User talk:TMC1982/Archive 13

Category:Mighty Morphin Power Rangers

While this category is a good idea, Zyuranger, Dairanger, and Kakuranger do not belong in it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:51, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you going to be making categories for all Power Rangers series/seasons?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:57, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You know, an answer to either of these would have been good before you went ahead and did it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:23, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Star Wars cats

Greetings. Just wondering why you feel the new Star Wars categories you created are notable/useful? They seem to be WP:OVERCAT at first glance. DP76764 (Talk) 19:21, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Captain America (Marvel animated universe)

The article Captain America (Marvel animated universe) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

For the same reasons out lined with regard to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flash (DC animated universe), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wonder Woman (DC animated universe), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blade (Marvel animated universe), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doctor Strange (Marvel animated universe), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superman (DC animated universe), and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/S.H.I.E.L.D. (Marvel animated universe). This article is a creation of original research that pulls information from various Wikipedia articles on comic book characters. This makes for an unneeded, pooorly executed content fork.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. J Greb (talk) 16:02, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Die Hard films on television

I have nominated Die Hard films on television, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Die Hard films on television. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 23:48, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Running Man Barnstar

		The Running Man Barnstar
		I award you this barnstar for your outstanding diligence in at least three articles. I read The NHL Network (1975–79), NHL on NBC and List of Stanley Cup Finals broadcasters each for the first time today and, I must say, you definitely help to elevate the level of research on Wikipedia. Keep up the great work. The Ink Daddy! (talk) 02:21, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Captain America (Marvel animated universe)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Captain America (Marvel animated universe), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Captain America (Marvel animated universe). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. J Greb (talk) 22:24, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of Spider-Man film characters (video games)

The article List of Spider-Man film characters (video games) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

In the vein of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Fantastic Four film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Hulk film series, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Superman film series - This is a backfill list that is built soley on sections copied in full from other article. Additionally, it implise that the character listed appeared in the films, something that is definetly not the case. It also looks beyond the games released in conjunction with the films to "pad out" the list and text.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. J Greb (talk) 22:40, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of Iron Man film characters (video games)

The article List of Iron Man film characters (video games) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

In the vein of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Fantastic Four film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Hulk film series, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Superman film series - This is a backfill list that is built soley on sections copied in full from other article. Additionally, it implise that the character listed appeared in the films, something that is definetly not the case. It also looks beyond the games released in conjunction with the films to "pad out" the list and text.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. J Greb (talk) 22:40, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of storylines adapted in the Marvel animated universe

The article List of storylines adapted in the Marvel animated universe has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

For the same reasons outlines with regard to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of locations in the Superman film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Superman film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Hulk film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Fantastic Four film series, and most explicitly Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of storylines adapted in films based on Marvel Comics.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. J Greb (talk) 23:53, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tie-breaker broadcasters

Look at List of Super Bowl champions, List of NBA champions, List of World Series champions, and List of Stanley Cup champions. All featured lists, all far larger television events than a game needed only sometimes by happenstance with no television contract, and none have this information. And such information would be far more easily cited than for, for example, Super Bowl broadcasts. I will continue to revert (and feel free to nominate things for deletion where I feel justified) because it is simply silly. This is a list of the games, not tertiary, half-filled, uncited information related to them. It also doesn't list the managers of the teams involved. It also doesn't list the temperature at game time. It doesn't list a lot of things, because overfilling the tables with every factoid would remove the usability. And I nominated the stand-alone list for deletion because there is absolutely no evidence of outside, WP:RS-passing coverage of the topic to even satisfy WP:GNG. Trust me, I know, I had to try and find sourcing for 2009 World Series' broadcasting section and that was the most recent championship series. Broadcasters simply do not garner particularly notable coverage to justify their own article (IMO, but remember that was just a nomination. The community had to agree to bring about the deletion), and are tangential enough to have no place in a list of the games themselves. Staxringold _talk^contribs 01:50, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I note that a large number of them appear to be articles of your doing, edited largely/exclusively by you. See, for example, List of FIFA World Cup Finals broadcasters which is heavily unformatted, almost entirely uncited, and wildly US-centric (particularly for an event that isn't anywhere near as big in the US as in the rest of the world). Again, List of Super Bowl champions has no broadcaster info and one of the biggest annual television events in the world. And List of Super Bowl broadcasters, which you heavily edit, is again almost completely uncited. Staxringold _talk^contribs 02:02, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At no point did I attack your value as an editor. But suggesting that there is some community need for these articles (which are poorly cited, no two ways about it) when you are the predominant editor to them and my brief AFD of this broadcaster list drew no opposition from the community is somewhat questionable. WP:GNG is a clear-set standard for stand-alone articles (which I am not sole arbiter of, all I do is AFD where I think it's warranted), and a whole host of Wikipedia guidelines speak to why tertiary, heavily uncited info shouldn't be wantonly added to existing articles. Staxringold _talk^contribs 02:23, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Shot"

Again I refer you to the David Tyree catch, wholly separate from the article on the Super Bowl it occured in, or Willie Mays' The Catch (baseball) from the 1954 World Series it occured in. Sadly, currently, our coverage of the older tie-breakers is imperfect and the series article doesn't exist. But this hugely notable "moment" should be a completely separate article (that doesn't go into the series as a whole except as it relates to what this play did for the series, namely end it) from the "series". Staxringold _talk^contribs 01:54, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will. You'll note I've been working backwards (though I may skip back to the 48 game to help Wizardman on his topic drive for the 48 Indians) and have gotten through 09, 08, 07, 99, 98, and 95 was already done. It's just that the further back you go the harder sources are to dig up. Staxringold _talk^contribs 02:03, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:15, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Broadcasting refs

Thanks for digging those up! One last thing, would you mind formatting them a bit using a template like {{cite news}}? Currently you've just posted links with a long quote and date. Staxringold _talk^contribs 13:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I left it here a week ago, not "the other day". And no you are not solely responsible, but when you are the one adding the content yes you are at least partially responsible. I'm not going to take time out of my day to fix wildly messy references you add that add little to articles already recognized by he community to be of high quality. Staxringold _talk^contribs 00:08, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And if you have "better things to do" than properly format your references, please don't just throw links onto a page and expect someone else to clean up your mess. Staxringold _talk^contribs 00:12, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, the difference is you threw those links on the page. If you aren't going to reference properly, please don't make a mess and assume others will do the technical work for you. Staxringold _talk^contribs 00:17, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not me you have trouble working with, it's the basic Manual of Style and WP:GNG, apparently. Your gargantuan 200+ KB, wildly overreferenced (if underformatted) List of WS broadcasters falls under the same issues. Staxringold _talk^contribs 00:28, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DCAU Lists

Bluntly:

The list you are protecting fall into the style that have been flat out deleted through AFDs - back filled, carbon-copy lists you have created from the "In other media" sections of other articles.
The relevant lists were created and moved out of being sub-pages of the DCAU master list. Sadly I got distracted by other thing and didn't finish the clean up/removal of these "lists".
Thank you for reminding us all that they need to be wound up.

- J Greb (talk) 13:48, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it isn't that copyright is being violated, per se. But at the very least the spirit of the GFDL is - you copy verbatim an article under that and you have to provide full attribution. What you've been doing doesn't acknowledge in any way, shape, or form that the material is pulled whole cloth from other Wikipedia articles.

And it gets worse. You state "The character lists as a whole are about a strictly, "centeralized" point of information (i.e. one particular TV series or film)." That's bunk based on the information you decided to copy. You included information listing not only characters that appeared in a show, but:

Characters that appeared in spin-off media - The comics are not the shows.
Characters that appeared in other related series - Appearances in Static Shock, Justice League, or Justice League Unlimited are not relevant for a list of appearances in BTAS ot STAS.
Characters that never appeared but are implied.
In the case of the DCAU JSA, creating a list that reflects a team that does not exist by name with in the series.

And frankly, this is the same editing practice that has gotten the majority, if not all, of the "lists" and "character" you created for comics adaptations deleted through AFD and PROD.

Last thing: a list can be, and in this case should be as simple as possible. A master list at List of DC animated universe characters, the end intent here, is a desirable thing. It gives an easy, concise list of the characters that appeared in a particular show. And the character names are linked to the relevant sections of other articles for expanded information, so that information doesn't need to be nut-shelled. Right now the biggest stumbling block is how to sort the characters with in the show sections. Currently they're set up by "Protagonist", "Antagonist" and "Supporting cast & cameos" though other schema are possible such as "Adapted character", "New characters based on..." and "New characters created for..."

- J Greb (talk) 15:39, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Star Trek cats

Hello, I'd ask that you stop creating and modifying categories relating to Star Trek. On one hand, there's the question of whether we need categories that will hold at most three or four items (Category:Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home). Secondly, you are mislabeling many articles with improper categories (Genesis II (film), Yesterday's Enterprise. I don't want to have to go back and clean up these issues. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 14:47, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if you feel I'm patronizing, but the point stands. Do I have to nominate the categories for deletion? Yesterday's Enterprise has nothing important to do with the recent Star Trek film. Adding categories to an article that barely references another film is a waste. No, I don't own the articles, but since I'm the only one building and maintaining them, I do have a vested interest in them. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 01:32, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry... noticed this since I'm watching this talk page re the above thread...

I have to concur with David Fuchs - the categories you've created are either "microcats" with 3 or 4 core related articles (films I - X) or very confusingly title (the one that is assumably for film XI).

General practice is that if a category for articles covers 3-6 related core articles, it doesn't need to exist since the articles themselves should be fully interlinked. And frankly CFD tends to delete these under WP:SMALLCAT.

And even if you were to clearly define the cat with text to the effect of "Collecting articles related to Trek film N including soundtrack, music, props, ships, characters, concepts, and characters" (remember we don't categorize actors, producers, directors, etc by project), it's still likely to be deleted under multiple overcatigorization issues including, but not limited to: WP:OC#OPINION, WP:OC#SUBJECTIVE, and WP:OC#ARBITRARY due to tenuous linkages.

And IIRC you've been down this route before with multiple television and sports related categories.

- J Greb (talk) 02:33, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marvel Animation "lists"

Consider the Silver Surfer a start since you are absolutely correct - they all should go.
Using Wikias as sources is a no go. Please stop. Now.

- J Greb (talk) 05:01, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Characters in Iron Man (1994 TV series)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Characters in Iron Man (1994 TV series), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Characters in Iron Man (1994 TV series). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. J Greb (talk) 06:38, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Characters in The Incredible Hulk (1996 TV series)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Characters in The Incredible Hulk (1996 TV series), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Characters in The Incredible Hulk (1996 TV series). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. J Greb (talk) 06:38, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Characters in Fantastic Four (1994 TV series)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Characters in Fantastic Four (1994 TV series), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Characters in Fantastic Four (1994 TV series). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. J Greb (talk) 06:38, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Characters in The Avengers: United They Stand

An article that you have been involved in editing, Characters in The Avengers: United They Stand, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Characters in The Avengers: United They Stand. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. J Greb (talk) 06:38, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Film related Batman lists

Category:Film related Batman lists, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:27, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of characters in the Batman film series

The article List of characters in the Batman film series has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

For the same reasons outlines with regard to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Fantastic Four film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Hulk film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Superman film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of locations in films based on Marvel Comics, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of locations in the Superman film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of objects used in films based on Marvel Comics, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of storylines adapted in films based on Marvel Comics. :This list is a back-fill construction made from full sections of the articles it points to. There is little or no attempt to summarize the information from those articles, it is just copied and pasted in place. :We have had a number of like content fork lists come through AfD and PROD from this editor, the bulk of which have resulted in the removal of the cut-and-paste lists. This is becoming disruptive - the discovery of new or additional like "lists" after the last batch has been deleted and having to go through the same presentation that "Yes, it's cut-and-past. Yes, it's an unneeded back-fill. And yes it is a carbon copy of already existing material.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. J Greb (talk) 21:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of locations used in the Batman film series

The article List of locations used in the Batman film series has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

For the same reasons outlines with regard to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Fantastic Four film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Hulk film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Superman film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of locations in films based on Marvel Comics, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of locations in the Superman film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of objects used in films based on Marvel Comics, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of storylines adapted in films based on Marvel Comics. :This list is a back-fill construction made from full sections of the articles it points to. There is little or no attempt to summarize the information from those articles, it is just copied and pasted in place. :We have had a number of like content fork lists come through AfD and PROD from this editor, the bulk of which have resulted in the removal of the cut-and-paste lists. This is becoming disruptive - the discovery of new or additional like "lists" after the last batch has been deleted and having to go through the same presentation that "Yes, it's cut-and-past. Yes, it's an unneeded back-fill. And yes it is a carbon copy of already existing material.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. J Greb (talk) 21:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of objects used in the Batman film series

The article List of objects used in the Batman film series has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

For the same reasons outlines with regard to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Fantastic Four film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Hulk film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in the Superman film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of locations in films based on Marvel Comics, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of locations in the Superman film series, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of objects used in films based on Marvel Comics, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of storylines adapted in films based on Marvel Comics. :This list is a back-fill construction made from full sections of the articles it points to. There is little or no attempt to summarize the information from those articles, it is just copied and pasted in place. :We have had a number of like content fork lists come through AfD and PROD from this editor, the bulk of which have resulted in the removal of the cut-and-paste lists. This is becoming disruptive - the discovery of new or additional like "lists" after the last batch has been deleted and having to go through the same presentation that "Yes, it's cut-and-past. Yes, it's an unneeded back-fill. And yes it is a carbon copy of already existing material.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. J Greb (talk) 21:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

/* Good Articles */ 1998 National League Wild Card tie-breaker game GA

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, thanks

This user helped promote 1998 National League Wild Card tie-breaker game to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:40, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Star Trek music

Hi, you added a well-sourced new section to the middle of List of Star Trek composers and music. I can't tell whether you wrote it yourself, but it seems to be very good work!

The page is currently unbalanced, and I think your contribution needs to be moved to the top, with the "list" parts demoted and a new intro. Maybe the page should be moved to Star Trek music. What do you think? - Fayenatic (talk) 19:54, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chiming in- Trek

Although I am not satisfied with the policy, it is actually official Wikipedia protocol these days that Imdb is "not a reliable source". This seems to me to be due to the fact that there have been errors in its "trivia" sections. IMO, the "unreliable" stigma should only apply to the trivia sections and not the rest of Imdb, but that is currently not Wikipedia policy. I'll let the guy who has been reverting you trace down the statement and revert you, but while you have my sympathies, I think for now you are fighting a losing battle.--WickerGuy (talk) 12:28, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and David Fuchs is saying that Imdb IS user-contributed.--WickerGuy (talk) 12:30, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB is reliable for things such as cast lists and credits. But sections such as FAQs[1] are all user-contributed. This makes them as disallowable a source as a wiki. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 13:27, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Differences between James Bond novels and films

I have nominated Differences between James Bond novels and films, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Differences between James Bond novels and films. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Weaponbb7 (talk) 04:41, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RFC on your conduct

RFC/USER discussion concerning you (TMC1982)

Hello, TMC1982. Please be aware that a request for comments has been filed concerning your conduct on Wikipedia. The RFC entry can be found by your name in this list, and the actual discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/TMC1982, where you may want to participate. Weaponbb7 (talk) 22:09, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]