode that Gore and Lombard wrote). 69.255.225.138 (talk) 16:32, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

As long as you discuss your edits on the article concerned, then maybe I'll be able to reinstate your edits. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 20:13, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I worked very hard on finding storyboard credits. 69.255.225.138 (talk) 21:22, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

No problem, and I understand that it took so long for you to research that. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 21:53, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television#"Storyboard artists/animation directors" in episode lists concerning not adding this information; the editor is well aware of this discussion. Time of research is irrelevant; the content is fancruft and if the IP editor continues their edits, they'll likely be blocked again for edit-warring. -- Alex_21 _TALK 13:13, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I didn't know about the discussion. Will revert their edits if they continue. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 21:21, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

The IP editor is still adding them on various animated sitcoms, claiming you approve them. — YoungForever^(talk) 02:02, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

The reason why I let him reinstate the storyboard credits is because I thought that he was able to show that the changes were verifiable and that they have independent reasons for making such edits. Oh well, if the Wikipedia does not benefit it, then I shall revert. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 02:12, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Not only that they have been adding them for a while now since August 2022 on all the seasons of Family Guy and The Simpsons. Even before the recent discussion, there is a general consensus to not include them per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/Archive 33#"Storyboard" parameters which was just last year. — YoungForever^(talk) 02:18, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

I also wanted to point out that for The Simpsons, they got the storyboard credits from Wikisimpsons which is not even a reliable source. Please see which they said they got them from Wikisimpsons. — YoungForever^(talk) 02:43, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

How is Wikisimpsons not a reliable source? Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 21:09, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Because it is a user-contributed website. Just like Wikia which is also not a reliable source. — YoungForever^(talk) 21:27, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Well then if Wikia is not a reliable source, then what reliable sources for TV shows can be used? Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 22:06, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Please see WP:TVFAQ. On-screen credits are covered by watching the episode itself after the episode has been released or aired. — YoungForever^(talk) 22:13, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

But what if the storyboard credits were sourced from the end credits of the show? Would they still be citeable? Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 22:22, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

They would be citeable. However, there is still no consensus to add storyboard credits on the episode table as said repeatedly. — YoungForever^(talk) 22:44, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Pinging @Alex 21: as well. The IP address editor is still edit warring on multiple articles. — YoungForever^(talk) 14:30, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

I tried to ask some of my editors to add these artists back but I failed to do that. What is another way I can try to ask them and then maybe they can agree with me to add them back? 69.255.225.138 (talk) 23:00, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Sure one user mentioned that if its sourced from the credits, it is source-able but I can't do that since no concencus of adding storyboard artists have happened yet. 69.255.225.138 (talk) 23:14, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Oh well, I'll explain to you tomorrow. 69.255.225.138 (talk) 01:44, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

A consensus essentially means a majority of participants agree on a particular viewpoint. One can also reach consensus by compromise. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 21:07, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

As said by multiple editors, WP:DEADHORSE. The IP address editor's behavior of being dead set to add storyboard credits on the episode table and their refusal to drop it and move on are considered to be disruptive at this point. — YoungForever^(talk) 22:43, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

I know that YoungForever but Magnatyrannus actually said that I need to reach a consensus by compromise. Meaning that the Wikipedia group members develop and then have to agree to support a decision in the best interest of the whole. But you keep saying I failed. Maybe Magnatyrannus actually have a point on this. The users need to agree before I can do that. Also YoungForever, stop saying I'm disruptive. Remember I got blocked for that reason due to editing over 100 articles in a one day? I don't want to be blocked again, okay? Magnatyrannus actually have a point. 69.255.225.138 (talk) 23:31, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

As said by multiple editors, you have failed to change the established consensus. So, your refusal to drop it and move on is disruptive. You can't make nor force people to change their minds. That's not how Wikipedia works nor how the real world works. — YoungForever^(talk) 00:23, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

I would not want to be blocked again for being disruptive either. Sometimes, you've just got to learn to accept consensus. When people say "no", that means "no". Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 00:28, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

How can I accept it? I read that you can't edit a consensus, so how can I find a way so the editors will agree? There are no videos on how to do this on YouTube so I do need help how to do it. 69.255.225.138 (talk) 00:32, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

As said by multiple editors, you seriously need to let go and move on. — YoungForever^(talk) 00:42, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Maybe convincing them of your position or trying to get more editors involved would be one way to get others to agree with you. But as all the other editors have stated, continuing to force other editors to stick with what you want to include is not helping, so if you refuse to abide by the consensus, and then repeatedly revert to your preferred version, then that's failure to get the point. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 00:44, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Just an FYI, canvassing and forum shopping (which this IP address editor is currently doing) with your personal viewpoints are inappropriate and will get you block. — YoungForever^(talk) 01:08, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

They are not "my" personal viewpoints, they are merely suggestions for the IP to get a consensus. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 01:19, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

No, no, that's not what I meant. I meant, canvassing and forum shopping (which this IP address editor is currently doing) with personal viewpoints in general are inappropriate and will get you block. I am sorry that I was not clear. If the IP address editor decided to restore the storyboard credits on the episode tables, they would be reverted and most likely get blocked as this clearly shows they are not abiding by consensus. — YoungForever^(talk) 01:29, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

I cannot get more editors involved because I failed. YoungForever is literally forcing me to give up and move on but Magnatyrannus is actually helping me what to do. 69.255.225.138 (talk) 01:40, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Look, I am not the only one told you that you should seriously let go and move on. Multiple editors told you that and WP:DEADHORSE which clearly shows you are not getting it at all. — YoungForever^(talk) 01:53, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

If you can't stand the thought of others not agreeing with you, then maybe you should just let the situation go and not talk about it again. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 01:57, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

I know it's hard to move on but I getting at a point that I'm getting very annoyed about YoungForever repeating the same comments about moving on over and over again. I'm not trying to argue and make it worse. All I need it to invite other editors to start an agreement but if ask again, you are going to just repeat the same comment again. I'm so sorry I keep asking about the same thing YoungForever. Can you forgive me and can you finally leave me alone? If this conversation continues, I'm only going to talk to the other users that isn't YoungForever. I'm not saying that I outright hate you, its just you keep repeating the same comment. Once this problem is finally resolved, I won't talk about it anymore, okay? 69.255.225.138 (talk) 02:03, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

It has been resolved, you are just refusing to accept the consensus. I keep repeating it because you are still not getting it. You refusal to drop it and move on is not getting it, FYI. — YoungForever^(talk) 02:08, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but we're trying extremely hard to help you understand that you're still not getting the point. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 02:10, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to argue and be disruptive so I can get blocked again. I tried everything to try to put these artists back but anytime you do that, you either revert it, delete it, or simply saying that you need a consensus. I'm very passionate about animation and if you would've let me add these people back, it will be more easier for people to know which was storyboarded instead of sources like IMDB since I showed you two vandalized examples of SpongeBob episodes. How could I accept a consensus and what are the steps to it? I tried search videos on YouTube but they're are not results on that topic. Even if you can read about consensus, how can talk to users about putting the changes back the way it was? Even with or without storyboard artists, I reorganized the writers and directors to be more readable. 69.255.225.138 (talk) 02:15, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

how can talk to users about putting the changes back the way it was? this shows that you are refusing to abide by consensus and still determined to change other editors' minds. This is not getting it. — YoungForever^(talk) 02:21, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Although I read the page about consensus, I can't abide because all the users I talked to, refused to add them back. Consensus literally means that the users have to agree to support a decision in the best interest. I can't do that if you guys keep refusing me. If only I have a better attitude with you guys, I would've abide. 69.255.225.138 (talk) 02:25, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

What I was trying to say is that if I was more calmer and serious, I could of abide the consensus. 69.255.225.138 (talk) 02:26, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Phosphatodraco

Hey. Would you be able to review the Phosphatodraco FAC? LittleJerry (talk) 00:59, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I am not able to review the Phosphatodraco FAC or any other FACs for that matter. It's because I have not gained any experience in making FACs, so no, I cannot review it. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 01:01, 17 September 2022 (UTC)