User talk:Salvidrim!/Q3-Q4 2011 Archive

MvDK2 review

Going to Metacritic, while the review is not linked, we do have a page and date of the publication's review [1], being Nov 2006, p 142. Therefore, we just need to change the reference to be a print and not online source. I fortunately have a sub to the magazine so I can get the text online, and can affirm it is a 6/10 score, authored by "JEREMY", which based on WP's page for the magazine, is Jeremy Zoss. --MASEM (t) 21:42, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, will modify the ref later.  :) Salvidrim (talk) 22:26, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Eek,  Done, I'm such a procrastinator! Salvidrim (talk)

RE:Some corrections

Thanks for the edits to User:Guyinblack25/Sandbox. Others have edited it as well, so please don't feel shy about editing it in the future. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 16:09, 21 September 2011 (UTC))

No probs! Salvidrim (talk) 16:16, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hey there! Thanks for the WikiLove!

Right now I'm concentrating on Mario & Wario, Dr. Mario Express, Yoshi (video game), and Yoshi's Cookie, as those are mostly Stub or Start articles, and I've played them all. I had started heavy work on Wii Music (not a Mario game, though) a few months ago, but I still need to pull together more information about Development and Reception. I think the Gameplay section is okay, but I need some peer reviews from those who have played the game and those who haven't, given that the gameplay is somewhat difficult to explain without going overboard. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 23:28, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Warnings

Greetings, and thanks for bringing this anon IP editor to my attention. I wanted to pass on a tip regarding how/when warnings should be issued. I agree that we're at the point where the warnings do need to get stronger, as we're assuming (probably correctly) that this is the same person logging in from whatever address their ISP has given them during that session, and then proceeds to make multiple incorrect changes in a very short time.

The normal procedure for issuing warnings is not necessarily one warning per infraction. If there's a bunch of them that you find at once, pick the newest one and issue a warning for that one, whatever the next warning level for that IP is. The rest should be simply fixed/reverted. The premise is that the editor needs to see the warning and see the error of their ways. It would be a bit unfair for a new, anonymous editor to make a number of changes they feel are appropriate only to see they're apparently one edit away from being blocked.

When you warn on the latest one, you would then assume that they've seen the note and will change their ways. However, if they're still being disruptive, you'd issue the next warning for an infraction that occurs after you made the previous warning, again using basically the same methodology I've described here. Our goal is to protect the project, and at the same time we need to try and get through to this editor that while they think they're being helpful, they really aren't.

Let me know if you run across another IP making edits. I'm keeping track of the ones I've found on one of my sandbox pages (I'm up to 9 different IPs, with 8 in the same range). Hoping we can resolve this soon, and again, thanks for your help.

--McDoobAU93 14:30, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I'm the one that should be thanking you! Also, in the most recent warning I simply stated one game in the actual warning, and added a list of the other 6-7 reverts as a note... was that okay? Salvidrim (talk) 14:40, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

That was actually a good idea, since you're showing them other examples of their editing, or otherwise lumping them all into a single warning. He usually pops on once a day, so we'll just have to see when/if he visits today. --McDoobAU93 14:54, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Yea, I assumed tossing out 6-7 warnings was a bit ridiculous, and doing a single one didn't quite capture the scope of his actions. :) Salvidrim (talk) 14:59, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Dr. Mario

Hey, I'm doing work on Dr. Mario (video game) and I'd like your opinion on any changes I could make. So far I simplified the Gameplay section, which had a lot of excessive and somewhat irrelevant information (still needs sources). The Reception section definitely needs more but as for the list of Games, I was thinking of integrating it into a prose-oriented "Legacy" or "Re-Releases" section or something. What do you think? I'm doing this article first since I think it will greatly help in working on both Dr. Mario Express and Dr. Mario Online. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 23:41, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

The list of games really need to be prosed. I think other games in the same series (Dr. Mario 64, Tetris & Dr. Mario, DxMarioExpress, Dr. Mario Online Dx) that have their own articles and are independently released don't need to be mentioned individually, as this is about the singular NES/SNES game, not the Dr. Mario series. However, being the "original" game that started the series, a Legacy section should mention the series of games taht reprised the concept and came after the success of this one, and separately talk about the appearance of Dr. Mario (as a character) and Dr. Mario-based minigames in other standalone games. The GBA re-release as part of the Classic NES branding is also a good indication of its strong legacy, and should be underlined.

On another note, I feel there needs to be some explanation as to the role of the Mario character. Heck, Mario isn't even wikilinked at all! He's described as being a plumber in Mario Bros., where that is a trivial detail, so it should definitely be explained in the lead or at the start of the gameplay section that in this game he is a doctor, etc.

I'm more of a copyeditor and re-worder than an actual writer, so I'll let you go ahead and will re-work it. I'll analyze the Gameplay section in a few minutes and probably modify a few things if need be. :) Salvidrim (talk) 00:53, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Dr. Mario was only released on SNES (actually Super Famicom) in JP. The NA, EU and JP dates that were in the article for the release are actually for Tetris & Dr. Mario,which is a different game. I removed them and sourced the proper JP release. Salvidrim (talk) 01:02, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I verified, the info if corroborated by MobyGames, NinDB & GameFAQs (despite some of those being of doubtful reliability). Salvidrim (talk)

Did some pretty major CE on the Gameplay section as well, lemme know what you think. :) Salvidrim (talk) 01:44, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I think it looks pretty good! Definitely better. I'm going to start on the list of Games now, putting them in a "Legacy" section merged with Reception. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 02:09, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I have it watched, but just drop me a line when you want someone to give it a look. :) Salvidrim (talk) 02:36, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

• Screenshot

Great work this morning! But I feel the start of the body is "squeezed" between the infobox and screenshot, maybe the screenshot could be aligned right, under the info box?

I was thinking about that, but when it's on the right it seems to leave the Game Play section altogether and looks like it could be part of the Reception section (at least on my monitor). So personally I prefer it on the left, which I've done with both Wario's Woods and Yoshi (video game), but I'm open to suggestions. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 17:35, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I just decided to shrink the image a little bit, hope it helps. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 17:36, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

• Reception & Legacy

Nice. Also, I think "Reception and Legacy" is not what it's usually used as, lemme look it up. Salvidrim (talk) 17:42, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Yea, Legacy is a sub-section of Reception (see Super Mario Kart), it should be the same in this article, I think. Salvidrim (talk)

• SFC NP issues

Hey, I think the article is almost ready to pass as C class. Would you like to make any additional edits or suggestions before I file a request for assessment? --ThomasO1989 (talk) 19:48, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I think it is definitely ready for C-class. I'm eagerly awaiting the reviewer's suggestions to try to make it B-Class to give an ida of the work than could be done. Obviously we will need a Development section. Also, I mentionned and sourced the SNES release of the NP version but it is not mentionned anywhwere, I think it should be in Legacy, and maybe even in the first paragraph? Salvidrim (talk) 19:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I've mentioned them both under legacy and adjusted the release dates and platforms in the infobox. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 20:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't like the way the Super Famicom entry is diplayed in the Infobox... Nintendo Power is not a console or standalone games distribution service (like Satellaview, Virtual Console or Xbox Live, for instance), it is a flash peripheral allowing players to download and store games to play on the SNES. If anything it is more akin to a PS3's HardDrive than the PSN, so PS3 games released on the PSN for download are still PS3 games (in contrast with PSN games), which the same case here. I would use Super Famicom (Nintendo Power) but that is a bit long, and SFC (Nintendo Power) or Super Famicom (NP) both use abbreviations not immediately obvious. Perhaps Super Famicom (NP) would be an ideal compromise? Salvidrim (talk)

Also because Nintendo Power (cartridge) could refer to the one on GB, which is not the case here. I have changed it to what I thought best, but I'd like your thoughts on it. The info is available a few lines higher and down in the Legacy section. Plus, the 'important' part is the Nintendo Power, SFC is only mentionned to differentiate with an eventual GB release. Salvidrim (talk)

I must've clicked Preview and forgot to make them effective -- I just did it now. Salvidrim (talk) 19:16, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Re: AfD Help

Which article is this, if I may ask? I wasn't able to find it yesterday. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 10:01, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Forgot to link it! Super Mario-kun (Pikkapika Comics). I believe it is not notable, or should be merged either with its author's article or with something else. I PROD'ed it a couple of weeks ago but it was contested, so I've been thinking about it since then. There's no AfD right now because I simply do not know how to do it, I was hoping you might be able to assist? :) Salvidrim (talk) 15:12, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in, but here's the article's deletion discussion.--Yaksar (let's chat) 07:14, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Salvidrim (talk) 18:00, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

No problem! By the way, I use WP:Twinkle to create AfDs. It's a handy tool (as long as you're careful with it), if you want to check it out.--Yaksar (let's chat) 18:21, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

I know what Twinkle is, and planned on starting to use it once I felt fully comfortable with the "standard" wiki tools. ;) Salvidrim (talk) 18:24, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Makes sense, it's always smart to be cautious.--Yaksar (let's chat) 18:26, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Plus, I've been known to have a tendency to go a bit "wild" when presented with an oveload of buttons & functions, so I'll try and keep the child part of me in check. ;) Salvidrim (talk) 18:34, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Your request for rollback

Hi Salvidrim. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! FASTILY ^(TALK) 09:02, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Congrats on attaining rollback rights! --McDoobAU93 15:39, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll take the week to start exploring Twinkle's toolset. :) Salvidrim (talk) 17:35, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello

I just want to say I love you Mariecameron (talk) 22:04, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, mom, and welcome to wikipedia! Salvidrim (talk) 00:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Mario DDR

Wow, that was fast! Yeah, it looks way better now. Well done! Sergecross73 msg me 00:26, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

(Sidenote: I know it's none of my business, but I can't help but wonder what is going on in the section above, titled "Hello". O_o Sergecross73 msg me 00:28, 18 October 2011 (UTC))

I went to visit my parents and my mother insisted I show her around wikipedia. I thought the simplest way was to have her post on my talk.

Don't ask. Salvidrim (talk) 00:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Nevermind, it makes more sense if one of them was you. At first it looked like it was 2 people other than you...and that seemed random for your talk page. Sorry to intrude. Sergecross73 msg me 02:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Haha, no worries. The "reply" was posted from my iPod, so not logged in, thus it was IP-signed, but I just changed it to a proper signature. ;) Salvidrim (talk) 02:03, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

No problem, butt in any time on my talk page. You just said pretty much the same thing I would have said anyways! ^_^ (Although, I must admit, at first glance, I saw your comment before I saw the other persons comment, and I thought you were lecturing me about being wrong, that I should give up, etc. Once I saw the whole conversation, and that it was towards the other guy, I was fine. And that was my fault for not reading it all at first.) Sergecross73 msg me 13:05, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, good thing you read it all first, or I would've been confused by your reply! ;) Salvidrim (talk) 18:31, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

RH AN/i

His attempt to add sources to a closed AFD was the last straw. [2] Ridernyc (talk) 07:31, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I'm hoping the evidence I presented helps weigh the balance in the favor of restraining the behaviour. Salvidrim (talk) 08:12, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Salvidrim

So sorry for continually spelling your name wrong. (In fact, the first time you pointed it out on my talk page, I thought you were "facepalming" about something else. Upon closer inspection, you were doing it at me, for "murdering" your name.) I apologize, I hope no offense was taken... Sergecross73 msg me 14:16, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Hahahahaha, none taken, that name gets misspelt every other day anyways. :) Salvidrim (talk) 14:23, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm honored to be one of your "Trusted Editors". Especially considering my spelling of your name at times. ;) Sergecross73 msg me 02:30, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Weeeeeell, someone's watching my userpage, eh? ;) (Do note I do the same thing, though...)

And a handful of users edit stuff on my Watchlist daily, it only eases my work to be able to trust a few enough not to review systemically. --Salvidrim! (t • c) 02:35, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Haha, you caught me. Yeah, I tend to have a few people on my watchlist, a few who I tend to interact or edit on similar pages with, and a few who cause trouble...-__- Sergecross73 msg me 02:40, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Meh, I'm watching yours, so I can't really complain, can I? Haha --Salvidrim! (t • c) 02:42, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Re: Dr. Mario

Sorry for getting back to you so late. I have tried looking for information about Development before, but there doesn't seem to be any, and I don't think the US Patent for the game counts. If we really need the section, we could do the quick and dirty Mario & Wario style and simply say who designed it and wrote the music. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 23:33, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Come to think of it, Wario's Woods is B-class but does not have a Development section. It instead has a Re-Releases section. Think we should move all that info about Nintendo Power and so forth into a section like that? --ThomasO1989 (talk) 23:35, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Might be a good idea, there's more than enough to flesh it out. I'll check out the B-review on the other article. Could expand the reception section too, either more reviews or more explanation from current reviews. Salvidrim (talk) 02:27, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

The PSP listing Article

Next time when you post please be sure to post the date properly including the section that is written out like this

|2011-11-17 November 17, 2011

Not to be to damanding or anything, but I update it whenever I hear or read about a new game, and use the section in it that has "display:None" to know how many games are in there.

~A game is a game, and reality is reality, don't bring reality into a game.~ (talk)

Not sure what you are referring to. My only edit on List of PlayStation Portable games was this one, which just disambiguated a few links... nothing to do with dates, and no message on the talk or anywhere else. Also, I find it ironic that you remind me about dates when your own message on my talk bears no date. I'm rather confused by what you're saying... --Salvidrim! (t • c) 21:13, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea either. I looked it up out of curiosity, and all I learned was that that editor has a rather strange edit history if you look at the history of their talk page. O_o. Perhaps he's not to be taken seriously? Or its a mistake? Sergecross73 msg me 21:18, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Of course I looked at the contribs and history... I think he is serious, and is using his own system to track the number of games on the list by using some system with the dates display, which the editor seems to think I did not follow, though I did literally nothing to the article's structure, as I was using DabSolver. Meh, more HWFO. :) --Salvidrim! (t • c) 21:20, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

My bad, thought I did date it, and as for what I was talking about on the post, I already edited what you had posted, when you changed it around you didn't add the proper date setting to the Game, only added it in the first type of setting, I didn't mean to make it sound to serious of over-dramatized. In the upcoming list that is not a part of the listing, only the normal date, I do everything manual. Anywho; sorry if I bugged you or anything, just wanted to ask if you did edit later on to remember that for me, cause' I like hanging around that page because I'm not very well informed about anything else. XD

~A game is a game, and reality is reality, don't bring reality into a game.~ (talk) 03:17, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

It's fine, I assumed it was just a misunderstanding, as I edited only a few links, not the actual page. :) --Salvidrim! (t • c) 03:21, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

JBSS BAHN

I don't know why you are calling the article about JBSS BAHN a stub. It took a lot of time to write (see the history page of it). The essence of the program is told. I don't like my article only being assessed instead of being making better. This way Wikipedia is only disencouraging writers. Marco Roepers (talk) 09:33, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

I did not analyze in depth, but a cursory glance at sources left me with a strong impression they were all first-party sources. Feel free to request a formal assessment if you disagree with mine. :) --Salvidrim! (t • c) 09:38, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Also note I only assessed it as such due to the fact it was wholly unassessed. Now that it is flagged as part of WP:VG, I am sure other assessors will be happy to review it more in-depth. --Salvidrim! (t • c) 10:10, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Wario Land

Mario actually does appear in Wario Land. See 27 seconds into this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdHsX-KJRG4 ArtistScientist (talk) 10:04, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

HAHA! After reverting you I had a sudden doubt and looked it up, found the exact same video, so undid my revert (but corrected the year). :p --Salvidrim! ^T·_C 10:05, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you very much for helping with Tailsman IP vandalism stuff, whether it be on my talk page, reverting his vandalism, the SPI stuff, etc. I appreciate it! Sergecross73 msg me 17:20, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I really don't understand vandals. I disagree with the consensus allowing IPs to edit at all, but that's another matter. :) --Salvidrim! ^T·_C 17:26, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

With my experience in editing, I'd have to say I think I agree. As long as it's free and easy to sign up for an account, I think it could be a good barrier to keep trouble-makers out. It reminds me of a library policy; where it costs something insignificant like 10 cents to make a copy. It's not really that they're trying to make money, it's more to keep people from being reckless and printing out 1,000's of pages without really needing to. Same kind of concept, I think some vandals wouldn't bother with their silly edits if they had to commit a minute or two to signing up... Sergecross73 msg me 17:53, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh, they might sign-up, after all it's easy as pie; but it's much easier to keep control and ban vandals if they have to commit to an account, dontcha think? --Salvidrim! ^T·_C 17:58, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, my analogy is more for those "casual" vandals, who chose to make their only contribution to wikipedia be a singular edit adding the word "poop" randomly in an article or something. >_> I agree though, what you're talking about would be very helpful towards the long-term, more committed vandals.

We'll have to let each other know if there's ever any serious debates on this starting up somewhere... Sergecross73 msg me 18:13, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

There's been plenty of debates and consensus, which is why I'm not "pressing the issue". I just learn to work with it. :) --Salvidrim! ^T·_C 18:16, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

About the Warning...

How are those YouTube videos not official? Did you even watch them? What do you think they are videos of? They are from Paper Mario 3DS. 76.120.127.225 (talk) 08:56, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

The first one could arguably be considered a primary source. However it is strongly preferred to have sources about the video than use the video itself. Surely a trailer for a major Nintendo game shown at the E3 has had coverage in independent sources.

Do note also the warnings were not about using unreliable sources per se, but the fact that you keep removing the {CN} tag without adding a source in its place. Salvidrim! 09:08, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Paper Mario 3DS

I explained my reason for the removal. The ratings are NOT official. Plus, a Mario game is very unlikely to have an 12+ or M rating. No source confirms these ratings. If you show me a source showing these ratings are indeed official, I will leave the page alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.78.41.64 (talk) 05:15, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I've replied on your talk page. Salvidrim! 05:19, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Misleading Signiture

Oops, I used someone elses as a template and I forgot to change the links but I have changed it so you will go to mine now. Thanks Matthew ^Talk 12:26, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I saw that on Wikipelli's talk page. Sorry for acting so rude, it was a honest mistake. :) Salvidrim! 19:36, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

It didn't appear rude, I'm glad you told me because I had no idea so thank you! Matthew ^Talk 10:10, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad you take it so well, but I know that privately I did NOT assume good faith. :) Salvidrim! 10:14, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, if you know that 'privately' you did NOT, shouldn't you keep that private? Matthew ^Talk 15:37, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

I believe strongly in transparency, especially in collaborative environment. I believe it is important to admit your mistakes even if others do not note them. :) 15:57, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Why?

Why is YouTube not reliable? Nintendo posts videos on YouTube. Nintendo is official. Therefore, YouTube can be official. I also don't know how to source! Even if I did, I know if I placed an official Nintendo PM3DS gameplay video, you would say "YouTube is never official."

What should I do?

76.120.127.225 (talk) 06:54, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

I am not arguing the reliability of the alleged source. The warnings, as explained above, are because you are removing a {cn} template without adding a citation in its place. Salvidrim! 06:58, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Additionally, Youtube falls into the same area as messageboard posts or other wikis: It's too easy for anyone to put up whatever they want without anyone quality checking it. It's too easy for people to video edit and alter things to create hoaxes or slanted information. Also, there can be WP:COPYVIO problems. That's why it's best to try to link directly to where it came from, for instance, nintendo's site, if possible. Sergecross73 msg me 13:14, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

However, one of those videos is an official trailer posted on IGN's channel, so I think it could very well be used as a source. But there is probably a way to find the same trailer outside of video sharing sites indeed. Salvidrim! 23:03, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that's kind of what I was getting at too. You'd use the link from IGN, not the version of the video on youtube. Sergecross73 msg me 01:03, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

In this case, that link. Salvidrim! 01:09, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Great work!

Great work on getting Dr. Mario to B-class! --ThomasO1989 (talk) 00:40, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

I'll try for GA, but first I'll need consensus on the sources. Salvidrim! 00:42, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

FYI

See my comment here for the best summary. Thought I'd update you since you've witnessed much of it on my talk page... Sergecross73 msg me 20:16, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:98.71.49.191 Sergecross73 msg me 20:31, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. Also, it may be a good idea to make sure to add the {unsigned} templates after such unsigned posts, for clarity's sake. Salvidrim! 20:42, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

You know, I've never played around with those. Do you just put it after his lines, and then a bot will adjust it? I've seen them all over, I've just never done it myself... Sergecross73 msg me 20:45, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

SineBot occasionally goes around adding them automatically, but when it doesn't, I add, for example, {{unsigned|Salvidrim|~~~~~}}. If not done right after the post, the date/time (five tildes) can be left out, or you can look at the history and copy the date/time.

The original block(s) expire tonight too.... Salvidrim! 20:52, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Sergecross73 msg me 20:55, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I just looked at that exchange ... wow. o_O --McDoobAU93 21:02, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it never ends with that guy. (I'm sure it's Tailsman. He's got that same way or writing and responding to questions...) Sergecross73 msg me 21:05, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

When it doubt, duck it. --McDoobAU93 21:07, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Serge, there should be another case opened at ANI. Tailsman is under two blocks and one range-block, not his firsts, and is clearly evading. Salvidrim! 21:10, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

ANI, or SPI, or... well, to be quite frank, I'm not sure what the best venue is. Perhaps you could enquire with his blocking admin (MuZeMike, I think) directly as to what he thinks is best. Salvidrim! 21:11, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I was contemplating going to ANI, or that KWW who initially blocked him. Perhaps MuZeMike would be a good avenue as well. It'll be pretty easy to report, all we have to do is link to that ridiculous conversation, which provides all the proof we need... Sergecross73 msg me 21:14, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I must say from personal experience MuZemike is very professional and efficient when dealing with distuptive editors, and it has happened two or three times that he had blocked someone who was evading (or back to his bad habits after block expiration), I notified MuZemike with the evidence and he took a decision. As he's he one that had issued the range-block in response to the SPI case (I don't have the link on hand, isn't it higher on this talk page?), that would be what I'd do. Salvidrim! 21:17, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

True. I posted a link to that ridiculous conversation on his talk page. Sergecross73 msg me 21:26, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Really? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.49.191 (talk) 16:39, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Really what? Sergecross73 msg me 16:44, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Have fun trying to tell him you got the wrong guy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.49.191 (talk) 16:46, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

SPI Case Salvidrim! 01:29, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

I saw you weren't having any luck, so I tried another route. And it worked. Sergecross73 msg me 04:26, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

I should've known Kww didn't just come out of the blue with that ban. Good to see he is stopped... for now. I have a nagging suspicion this is not the last we hear of him. But since he's more involved with the Sonic area, you're likely to encounter him before I do, as always. Salvidrim! 04:31, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, and for whatever reason, much of the Sonic-fanbase acts just like he does anyways :they just love adding WP:GAMECRUFT, unsourced speculation, pointless trivia, crazy fan-theories, etc. I've always worked on the Sonic articles some, but seeing how you're watching over all the Mario articles had made me want to do the same for the Sonic ones. But there's always users adding junk to them. (Doesn't seem so bad with the Mario fanbase. Or maybe there's just more people policing that kind of stuff...) Sergecross73 msg me 13:29, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, I must say a majority of the vandals we get are just that -- vandals. And vandals are easier to deal with (IMO) than disruptive editors who add gamecruft, at least in part becauuse people who blank pages, add shit to them, or otherwise commit acts of uncontroversial vandalism generally stick to that, as opposed to disruptive editors (gamecruft or other behaviours) who often engage in such tiring and pointless discussions... plus, 3RR is easier to deal with when dealing with pure vandalism. So far I've only had one very persistent vandal to deal with (but I've only been around for a handful of months), see #Warnings. But I must say the Google Chrome watchlist extension definitely helps in being the first to revert the vandalism... I could not possibly counter vandalism this way if I had to manually refresh a watchlist page. ;) Salvidrim! 23:11, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

I noticed your new subpage. Thanks. That'll be a good quick reference in case we need to go to ANI, SPI, etc again in the future. Sergecross73 msg me 18:53, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/184.44.129.253 - A lot of the same articles, randomly talking on talk pages, discussing fan games, referenced being named something along the lines of "Nazo" in one of his signatures, which was part of a name of some fan video that TM was all worked up about when it was deleted at AFD... Thoughts? Sergecross73 msg me 18:44, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

My thoughts are that you might want to watch the info page about him, it has been added about half an hour ago. ;)

Also... the latest range-block still being in effect, he is technically ban evading. I need to go out for a short while now so don't have the time to write up a report, but will look into it when I come back. Salvidrim! 18:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I bet he's on his school's computers, block-evading... Sergecross73 msg me 18:52, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Salvidrim/Tailsman67

As you clearly don't want this recreated and it's just harrasment by the IP I have both deleted and WP:SALTed it for you. Hope that suits, if not let me know. Pedro :  Chat  22:11, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I was about to do a redir and request SPP. :) Salvidrim! 22:16, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

No probs. I forgot to mention that it's only semi protected not fully salted. Happy editing. Pedro :  Chat  22:38, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry!

Sorry people,I don't deserve a Wikipedia Ip,I will do better next time, I'm a complet duscehbag.:( TT-TT — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.62.146 (talk) 23:22, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

No personal attacks please, including yourself. Salvidrim! 23:33, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I was a tool in a plot to take over. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.62.146 (talk) 23:40, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dr. Mario (video game)

The article Dr. Mario (video game) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Dr. Mario (video game) for things which need to be addressed. ♫GoP♫_T^C_N 11:52, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

This user helped promote Dr. Mario (video game) to good article status.

I think it is a very good article! =)♫GoP♫_T^C_N 15:34, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations from me as well! --ThomasO1989 (talk) 15:45, 18 December 2011 (UTC)