Revision as of 00:27, 24 December 2010 view sourceRyulong (talk | contribs)218,132 editsm Reverted edits by Fifteen501 (talk) to last version by Ryulong← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:16, 24 December 2010 view source Fifteen501 (talk | contribs)337 edits →Gyarados: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 139: | Line 139: | ||
As with Vanipeti, Vaniritchi and Baivanira, shouldn't Baruchai become "Vulchai" and "Barujīna" "Vuljina"?{{unsigned|Fifteen501}} | As with Vanipeti, Vaniritchi and Baivanira, shouldn't Baruchai become "Vulchai" and "Barujīna" "Vuljina"?{{unsigned|Fifteen501}} | ||
:No.—<font color="blue">Ryūlóng</font> (<font color="Gold">竜龙</font>) 22:06, 23 December 2010 (UTC) | :No.—<font color="blue">Ryūlóng</font> (<font color="Gold">竜龙</font>) 22:06, 23 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
== Gyarados == | |||
Yes, Gyarados is not separate from Ring-Ring, but she appears in many episodes. I will remove the entire section on Gyarados and will not add it back. However she will be part of the "Ring-Ring" section, because the character exists but is not separate from Ring Ring. |
Revision as of 01:16, 24 December 2010
Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page by using either the "new section" tab or this link. |
Please sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). If you do not sign your comments, I may remove them entirely. |
Please keep your comments short and to the point. I do not want to read essays on this page. |
I will revert and ignore any basic template messages used on my talk page. If you want to talk to me, use your own words. |
I prefer to keep conversations on one page. If I left a message for you on your user talk page, I prefer to respond to you there. |
My local time: January 2025 7 Tuesday 11:19 am EST |
Archives
|
---|
|
When I find that the conversations or issues discussed here have either ended or resolved, they will be inserted into my archives at my own discretion.—Ryūlóng
"Cannabis Corpse" should not be salted
I was looking over the backlog of Fair Use images not in articles and found which is scheduled for December 5 deletion. There are many Google references including a secondary-ish which points at them. There's even a site from Sweden: . I actually have very little interest in the topic, but because the Cannabis Corpse article was deleted and salted I can't myself start a basic stub to hang the fair use image on. Please fix? Wnt (talk) 11:34, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not an admin anymore.
- The subject still fails WP:MUSIC
- I'm glad I could be of service.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:08, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
- Looks like multiple non-trivial published works to me. But I don't have the patience to win an AfD just to start a stub article, so I'll just pitch the stuff somewhere it doesn't belong. Wnt (talk) 20:24, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
- I can't do anything about it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:53, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
- Looks like multiple non-trivial published works to me. But I don't have the patience to win an AfD just to start a stub article, so I'll just pitch the stuff somewhere it doesn't belong. Wnt (talk) 20:24, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Buredoran
- i apologized for making buredoran page. but if u have time, can u make buredoran page. just like what shadow moon page has! :) or even u can make the entire goseiger villains page :D - User:Jbr999
- Shadow Moon is a unique case. Buredoran is not.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 10:33, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
- But the Goseiger/Shinkenger crossover has Buredoran in a Gedoushu form.131.247.129.232 (talk) 16:24, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
- We'll figure that out later.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:41, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
- But the Goseiger/Shinkenger crossover has Buredoran in a Gedoushu form.131.247.129.232 (talk) 16:24, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
- Shadow Moon is a unique case. Buredoran is not.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 10:33, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
- i apologized for making buredoran page. but if u have time, can u make buredoran page. just like what shadow moon page has! :) or even u can make the entire goseiger villains page :D - User:Jbr999
Why are you using "Buredoran of Chimatsuri" instead of "Buredoran of the Chimatsuri"? All of the names have "the" in it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:36, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
- I see where you're getting at, though there are special cases where "the" is not used if it sounds like bad grammar.131.247.129.232 (talk) 21:40, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
- Ok.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:16, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
English Names Of Tsutarja , Mijumaru & Pokabu on Best Wishes Article.
Ok thanks for telling me , i'l ask in the future. But when will we have the english names up on the article , when the anime comes out in english , i assume 79.194.95.33 (talk) 18:56, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
- Once Best Wishes! is dubbed into English, then the article will be full of the English names of all of the characters, places, and Pokémon. Because we do not have everyone's names in English, it is better to use the Japanese names now, and just change everything later. That is why we use "Satoshi" instead of "Ash" at this stage.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:58, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Need help: remaked Climax Heroes series character tables.
Similiar to the other wikipedia that has a tabled character appearances liked in MvC series, Naruto Ultimate Ninja series, Tekken series. I kinda screwed & messed up to make that remake. It's makes me puke.
- Tables are not needed.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:24, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Visits table?
Do you want me to build One of these for the American version's page? It might get really big, so I need to know how to make the table show up in two columns. 174.1.48.24 (talk) 01:34, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- You can't really make a table like that have two columns.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:58, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- I figured it out by looking here. So do you want me to make it, or do you think it's unnecessary. 174.1.48.24 (talk) 02:15, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- Go ahead.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:28, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, actually that doesn't really work for what you want to do.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:34, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- I figured it out by looking here. So do you want me to make it, or do you think it's unnecessary. 174.1.48.24 (talk) 02:15, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Reminder: Assume good faith
You've certainly had enough experience to know the assume good faith guideline, yet you seem to have forgotten it on 76.203.72.184's talk page. I have replaced your warnings with a friendly message assuming good faith and which is more likely to work (You do catch more flies with honey than vinegar after all!). Signed by Barts1a Suggestions/compliments? Complaints and constructive criticism? 11:23, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- And I apologise in advance, if you like, to both of you. I have reverted the last edit by Barts1a to leave all contributions showing, which in my view is the correct approach, given that again IMHO the edits by Ryulong were acceptable, if a little terse. --Anthony Bradbury 12:21, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- Well, Anthony, Barts1a has been blocked for a week concerning these edits.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:05, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
- Ref your edit on my talk-page; his last edit was 05.34, your warning 06.00 and he has no edited since. Block is not appropriate unless he vandalises after your final warning. --Anthony Bradbury 11:23, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
- If he edits again today can the IP be blocked?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
User talk:Brian barghout
Could you please comment on the unblock request? Thanks. Ronhjones 19:52, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
- Do what you think is right. I can't do anything about it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:38, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
December 2010
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for your disruption caused by edit warring by violation of the three-revert rule. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:48, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
Ryulong (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have done everything to engage the other parties in discussion over the content of a policy page, while the other parties (User:Pmanderson) continued to edit war while the discussion took place. This block now hinders any possible attempts I can make to further discussion as well as contribute to the project in other ways that I normally do. A week four-day long block is a bit excessive and I don't know what the "removing report from AN3" part is about (as seen in my block log) and 3RR blocks never escalate in length like this, regardless of the fact that I was blocked for 3RR in August and September of this year for 24 hours each day. My block should most definitely not be a week 4 days long, when Pmanderson's block is only 12 hours and he has twice as many 3RR blocks (and blocks overall) than I do.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:59, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Decline reason:
None of this justifies edit-warring. You have edit-warring blocks going back to 2006 and should have learned that by now. You and Pmanderson should consider yourselves lucky that both blocks were not much longer. Sandstein 08:25, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
- I'm sorry, I misread about deleting the AN report. I'll redact the log and shorten the block to 96 hours. That said, you made six reverts. And then length of the block is because frankly previous blocks are clearly not getting through that this edit warring has to stop. Perhaps the fact that previous block lengths didn't escalate is causing you to take it for granted.
- As for hindering the building of the encyclopedia: I'm thinking the tendency of edit warring is more harmful than having a clause slightly off in AN3. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:04, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- A week is a bit much. And edit warring over trying to restore the original reading of a policy page does not really harm the project as much as edit warring over live content. I know I should not have edit warred, but the manual of style was being continually edited in the face of the standing consensus and over an aspect that simply does not make sense to keep. And four days is still a bit much, especially that the page has been protected, I did not revert Pmanderson's last edit to the page (tagging the whole thing with "disputed"), and that Pmanderson was particularly disruptive in some of his subsequent edits to the page (tagging the whole thing as an essay and referring to my stance on the guideline).—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:06, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- To those of you reading on WP:AN3 and WP:ANI, I attempted to go through with the Misplaced Pages:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. However, Pmanderson kept on modifying the page despite my attempts to initiate discussion. I know this is my third block this year for edit warring, but every single time I revert a bold change and initiate discussion, the other party reverts back and the edit war begins. I can't request protection in these cases because it gets thrown out as a content dispute, but that's the only way to enforce discussion outside of the edit war. Unblocking both myself and Pmanderson will allow us to work on discussing the manuals of style now rather than in four days when I'm unblocked and Pmanderson has full reign over WP:MOS-JA without any opposition to his interpretation of policy because some of you are suggesting the protection be lifted. And Pmanderson has a much longer history of this kind of disruption than I do.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:11, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- Silver seren, Pmanderson was bold and made the change, and I reverted and then initiated discussion. And consensus was with the original version of the page before Pmanderson ever edited it. If Pmanderson had kept to discussion rather than repeatedly disrupting the status quo of the guideline and changing the meaning of my attempts to clarify a statement, the edit war would have obviously not happened. Long before the edit war even started and then even before it got into the 3RR territory, I attempted to initiate discussion, but Pmanderson just continued to modify the page, even if two other people arrived to side with his edits. That does not make a consensus against my edits. There was no consensus in either direction, so no edits should have been continued to be made to the page to make it appear that one side had consensus over the other.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:28, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Sandstein, my block in 2006 was a mistaken block when I was reverting either vandalism or a banned user (not sure which at this time). Besides, the first 3RR block that has been left in place on my account was this year. It is entirely unfair that Pmanderson is only blocked for 12 hours, when he was disrupting the page while edit warring. Either my block should be cut down to the same length as Pmanderson's or Pmanderson should be blocked for as long as I am.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:32, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm not saying I was right in doing what I did. But the length disparity between my block and Pmanderson's is wrong and Magog the Ogre even admited that he was being too lenient to Pmanderson.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:54, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).Ryulong (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
(Sent by e-mail to Sandstein 11:19, 11 December 2010 (UTC)) I am asking for one of two things here
Either shorten my block to match Pmanderson's block of 12 hours.
Or extend Pmanderson's block to 4 days like mine currently is.
Any block from before 2009 on my account was done in error. In fact, one of the blocks from 2009 was also in error as the edit warring stopped hours before the block was put in place, and the dispute was settled, too.
Pmanderson has been blocked and was kept blocked almost every single time he was blocked and I'm tired of being punished for being desysopped and it being expected of me to be aware of every single time I break policy.
I honestly don't care which you do, but it's unfair that I was blocked for a week at first and now for 4 days, and he is only blocked for half a day.
Decline reason:
6RR is a bit much to be complaining about "be aware of every single time I break policy". SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:03, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
I have received the above request per mail and am posting it here for review by another admin. In my opinion, the block duration of Ryulong is, if anything, too short in view of his previous blocks for edit-warring. The block duration of Pmanderson is not subject to review in the context of an unblock request by Ryulong, see WP:NOTTHEM. Sandstein 11:19, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Re your email
Hi Ryulong. You're right; upon further review, it became obvious to me that Pmanderson received far too short of a block. But here's the thing, shortening a block is non-confrontational; lengthening a block is however a bit of a dick move. It's like this: if the judge lets you off easy for doing drugs, he's not going to come back a few days later and lengthen the sentence; but if he realizes it was too long, he may have leniency and shorten it.
Really Sandstein is correct though, PMA is immaterial in this case because we're talking about you. I'm afraid if you think I should lengthen his block, I'll have to take it to ANI for it to be reviewed.
But I don't think shortening the block on your account is a good idea. I believe 4 days is appropriate, and really would have been appropriate for PMA as well. This is due to your recent history of edit warring and the fact that you're clearly not getting the point with shorter blocks. Per WP:BLOCK: "incidents of disruptive behaviour typically result in 24 hours blocks, longer for successive violations." But you're a former admin, so you should have known that.
Therefore, the fact that anyone else that would have "had your back" in this dispute is not relevant- you're still edit warring. And frankly you're exhibiting a bit of WP:MPOV by asserting that the other party is edit warring but not admitting you too were doing it.
Mind you I feel awful blocking someone who was editing before I ever was, but I have to enforce things fairly at AN3. Magog the Ogre (talk) 12:17, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- What about just cutting my block down in half? A four day block is still excessive after my last block three months ago was only for 24 hours. I have articles that I want to edit today (or tomorrow) that have nothing to do with the edit war, and Pmanderson is now allowed to edit despite his excessive disruptive edits that took place during the edit war. Meanwhile, I'm fucked over till Wednesday night. This "former admin" shit is so annoying. I shouldn't be treated with a heavier hand because I was the heavier hand.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:52, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- I do everything I god damn can to avoid edit warring. I left a message for the user. I initiated a talk page discussion. But I always get screwed over by the other party because they just restore their preferred version of the page despite every single step I take to come to a consensus over the content. This happened in both of my last two blocks and it most certainly happened in this block. The page is protected now, and there's no way for me to even work on finding out a way to solve the problem and come to an agreement on what to do with the policy, rather than edit warring over some inconsequential article content.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:01, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- How about this: I cut the block length in half, simply out of fairness because Pmanderson got off easier. However, I place in your block log this note: "unblocked under the condition that all edit warring will stop; user agrees next edit warring block is to be for 10 days". It's kind of dickish but I think you understand why I'm doing it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:31, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- Deal, even though it will prevent me from updating the page I normally update on Sundays.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:38, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- How about this: I cut the block length in half, simply out of fairness because Pmanderson got off easier. However, I place in your block log this note: "unblocked under the condition that all edit warring will stop; user agrees next edit warring block is to be for 10 days". It's kind of dickish but I think you understand why I'm doing it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:31, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
I need your help.
And well this is a serious one since some idiot is editing this topic: List of all Jewelpets in Appearance. I don't remember Sanrio stating Angelite is a fox and Jasper is a Dragon and I keep on removing it again and he keeps on adding it. You need to clarify this. I NEED YOUR HELP FOR ONCE~! ;A;Blackgaia02 (talk) 01:33, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
- I don't know what you're talking about.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:36, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Rider Movies
I hope you're gonna make new articles for Double Returns and Kamen Rider 40th Movie because I suck at making new article and I'm tired.
Web Sites: w-returns, all-rider
You don't have to if you don't want to, just wondering what to do with them beacause we cant put a cast and web site fro "Returns" and we can't put "The Movie" in all Kamen Rider show articles (or can we?) because there is nothing to confirm it is Ichigo's, Den-O's, or OOO'.
~Xtreme2010~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 03:36, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- W Returns are V-Cinemas and we don't have anything extensive about it, so it's getting a section on the KRW page for now. I haven't seen anything for "All Rider" yet but I'll figure out somewhere to put it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:38, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- Current title, Kamen Rider Birth 40th Anniversary Commemoration Movie (仮面ライダー生誕40周年記念映画, Kamen Raidā Tanjō Yonjushūnen Kinen Eiga). ~Xtreme2010~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 03:48, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure there should be another long u in there, and I don't think that's the current title.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:02, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- Well, it can be read as "Yonjūshūnen" however the correct saying would be "Yonjushūnen". And I meant it as a temporary title. ~Xtreme2010~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 04:39, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- Jusshūnen.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:41, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- yeah. ~Xtreme2010~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 04:48, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- Jusshūnen.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:41, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- Well, it can be read as "Yonjūshūnen" however the correct saying would be "Yonjushūnen". And I meant it as a temporary title. ~Xtreme2010~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 04:39, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure there should be another long u in there, and I don't think that's the current title.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:02, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- Current title, Kamen Rider Birth 40th Anniversary Commemoration Movie (仮面ライダー生誕40周年記念映画, Kamen Raidā Tanjō Yonjushūnen Kinen Eiga). ~Xtreme2010~ ( ★ AlienX2009 ★ ) 03:48, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Release Date
I know we aren't Bulbapedia but Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia for all the info possible. Also, I did my research and I found a reliable source(you just need to know where to look).http://www.pokemonblackwhite.com/en-us/zorua/ (look at the bottom of the page, read carefully)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolg863 (talk • contribs)
- Okay. THat's a reliable source.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:56, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Kamen Rider's DiEnd K-Touch (Current revision as of 07:39, 19 December 2010)
Actually my only purpose is simply "to make things clear", and since I'm new on this, I'm very sorry if it's not according to rule. The previous revision stating how Diend's works like Decade's simply doesn't work in my mind, since he never used it in same way, something I thought as a "radical guessing" itself (please correct me if I used wrong phrase). The current revision is much better, and I like it.
Again, sorry, and thank you. May someday I learn how to contribute well, just like you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Estradael (talk • contribs)
- Your information just is not important to the article. I know you mean well, but it has no place on Misplaced Pages.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:38, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Bulbapedia Pokedex entries
So now we can't even use those? wth. They will be changed immediately once the actual English versions are available, but for now it would be nice if we could have sourced biographies. Blake 14:59, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Oh, mybad. I didn't see you reverted yourself. Blake 16:53, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
- I didn't realize we had a template here to cite to the Pokedex entries.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:15, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Baruchai, Barujina
As with Vanipeti, Vaniritchi and Baivanira, shouldn't Baruchai become "Vulchai" and "Barujīna" "Vuljina"?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fifteen501 (talk • contribs)
- No.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:06, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Gyarados
Yes, Gyarados is not separate from Ring-Ring, but she appears in many episodes. I will remove the entire section on Gyarados and will not add it back. However she will be part of the "Ring-Ring" section, because the character exists but is not separate from Ring Ring.