User talk:Apoklyptk

Red Hulk
That's ok.. compromise is better than edit wars i think. --- Paulley (talk) 16:19, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Stop it. The section says NOTHING. Quesada made a joke. The section says 'quesada made a joke, it was shown to be a joke. We know nothing, and we're writing that only the writers know here on wikipedia.' It's a useless, uninformative section, and does not need to be included. ThuranX (talk) 14:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

No, you stop it. This has been a mainstay for months and now it must go because you decree it to be so? And when asked to discuss you delete instead of replying on your own talk page. You keep coming up with reasons that do NOT justify the section's removal. The section alleviates rumors about identity and clarifies to the READER (not the editors) that this is not the case and the identity is unknown. It stays. --Apoklyptk (talk) 14:39, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * In regards to this edit, you can't just say "it stays," or this is the "final word" on the paragraph. Wikipedia is all about gaining consensus, which according to the talk page and the multiple editors who have reverted you, is against the addition of this paragraph. If consensus was in favor of keeping it last summer, it has changed. Please don't threaten an edit war if you don't like the current consensus. Dayewalker (talk) 18:51, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I've responded on my talk page, but I see you've reverted again. Please revert your edits and discuss on the talk page. It's regrettable if you and ThuranX aren't getting along, but edit warring when consensus is against you isn't the way to handle it. Dayewalker (talk) 20:38, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have asked where the consensus exists, and how can it be edit warring when I just reported the user reverting for 3RR??? --Apoklyptk (talk) 20:56, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It takes at least two to edit war. When last I checked, you were reverting at least three other editors. Dayewalker (talk) 20:59, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * In regards to your continual reverting against the edits of multiple editors, I have filed a case at the edit warring board . Had you reverted and discussed, I would not have done so. However, I feel that your personal problems with ThuranX are leading you to make this revert to make a point, so I feel it's best if this gets admin attention. Dayewalker (talk) 21:03, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

January 2009
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. 'Stop now! Further edit warring at this article without first obtaining consensus on the talk page will result in a block' Spartaz Humbug! 21:21, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Red Hulk discussion
I'm starting a new discussion on the Red Hulk page about the Quesada quote, please take your comments there. I understand you and ThuranX have had difficulties in the past, but let's all be civil in the new discussion and we can work things out. Thanks! Dayewalker (talk) 21:33, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Red Hulk edit conflict
Hi. I've started a consensus discussion on the edit conflict on Red Hulk here. Can you offer your opinion on the four points there? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 15:25, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Request for your opinion
Hi. Can you join this discussion in order to offer us your thoughts? We need as many people as we can get in this, since the 4-6 participants from previous discussions on this matter was felt by some to be insufficient. It would be most appreciated. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 07:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)