User talk:Maratanos

Firefly thoughts

A few thoughts on the Firefly "debate"; firstly, you're right. That said, see notes I made on the issue and, if you so desire, feel free to copy the information into the debate (or comment on them, or whatever). Just be prepared for the "Other Stuff Exists" argument, which is usually linked to a section of an essay that asserts with pretend authority that precedent on Wikipedia is meaningless and just because it's done "everywhere" or "elsewhere" doesn't mean it can be done "here". Just a thought. VigilancePrime (talk) 02:53, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only problem is that I have several real world deadlines looming. As I read through Serenity Found for review purposes, I might be able to include notes from it (although the pro-merge faction has already said that they won't accept those books as third party sources, gotta love the assumption of good faith), but I have limited time at least through the end of the year.Shsilver (talk) 03:06, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if you look in the history at the changes I made to Browncoat, adding a variety of sources, and then look to see what User:Guest9999 and his compadres have done to the article, even after the AfD was declared a Keep, I don't see any point in spending the time on the articles, which I why I've stated that I wouldn't work on them while they were threatened. Shsilver (talk) 03:21, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm back to Wikipedia after many months of not using it. I always go to "User Contributions" and check the most recent edits for vandalism. It didn't escape my notice that it was just one line, I just forgot to delete that one line, not mark it for speedy deletion Drewhamilton (talk) 20:56, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation case about the proposed merger of Firefly characters

Since no agreement could be reached through discussion about the proposed merger of Firefly characters, a mediation case was started in which you were listed as party. If you wish to comment, please see Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-01-09 List of characters in the Firefly universe. – sgeureka ^t•c 15:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Centralized TV Episode Discussion

Over the past months, TV episodes have been reverted by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [1]. --Maniwar (talk) 23:18, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Summer Glau

I really only broke a two year gap, in logging in. I do edit and I've been active in academia reading and discussing many of the current journal articles on wikipedia. I've just never found a reason to log in other then this time. I don't agree with what's happening but I'm willing to work on it but once again back to my earlier comments, a Popular Culture Section needs only the direct citations to the references then its verifiable, also as a subsection it is not subject to the notability rules, as per WP:Notability on content. But the fact that it has about 1 real worth while reference makes it a stub that should be expanded, as per the discussion it has been pointed out that one of the references is not about Summer which I agree with. I understand the need for semiprotect but in this situation which was not listed in WP:PROTECT, so I logged on and put the content back. Also in no way do I see the edits as vandalism as per WP:VAND#NOT they fall under Stubbornness really, so no vandalism no semi protect in my mind.Beckje01 (talk) 21:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that this is not WP:OR the section is a list of her references in popular culture not any sort of commentary; just as the Filmography section is a list of appearances. The Filmography section doesn't need a secondary source to say Summer was in a movie the fact that is happened is enough, thats the exact kind of section I'm pushing for with the Pop Culture References. I count XKCD a part of popular culture thus it stand up for the WP:V I really feel that you're against something I'm not asking for. Beckje01 (talk) 22:44, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Book's Ident Card

You were involved with the recent edits on this (ident or identification) and because people keep changing it back and forth, I started a discussion on the talk page so that will hopefully stop. Zybthranger (talk) 14:05, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]