User talk:65.35.69.180

Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia! Please see the X-Men article: you may want to merge your material into the already existing articles on these characters. -- The Anome 22:50, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Reply: Thank you. Will do.

Please quit adding new articles that are exact copies of articles that already exist. RickK 22:58, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Reply: They aren't exact copies. There is a great deal of information in my articles that was not in the previous entries, such as physical descriptions of the characters and other vital statistics. I think you may actually be accusing me in some instances of copying work I simply wrote from a different IP address earlier.

Hello. Please notice the highlighting convention. An example is the editing of shadowcat after you created that article. The title word or title phrase is highlighted at its first appearance. Michael Hardy 02:42, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Reply: Thank you. Will do.

It is generally bad form to blend text on two different topics together. I've split the text you put on Santa Claus off onto Santa Claus (comics). Please continue your edits there. Please take some time to look around at how other articles are formatted, as Michael Hardy pointed out to you above. You are being more annoying than helpful. UtherSRG 19:28, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Reply: You are being more annoying than helpful. It was a joke. Get a life.

Greetings: In general we've been shying away from putting "vital statistics" on the individual character entries. This information is often either highly speculative (how strong is a given character?), extremely vague (well, he's "massively" or "superhumanly" strong), a copyright violation (copied from some other source), or of perfunctory interest (most readers don't care that Cyclops' hair is brown). Simply adding lists of data about fictional characters make the entry less interesting; working it into the flow of the article with examples ("the Thing routinely gets his ass kicked by the Hulk") makes the article of more general interest and more readable overall. -mhr 03:50, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Reply: Many people enjoy reading the vital statistics and you cannot AND SHOULD NOT decide what is best for them to read. You are obviously only aiming to attack me personally by deleting my entries. As far as readability is concerned, the articles I wrote were very simple and readable. If you find them uninteresting that is the fault of your own lack of taste. Your copyright infringement notion is extremely laughable as if it were carried through every mention of every copyrighted fictional character would have to be removed from Wickipedia. Further, my articles were written from MEMORY, there for not simply copied from a source. There are only so many ways to express the same information so inevitabley there will be similarities.

Further, my descriptions are not vague. The abilities of the characters are clearly defined with words like enhanced human and superhuman and not more subjective words like massively. Superhuman is defined in the Marvel Universe as being able to lift/press significantly over 2000 lbs. Enhanced human is defined as being able to lift/press more than an olympic level wieght lifter (600 lbs) and less than 2000 lbs. I don't use language like "he gets his ass kicked" either.

I am not going to attempt to reason with you further as it is manifestly obvious that your aim is petty, and your logic for removing my entries is unsound and clearly a pretext.


 * I am not deciding what is best for them to read. I am trying to discuss with you the best way of presenting this information. Dysprosia 05:07, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Please merge X-Men Newer Members and List of X-Men Founding Members into List of X-Men, and stop creating these duplicate articles. The creation of duplicate articles, and the wasted effort this causes, can be avoided by searching for existing articles on the same subject. --Lowellian 01:03, Dec 11, 2003 (UTC)

Whatever

Please stop marking minor edits as major. (Firt --> first, for example) Also, can you try to go through the entire article and make all your changes at once instead of making a seperate edit for every little change? It's very irritating, especially when they're all marked as major edits. If you insist on doing this, please mark them as minor so that they don't show up on most peoples' recent changes list and clog them up. PMC 03:46, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)

See reply above.

Fair enough. PMC 03:57, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Professor X (brief profile) listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Professor X (brief profile). Since you had some involvement with the Professor X (brief profile) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BDD (talk) 13:33, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Strength level for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Strength level is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Strength level until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 01:02, 27 May 2018 (UTC)