Knowledgekid87 (talk | contribs) |
→Reminder of voluntary restrictions: new section |
||
Line 228: | Line 228: | ||
I was working on the schedule for [[Najica Blitz Tactics]] and it is quite crazy as an actual instance where the earliest airdates shifted across midnight. Can you take a look at the verbiage and see if it makes sense? Fortunately Media Arts DB has the right dates based on earliest broadcast. [[User:AngusWOOF|<strong><font color="606060">AngusWOOF</font></strong>]] ([[User talk:AngusWOOF#top|<font color="663300">bark</font>]] • [[Special:Contributions/AngusWOOF|<font color="006600">sniff</font>]]) 21:00, 5 November 2015 (UTC) |
I was working on the schedule for [[Najica Blitz Tactics]] and it is quite crazy as an actual instance where the earliest airdates shifted across midnight. Can you take a look at the verbiage and see if it makes sense? Fortunately Media Arts DB has the right dates based on earliest broadcast. [[User:AngusWOOF|<strong><font color="606060">AngusWOOF</font></strong>]] ([[User talk:AngusWOOF#top|<font color="663300">bark</font>]] • [[Special:Contributions/AngusWOOF|<font color="006600">sniff</font>]]) 21:00, 5 November 2015 (UTC) |
||
:I will take a look at it. - [[User:Knowledgekid87|Knowledgekid87]] ([[User talk:Knowledgekid87#top|talk]]) 23:42, 5 November 2015 (UTC) |
:I will take a look at it. - [[User:Knowledgekid87|Knowledgekid87]] ([[User talk:Knowledgekid87#top|talk]]) 23:42, 5 November 2015 (UTC) |
||
== Reminder of voluntary restrictions == |
|||
Per [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive887#Knowledgekid87 this] community consensus, please stay away from the noticeboards and the user talk pages involved in the RO drama. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 03:26, 16 November 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:26, 16 November 2015
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/19/Wikistress3D_1_v3.jpg/220px-Wikistress3D_1_v3.jpg)
Powerpuff girls original/2016 reboot anxiety
Overnight, I saw the new images of the 2016 Powerpuff Girls reboot and read about the new voice actors. Months ago, I signed a petition by a man named Matthew Coleman on Change.org to bring the Powerpuff Girls' original voices back and at the time it was progressing, it was shared by a former Cartoon Network representative. However although it made progress it didn't get through- but I don't know for sure! Anyway while the new pictures depict the new versions of Blossom Bubbles and Buttercup looking excatly like their original counterparts, but with two mediocre touches, I'm scared that once the new Powerpuff Girls series airs sometime next year it'll be just I'm imagining- Cartoon Network is gonna stop caring about the original Powerpuff Girls series that aired from 1998 to 2005, they and everyone else will take the original for granted, and pretend that it doesn't exist anymore- erase the original PPG series from Cartoon Network's history, as well as the original PPG website on cartoonnetwork.com because of the reboot. Remember the original 2003 Teen Titans series? Cartoon Network took that for granted after Teen Titans Go! premiered at they replaced it with Teen Titans Go!- even its website got replaced on cartoonnetwork.com! That's exactly what's gonna happen to the original Powerpuff Girls series once the new series comes next year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zboogie604 (talk • contribs) 18:26, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
- If it happens it happens, there isn't much you or me can do about it sadly. I don't know why the original cast wasn't brought back, I do know though that the answer to almost everything is: Money. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:41, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
I hope the original doesn't disappear when it comes. It's just that what I'm trying to say from this is what if I'm not ready for the revamped PPG series, I'm too scared to let go of the original and everything associated with it. Zboogie604 (talk • contribs) 18:26, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
- Then don't let go of it, nobody is saying you need to or anything. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:53, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
Tenshinhan
Hello, I started a move discussion at Talk:Tien_Shinhan#Requested_move_14_June_2015 in regards to having the article use Viz Media's official spelling. Since it is the same case as Freeza, I thought you might be interested. Xfansd (talk) 15:22, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- Okay thanks I will check it out. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:23, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
2015 attack on Dallas police has been nominated for Did You Know
Arbitration motion regarding Arbitration enforcement
By motion, the Arbitration Committee authorises the following injunction effective immediately:
- The case is to be opened forthwith and entitled "Arbitration enforcement";
- During the case, no user who has commented about this matter on the AN page, the AE page or the Case Requests page, may take or initiate administrative action involving any of the named parties in this case.
- Reports of alleged breaches of (2) are to be made only by email to the Arbitration Committee, via the main contact page.
You are receiving this message because you have commented about this matter on the AN page, the AE page or the Case Requests page
and are therefore restricted as specified in (2). For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
A word of advice
I personally don't see this comment as overly serious, and I value civility as well, but it's a two way street. You can't expect civility but be uncivil, directly or indirectly (and as someone who is active in dispute resolution, I won't tolerate incivility of any description.). My advice is to really lay low. My experience with editors that have been previously sanctioned, or are under sanctions, is that some people may be waiting for them to slip up. Take my advice - just focus on your article work for a while. And, assume you don't have any (and we will not be having that conversation), but before you write a comment somewhere, try look at it from the point of view of your worst enemy - if they could find fault with it, ask me, or rethink it altogether. Just focus on your article work for a while, OK? (and please, don't archive this that soon). Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 14:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
- Okay, I will lay low as I really want to try to find another article to may a GA out of. What is civility though to you, and if you saw something that you thought was wrong would you just ignore it? As an admin you have to enforce civility as it is a core Wikipedia pillar so I would be interested in hearing your take. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:00, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
- I see you using the word insight repeatedly. Can you tell a bit more precisely what insight you received from looking at my talk archives as recommended? Just one comment - one insight perhaps? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
- I would be happy to at the end of July, I took a quick look though and saw that you do a great job at DYKs - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
- Well, repeating: the task was to look for the (not many) entries by Eric Corbett, formerly known as Malleus Fatuorum. Helping with quotations (all excerpts):
- (first entry) ... Have to warn you though that ... I scare away women, children and new editors. Allegedly. But I'll try and be gentle. 1 Nov 2012
- Ironically, now that the lead's been expanded, I much prefer the uncollapsed infobox. 17 Mar 2013
- ... if I were a betting man I'd say it's quite likely that you'll be admonished ... I know from personal experience how difficult it is to see yourself being discussed for weeks on end, often unfairly, without any effective redress, so keep your chin up. 2 Sep 2013
- To be perfectly honest Gerda I'm not sure I'd encourage anyone to remain here. (same)
- (in reply to WIKI OUTCAST) It's a big club, and one I'm proud to be a member of too. 11 Sep 2013
- Admirable civility and precise language and evaluation of politics, imho. Your turn. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:29, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
- ...and have a group of editors pounce on me if I speak my mind no matter how civil I am? No thank you, not now anyways. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
- Well, repeating: the task was to look for the (not many) entries by Eric Corbett, formerly known as Malleus Fatuorum. Helping with quotations (all excerpts):
Change from announced time table for the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case
You are receiving this message either because you are a party to the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case, because you have commented in the case request, or the AN or AE discussions leading to this arbitration case, or because you have specifically opted in to receiving these messages. Unless you are a party to this arbitration case, you may opt out of receiving further messages at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Notification list. The drafters of the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case have published a revised timetable for the case, which changes what you may have been told when the case was opened. The dates have been revised as follows: the Evidence phase will close 5 July 2015, one week earlier than originally scheduled; the Workshop phase will close 26 July 2015, one week later than originally scheduled; the Proposed decision is scheduled to be posted 9 August 2015, two weeks later than originally scheduled. Thank you. On behalf of the arbitration clerks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:58, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
- @L235: Could you please remove me from the list? I cant comment on the case even if I wanted to. Thanks - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:34, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
- Done. Thanks. L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 18:27, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
dead links
I don't have a clue why you restored dead links at List of The Qwaser of Stigmata manga volumes and List of Samurai Harem: Asu no Yoichi chapters. Every link that goes to Akita Shoten is dead and has been for atleast 4 years. Bgwhite (talk) 06:52, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Bgwhite: The website received an update is all, rather than retype the template for each instance I undid your edits and updated the links. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:00, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
- You didn't redo the links. They are still are dead. Everyone I just tried were dead. Bgwhite (talk) 04:46, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
- I only did List of Samurai Harem: Asu no Yoichi chapters, the other I left the link in the form of a cleanup tag as it will take longer. The new links work for me on the former. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:16, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
- Next time, revert one article to your sandbox and work on it there. If I had a dollar for everytime somebody said they will work on it and never did, I'd be a millionaire. Bgwhite (talk) 06:54, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
- Okay, I jumped in and fixed the Japanese links. ;) AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:28, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
- @AngusWOOF: Thanks! ^-^ - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:27, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
- Okay, I jumped in and fixed the Japanese links. ;) AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:28, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
- Next time, revert one article to your sandbox and work on it there. If I had a dollar for everytime somebody said they will work on it and never did, I'd be a millionaire. Bgwhite (talk) 06:54, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
- I only did List of Samurai Harem: Asu no Yoichi chapters, the other I left the link in the form of a cleanup tag as it will take longer. The new links work for me on the former. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:16, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
- You didn't redo the links. They are still are dead. Everyone I just tried were dead. Bgwhite (talk) 04:46, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#Airdates again: It's time to standardize them once and for all
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#Airdates again: It's time to standardize them once and for all. Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:28, 15 July 2015 (UTC)Template:Z48
- @Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for the heads up! I don't really have a strong opinion on the matter but will go along with whatever consensus comes out of it. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:29, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Note
Wikiprojects are not entities which own pages or topics, they are not arms to exert peer pressure or power. If project members weren't so annoying every time I add a few hundred sources and fix dozens of problems the Wikiproject wouldn't have such an extensive list of "this need fixings now". Some of the problem comes from the fact that people who can't read or write the language feel compelled to insert their opinion on notability and such. I don't like people who find pleasure or take pride in dismantling good pages or sweeping problems under the rug by deleting/redirecting them. Problem is that is the natural tendency of too many people on the Wikiproject. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:12, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
- @ChrisGualtieri: In my view redirects aren't deletions, there are a whole lot of other articles that need the attention much more. I have also added a lot of sources as well as fixed my fair share, the list of articles that need attention has been dwindling to all time lows. [1] If you want to help out, notability is a major issue (400+ articles tagged) I am currently working on sourcing and dead links. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:01, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
- To readers - blank and redirects are the same as deletions because the content is not visible or seen unless a person specifically finds the page, goes back to the unredirected page, clicks on the view history and finds the last version which had meaningful content. None of these actions are commonly known or employed by non-editors. Any anime series by a top-50 studio meets the GNG requirement - most top-500 idols/voice actors and such meet that as well. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:01, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
- Im wondering if there is a way there could be a category for redirects then so they aren't swept under and forgot about then. You are right when you say there is a breakdown to those who don't understand Japanese but if someone is passionate enough about a series I could see a GA article or two. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:44, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
- Look - I'd love to help this project and I had basically dozens of content pushes ready to go - I have more than 40 books on hand, but having someone who cannot read or write follow me around and revert changes to something as simple as removing a spurrious N tag from Tezuka's works is beyond irritating. Editors like TheFarix do not understand what Wikipedia is supposed to be and that's the same issue Ryulong had. TheFarix called me a racist for no reason and won't apologize, instead doubling down like Donald Trump on a field day. You know why I don't have good relationships with members of this Wikiproject - its all the nasty emails from members of this Wikiproject and the hounding. As long as this place continues to be self-run by people who cannot read or write, then I won't be a part of this project because avoiding the main area doesn't help when you are being stalked and harassed. That's why.
- And you are not one of the problems, but you are sometimes careless - as you removed valid well-sourced content in that cited posting from before. Just cause someone didn't cite inline doesn't mean its vandalism. I'm not angry, but I do get annoyed when very basic and sourced info gets removed. The biggest issue is that this project is on the defensive and its expectations and demands go far beyond reason. It is not a positive atmosphere if you desire to improve content and create pages. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:40, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
- Further note, Farix's actions like this which is the problem. It is in the official credit list on the English version. Is 30 seconds before you go warning a well-meaning IP editor too much to ask? Ryulong did this a lot and its why so much good work went to waste and so many people dislike Wikipedia. There is nothing fostering a friendly atmosphere or goodwill - its WARNING DON'T DO THIS OR YOU GET BLOCKED. Shameful? I think so. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:56, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
- @ChrisGualtieri: I have been staying out of the whole airdates debate and apologize for putting you on the spot. I don't like to be talked about behind my back though, yes at one time I did remove good content, I am aware of that but really I focus on where I am at now. If I see a series I like or that interests me that is what I put all of my heart and effort into. I haven't really had any problems with people from the anime/manga wikiproject as it is a big place with lots to do. I ask that you try to keep cool, and don't criticize editors if they make mistakes you feel are plainly visible, everyone has their moments and a gentle reminder is always better than chewing their head off. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:32, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
- If editors from this project weren't threatening others and violating WP:BITE then perhaps I'd be more pleasant. Also, what irritates me is that someone who cannot read or write carrying themselves with authority on an encyclopedia - don't you see the problem with that? The fact that such persons are really unable to search, identify and carryout WP:BEFORE because they don't possess such skills is the largest problem of WP:ANIME. Members of this Wikiproject actually have held the belief that "English-language" notability is required to meet WP:N and that Japanese Wikipedia should cover everything that doesn't. Such statements are beyond foolish and shows not just ignorance, but outright incompetence. I'd like to show some of these said members the proverbial door because these members were behind the original blank and redirecting series like Dragon Ball Z. Ryulong in particular fought for months to prevent the recreation of a stand-alone page. Stuff like that made me so disgusted with this project that I decided to go to WP:NRHP. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:09, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
- Im wondering if there is a way there could be a category for redirects then so they aren't swept under and forgot about then. You are right when you say there is a breakdown to those who don't understand Japanese but if someone is passionate enough about a series I could see a GA article or two. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:44, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
- To readers - blank and redirects are the same as deletions because the content is not visible or seen unless a person specifically finds the page, goes back to the unredirected page, clicks on the view history and finds the last version which had meaningful content. None of these actions are commonly known or employed by non-editors. Any anime series by a top-50 studio meets the GNG requirement - most top-500 idols/voice actors and such meet that as well. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:01, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Potential edit warring in When Marnie Was There
Hello, you're invited and express your views on Talk:When Marnie Was There#Edits reverted without adding summary. Jotamide (talk) 18:51, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
DYK for 2015 attack on Dallas police
Gatoclass (talk) 16:51, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Otakon, Guidebook, and primary sourcing (again...)
Since you spearheaded the Event history cleanup in Otakon, wanted to get your opinion on the latest set of edits that were added. Seems a large amount of history expansion was done using Otakon's Guidebook, a primary source that while not in dispute (most edits were location based), it still raises some issues similar to Event history. Esw01407 (talk) 13:24, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- @Esw01407: I will take a closer look at it later today. The main question we should ask is do we want the event history presented in table or prose format? You are right when you say the information duplicates the event history, but I wish there was some kind of GA article related to a convention to compare Otakon to. I could see Otakon rising up the ranks if it were a bit more organized. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:45, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
List of Digimon Fusion characters
Need your thoughts on List of Digimon Fusion characters. The current editor does not like my bold changes, but not sure what else can be done to structure the article better. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:49, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
- @AngusWOOF: The edits you made that are policy based (MOS) should definitely stay. As for the editor you placed your concerns on the talk-page but he/she may be in another time zone. I am semi busy myself, I will be more free about 5 hours from now or so, for now I would wait for a reply. If there is no reply in that time, I will revert the changes as I feel it is a case of WP:JDLI. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
I started another RM. Make your decision. --George Ho (talk) 18:39, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Motivation of a hopeless new guy on an RfA page
In my mind, while making that edit I was voicing over a potential Administrator preferring to dodge adversarial editorial challenges over addressing them. I feel strongly about Administrators having the capacity to formulate and present arguments under duress; it is not an objection with any roots in personal or political qualities.
Obviously in reality I was making a real mess of things for more than a few people, looking like a clown, and it seems like I might not even get to help out with copyedit due to all this. So it goes.Jasphetamine (talk) 14:14, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
- @Jasphetamine: Innocent until proven guilty is what I am leaning towards here. I do apologize if editors find you suspicious, sock accounts (People who abuse multiple accounts) are a real problem here on Wikipedia. Even if someone is socking and gets caught and blocked it doesn't mean forever. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:17, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
- @Knowledgekid87: It means a lot to hear a slightly more gentle tone in response to this. When I realized what I did I expected the editor/admin response to be targeted at a severe faux-paux, and was unprepared for seeing a growing consensus that I am a sockpuppet and the severe treatment one editor gave me.
- I appreciate you taking the time to respond to my little dilemma greatly; thank you very much. Jasphetamine (talk) 14:26, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
- You are more than welcome =). If you want to ask questions I also recommend the WP:TEAHOUSE. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:37, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Montanabw RfA
I agree with you, and I'll not comment there again. Nice to hear from you! How've you been? RO(talk) 15:15, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
- I have been okay here =), I got my T-ban lifted so it doesn't hang over my head anymore. Other than that, I have been mainly working on anime articles like before. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:17, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
- Its okay no worries, I have distanced myself from leaping in though when it comes to WP:ANI. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:25, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
- Same here lol, I don't know how admins can handle it sometimes. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:27, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
- If it were me a withdrawal would be better than an unsuccessful run, at least then one could look back and say "I wasn't ready" rather than having someone point it out to you. I disagree with one of the people opposing, I think Montana is still very much into wanting the admin job. Anyways, it will be over soon and everyone will go about their way success or no success. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Atsushi Kamijo prod
I removed the prod on Atsushi Kamijo as I was able to find media arts DB detail on the author and a few more ANN articles. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:52, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Alright
I'll keep that in mind. 5.156.127.6 (talk) 15:43, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
RO
Knowledgekid, please stop commenting on the RO situation. As I recall you were under some kind of topic ban regarding this kind of thing. Perhaps it has lapsed, but it would nevertheless be better to stop commenting because it makes things worse. I hope you'll consider staying away from it completely. Sarah (talk) 19:28, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
- My initial comments were addressed towards Montana, nobody else. It is up to her what she does with it. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:30, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
- See, KK87? Once they rally the usual troops via email there is nothing you can do but obey. It's a simple matter of numbers, and they almost always have superior numbers and the associated coordination needed to control almost every situation. I agree with, Sarah. It would be better for you to not get in trouble here, and there's nothing you can do to help really anyway. Don't worry about me. RO(talk) 20:28, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Rationalobserver: I have said my peace, my last bit of advice would be for you to continue editing away from Montana, you had been doing a great job for months. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:30, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
- I know it, but she keeps attacking: ([2]); ([3]), and nobody wants to officially ask her to stop. In 13 months of editing, there are exactly 2 articles that I've edited that MBW edited before me. RO(talk) 20:32, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
- You'll notice the same group of editors are trained to rally to the cause in military-esque precision. You cannot win or even tie them. They know how to overwhelm their opponent, so I suggest you don't bother. Someday enough time will have passed that the cliques power will have faded, but until that time there's no sense getting involved with anything where you see one of them. RO(talk) 15:47, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Rationalobserver: I have known this for awhile now, you cant have a discussion with some people here without a flood of other editors rushing in to defend this is how "dramah" starts. I was lucky this time, I was able to have a decent conversation with Eric about the IBAN before others rushed in. Yes the IBAN might have effected Montana's RfA but comments like "Watching and eating popcorn" on a discussion involving a possible solution to a problem isn't helping either in my view. I wonder if admin have IBANS in place with other editors? I mean there has to be a case out there where an editor, and an admin don't get along and worked out a solution. I wonder if there is another way of going forward other than letting fate and chance decide. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:59, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
- We are out-numbered by an organized clique, so the only options are avoid them or leave. Someday, after a few of these people leave, balance will be restored, but in the meantime, they really cannot be stopped. I think their influence is already waning though, as their attempt to derail Liz's RfA failed miserably, and their attempt to push MBW through RfA failed just as spectacularly. RO(talk) 16:04, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
- At least one of them is pushing 70 years old, so I doubt they can maintain this level of indignant participation for too much longer. RO(talk) 16:42, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Rationalobserver: I have known this for awhile now, you cant have a discussion with some people here without a flood of other editors rushing in to defend this is how "dramah" starts. I was lucky this time, I was able to have a decent conversation with Eric about the IBAN before others rushed in. Yes the IBAN might have effected Montana's RfA but comments like "Watching and eating popcorn" on a discussion involving a possible solution to a problem isn't helping either in my view. I wonder if admin have IBANS in place with other editors? I mean there has to be a case out there where an editor, and an admin don't get along and worked out a solution. I wonder if there is another way of going forward other than letting fate and chance decide. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:59, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Rationalobserver: I have said my peace, my last bit of advice would be for you to continue editing away from Montana, you had been doing a great job for months. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:30, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
- See, KK87? Once they rally the usual troops via email there is nothing you can do but obey. It's a simple matter of numbers, and they almost always have superior numbers and the associated coordination needed to control almost every situation. I agree with, Sarah. It would be better for you to not get in trouble here, and there's nothing you can do to help really anyway. Don't worry about me. RO(talk) 20:28, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
MOS:IDENTITY is being revisited: How should Wikipedia refer to transgender individuals before and after their transition?
You are being contacted because you contributed to a recent discussion of MOS:IDENTITY that closed with the recommendation that Wikipedia's policy on transgender individuals be revisited.
Two threads have been opened at the Village Pump:Policy. The first addresses how the Manual of Style should instruct editors to refer to transgender people in articles about themselves (which name, which pronoun, etc.). The second addresses how to instruct editors to refer to transgender people when they are mentioned in passing in other articles. Your participation is welcome. Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:07, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/Iris_cat.jpg/150px-Iris_cat.jpg)
Thx for the help! Stay awesome! :3 I love love love anime/ manga too! My friend and I had a folder for it!
Glistensnow (talk) 03:06, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
- Aww, and thanks will do! =) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:06, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Corbett saga
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Your various comments on the latest Eric Corbett saga suggest that you have learned nothing at all from your recent topic ban. Please back off: you add nothing useful and you piss people off. - Sitush (talk) 20:16, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- Sitush, will you for once just let EC dig himself out of his own messes without trying to bully all of his detractors into silence? KK87 isn't the only one who always shows up at these drama parties, and he is the least of your problems. EC is a grown man, but you protect him like your underage child. Per Einstein, try a different strategy, because repeating this over and over is madness. RO(talk) 20:22, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- Eric had every right to defend himself but according to the blocking admin that isn't why he was blocked. Agreeing with others are what are considered opinions. You may not agree with them, but others do. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:26, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- Yes. EC had every right to defend himself, but he went too far in denying the existence of the gender gap, which is exactly what he knows he isn't allowed to comment on. Here's proof he knew that ahead of time: ([4]) RO(talk) 20:32, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- I know, and wish Eric didn't take swipes at the gender gap task force. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:38, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- That's the thing though, EC does it with the intent to illicit a strong response. My guess is it's tied somehow to inadequate self-esteem, and he regularly needs reaffirmation that people like him and want him to stay. This is all an orchestrated drama of EC's making, and we are all pawns in his childish game. Really, what grown man acts like that on a regular basis? How embarrassing! RO(talk) 21:22, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- I know, and wish Eric didn't take swipes at the gender gap task force. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:38, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- Yes. EC had every right to defend himself, but he went too far in denying the existence of the gender gap, which is exactly what he knows he isn't allowed to comment on. Here's proof he knew that ahead of time: ([4]) RO(talk) 20:32, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
My concerns are not about Eric, regarding whom I have said nothing in the last few hours. My comment relates to Kk's behaviour. As for you, Ro, well, you are another who should back off - your history is entirely one of opposition to Corbett, whereas mine is not one entirely of support for him. - Sitush (talk) 22:41, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- Sitush, I have no personal grudge against EC, but I am concerned with his problematic behavioral patterns, special treatment, and the aggressive Fan Club that intimidates all detractors. I don't want EC to leave; I want him to stop being a dick. He isn't a messiah sent to lead us from Jimbo, he's just a high-maintenance drama queen. Stop treating him like an immature prima donna, and he might stop acting like one. RO(talk) 23:06, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- What behavior is that, agreeing with an admin's block? It feels like you are taking my edits under a microscope at times, and making things into a huge deal when they aren't. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:54, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- It's a simple and effective strategy. They relentlessly bully all opposition until they outnumber or eliminate them. Most discussions on Wikipedia can be derailed or controlled by 4 or 5 people of the same mind, and that's all it takes to dominate everything. RO(talk) 23:06, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- RO, you have a pronounced grudge and that will be your downfall here. Kk, you simply cannot stay away from drama, which will in due course be your downfall. Both of you, Wikipedia is a MMPORG and you are pissing off the wrong people. In the former case, that is actually very unfortunate because you have clearly demonstrated that you are a very useful contributor and that, if you step away from the grudge issue, you are also reasonably collaborative in my experience.
- It's a simple and effective strategy. They relentlessly bully all opposition until they outnumber or eliminate them. Most discussions on Wikipedia can be derailed or controlled by 4 or 5 people of the same mind, and that's all it takes to dominate everything. RO(talk) 23:06, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- Back at ANI for what? Why are you inserting yourself here? You keep talking like you want to do something but aren't answering anything. @Sitush: I feel like bringing you to ANI for harassment, the last couple of times we have encountered each other you have done nothing but badger me. I ask that you not comment here again after this discussion is closed. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:37, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Corbett versus Jimbo
I admire your tenacity, but wonder if you aren't wasting your time. IMO, the crux of the rivalry has more to do with Jimbo's celebrity and Corbett's lack thereof than it has to do with an actual concrete issue that could be resolved. Do you really think they can come to an understanding? RO(talk) 20:48, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
AFAIK, JW can't be blocked or banned. GoodDay (talk) 20:56, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
- That's interesting, but how does it relate to the feud? RO(talk) 21:01, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
- It creates an uneven playing field. Nothing is more frustrating then being under topic bans and/or restrictions. Believe me, I know. GoodDay (talk) 21:04, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah, I suppose so, but why would a grown man have such difficulty avoiding just one person and one topic, both of which he seems to despise? At some point the community will need to hold EC accountable for his actions like it does for everyone else. That's the only way this saga will ever end. Or, EC can decide to stop disrupting Wikipedia and go on with things he's good at, but he is consciously not doing that because of the reinforcement he gets when he acts out. If the enablers stopped their coddling, and EC just served his blocks like everybody else, we might be able to move past this. RO(talk) 21:20, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
- Arbcom will have to decide for themselves, if an editor should remain or not. FWIW, EC never requested an unblock. GoodDay (talk) 21:29, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
- Right, he never requests an unblock, but he never needs to either, as so many of his supporters line up to do it for him. Has he ever asked any of the usual suspects to stop raising hell every single time he gets blocked? FWIW, I think he's a fine contributor who just isn't willing to play by the same rules as everyone else. Anybody else who behaved the way he does would be site-banned, so why shouldn't he? RO(talk) 21:32, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
- Arbcom will have to decide for themselves, if an editor should remain or not. FWIW, EC never requested an unblock. GoodDay (talk) 21:29, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah, I suppose so, but why would a grown man have such difficulty avoiding just one person and one topic, both of which he seems to despise? At some point the community will need to hold EC accountable for his actions like it does for everyone else. That's the only way this saga will ever end. Or, EC can decide to stop disrupting Wikipedia and go on with things he's good at, but he is consciously not doing that because of the reinforcement he gets when he acts out. If the enablers stopped their coddling, and EC just served his blocks like everybody else, we might be able to move past this. RO(talk) 21:20, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
- It creates an uneven playing field. Nothing is more frustrating then being under topic bans and/or restrictions. Believe me, I know. GoodDay (talk) 21:04, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
- The biggest change I want to see is for editors on both sides to stop the encouragement. You may think you are helping defend but you are only making things more complex, ignoring if you can I feel is a better strategy. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:57, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
You may opt-out of future notifications related to this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 5, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. For this case, there will be no Workshop phase. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Liz Read! Talk! 13:18, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Please express your opinion on a different name for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (2015)
I have offered a new name: "2015 Palestinian unrest"
Explaination to this, regarding concerns brought up by other users is the the offer's section. Please express your opinion on this name.
There is no use answering me here, it's better to answer me here: talk:Israeli-Palestinian conflict (2015)#M. 2015 Palestinian unrest --Bolter21 (talk to me) 18:35, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Airdates after midnight, a complicated example
I was working on the schedule for Najica Blitz Tactics and it is quite crazy as an actual instance where the earliest airdates shifted across midnight. Can you take a look at the verbiage and see if it makes sense? Fortunately Media Arts DB has the right dates based on earliest broadcast. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:00, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
- I will take a look at it. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:42, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Reminder of voluntary restrictions
Per this community consensus, please stay away from the noticeboards and the user talk pages involved in the RO drama. Viriditas (talk) 03:26, 16 November 2015 (UTC)