User talk:Suriel1981/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Why undo the edit?

? Freddy Krueger 23:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

1. I know not to revert more than 2 times.
2. The notability thing isn't an official policy, plus there are exceptions to the not-a-policy, such as Wikipedia:Ignore all rules.

This "consensus" you speak of is all of 3 people.

Well, the fact that there were white ring ropes isn't important either. Take that out, too. Freddy Krueger 19:13, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Poof. Gone. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 19:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's not. Freddy Krueger 21:06, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Dan Severn

Suriel,

Regarding your comments at Dan Severn's afd discussion, isn't TNA part of (or was part of) the NWA as suggested in its article ? Also the NWA Heavyweight Championship (which presently belongs to TNA) was considered a world title at least by one major publication, Pro Wrestling Illustrated, during Severn's reign. MadMax 02:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

RE

No prob. Peace, -- The Hybrid 05:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Cool User Page

Hooray for cool new user pages! Bmg916^Speak_Sign 13:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Ehhh, I actually got the autograph code from Darkest Hour. But as for Chyna at an S&M convention...*shudders* Bmg916^Speak_Sign 13:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

WPPW

That's why I've said that it couldn't be used, unless any more info comes to light, by the way, how's it a personal opinion?. Davnel03 16:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I weren't actually meaning the first bit, I was talking about the Michaels/Cena match bit. Sorry if it didn't make sense. Davnel03 17:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

RE: Sock

Yea, that's the one. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 17:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

He'll get indef. blocked eventually, until then, we wont see him until at least early May. But yea, he's in his own world, completely. But hey, just cause a person is paranoid, doesn't mean they're not really out to get him. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 17:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Tempting yes, but I wouldn't run the risk of "personally attacking" such a fragile mind. Speaking of The Iron Sheik, search YouTube for his appearance on Jerry Springer...freaking PRICELESS. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 17:49, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

WP:PW Barnstar

Thank you for the support and kind words. I'm glad you like it. ---- GIGGAS2 | Talk 20:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Iron Sheik

If all Sheiks were like the Iron Sheik, there would be peace in the Middle East and gas over here would be less than £1.52 for f***king 3.8 liters (3dollars a gallon). And as for your comment at the WP:PW birth template controversy.... LMAO Bmg916^Speak_Sign 14:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

RE: John Cena

It better be GA status now. Hell, it better be able to reach FA status after the hell I just went through citing that thing. WP:PW needs to get in gear though, or the content from all our articles will be deleted by the Defenders of the BLP. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 15:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Lita

BOOBIES!!! Sorry, had too. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 17:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Eh, I'm not a big fan of Ric Flair's saggy man boobs either. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 17:25, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Mae Young EVER is grim. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 17:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Randy Savage

The information is not random. I can prove it to you that the information about Randy savage defeating Shawn Michawls is not random.

That is where I should Write. I do not have anywhere else to write.Angel 850 18:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

It's not that it's random, it's just not notable at all. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 18:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

What is the harm of mentioning it?Angel 850 18:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

It unnecessarily elongates the article and opens up a whole can of worms for other non-notable stuff to get mentioned. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 18:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

If something's not notable... what's the point of referring to it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GIGGAS2 (talk • contribs) 18:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC).

It still should be written.Angel 850 18:20, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

No it shouldn't, because it's not notable. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 18:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I've explained on Angel 850's talkpage why, according to WP policy it shouldn't be there. Direct arguments with basic policy to Jimbo Wales *lol* ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak_Sign 18:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

re: Bulldog article

Thank you for going through the site and article and figuring out all the parts that were copied. I'd give you a barnstar but I dont know how... *presents you with a notional Barnstar* there you go.64.230.4.4 04:05, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

RE:Admins

LOL, that was awesome. I love it. Psst, don't tell anyone this, but I am the cabal. Jimbo is just my mouthpiece. I'm really the one in control. Peace, -- The Hybrid 04:52, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes sacrifice to me-er-him. Yes, you truly are my-er-his most faithful servant. You shall be greatly blessed for your work. Peace upon you, -- The Hybrid 05:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Good, good! I feel the power! -- The Hybrid 05:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

World Championship Wrestling

Did you manage to get some stuff out of the book "Sex, Lies and Headlocks"? I haven't had time to add any links (been caught up in a bot attempting to block me!), so I thought I'd ask if you'd managed to put anything in. Davnel03 17:12, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot man, it'll be good if we get it to GA-status, I can't see the WWE or TNA main article getting GA-status, as IP users spam the page. Thanks! ps. Make a note over on WPPW if you want to that you've referenced it. Davnel03 18:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

:)

Thanks, Suriel, for signing my autograph book! :o)

Haha. Having an editor as a sister pays off in grammar class. :o)

Fair Use Images

Any use of fair use images in a biography of a living person is a violation of policy. There are hundreds of wrestling articles, so we have basically given up trying to patrol them, though I will be crusading against them in the near future. It is a copyright issue. Fair use images are only allowed if a free use alternative doesn’t exist, and one cannot be created. If someone is alive, then all it would take to create one is someone at one of the shows snapping a picture of them. Therefore, using them in a BLP is a violation of copyright laws, and could result in Wikipedia being sued. Peace, -- The Hybrid 02:37, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

If he is still alive, then someone could run into him at the store and snap a picture with their cell phone. That is unlikely, but it is technically possible. That makes using a fair use pic of him illegal. Peace, -- The Hybrid 02:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

It is going to be terrible. I'm really busy in real life, so busy that I may be taking a month long Wikibreak soon. After my life is sorted out I will be helping to raise the LAX article to GA status. When that is done I will begin recruiting people to help with my fair use crackdown. There is no way that the 2 of us can handle this alone. We can't just remove the images; we have to keep them out of the articles. We need a group of at least 15 dedicated people to handle this job. Peace, -- The Hybrid 03:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

get a life

dude seriously are you real ?? before going on threatning , just want you to know that all the wikimedia foundation and all the wikimedia based project has 0 value for webmasters .... did you ever heard of the nofollow tag well this tag made wikipedia and her sisters useless

in other word if all the sites using wikimedia blacklisted us , nothing would change because they are already useless.

secondo , dude we are contributing with nice and interesting links , we are not vandals nor spammers but attitudes like yours make us unleash our hords of vandal bots from time to time

and if editors like you don't start differenciating between spam and contribution ,it's only a matter of time before pissed webmasters take revenge .... and make wikipedia history.

but what is amazing is that you people work for free while your wikipedia president Jimmy Wales has launched a clone of wikipedia supported by adds and containing huge amount of wikipedia information and guess what you're working for free while Jimmy is making 800-10.000$ per week per page of the wikipedia clone , let's see that's millions while editors are getting 0$ and they're happy ....

.......... go get a life ... get laid .... and quit this shitty wikipedia it's corrupted ... it's mass manipulation ... but we'll take it down one day , promise ;) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Newww (talk • contribs) 15:33, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

My approach, for what it's worth

Personally, I think the way to handle a situation like User:Scotts33 is to let him remove the warnings. Removing legitimate warnings is "frowned upon" but not prohibited. My practice is to let it go unless there is additional vandalism, in which case I restore the warnings and add a new one. It complicates RC patrol, as you have to go dig through their history to see if they were previously warned, but I think the consensus is generally a good one. User talk page revert wars are pretty pointless.--Kubigula (talk) 05:12, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it can definitely get messy (there's a Wikipedia is like sausage metaphor here somewhere). I've seen a few where the vandal has changed the warning so that we are now thanking him/her for vandalizing. Then others add new legitimate warnings or other messages and you quickly get a crazy hodgepodge with no "clean" version to revert to.--Kubigula (talk) 05:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Cena

Neither one of them are dead. It was just vandalism that was taken to the extreme by some anons who believed it. Now, I'll let it slide this time, but next time you will face the consequences of your actions >:^(. Beware, -- The Hybrid 05:20, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

That's awesome. I'm posting that right above mine. Peace, -- The Hybrid 05:43, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and I will miss laughing at all of the idiots, and you, for not catching on the the fact that no one had died until I left the warning (ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ;), but we must return to the realm of productive conversations, assuming that we were ever in that realm. Yes, I got all of that info into one sentence. I am God. Peace, -- The Hybrid 06:08, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Amy Dumas

I didn't check the edit history so I wasn't aiming the comment at anybody specifically, however, if it was your edit then it's wrong. Move names with Lita (bar Litacanrana) in the title are completely unauthorised and unofficial, and there was a problem a while back with somebody continually changing them; hence there is now a warning, which you either didn't notice or ignored. BertieBasset 11:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Barbie Blank

now I know my ABC's wont you come share half-naked pics of hot chicks with meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 19:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I make the hardcore pornography my friend. :-) Bmg916^Speak_Sign 22:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, you know it involves them. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 23:45, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Removing warnings

My advice: removing warnings is somewhat frowned upon, so it's not unreasonable to point that out and restore the warnings, say, once. But after that you just have to trust that future RC patrollers, when faced with a blank but blue-linked talk page, will have the savvy to check the history and the user's prior contributions... which is a good idea in general anyway. Mangojuice^talk 01:03, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

How about..?

Hello I have an image of Debra (Debra Marshall) that I toke when I went to a WWF/E event a few years ago, would that be accepted? 217.38.64.156 15:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Inane arguments

You ready for another one? Bottom of Talk: Shawn Michaels. The ladder match bit thingy. Let's get this one out of the way before it gets out of hand. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 12:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I actually hadn't seen that (and I seriously don't know who that was), I was more reminded of the argument at Booker T (remember kids, The Rock isn't black, because he "counts his samoanism more"). Bmg916^Speak_Sign 12:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

People like that are the reason I am rapidly losing faith in the human race. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 12:52, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

George Bush was re-elected, there is no hope. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 13:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Armageddon has started already, in Iraq my friend. I never voted for the douche. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 13:34, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

RE: Atticus

Yea, I noticed, I revoked the barnstar I gave him. I have some photos I took of Raven and Danny Doring I want to put up from an independent show I went to last weekend. The problem is I took them with my friends camera, and my friend lives 3.5 hours from here, and still hasn't e-mailed them to me (jackass). On a side note, Danny Doring is a really personable guy, we talked for a while after his match about all sorts of stuff. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 14:39, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Yea, he was real open to me about his time in WWE. He said he was so miserable and that his lack of being used was due to him being very open backstage about a disagreement he had with Paul back in the original ECW. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 15:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Not only that, I respect him a lot for taking time out for his fans, and not thinking he's above them since he's a somewhat big name (he didn't charge at all for autographs or pictures), and he was autographing even after shredding his elbow on the concrete floor (he got it wrapped up then came out to talk to fans). In my opinion Doring is a helluva man. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 15:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

My sense of humor is out to lunch. I can't see to come up with a joke about that. Peace, -- The Hybrid 04:26, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

---

what's wrong with my anagram edit? it's true, and I think it's intentional. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tvongeld (talk • contribs) 22:25, 13 April, 2007 (UTC)

The "Ginger Separitist Movement"? It's a reference. An anagram is something clever that the creators of south park would throw in. I don't know if the term "ginger" for pale, freckled, redheads was something that they invented, or if it was previously used. If it was previously used, then I'm just reading too much into it. However, if it is as I assume, that they invented the term for that episode of the show, than it is unlikely that the anagram is unintentional. If it is intentional, then it would be an interesting tidbit to put in an encyclopedia. I'm certainly not being a vandal, or being offensive. Maybe it should be posed as a theory rather than a fact.

hello i saw your great comments on the tiffany limos site and i liked them alot... Jaynekennedy 18:21, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Page Blanking

Please stop. If you continue to blank out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. DXRAW 01:18, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Go for it. I did nothing wrong. DXRAW 01:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

A admin is not god. There was no reason for the talkpage to be blanked. Anybodys edits can be reverted. Even Jimmy Wales edits. The only bad faith was from you in blanking the page. DXRAW 01:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

MySpaces on Amy Dumas

The reason that I reverted your edits is because they were in the wrong location. You can put Amy's myspace back in under the external links section, if you feel that it is necessary that it should be there. However, the Luchagors' Myspace shouldn't be on Amy's page, but you can it it to their wikipedia page if you want. Nikki311 03:46, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Warren85 is out to get her and take a look at the post I put up, thanks. Jaynekennedy 04:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Tiffany Limos

I am just saying that they are calling her a porn actress when Kim Kardashian and Jenna Jameson have Wikipedia sites. Kim Kardashian is a solialite with a sex tape and Jenna Jameson is a porn star. It has nothing to do with any of that. They have a personal vendetta against Tiffany Limos because that doesn't make sense for them to be attacking her like they are doing. I appreciate all that you have done. Do you have a personal email so I can discuss further because I don't want those idiots coming over here stalking your page to seek out information.

Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jaynekennedy (talk • contribs) 04:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC).

Tiffany Limos

I am just saying that they are calling her a porn actress when Kim Kardashian and Jenna Jameson have Wikipedia sites. Kim Kardashian is a solialite with a sex tape and Jenna Jameson is a porn star. It has nothing to do with any of that. They have a personal vendetta against Tiffany Limos because that doesn't make sense for them to be attacking her like they are doing. I appreciate all that you have done. Do you have a personal email so I can discuss further because I don't want those idiots coming over here stalking your page to seek out information.

Thanks. Jaynekennedy 04:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

check out what warren85 has put up now!

Jaynekennedy 04:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Reverting the Power Slam Page

Granted, the page "isn't about Stately Wayne Manor"--but all that was changed was an inaccurate reference--at the request of SWM himself--one sentence taken out, and a little added in its place. Hardly what IMHO constitutes an attempt to hog the entire page. In fact, the hardly relevant sentence was deleted in an attempt NOT to hog said section!

Any chance of undoing it rather than us getting into a childish game of "one guy changes it until the other guy takes notices," being you profess to being fairly easy-going?EJ Paolone 19:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)EJ Paolone

One Less Disruption

Mr. Racial Purity has been indef blocked for creating socks Bmg916^Speak_Sign 13:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

A new sacrifice

I believe that Lord Jimbo is displeased with us, because of the recent vandal wave. We must appease him! ALL HAIL THE CABAL. --ÄtΘmicR€£igione^sїgñ

BLP Police

TJ Spyke just got indef. blocked for "willfully violating BLP". He reverted two of Burntsauce's blankings, that's it. Two. I say we start going around blanking unsourced materials from other BLPs such as Snoop Dogg, Dr Dre, Eminem, Jerry Seinfeld, Dane Cook, etc. Let's see how quickly we get blocked for "blanking content". This is ridiculous, I'm tired of this POV vendetta against pro wrestling. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 14:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I saw that admin nomination too, just confusing. Anyway, the reviewing admin has agreed to unblock him thank g-d. This is just ridiculous already. Their going to drive the whole project from the wiki. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 14:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

While I'm not sure about Davnel deserving the block or not, he certainly didn't do the project any favors by making legal threats and telling Burntsauce "happy blanking, bitch". So I'm kind of unsure whether or not to feel sympathy there. I also respect User:Yamla way to much to get involved in their blocks, I trust their judgment fully as they have helped out me and other users of WP:PW in the past. This wasn't a PW vendetta block. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 14:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Things do seem a bit nuttier round here lately. But I can't blame the hot weather, as it's cold as f*ck in the Northeastern part of the states right now...I wish it was sunny :-(. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 17:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

After contacting the IP address he stopped violating the MoS. TJ Spyke's block has generally been seen as a mistake on the part of the blocking admin, though the other admins involved have decided to watch him, which is perfectly acceptable. He has quite the colorful history, but in spite of this he is still regarded as an admin hopeful. This is very unusual, and personally I will be glad for the extra scrutiny. I believe that it will help him become what he has the potential to be. TJ has the potential to be one of the greatest admins Wikipedia has ever seen, but he also has the potential to be one of the most controversial and destructive users in Wikipedia history. He is one of the most established, trusted, and generally well liked users in WP:PW, but he also handles disputes very poorly. If he has to watch his mouth and actions constantly, then I believe that he will learn the dispute-resolving skills that he needs to be a successful admin. At this point I don't think that anyone would trust him with the ability to protect pages, nor to edit them. However, if he can gain those skills as a result of being watched by the admins, then he will deserve to be sysopped, and will do a great job with the tools. If he ends up blocked as a result of this, then it will be the result of his own actions. This mistake stirred up something that has the potential to create a truly incredible admin, and I love it. Peace, The Hybrid 04:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, the indef block was f*cking bullsh*t to put it plainly. I hope that someone is watching that admin more closely than TJ is being watched. That was a stupid move, and knowing that someone like that has admin powers scares the hell out of me. I will be watching the IP as well, but I'm only semi-active, so I won't be here to watch it most of the time. Peace, The Hybrid 05:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC)