Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 13:40, 3 October 2012

I like to keep conversations in one place. If you make a comment here, I'll reply here, so keep an eye on this page for my response. If I left a comment on your talk page, I'll be watching it awhile, so just respond to it there.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Re: User:BEATWEAKer

Thanks for handling the situation with BEATWEAKer (talk · contribs) so well. I generally don't try to reason with these types of editors (genre warring is a pain to deal with) but I respect those who do. I was the one who put him on the AIV board (so I'm to blame for him being blocked right after you posted on his page) but I was starting to question whether I should have done that considering his edits had shifted in a more reasonable direction. Anyway, hopefully after 72 hours the user will be making constructive edits. So kudos for all the good work you've been doing on music-based articles. Cheers! Friginator (talk) 00:12, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I hope BEATWEAKer's behavior changes. I left them that message because, like you, I noticed their edits had shifted in a more reasonable direction (at least providing some sources). Usually I just revert genre warriors outright and leave templated warnings, but on the rare occasion when they show some improvement I try to give them a nudge in the right direction. BEATWEAKer seems to be off on the wrong foot (they've also uploaded copyrighted album covers and promotional photos to Commons, which I've had to nominate for speedy deletion), but in general they seem to mean well and can hopefully be shown the right way to deal with this sort of stuff. --IllaZilla (talk) 00:19, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Poll to Remove Ratings info boxes for all the Siouxsie and the Banshees albums

Hi, could you vote in this Talk:Siouxsie_and_the_Banshees#Poll_to_Remove_Ratings_info_boxes.-- Carliertwo (talk) 4 September 2012 18:03

Refactoring talk pages

this is what is written on wp:Refactoring talk pages

Refactoring should only be done when there is an assumption of good faith by editors who have contributed to the talk page. If there are recent heated discussions on the talk page, good faith may be lacking. If another editor objects to refactoring then the changes should be reverted. Nevertheless, if the page is larger than the recommended size, then archiving of the talk page, or sections with no recent contributions, without refactoring can still be done.

I object so don't change anything in my edits on Talk:control.

Carliertwo (talk) 4 September 2012 15:03

Object all you want, your changes make the conversation much more difficult to follow. WP:TALK permits refactoring in such cases. I'm pretty sure we're done at that talk page anyway; not a single person has supported your position, and I plan to keep editing down the plot summary to somewhere in the 550-word range. --IllaZilla (talk) 14:29, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The Underground: Issue 1 (August/September 2012)

Delivered by In actu (Guerillero) on behalf of WikiProject Punk. You are receiving this because your user name is listed in Category:WikiProject Punk music members or on our participants list. If you would like to stop these sorts of updates please remove the userbox from your profile, remove the category from your profile, and/or move your name down to the Inactive/former members section of the participants list. Thanks.

Cheers,

benzband (talk) & Guerillero | My Talk 00:31, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Chixdiggit!

Hi IllaZilla. The RM discussion on the talk page resulted in no consensus to move. It was noted that even on the band's website it was written without the exclamation mark in running text. Also, I just did a search of various newspapers and magazines, and found that in most cases it was written without the punctuation. I think it should probably go through another Requested Move before it is moved. Regards, Paul Erik 00:07, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I guess I should've checked the talk page first, but still it seems pretty cut & dry to me. Literally every album cover has it rendered Chixdiggit! (with the exclamation point). I think that renders most other arguments moot. It's unsurprising that most newspapers/magazines don't include the punctuation, as they often ignore punctuation in proper nouns. To me this seems similar to Portugal. The Man, Panic! at the Disco, and other artist articles which we have titled with the punctuation intact. --IllaZilla (talk) 03:43, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from, but I don't actually think it's so cut and dry. I've reverted, and added a note at Talk:Chixdiggit, as other editors might also want to weigh in. Thanks, Paul Erik 16:11, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Predator (film)

We had a couple of edit conflicts. I'm headed off line for a couple of hours to run errands. If you have time you can do the edits and I'll take a look this evening.

I'll mainly be looking at that one scene where Dutch sends Anna off to see if it's clear Dutch has figured out the part about unarmed people. FWIW, the thermal imaging never highlighted weapons and Anna seemed to be as much as a "blob" as the armed humans. As it is, I thought it was silly that they showed them as blobs. Had it been real the creature likely saw detail as well as or better than humans. It certainly could spot nearly invisible tripwires. That roving creature we have on Mars at present has broad spectrum imaging that can resolve grains of talcum powder. :-) --Marc Kupper|talk 18:29, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

???

Can you explain me unexplained changes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BEATWEAKer (talk • contribs) 00:04, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I did not see this edit which contained an explanation of the changes (it was auto-reverted by Cluebot for some reason, so your edit summary was further down in the history & I simply didn't see it). I'm going to make a good faith restoration of your edits until I can review the changes more thoroughly. --IllaZilla (talk) 01:50, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Princess Mononoke#GA push?

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Princess Mononoke#GA push?. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:48, 15 September 2012 (UTC)Template:Z48

i put up, now you shut up.

Dude,

Check out the Lincoln bust behind Lawrence Harvey.

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm977372160/tt0056218

Dude, http://www.filmsite.org/manc2.html

Senator Iselin is reflected off the glass covering a portrait of Lincoln - juxtaposing the ghostly-thin, anti-Communist with a stalwart American from another era, as he fixes himself a drink. As a spineless puppet, Senator Iselin complains to his wife that he can't keep the number of Communists straight in the Defense Department: "I mean, the way you keep changing the figures on me all the time. It makes me look like some kind of a nut, like an idiot." She holds up a newspaper and proclaims:

Raymond's vicious, overly-smothering mother - sitting next to a bust of Lincoln and in front of a fireplace portrait of Lincoln - sabotages his relationship and potential marriage plans with the daughter of one of his step-father's political foes - she labels Jocie "a Communist tart." She interprets his romance as dangerous to her own plans, and maternally 'brainwashes' him to give her up:

http://www.filmsite.org/manc3.html

The celebration opens with images of American patriotism gone mad - there is a closeup of an American flag - a hand reaches out and defaces the flag with a trowel-like shovel. It scoops up the caviar from the star pattern onto a cracker to be devoured. The hand belongs to Johnny Iselin, who is dressed with a tall stove-pipe hat and fake beard as Abe Lincoln. He excuses his desecration: "It's all right, it's Polish caviar." Mrs. Shaw, who appears as Little Bo Peep (or Mother Goose?), reaches out with her long staff and pulls his arm - an apt metaphor for her controlling nature. Raymond, who is costumed as a Spanish gaucho, is extremely nervous about meeting his long-lost girlfriend.

The scene in the study between Raymond and his mother begins with a close-up of a black bust of patriotic father figure Abraham Lincoln - one of many such witty image compositions and motifs in the film (visually linking Iselin to Honest Abe). Raymond's mother divulges that she is his American controller - an agent for the Reds: "Why don't you pass the time by playing a little solitaire?" When he comes upon the Queen of Diamonds, she is unexpectedly called away and takes the card as a precaution. Jocelyn, however, finds Raymond in the study and is reunited with him - she is coincidentally (and improbably!) dressed as the Queen of Diamonds - the most appealing costume possible for him! After embracing, they depart to elope, and leave behind her card costume.

IS THAT ENOUGH FOR YOU DOUBTING DUDE???

johncheverly (talk) 23:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Dude, I really don't care. I've never seen the film and I'm not a Lincoln buff like you seem to be. I'm simply trying to get you on the right track with regard to finding sources to back up your claims. Even with the sources above, this doesn't seem like content appropriate for an article about Lincoln. Appropriate for the article about the film, sure, but not to an article about Lincoln. It's an analysis of the film, not of Lincoln or even of a portrayal of him. And again, stop shouting and ditch the confrontational attitude. With a topic header like this, I'm inclined just to delete the whole thing and ignore you altogether. You really need to improve your communication skills. --IllaZilla (talk) 00:10, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

If you don't really care, then you need to shut your big mouth in the first place. And you need to grow a spine and use your real name, otherwise you're just another punk. johncheverly (talk) 00:23, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Now you're just being an ass. I'm going to report you. You can either demonstrate civility and a willingness to collaborate with others, or be swiftly shown the door. --IllaZilla (talk) 00:25, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

ANI notice

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:59, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Johncheverly

Users, including blocked users, may blank all or part of their talk page. Only block and unblock discussions must remain. You must not edit war with Johncheverly on his talk page. You've made your feelings regarding Johncheverly's behaviour clear, and you would be very well advised to disengage from further discussions with him. Continuing to post on his page is unhelpful and is causing rather than solving an antagonistic situation. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 22:48, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

That is fine, and good advice. I had spent quite a while composing that long reply of mine, and I see his blanket removal of the entire discussion, including his entire back-and-forth with the blocking admin, as a show of bad faith. The guy has really got my goat with his continued insults and personal attacks directed at me (his every reply and edit summary seems to contain a fresh batch of name-calling). But I will let it be. --IllaZilla (talk) 22:56, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Nothing in Johncheverly's behaviour, before or after his block, suggests to me that he is at all amenable to reason. It is very possible that Johncheverly is simply trying to troll us, and there's nothing a troll likes more than to make a reasonable person angry. I don't think any amount of post-hoc talk-page prunery is going to fool anyone that he's interested in being a productive contributor. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 23:04, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your outstanding help with combating TheMetallican's sockpuppetry and vandalism. Friginator (talk) 22:12, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

72.186.48.128

You warned this IP repeatedly about his or her edits. I just blocked the IP for 2 weeks. I suggest you keep an eye out for new IPs from the Tampa, Florida area doing the same stuff; if so, report them to me or another administrator, being sure to include a link to this IP's talk page (that way you won't have to jump through hoops first giving multiple warnings, etc).

Thanks for watching over our content. --A. B. 00:09, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. It was hard to tell what was going on with that IP: some of their edits looked good/legit, others were unexplained genre changes, while still others introduced flat-out factual errors. Since they never left a single edit summary or responded to talk page inquiries/warnings, it's hard to tell what their intentions were. --IllaZilla (talk) 00:12, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I encounter editors like that and wonder the same thing. My approach is to give them a warning to stick to talk pages, then block them if they don't. If it's a real vandal, they just can't resist hitting articles. Of course, it can also be a seriously obsessed non-vandal, too, but at that point the block is about disruptive editing, not vandalism. From here on out, I feel that if that person ventures off talk pages in the future, they're fair game for a block at any time with no warning. They know the score, now.

--A. B. 00:18, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

An undo?

I do not understand why you undid my edit to User:Realist2/Genre Warrior. My edit was legitimate and "undo", as a form of revert, seem inappropriate. Regardless, the information you put in the edit summary which addresses my concerns belongs in the essay. It is a bad thing to have a hard-to-verify claim in an essay. If specific wikilinks are difficult to provide, a footnote with the information you wrote would have been a good alternative and more appropriate than just undo'ing my edit. Jason Quinn (talk) 18:24, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Did you read my edit summary? You said you couldn't find where it had been discussed, so I pointed you to it. I thought I'd addressed your concern. I guess I just didn't think to footnote it. If you want to do that, by all means go ahead. --IllaZilla (talk) 18:38, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Since I mention your edit summary above, yes, I did read your summary. The comment in my edit summary was just to note that finding those discussions is not easy. Sorry if my summary caused confusion. I would have used the talk page if I just wanted to know where the discussions were. I will add a footnote. Jason Quinn (talk) 18:54, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

BRD project

Hi, I have outlined a proposal for a potential project that you might be interested in at User:Betty Logan/BRD enforcer. The essence of it is a peer review system in relation to challenged unilateral edits. If you are not interested then no worries, I'm just seeing if there is any interest/suggestions at this satge before going to the bother of formalizing a proprosal. Betty Logan (talk) 00:53, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

"User:TheMetallican" and sockpuppets

Hello, you were involved in a (now archived) sockpuppetry case involving the above user. While I never had any direct dealings with the above user, a sockpuppet of the above user added an intrusive edit to the Bay Area thrash metal page and shortly thereafer, an autoconfirm, (User:FunnyPatrol99), is persistently trying to sustain the same edit , . This is really just an FYI, based on your post on 2601:A:4100:5A:EC7A:ECA5:15F6:C925's talk page. I let an admin know, and am pondering whether to open a new SP case. Thanks, --Danteferno (talk) 23:15, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

I say start the SPI. Funnypatrol's edits are definitely of the same flavor as TheMetallican's, and in the same types of articles. --IllaZilla (talk) 23:17, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Heck, I'll start it. --IllaZilla (talk) 23:20, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

They were quacking far too much so I blocked them --Guerillero | My Talk 01:10, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Udon for you!

For keeping safe and reverting vandalism on pop punk band pages. --101.161.42.150 (talk) 04:49, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I don't think I've ever had udon before. --IllaZilla (talk) 05:35, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

help request

Hello, I noticed you left a message on a users page for acting in a way that could be considered edit warring. the same user has been causing trouble on the following page - http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Bio_Booster_Armor_Guyver&curid=2060496&action=history you seem to know what you're doing on here so I was hoping you could help with this situation. The user is adding blatantly false information. it's something that is not present in the series and has never been referenced. the user seems to be basing his addition on something he has misheard from watching the anime series. the article isn't even about the anime series. I would appreciate your assistance in this, doing things the proper wikipedia way. I can only think of restoring the article to a state that doesn't contain false information. I've asked him to stop, I don't know what else to do. I don't want to end up in an edit war with somebody like this that seems to be just trolling. thanks! Drag-5 (talk) 22:58, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Which user are you referring to? Are they registered, or anonymous IP addresses? I can't really tell from the article history who the problem editor is. --IllaZilla (talk) 07:15, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Help

Hey, can you help me with something? I uploaded this image to Misplaced Pages: http://en.wikipedia.org/File:Stikky_cemetary_San_Jose_1987.jpg I contacted the photographer and he gave me permission to use it on Misplaced Pages, so I was wondering what the proper licensing would be. I tried to find the proper license tag, but Misplaced Pages just put it on speedy deletion. Thanks in advance. BLAguyMONKEY! (talk) 09:42, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

EDIT: Nevermind, I got it. BLAguyMONKEY! (talk) 10:26, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Big Idiot!

	The Most Musically-Retarded Idiot!
	This award goes to IllaZilla, the stupidest dictator on all the Internet! He agrees 3000% with the 2 people who think 30 Seconds to Mars is kinda-emo pop, except he thinks that just being kinda emo pop makes it a pure emotive hardcore band! His favorite punk bands are Black Veil Brides and Meshuggah. Frammis4242 (talk) 13:40, 3 October 2012 (UTC)