Talk:Storm Surge (ride)

Untitled
According to PBL1998 changing something that is wrong is vandalism (look at history of article) I don't think it is very fair by saying helping wikipedia out is vandalism.

WILLROCKS10 (talk) 18:23, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Vandalism is generally making clearly disruptive edits in bad faith, e.g. blanking a page, inserting malicious or abusive content and generally acting like a vandal! You would nearly always need to be acting in bad faith to be acting as a vandal, and the edit you are talking about is quite clearly being done in good faith, i.e. your intention is to improve wikipedia, not to disrupt it. However, many editors use the phrase when someone keeps ignoring consensus and making tendentious edits, which you have certainly been guilty of in the past. to quote from that article On Wikipedia, the term also carries the connotation of repetitive attempts to insert or delete content or behavior that tends to frustrate proper editorial processes and discussions.. to be fair though, you are both guilty of that by going back and forth on the subject rather than trying to discuss and resolve it on the talk page. You've both done this in the past (Bat/B.A.T comes to mind) and it's not a great habit. In particular if you get into this sort of back and forth with anyone else, you're asking for trouble. Also, you need to keep in mind the three revert rule. Very little is resolved by just pinging reverts back and forth at each other, much better to discuss it on a talk page and reach consensus.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 13:18, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

Yes, as you know I know Willrocks10 I have said most of the points you have said above. He does not listen sometimes. I know the three revert rule. I realised it on Fons Pelser, do you remember PaintedOne? I showed him a newspaper cutting. He agreed. I know the park hasn't been open since October, but there have still been visitors/guests. I will say no more on this matter apart from I would like everyone to consider MY OPINION. I also would like Willrocks10 to read the rules more. As I know the rules OK, obviously I'm developing, i would like Willrocks10 to do this aswell. Please take advice, every bit from everyone!Personal and through talkpages!

Thanks, please take this into consideration.

Thanks again, pbl1998--Pbl1998 (talk) 18:45, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello,

I pretty much know the rules of wiki now thanks PBL.

I was just trying not to make it sound like the general public has been able to enter the park in recent weeks. I did agree with the newspaper cutting about the ghost problem. I do listen thanks.

WILLROCKS10 (talk) 20:23, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

It seems not, especcially as I know you!

Thanks, pbl1998

These minor issues of wording really aren't all that important. Have a read of WP:DEW which discusses this sort of thing.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 11:00, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

Here you go again. Reverting perfectly good edits when there's proof. I am seriously thinking of reporting you now. LOOK AT THE EXTERNAL LINK-DESIGN AND INFORMATION. You will find what I'm trying to prove there. Any any disruptive edits will be reverted and assumed as vandalism. PLEASE GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE RULES.

Thanks, pbl1998--Pbl1998 (talk) 13:10, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

I am thinking of reporting YOU! you keep channgeing the things that I add to the articles. I am trying to improve your grammer!

WILLROCKS10 (talk) 13:11, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

'Improving your grammer'-Improving your grammAr. 'you keep'-You keep'. 'channgeing'-changing. 'Improving MY grammar'. Looks like you need to improve yourself a bit! Also, YOU seem not to be able to accept that I'm right and your wrong. I HAVE EVIDENCE-A LINK! How much is it going to take? I am making it up to standards you don't obey. RULES or GUIDELINES to follow on Wikipedia. You have to live with these rules. Yes, sometimes they are annoying but you have to live with that. Yes, they maybe good faith edits but they might not be corect. In this case they aren't. I've warned you. Check the link. You are so intimidating sometimes-It's not something to be proud of. Please, just listen. I am prepared to take this further. I will say no more, for now that is. Oh, yes, one last thing. Can you please explain what reason you have to get me blocked-Or is it just to threaten me?

Thanks, pbl1998--Pbl1998 (talk) 17:17, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Can I suggest that BOTH of you read WP:CIVIL. That's one of the five pillars, so not something you want to ignore. That road leads to Blocksville.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 20:14, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

Thanks for the link. Willrocks10 is just getting a bit intimidating. He should stop doing this. I have read the link and I hope Willrocks10 will aswell. I will not rise to this although if I am forced to do something I will. Do you understand my view?

Thanks, pbl1998--Pbl1998 (talk) 20:30, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Refs
You guys really need to learn how to do inline citations. Is there any reason you're not? You can't work on any significant wikipedia article without understanding this.

By the way, I'm not convinced this article will stand. The only really notable thing here is the ghost incident, which fails WP:NOTNEWS.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 13:28, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

Also, I know how to do bullet point citations but, to be honest, them and pictures are not my strong point. Please help! I do see your point on this page but i will fight to keep it. I will find more information on this article. I've said it before and I'll say it again it's a developing page, it will improve.

Thanks for all your help, pbl1998--Pbl1998 (talk) 18:45, 9 February 2011 (UTC)


 * The instructions are at WP:INCITE, have a look at them then post on your talk page if you're still unsure. We can maybe pick an article and I'll walk you through adding a couple of cites so you can see how it works.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 11:00, 10 February 2011 (UTC)