User talk:Bishop2

Thanks man.
You turned off the "suck" switch on the Bustin' Out article. The many small things you did made an article that read like a fan summary encyclopedic.

You deserve some sort of cookie. Too bad I can't send baked goods as email attachments. XXDucky21Xx 02:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Halloween Resurrection
You removed a so-called personal opinion from the Halloween;Resurrection page that I had placed a few days ago. I only wrote it because the article already stated in the "reception" section that "The film recieved extremely poor reviews from critics and is widely regarded as the worst film in the series." and I wanted that information to be states in the intro... all I did was transfer that information to the intro. I want to restore it, but I want you to acknowledge that such a transfer is correct. Thank You Kiske 21:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You're right, that transfer on your part was a logical one at the time. However, I don't think it really should be in the article anyway, unless we can somehow cite that it is generally regarded as the worst film in the series.  And I don't think there's any source that could actually prove that. --Bishop2 21:29, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * That't the point I was making about it not being authentic. I didn't mean it wasn't written by him, though that can't be verified anyway because it wasn't like they were handing out copies, but more that what he's using to shoot the film with isn't what they were reviewing.  BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 03:12, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes you are right, that section should not be placed in the article because we would violating wikipedia's policies on absolute objectivity, and saying that it is the worst film in the series is copletely biased and based upon personal judgement and therefore, a violation of wikipedian policy. However, apart from Halloween III, season of the witch, Halloween resurrection IS widely considered to be the worst film in the series... perhaps we could state that in both the intro and the reception section... incidentally, I admire your quest to get rid of bias in wikipedia... if you really want to immerse yourself into a discussion regarding bias, check the STALIN Page... for months; I am not joking; for months I fought to remove the bias from that page; but people were simply too stubborn and would not let me remove it... I was actually blocked twice! You should check that page out and tell me what you think. Check the discussion page, check my arguments about why he shouldn't be labeled a dictator... perhaps we could change that.

Thank You. Kiske 04:15, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll check out the Stalin page, sounds interesting. As for Halloween, in my experience it seems like 5 and 6 are widely regarded as the worst by others.  So it's really all subjective. --Bishop2 04:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes you are right; given the circumstances and the consensus we have reached, I am now going to erase the subjectivity we have refered to in the Recepction section of the Halloween; Resurrection page. And when you check out the Stalin page, please let me know.

Kiske 04:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games
Since you participated in the discussion on the VC page, maybe you should voice your opinion here. TJ Spyke 21:48, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Blue Storm
I responded on the talk page there.--Clyde (talk) 19:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Here's the link.--Clyde (talk) 19:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the insight into your rationale, I've replied to your comment. --Bishop2 20:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

POTC3
Just how inane can you get? So if someone's sex is technically stated in any film, they have to be genderless? Alientraveller 18:46, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Just look at the kid. There's a reason why my party was left debating the kid's gender at the movie was over.  It's nearly impossible to tell whether it's a boy or a girl, and that is seemingly by design of casting, makeup and even hairstyle.  But the most relevant fact is that I believe Ted Elliot confirmed that they were trying to leave their options open for any future sequels by making sure it was unclear whether it was a boy or girl.  As I said, I'll have to find you a link. --Bishop2 18:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Ref help needed
Hey Bishop do you know if it was mentioned anywhere online or in the manual of Blue Storm that a few characters were from 1080 there? I need a ref and can't find one.--Clyde (talk) 04:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)


 * This article mentions a couple of the characters as having appeared in both games: http://www.gamespot.com/gamecube/sports/1080avalanche/news.html?sid=6075460 --Bishop2 04:08, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Manhunt 2
Thank you for taking the time to stop by the Manhunt 2 talk page and hammer out an agreeable solution to the issue concerning the info in the info box. 72.69.111.146 14:58, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Malon
Why did you add the old wrong information about the translation of Malon's name? マロン can only be translated to Malon/Mallon/Marron/Maron because ロ means "ro", not "ri". Marin/Marrin/Malin/Mallin would be マリン.

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:AeroAcrobat1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:AeroAcrobat1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:11, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:AeroAcrobat2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:AeroAcrobat2.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:AeroAcrobat1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:AeroAcrobat1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 18:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:AeroAcrobat2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:AeroAcrobat2.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 18:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

WP Meetup in Miami next next Saturday
Hope you can come! - Jameson L. Tai  talk ♦ contribs 04:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Pergola site
Yes, the picture matches that on the Baldwin site because I designed it. Please quit bothering my work.


 * If you want to keep using it, you'll need to at least make it smaller. I'm not so sure we can allow the logo to stay on there either; that might represent a copyright issue. --Bishop2 (talk) 19:23, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Alien and Predator Timeline
Hi, you do some fairly good work on deleting those personal opinion stuff but I am going to have to say that the Alien and Predator Timeline is not an opinion. I do know that you probably have seen the films, so why is the timeline a opinion. It is giving the facts that people of wikipedia need to get a clear understanding of the AvP universe. Please reply back cause I need to know your main reasoning here. --Tj999 (talk) 18:39, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, the dates for AVP's "ancient pyramid" flashback and AVP:R would have to go for sure, because there's no way to back those up... although AVP might have a date for those flashback events in the novelization, I'd have to check on that. I don't know. The location for the ancient pyramid flashback also can't be cited; since the pyramid is blown up at the end of the flashback, it's seemingly not Bouvet Island (where the pyramid clearly still stands), which leaves it wide open. The larger issue, however, is that none of the Alien franchise films have any dates on them. I understand where 1987 and 1997 come from on the Predator films, and the date in AVP is clearly stated. However, where is the date declared in Aliens? You've mentioned that it's there, but I've never heard it. What scene am I looking for here? I'll double-check. --Bishop2 (talk) 20:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * As for dating Aliens, granted it's in the Special Edition, but what about the scene where Burke provides Ripley with the information on her daughter? Was there a date somewhere in there? Although, I have to point out, that there's been past discussion on the Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles talk page over whether such timelines can be reasonably synthesized, or violate WP:SYN. (Admittedly, that was more a discussion over whether the dating represented a continuity error, but it may be instructive to look through the arguments on determining dates of other entries in a series based on the primary sources.) --Umrguy42 (talk) 20:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok, I recently perchased Aliens: Special Edition and they definatly speak of the 57 year gap and to back this fact up is that Ripley's daughter (Amy) was going to turn 11 in Alien and died at the age of 66 two years before Aliens. As for the years these occur I am still researching. (66 + 2 = 68 - 11 = 57) --Tj999 (talk) 17:12, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


 * If you visit http://time.absoluteavp.com/index.html the author explains how the dates were found. The months are probably not true for they are the author's beliefs but the years for the films (not the events outside the films) are probably close to accurate. I will continue to look into it all. The author also declares that there is a date on the photo of Ripley's daughter at the age of 66 and that Burke says the date is 6/12/79 sometime in the movie. --Tj999 (talk) 17:21, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of High Voltage Software
An editor has nominated High Voltage Software, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 21:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Alien
" Hello! "

Thank you for contributions. I have realized that you have edited an Alien related article. If you wish there is a Alien WikiProject which you can join and help us edit Wikipedia’s Alien articles. Wikipedia also has the following Alien related projects: If you have any questions just ask at the Alien WikiProject.
 * Alien WikiProject discussion
 * Index of the best Alien articles
 * Alien things to do
 * Alien Collaboration of the week
 * Alien Portal
 * Alien Selected Article voting

Again, Thank you for your help! --Tj999 (talk) 22:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)