Jump to content

User talk:TJ Spyke/Archive 25

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20←Archive 23Archive 24Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27→Archive 30

Sourcing

I am working on Sourcing this article and have come to a little problem, with the reigns and am wondering what do about it. Afkatk (talk) 18:37, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Metroid Prime Trilogy

Hello TJ Spyke. Please comment here if you disagree with Metroid Prime Trilogy as a redirect. Thank you. -sesuPRIME talk • contribs 20:26, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 1 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 23:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Professional wrestling in Australia

TJ, I may need a hand here. I've just reverted edits for a third time (outside 24 hours so 3RR doesn't apply) trying to push two Australian wrestlers overseas - one of whom (Dingo) who's Australian ID is questionable to say the least. The other - Outback Jack - has a level of notability that I would consider questionable. Would someone who embarassed his home country be notable? I've prodded both articles on the individuals due to lack of sources, and Outback Jack's notability is not established beyond his very short time with the WWF. The IP's are pushing edits or whatever it's called (in my view) and I need a hand to control them. !! Justa Punk !! 07:20, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Good luck

Good luck with this!--WillC 06:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Well have fun.--WillC 19:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

Delivered: 14:29, 7 June 2009 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

help me please

Hey my names kevin I've used wikipedia and been a member for a while but i haven't created a page because i don't understand the whole citing thing like i wanna start a page about Jay Lethal and Consequences Creed because they've been tagging together for a while but i don't know how to cite my sources. Please help me leave me a message please--Kevmicester2000 (talk) 22:23, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

List of WWE Champions

I know you don't like it when things are added to the page without your permission, but the links I added did indeed work. I have no idea why you would assume they were fake and remove them without checking. -- Scorpion0422 02:35, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Re:

Vandalism? Ok I will not do that again.

Thanks for the warning message ^^.

-AndSalX-WWECR (talk) 16:00, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Metroid Prime Trilogy.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Metroid Prime Trilogy.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Super Shy Guy Bros.Not shy? 00:56, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Extreme Rules ("Miss WrestleMania") match

I noticed your edit at the Extreme Rules page. I just wanted to let you know that moments before the match started, Vickie said she made the match into a handicap match. --UnquestionableTruth-- 02:07, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Here's a link http://www.wwe.com/shows/extremerules/matches/9684380/results/?cid=2009EP-00 --UnquestionableTruth-- 02:11, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling#To clear things up

Click the link please.--WillC 02:23, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Well I checked WWE.com and they still have Batista listed as champion. Usually when it is vacant they have no champion listed. We never know, the four way may become a five way with Batista playing a minor role. They may even pull a Booker T and like they did before with the US Title, allowing Batista to choose someone to defend the championship for him since he can not. All this is speculation, but I'm just trying to be correct.--WillC 05:14, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
This one involves the sorting templates and helps with guidelines. Such as bold amoung other things. Only the wrestler section should be highlighted as well as the table is a quick check table. So all links should be working. Things I've learned with my recent nominations at FLC.--WillC 06:09, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Mario/Sonic edit warring

Please do not continue to revert war on the Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Winter Games article. Twinkle is to be used on outright vandalism only and should not be used in a borderline dispute such as this. Seddσn talk|WikimediaUK 03:42, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

[1] -- Scorpion0422 15:14, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Surprise, Surpise. Someone that has a grudge against me reported me for nothing. TJ Spyke 17:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Just returning the favour. And if you don't like being blocked, perhaps you should stop edit warring over silly minor things. I don't know why you are blaming me. The fact that you are edit warring and violated 3RR - OVER CITATION TAGS - twice within 24 hours probably had something to do with it. -- Scorpion0422 17:44, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I know you don't like me, but take a honest look at those and you would have to agree with me. IP's were adding in unsourced and speculative material. I wasn't taking out the BS info, I was putting in {{fact}} tags. The tags should not have been removed without being sourced. I stopped removing the info when I saw I hit 3 reverts, I was not aware that putting in tags (while leaving in the BS) would count against that too. TJ Spyke 17:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I wouldn't have edit warred over citation tags. If you can't remove it, then adding a tag isn't going to make much of a difference. -- Scorpion0422 17:55, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I have blocked you for 55 hours for disruption and edit warring. Given your long history of disruption, please note that any further edit warring will result in an indefinite block. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
That was NO disruptive editing. Remove constant addition of unsourced and original material is helpful editing. I should be unblocked (I may make a formal request later today). TJ Spyke 17:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Championship pages

Okay overlord, why is there no need for a refs column? -- Scorpion0422 17:17, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Because it makes the page look tidier and more professional. Before, there were references all over the place and a few dozen notes columns with just refs. That looked bad, so I tried to fix it. -- Scorpion0422 17:24, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
By the way, I may look like an ass, but at least I don't look like a petty editor seeking revenge on a user who reported you at 3RR. -- Scorpion0422 17:27, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

You just got blocked for edit warring, and less than 24 hours after returning you are edit warring on multiple pages. Nice to see that you learned something from your block. At one point, I didn't like reference columns either, but I have started to see them as more of a benefit. The column for them is very narrow, so it doesn't clump the table up too badly. It presents all the refs in a nice neat column so if a user was looking for the WWE page about a certain page, it's much easier. Having references thrown all over the place in the notes column did look very messy, and I'd rather have a blank cell than one with just a citation in it. -- Scorpion0422 17:37, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Now who looks like an ass? The irony is that you accuse me of being a petty child when you yourself are acting like one. Quit acting so self-righteous. You got blocked, it happens to all of us, move on (and if it was so unjust, why didn't you request unblocking?). By the way, before adding them, I had a discussion with Wrestlinglover about these columns. -- Scorpion0422 17:43, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

You need to cut this out. I find the whole situation childish. I looked at your contributions, and your first few edits after the block was over was reverting Scorpion. You need to avoid him, and he needs to avoid you. If you have a problem with one of his edits then bring it to someone else, and if they deem the edit inappropriate, they should revert it. Edits like this are just not acceptable for an edit summary. It would be best if you two could just avoid each other, or I can see you getting blocked for edit warring again. (iMatthew - talk) at 17:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

This is also inappropriate. Please avoid him. (iMatthew - talk) at 17:46, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
I'd hardly call your comments to each other "discussing." It's more like bickering. If it continues, an administrator may need to watch the title pages to make sure that the edit warring stops. – iMatthew • talk at  17:57, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

" think you should reach a consensus with the people who actually edit these articles " - What the hell is that supposed to mean? I work hard to maintain those lists just as much as anyone else (and I did nominate a few of them). I have no idea why you are questioning my ability as FL director, but refs columns are actually becoming a much more common thing these days. For example, List of United States Military Academy alumni (athletic figures) (which was promoted yesterday). By the way, being promoted under one form does not mean that it has to stay that way. Those lists were all promoted 2 years ago, when the standards were much lower. Why shouldn't I try something that I thinks improve the table if I want to keep it above standards? -- Scorpion0422 18:00, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Translation: "Get my permission first." Wikipedia encourages being bold, and if I think I can improve a page, I'm going to do it and not worry about making other editors feel important by asking them first. This discussion is going nowhere, so I suggest we quit bickering back and forth. If you want to start a discussion, then go ahead. -- Scorpion0422 18:25, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Donald

Looks like we'll be stuck reverting for days. Thanks McMahon--EmperorofPeopleEverywhere (talk) 01:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Your comment

I don't have a problem with you reverting my edit to the List of WWE Champions (I may have missed where they stated the title was vacant and I did check WWE.com. I will go back and rewatch Raw later), but you didn't have to be so rude about it. A simple, "They vacated the title at the beginning of Raw" would have been enough. The "try watching raw" part was unnecessary and quite frankly not very civil. Wwehurricane1 (talk) 03:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 15 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 12:27, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Super Mario Bros.

Bowser was NEVER called "King Koopa" in any of the video games, only in the animated cartoons. Also, the instruction booklet [2] even calls him Bowser. I also removed plot details in the intro, since it's redundant and is already mentioned later in the article. So please don't revert it. Richiekim (talk) 01:53, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Sup?

God bless you! Danny Boy 420 (talk) 04:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Reverting procedure

Can I have some explanation as to why you continue to undo edits I make regarding anything to do with professional wrestling. Most recently the fact that the SummerSlam poster has been put up for speedy deletion. I honestly don't mind if there are legitimate reasonings for reverting or changing things I write, but it does appear as though you are trying to ensure the only edits that are made to do with anything WWE are your own and nobody elses. Please assume good faith and WP:BITE. I hope we can be civil from here on in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robriotuk (talk • contribs) 18:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Apologies. I understand your reasoning now. However if you check my contributions page and then check the history of those articles you will see that the majority of the edits immediately after mine were made by yourself. I'll put this down to you just being a highly pro-active Wikipedia member - which of course shouldn't be discouraged. However reading some of the other comments made by members on here it appears as though your overzealousness hasn't gone un-noticed, and maybe occassionally you edit without thinking. If you are unsure of whether someone was correct in an edit you should ask them directly for clarification prior to simply editing it yourself or reverting it. That way not as many people will get upset. As with mine you could of asked me to include the correct URL first rather than simply delete it. I hope you see my point of view.

It's not the direct reverting of articles that concerns me. Just the subsequent edits, but it doesn't really matter. I understand you're only trying to help.

Re:SummerSlam 09

I don't have an account at the Commons, so I'm limited in what I can do. The image is tagged for speedy deletion there, so it should be deleted soon. If you have an account there, it might be a good idea to notify the appropriate notice board or get an admin there to keep an eye on him. In the meantime, though, I've warned the user about 3rr and put the article on my watchlist. If he reverts again, I'll block him for edit warring. You are at 3 reverts yourself, so be careful because I don't want to see you in trouble. Nikki♥311 00:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I have an account on commons. What is going on? I get on there and nominate pics for deletion plus upload some from Flickr.--WillC 18:43, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I knew about the image. Was making sure this was the case. Either way it being created by the users or not, the logos are still copywritten so it must be deleted. I'll go check up on it.--WillC 19:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

You got the name of the file? I can't find it unless it has been deleted again?--WillC 19:34, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Fixed.--WillC 02:40, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Polls

Both polls were in an email that was sent out to their subscribers. The same as the Breaking Point poll. Wwehurricane1 (talk) 23:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Just to help out Wwehurricane a bit, here's the HIAC poll. I'd also give the Breaking Point poll link, but it seems pretty useless now, so I wouldn't recommend the website as a whole as a permanent source. --  Oakster   09:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

Delivered: 11:39, 21 June 2009 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

Angle's reigns

Since this is supposed to be an encyclopedia. We should go by what is true. Since Angle is actually a 4 time champion. The articles should say he is a 4 time champion. Though TNA does not recognize one of those reigns, that doesn't come into play. In this situation, what the company thinks doesn't matter. Also for the sort template to work, the counting template, has to go twice. I figured that out in a review.--WillC 04:19, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Wrong, he was considered the champion at Impact~. He was stripped of the belt. TNA just is trying to rewrite history. As for the WWE reigns, that is a different list is bad condition. If we go by what a company thinks, then this isn't an encyclopedia. We are supposed to be factual. And the fact is, Angle has held that belt 4 times now.--WillC 23:39, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
No, he was announced as TNA World Heavyweight Champion on Impact! and Cornette said he was not the champion because he was stripping him of the belt. Then on TNA Wrestling.com they had an article stating that Angle was stripped of the championship. It is noted that TNA does not recognize the title reign. But because they don't does not mean we should be blind to facts. The facts Angle was announced as champion on Impact!, was stripped of the championship, etc. At Slammiversary, the match was billed as being for the undisputed or pure TNA World Heavyweight Championship.--WillC 00:01, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and this was discussed before yes. I was involved in it for around a year and was involved in the final discussion to remove Cage's reign and create the list of champions article so I'm not making anything up here.--WillC 00:02, 23 June 2009 (UTC) Lets just discuss and not revert. The current version has been in there for a while and was agreed upon. Plus there are sources within the article showing Angle's official reign.--WillC 00:43, 23 June 2009 (UTC) Also, wikipedia can not source itself. Because something is done in one article does not mean it has to be done in another. The fact is, Angle's first reign was recognized and should be apart of the official reign. TNA's view is irrelevant in the case today. If it was, then the NWA Champions would be in the article.--WillC 00:46, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm cool with a long discussion. I'm very pleased with that and I would rather neither of us get involved in a 3RR dispute. In my view, your version is incorrect like it your's mine is incorrect. You are going by TNA's view. Which we shouldn't. Does a critically acclaimed encyclopedia follow what some company says about their history when it isn't true by their telling? TNA are saying in this instance that Angle's reign never happened and though the article says it did, it also goes by TNA's revisionism and says that Angle is only an official 3 time champion when clearly he is not. He is a 4 time official champion. Unofficially he is a 3 time champion in TNA's eyes. The fact of it all is that Angle has held that belt four times. Not three, four time. The Impact! after Sacrifice he was called the current and new TNA World Heavyweight Champion. Saying he won it at Sacrifice.--WillC 00:59, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

One thing I feel must be cleared up is the fact that Angle's original reign post-Sacrifice was indeed recognized at the time by TNA. [3] TNA officially stripped Angle of the title on the following taping of Impact and set up the TNA title match at Slammiversary. As shown by the current stance of TNA, Angle's original reign prior to Slammiversary is no longer recognized. However, the fact remains that TNA, for that short period of time between Sacrifice and the following Impact taping, did recognized Angle as TNA World Heavyweight Champion. --UnquestionableTruth-- 04:14, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 22 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Concerning a possible RfC on RobJ1981

This essay [4] may be construed as a personal attack, yes, but it holds a lot of truth about RobJ1981's disruptive, deletionist editing style. I am collecting a list of articles where he conducts himself like that and am contemplating initiating an RfC on him. If you are interested in taking part, message me

BTW here is a non-comprehensive list of articles where he committed such behaviour
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nuclear_Football_in_popular_culture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bugbears_in_popular_culture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Satyrs_in_popular_culture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Three_Stooges_in_popular_culture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Homelessness_in_popular_culture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Australian_repeated_place_names
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Trench_coats_in_popular_culture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hippogriff_in_popular_culture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_fictional_beverages_(2nd_nomination)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Doctor_Who_spoofs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Syrinx_in_popular_culture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Shinigami_in_popular_culture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ship_of_Lights
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Nintendo_characters_(2nd_nomination)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Johnny_Bravo_(character)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/American_Idol_Hot_100_singles_(2nd_nomination)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Samson_in_popular_culture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rimbaud_and_modern_culture

I am going to refine the list into cases where he blatantly violated WP:ITSCRUFT in nominating an article, cases where he blatantly violated WP:ITSCRUFT for how he voted in various AfDs, and cases where he simply just followed a bandwagon (whether the bandwagon won the AfD or not) voting Delete/redirect per above. I have been going through his contribs and it appears he rarely actually adds content to Wikipedia, most of his edits (other than updating tags) are either deleting content from articles (though I must admit once in while his deletions are valid) or him nominating or voting for anything and everything to be deleted. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 16:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Is there a section in the MOS somewhere I'm missing that states that publishers without articles should be unlinked even if there's a valid subsection of an existing article to link it to? That being said, it always struck me as odd that WON has no article. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 23:54, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. Bring it up at WT:PW if you like. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 00:18, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

About Metroid Prime: Trilogy

Hello again TJ Spyke. What's a "SYNTH"? Anyway, the side of the box art clearly says "METROIDTM PRIME : TRILOGY" (hi-res image here). -sesuPRIME 21:42, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Did you look at the image I provided? There's clearly a colon between "PRIME" and "TRILOGY".
Logos almost never show colons even when the title obviously has one (take the titles of Prime 2, Prime 3, and The Legend of Zelda series, for example). As for Nintendo's site not acknowledging the colon, the new box art was just revealed today, so maybe they just haven't updated their site yet? MPT is still in development and information on it could change. It's certainly within reason Nintendo could drop the colon by the game's release, but the most up-to-date information we have shows a colon in the title. -sesuPRIME 22:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Let's continue this here. I hope you don't mind, but I copy-and-pasted both of our comments there. -sesuPRIME 23:18, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: List of WWE pay-per-view events

Sure thing. Added to my watchlist. :) Gavyn Sykes (talk) 15:19, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I must admit, I can't believe how easy you guys at WP:PW start off edit-wars. If you see a contentious edit made to a wrestling article, search to see if you can find a source, i.e. [http:/www.wwe.com/ WWE.com]. Chances are you'll find a Reliable Source - hint: see the PPV sidebar. What's better for improving the encyclopedia? Pointless, lame edit wars or finding sources? I'll leave you to answer that. D.M.N. (talk) 16:02, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

RE

I discussed this with Scorp a while ago. All of the WWE FLs are out of date plus a few others are as well. The format is wrong, there are too many primary sources, they give too much or too little information on the championship, etc. The sorting templates and other are apart of the FL criteria. I could have just nominated the article for FL removal like I was going too but this way we avoid the backlog. I know how to fix it, but the dashes, etc have to be in there first to fix them.--WillC 03:05, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[5] Probably should have nominated it for speedy, but forgot the template.--WillC 21:04, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Alphabetical takes over, which is what should be done. I don't know why you think it should be by date won.--WillC 03:45, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
I might do that or I'll wait and just update all the lists.--WillC 03:40, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Fake / Too Early?

What do you mean it's fake? It's listed as an upcoming event like WWE Extreme Rules was. That was not fake. Also, why would it be too early? I see no reason to deny the entry for a start-class page. ⒺⓋⒾⓁⒼⓄⒽⒶⓃ② talk 16:28, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Seems Fair Enough. ⒺⓋⒾⓁⒼⓄⒽⒶⓃ② talk 16:32, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I made the Breaking Point (2009) page, it took a lot of time as I am fairly new at making pages, but I sourced properly and it has been announced by WWE as an umpocming PPV. Check the WWE Unforgiven page to see its logo. Therefore, it was really annoying to see the page be needlessly deleted or redirected back to the WWE Unforgiven page. It has been announced, so leave it!!! Or at least discuss it before deleting it needlessly!!! Benatfleshofthestars. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benatfleshofthestars (talk • contribs) 03:19, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, I only named it 2009 because it will carry on Uforgiven's lineage and also because all the other pay per views have been changed by year. Also, I would hope users to consider creating the page again, as it gives people information on the upcoming PPV. I wanted to know about it, and thus researched and thought it could be shared with others. Where's the harm? I hope you and other users will think about it. Thanks Benatfleshofthestars —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benatfleshofthestars (talk • contribs) 03:29, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

User

I gave him his last warning so if he makes disruptive edits, feel free to take it higher. AfroGold - Afkatk 22:07, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

CM Punk

I totally agree with you. I'm sick of reverting those edits. I've taken to just ignoring the article until he actually does turn heel. That's saying something, considering I'm usually constantly trying to improve that article. I feel like if I don't ignore this, I'm going to make a personal attack and get myself banned. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 00:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

DX table

I listed Angle second because of the alphabet. The first letter of each name I choose from; A.J. (A) came first, Kurt (K) was second, and Travis (T) was last.--WillC 03:07, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Likewise.--WillC 01:10, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

WWE Night of Champions

This will probably continue to happen on this page. As you are probably aware, next week's RAW was already taped after this past Monday's. It goes back to that whole spoilers argument that was had before I left. Whatever was the outcome of that anyway? Bmg916Speak 18:17, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Good call on there being no source for that being the main event, I agreed with your revert anyway. I think they taped it because they'll be on an international tour next week? Thanks for letting me know about the spoilers thing...anything else significant I miss? Bmg916Speak 18:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Probably a little less than a year ago I want to say...Bmg916Speak 19:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

SummerSlam (2009)

Thanks for exposing the fake SummerSlam poster, it took me a while to figure out where it came from. FYI, the real poster will be released on Wednesday. --  Oakster   17:10, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Just to let you know about Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hbb1994. I thought it's worth it, before this gets out of hand. --  Oakster   06:46, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

List of Wii games that use the Nintendo GameCube controller cleanup

The AfD discussion said that page needs a bit of cleanup, so I have begun working on that. I have converted the list into a sortable wikitable for one so that it is standardized with other Wii lists. Please give input on what else should be fixed

--Thegreyanomaly (talk) 18:32, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

Delivered: 11:04, 5 July 2009 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

Edited Entry

I received the following message from you regarding an edited enter:

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to WWE Raw, even if you intend to fix them later. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. TJ Spyke 22:00, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I have never edited this page. In fact, I've never even visited this page before your message

MistWing SilverTail —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.55.102.20 (talk) 04:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Replied on IP's talkpage. TJ Spyke 04:04, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

ECW on Sci Fi to ECW on Syfy

I request that you move the page from ECW on Sci Fi to ECW on Syfy because the Sci Fi Channel has become Syfy. Could you please move that page right now? I would really appreciate this a whole lot. This is very important. AdamDeanHall (talk) 15:00, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Replied on talkpage. TJ Spyke 15:08, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, come on.

This was plain rude. Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars. Vmjlhds is a regular contributor, and clearly not a vandal. If he blanked a portion of an article, it was probably some kind of mistake. Consider removing the template and adding a regular message to his talk page. Thanks, iMatthew talk at 01:02, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Sting

I didn't think that we recognized the WCW International belt or the WWA belt as World Titles, so I took them out of the mix.

I thought that the only World Titles we recognized were the WWE, World, ECW, TNA, ROH, NWA, WCW, and AWA Titles.

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

Vjmlhds 12:09, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 July 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:46, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:PW

Hi! I'm still waiting for a follow up to my response. --UnquestionableTruth-- 18:21, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure you read my reply to your examples about the show and the movie...--UnquestionableTruth-- 19:17, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm not obsessed with anything. I just think its strange that you continue to restate your argument about how a show from the US should be named by its US name on Wikipedia when the majority disagrees. Additionally I find it very strange that you continue to restate that the US names are the official names without providing any proof of that. As for the reply I've been looking for, I was referring to a reply to your Movie and Show example you gave. [6] I think you are terribly mistaken the discussion for something it isn't. To this reply [7] let me show you how you just lost your argument.
  • my argument is that the articles should be named by their most common name
  • you argue that Friday Night... and ...on Syfy are the officially names
  • I add that yes they are indeed their official names... in the US
  • internationally they are known simply as "WWE Raw" "ECW" and "WWE SmackDown" thus making those the most common names
  • you mistakenly believe that I am trying to argue that these articles should be named by their international names
  • I again restate that my argument is that they should be renamed to their most common name which just so happen to be the intl. names
  • so You gives this example
  • The Peter Principle is a show called The Peter Principle
  • but in the US its called The Boss
  • and Matter of Life and Death is a film called Matter of Life and Death
  • but in the US it was called Stairway to Heaven
  • and the articles of these subjects are named by their home country name and NOT their intl. name
  • ok but see here's where I just won...
  • You still believe that i am arguing to move the articles based on their intl. names
  • but I'm actually arguing to move them based on their most common name
  • now if you just gave that example it only proved one thing
  • The movie Matter of Life and Death and the show The Peter Principle were renamed to Stairway to Heaven and The Boss respectively when released in the US
  • but where else other than in the US were they renamed?
  • so if they were only renamed to those names in the US what is still their most common name?
  • Matter of Life and Death and The Peter Principle!
  • and what are their articles named to?
  • Matter of Life and Death and The Peter Principle!
  • The common names!

I hope you got that.--UnquestionableTruth-- 19:59, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

This is re: List of DSiWare games and applications—In my edit summary where I reverted your edit before, I referred to Wikipedia: NOTBROKEN. The only thing that you changed was that one link, and that is why I reverted it. There was no other purpose for the edit except to not use the redirect, which goes against that policy. A while back, there was a different contributor to the article who incessantly changed every single redirect link to point directly to the actual article, and it was during that time that I stopped really explaining myself and started just putting 'Wikipedia: NOTBROKEN' in my edit summary when reverting such edits. I apologize if my reason before was unclear, and I'll be more explicit in edit summaries about reverting similar edits in the future so the same confusion doesn't happen again. :) -- Khisanth (talk) 00:57, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Village School (Great Neck, New York)

Hi! You might be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Village School (Great Neck, New York) (2nd nomination). Thank you. Alchaenist (talk) 14:14, 9 July 2009 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})

Big Show

Could you help me watch this article? Several times I've added a source for his knockout punch finisher and come back months later to find it removed. I've had to add it three or four times already, it's really started to piss me off that it gets removed and no one reverts it's removal. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 17:03, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

Delivered: 11:11, 19 July 2009 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TJ_Spyke/Archive_25&oldid=1257940817"