Jump to content

User talk:Mythdon/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5→Archive 10

AFD

Deletion is not a method for trying to work with the name of an article. It's for deciding whether or not an article should be included on Wikipedia. If you think that it should have a different name, then we work on that.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:34, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Whats done is done. I already placed the afd, The communinty will decide on this afd. Mythdon (talk) 05:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
But the title of the page is not what the community decides at AFD. AFD is for determining inclusion. Not whether or not a name is official.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Although that may be the nomination reason, i will sit back and see what the communities reasons are for saying Keep or Delete. Like i said, whats done is done. Mythdon (talk) 03:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

==Unconstructive Edit==

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

An edit summary is where the editor explains the reasoning behind the change. Simply putting "No." leaves no room for discussion, or avenue of forming a consensus with other editors. If you disagree, post a better explanation than "No." and use the Talk page if more room is required. Read WP:edit summary for more information. TRTX (talk) 04:55, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

TRTX, stop making a big deal out of my edit. Also, saying im making unconstructive edits is basically telling me im vandalizing Wikipedia, so do not tell me the edit was not marked as vandalism. Please read Wikipedia:Vandalism. Mythdon (talk) 05:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Your edit summary was not sufficient explanation, and I saw no further discussion regarding the change in the talk page. That is why I posted the form response you have deleted twice (actively bolding the section regarding edit summary so you would see it). Also, I'd like to ask that you please stop removing my post from the talk page requesting clarification of another users's changes. That is something that's considered poor ettiquette per WP:Talk TRTX (talk) 05:10, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I can remove your post off of that talk page all i want as it does not involve discussing changes. Also, the post was directed at Ryulong so i suggest you post that on his talk page instead. Mythdon (talk) 05:17, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
How does it not discuss changes? Ryulong specifcally said "We are waiting...", which implies a consensus was reached at some point. So I'm simply asking for some clarification regarding this consensus and its effect on the proposed change. It is directly related to the article at hand. Posting it to Ryulong's talk page exclusively shuts out other potential editors from gaining a better understanding of the reasoning behind certain changes. TRTX (talk) 05:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Talk page posts should not be directed specifically to certain users so i removed the post. Mythdon (talk) 05:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Deletion of talk post

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

A talk page is not a place to edit other users content. Again, please see WP:Talk to get a better understanding. Also, your tiptoeing on WP:3RR in regards to blocking my attempts to open a discussion regarding a potential change. TRTX (talk) 05:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I was not editing your content on the talk page, i was deleting it. There is nowhere in WP:Talk that says do not remove peoples comments. Mythdon (talk) 05:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
From WP:Talk -
  • Discuss edits: The talk page is particularly useful to talk about edits. If one of your edits has been reverted, and you change it back again, it is good practice to leave an explanation on the talk page and a note in the edit summary that you have done so. The talk page is also the place to ask about another editor's changes. If someone queries one of your edits, make sure you reply with a full, helpful rationale.
Which is exactly what I was doing. TRTX (talk) 05:48, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Now i understand. Mythdon (talk) 05:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
But, you should also know is that talk page posts are allowed to be removed by others on circumstances. Mythdon (talk) 05:56, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Jungle Fury Power Rangers

Please do not revert this article again, this will get you in three revert trouble, and you may end up blocked. Instead, offer your case on the article talk page, and we can discuss the matter. J Milburn (talk) 23:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Please refrain from editing my user page

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

If you have an issue with a particular change I made, please take up this issue in either the article's talk page or my talk page. This would be a preferred means of communication, as opposed to making unconstructive edits to my user page. Thank you. TRTX (talk) 20:15, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

You have no right to me i cant edit your user page, because users do not own there user pages. The users user page is just associated with them. You should also read through WP:OWN. Also, the edit i did was not unconstructive in any way, shape or form. Mythdon (talk) 20:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Power Rangers

You're right, I actually used the wrong rationale; but I still don't think it's suitable for WP. I have never seen another list like this on here simply because it just isn't really a good idea for an article, I don't think... As I say in the AfD nom I have no problem with the inclusion of some of the more important name (Exec Producers, etc) but to list a whole heap of cast members isn't really advisable. Note: your comments would be better served at the AfD nom rather than on my talk page; feel free to air your concerns there. AllynJ (talk | contribs) 01:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:RFPP

Hello - just a quickie. For future reference, new reports go at the top of the list. I know it gets a bit confusing as various pages appear to have various approaches. I've taken the liberty of moving your request to the top, and semi-protected the page for 3 days. Thanks! GBT/C 21:31, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Comparisons

For starters, it's a very poor representation of the comparisons between the four Sim games (The Sims/Online/2/3) as the differences between these games have been better explained elsewhere (for example, see the body of The Sims 2 article). Also, the table consists merely of one's very narrow-mnided perception of what makes the four games different to one another (as much, if not all of it is based on original research and speculation). And don't get me started on spelling errors. :P All I'm saying is that the differences between these games cannot be properly represented in a table, and that it is unnecessary given the sum of its faults. Sillygostly (talk) 00:00, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

When to delete talk posts, and when not to

Hi. We had this conversation before, but you appear still eager to do this. While editors are allowed on occasion to delete talk posts, it's usually only reserved for situations when a post is far off topic (such as general discussion of the topic vs. article content). While my post may not have been directly related to the article, it was in relation to something I saw thanks to the work you did pulling several article titles into one place. While it may not be the best place, it's far quicker to ask the question in the topic at hand than to go to each article's talk page and post there in the hopes that one of them get's noticed. Instead of deleting the post, a better response would've been something similar to how Ryulong responded to your Power Morpher post in the same talk page [[1]]. I am interested in discussing a change that would effect multiple pages, and am not sure where that would go. But I would be more than happy to discuss it in the appropriate place if somebody can redirect me, which won't happen if you simply delete the post. TRTX T / C 03:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I removed your post because the post was not on the sections topic (as in what was being discussed in the section). I did not care whether you made the post or not, it is where you posted it (as in talk page section) on the talk page, that is why i removed the post. If you want to make this post again, please do so by starting a new section. Mythdon (talk) 03:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Just a suggestion for next time: You should probably follow the above example I posted from the same talk page, or simply move the offending post to a new section. Editors are allowed to do this as well. And it's generally preferred over an outright comment delete. Especially when the offending post isn't as much "off topic" as it is "wrong topic" TRTX T / C 03:41, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Michelle Gielan

A tag has been placed on Michelle Gielan requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez Get to know me! / Talk to me!←at≈:→ 07:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Sandbox MfD

If you want a page in your user namespace deleted, you can put {{db-u1}} at the top and an admin will delete it for you. If its a single edit you want deleted, you can ask an admin to just delete the one edit. Cheers. Synergy 11:25, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I was going to say :-)
You don't need to go to MfD for userspace requests made by the user. It's applicable under criteria for speedy deletion, so just pin up the template {{db-u1}} on the page and it'll be deleted much quicker :-) Xavexgoem (talk) 11:57, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Number of episodes

You and I have spoken before on how I think that the "No. of episodes" portion of that infobox should be treated for a series that is still airing. I don't think that a number should be included if we don't know how long the show is, and you think that it should be included and repeatedly updated. Please leave it be.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:25, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Readers already know the show is still airing. Simply adding "Ongoing" to the "No of. episodes" parameter is very repetitive. There is nothing wrong with updating the amount of episodes that have aired. It is one thing to only state how many episodes have aired is another to not state it at all until the show has ended. Do you understand now?. Mythdon (talk) 08:32, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Whatever. You should also do away with the navigation box style-archive thing and just make it a sidebar. This way you do not have to constantly move it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:36, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
I feel my archive subpage is good. So what, I constantly have to move it. I can handle it. Like it is really anybody else's problem. Mythdon (talk) 08:38, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Forces of Darkness (Power Rangers)

Because multiple images of copyright artwork is a lawsuit trap. What do you wish to happen: Disney sues Wikipedia over a wide berth of articles, or nip problems before they get noticed?--293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 18:58, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't wish for any of that stuff. I was just curious as to any other reason you removed the images. Mythdon (talk) 22:20, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Listen

Those characters are listed there as they are on those pages for a reason, and that is to redirect people to the "Other Ranger" page. Please leave these things be.

Also, stop asking me silly questions and suggesting unnecessary things for the Power Rangers pages and the Tokusatsu pages.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:04, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I feel it is best those are not listed on those pages. Mythdon (talk) 03:06, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Also, redirecting is not a sufficient reason for listing them on those pages. Mythdon (talk) 03:07, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, that is your opinion and I have an opposing one. You have to get consensus or convince me otherwise if you wish your edits to stand.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:07, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
The reason redirecting is not a reason for those Rangers to stay on those pages is because a template is used to link people to those pages instead of listed items in this case. Mythdon (talk) 03:12, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
We have constantly had edits that suggest that users don't realize how Wikipedia treats the color designations. This allows for that to be more concrete other than the singular table at Power Rangers (and as usual you have been suggesting changes for multiple articles on the the talk page of an article it does not directly concern).—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:17, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
I feel if the discussion is about multiple articles to the point where it is too many to make the same post on each talk than post it on Talk:Power Rangers for example

Hi Mythdon, I have noticed that you and Ryulong appear to be in a dispute. I kindly ask you to cease edit warring and take your concerns to the appropriate talk page. I also ask you to respect consensus and to make sure you fallow it even if you disagree. As for this specific incident it appears Ryulong has consensus on his side and as such before you continue to make such edits you need to make sure you are not violating that consensus. If you continue to do what I have just asked you not to, you will be blocked, which is not something you want to be. Might I also recommend dispute resolution and/or third party requests. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 03:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I have taken one of the disputes to Wikipedia:Third opinion. Mythdon (talk) 03:31, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Age

Well, thanks for tellin' me! I guess I forgot to update those. :) Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 02:18, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Your welcome. Next time you have a birthday, don't forget update all three sections. Mythdon (talk) 02:20, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Jeez, you really have an obsession with small details! Haha. :P Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 02:37, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Okay. It is best that you keep your userpage up to date. Mythdon (talk) 02:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Mythdon/Notable deletion users

I just thought I'd warn you about this section; after being around for a while you learn that many Wikipedians do not like being watched, especially if someone is publicly doing it. I'm not forcing you to do anything, but you should probably reconsider having that subpage in existence. Cheers, Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 03:10, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

You're doing it with good intentions, but like I said, some people will ask to be removed, others will get irritated. Its best not to meddle in the affairs of dragons in terms of this sort of thing. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 03:15, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Is the similar subpage User:Mythdon/Power Rangers notable editors an issue too?. Mythdon (talk) 03:17, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I'd say that any page keeping tabs on editors would be considered stalking. WP:STALK is a policy that half-applies here. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 03:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Does that apply if the users do not care that they are listed?. Mythdon (talk) 03:25, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
I'd say so, yes. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 05:10, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
With what the lists say, could that result in serious actions?. Mythdon (talk) 05:15, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
At the moment, no, but they're almost guaranteed to be complained about. Very few editors are comfortable with knowing that their actions are being followed by somebody they don't know; so yes, you may adversely affect someone's ability to edit Wikipedia and/or the quality of their work. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 12:57, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Then i guess i should request their deletion. Mythdon (talk) 13:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
I could delete them for you if you request speedy deletion. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 16:30, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
They have already been deleted as a result of my request at Miscellany for Deletion. Mythdon (talk) 00:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Well, I guess I'll let you go off on your own again. If you have any more questions, feel free to ask. Cheers, Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 02:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Power Rangers

I don't really see the point of it - nominally, it doesn't seem strictly objectionable, but it's been my school of thought that it's best not to call attention to the troubles of blocked/banned users. In other words, I'd recommend against it, but I wouldn't be comfortable forbidding it (nor do I have such authority). WilyD 12:02, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Then i guess I'll just keep him/her on the list. Mythdon (talk) 12:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Never mind, I'll take him off the list. Mythdon (talk) 12:08, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Mythdon

Mythdon, I think it would be best if you just focused on editing articles instead of the meta-meta-meta level stuff you have been doing. This is none of your business, the logo and merge requests are getting ridiculous, and frankly, listing myself and other editors on subpages as well as this page (the YouTube stuff) is getting a little creepy. I understand you mean well, but please stop. Things like this could lead to a ban if they persist.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:06, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I got some good news for you. I nominated them user listing subpages for deletion and they were deleted witch is good news as from what i have heard from other areas, they were harmful, so you shouldn't have to worry about the user listing subpages anymore. They are disposed of. I have also removed my "History on Wikipedia" section from my userpage as it could also be harmful. At the same time i made this post, i deleted the "Youtube" section from this talk page because it seems creepy to you implying that section violates Wikipedia policy too. Mythdon (talk) 03:16, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Fix it

So then, by that account, I'm expected to fix a subject I known nothing about? Again, you are wrong. It is nobodies job to fix anything, but if you create an article about a subject that is not known widely, you are expected to source it. Yes, we can fix things, but we aren't being forced to, we're here as volunteers, so again, it is not my job.— Dædαlus Contribs /Improve 10:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not forcing you to do anything. I'm just trying to get you to understand my point. I'm not saying you have to fix anything. Mythdon (talk) 10:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm telling you it isn't my job to fix it, and you're telling me it is, under my knowledge of the subject, it is not my job to fix it.— Dædαlus Contribs /Improve 11:00, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
It is anybodies job to fix anything, but we just don't bother to fix everything, period. Mythdon (talk) 11:03, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Again, again, and, again. It is nobodies job to fix anything. Are you unclear of what job is defined as? As something we are supposed to do or else? It is no one's job to do anything, but we do if we want and it follows policy.— Dædαlus Contribs /Improve 11:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
It is anybodies job to fix anything on Wikipedia, but in the case of administrators, it is only their job to anything that only they can fix. I wish for you to understand what I'm trying to tell you. Mythdon (talk) 11:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
No, it isn't. Job implies that we must do task A, or punishment B will happen. We are volunteers here, it is no one's job to do anything, but we can if we wish, if it follows policy.— Dædαlus Contribs /Improve 11:16, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Finally found the policy, please see WP:BURDEN.— Dædαlus Contribs /Improve 01:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Your editing habits

Since you've taken the liberty of questioning my editing habits, let me clarify you, that refactoring others' talk page comments or deleting them on the talk page of an article is against policy, and is a blockable offense.— Dædαlus Contribs /Improve 11:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Editing comments.— Dædαlus Contribs /Improve 11:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
I have not edited anybodies comments on Wikipedia in any way. If your referring to the fact that i removed the "=" off of the name of your reply section, i did that because it would only use to resize the section. I'm sorry. Mythdon (talk) 11:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
No, I am referring to your discussions with another user above, about your removal of his or her comments on the talk page of an article because you viewed it as off-topic or such. Such is not allowed, last time I checked, and I have seen other blocked because of it, as it is disruptive.— Dædαlus Contribs /Improve 11:23, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Okay, but on the other hand, I'm done trying to argue with you about the so called "fix it" thing. I will let you move on with what you were doing, but don't forgot that I will always disagree with you about that so called "fix it" thing. Mythdon (talk) 11:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
As an aside, anyone is allowed to remove talk page comments from an article's talk page that they consider off-topic, though that is generally used when the person is not discussing improvements to the article. But that is a past matter anyway, and nothing to do with D. Sticky Parkin 18:43, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Mythdon, I would like to apologize for the above. Perhaps I need to take a forced break from Wikipedia, but I don't want a block to tarnish my record.— Dædαlus Contribs /Improve 06:38, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, that wouldn't help, as I'm still addicted to 3D.— Dædαlus Contribs /Improve 06:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mythdon/Archive_3&oldid=1145865320"