User talk:Blaze The Movie Fan/Archive Nov 2007

Importance
I'm not disputing anything, but just so you know, the assessment importance doesn't need to reflect a real-world ranking. I would say "Top" importance articles would those subject to high levels of attention and inquiry. My favorite example would be anything mentioned in a Presidential speech.

Another example, were there a Microsoft WikiProject, Microsoft Windows might get "Top" importance, where Bill Gates might get "Mid". A Biography WikiProject might give Bill Gates a "High".

I think a subject like Family Guy should have one or two Top-importance articles, that the project really intends to work on. If we tag more, "Top" importance becomes less meaningful. / edg ☺ ★ 18:02, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: This edit
The unregistered user thinks I'm being silly. And I don't really know how to explain. I was wondering if you could get to that Talk Page and explain to the IP why this can't be added. TheBlazikenMaster 22:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I left him a bit of explanation here . / edg ☺ ★ 22:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Huh?
I don't get it? Why are you telling me this and why aren't you reverting me? TheBlazikenMaster 21:56, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Maybe you think otherwise. As it is within the WikiProject, there isn't a strict right or wrong on this one. / edg ☺ ★ 21:59, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Just a quick note
The reason why some users, including myself, have asked you to tone down the profanity is not necessarily because we're offended by the profanity itself. It is more because it is easily construed as incivil, and oftentimes can be taken as a personal attack when discussions get tense. In short, it derails the impact of your arguments. It's important to me that all contributors are taken seriously, especially when I agree with them, as I have with you in several past discussions. Anyway, that's all I wanted to say - I'm not telling you what to do, just suggesting things to consider. Have a good weekend! :) Girolamo Savonarola 23:23, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, I do notice the good, too! As mentioned above, we agree more often than not. Girolamo Savonarola 23:42, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Family Guy
Really sorry about this edit mate. I am on VP, and I guess I reverted just after someone else, and hence re-reverted! I apologise for my error.  L.J.Skinner wot 01:26, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Magical lamp and magic lamp

 * You could either write it or put it in as a requested article. -- John Reaves 23:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Why?

 * Do you mean 'archive' stuff to another page? I can help instruct you manually on how to archive your own talk page? Scar ian  Talk  18:44, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, what's wrong with the bot is all I need to know. TheBlazikenMaster 19:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * You'd be best off asking the operator of the bot, as they would have the best idea what's going on with it. However, according to the bot's user page, "Werdnabot is not currently functioning as of 15:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)." A clone of the original bot has taken over for it, and is currently active, however does seem to have stopped working for you. There is a third bot available that you could try, User:MiszaBot III. For questions about each bot, you should ask the operator (indicated on each bot's userpage), as they have the best knowledge about their bots and have the sole ability to fix them when broken. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 20:24, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

"Accent" conversation moved
I just wanted to explain this move. Normally I'd resist the urge to refactor a Talk page in such a disruptive and bossy fashion, but 213.121.151.142 has a history of vandal edits and their comment is probably trolling. This puts the conversation where it can do the least harm and (if it ever becomes productive) the most good. / edg ☺ ☭ 21:11, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Shadowbot3
The bot was not archiving your page because your syntax was incorrect; the bot couldn't determine what you wanted it to do. You can view my fix here. Shadow1 (talk) 23:36, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Edit confilt.
I apologize for causing the edit conflict and for chastising you for re-adding the speedy. Powers T 20:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Running Mates (Family Guy episode)
WP:RFC is a good place to start--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 22:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Also you might want to discuss your changes on the article talk page, and possibly with the wikiproject. --Sopoforic 23:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Personal wiki

 * We'll, first you'll have to get your own domain, or someone to host it for you. Wikia might be a good place to start for the latter. It's run by the same folks who oversee Wikipedia. But anyway, if you want to host it yourself, you will want to check out Main Page - there you can actually download software and use their installation guide to get it running.  N F 24 (radio me!Editor review) 13:13, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Saw III
Actually, I think we got our signals crossed and reverted the page at the same time. You accidently reverted BACK to 89 and I changed it back again to 18. Sorry for the mix up, I wasn't accusing you of anything! Wildthing61476 (talk) 17:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, check your last change, you did revert it back to 89, I just fixed it again back to 18. Sorry for the mix up! Wildthing61476 (talk) 17:52, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

No, it doesn't have to be.
Why does it have to be TTN? Let him decide what to merge and what not. If you want the articles merged, why not do it yourself? Wilhelmina Will (talk) 22:21, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I really don't wanna argue about this, can we just drop the discussion? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 21:12, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

If you say so. (Waves her hand to signal the discussion is at an end.) Wilhelmina Will (talk) 21:10, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

WP Films member list
I noticed that you added your name to the inactive list and just wanted to check to see if maybe that was a mistake? Regards, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 11:59, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I find my block on Wiktionary unfair, please help.

 * We have no control over procedures at Wiktionary. While there may be some admins here who are also admins there, your question is much better posted at some forum at that sister site.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I got blocked there, so I can't. I'm looking for a help to get unblocked and apologize. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 17:31, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * When a user is blocked here, they can still edit their user talk page, unless it is protected. I don't know that this is the same on Wiktionary, but have you tried?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately it doesn't apply to Wiktionary. All I'm asking is to ask some admin of Wiktionary to unblock me so I can apologize. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 17:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * You'll need to go through Wiktionary's procedures for unblocking. We are unable to assist and this is an improper use of the helpme template. I'll see if I can find the page on Wiktionary about these procedures, but I'm afraid that's all we can do. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 18:13, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Based on your comments above, it seems that on Wiktionary you edit under this IP address. According to the block log there, you will be unblocked in one week and can make your apologies then. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 18:15, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * That's a problem because I will most likely forget about all the thing by then. I know why I got blocked. Bad that you can't help, if this talk page can't help me nothing can. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 18:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, since Wiktionary won't give me another chance, and assume I will just keep on vandalizing, I just have nothing to do but getting back to my DVDs. It really sucks that I got blocked. I could have been blocked for 24 hours, but I personally find 1 week being too harsh. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 18:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Note that the user login wikt:User:TheBlazikenMaster is not blocked, and there is no issue with the user account. The edit warring by an (unknown to us) IP-anon was. I could unblock the IP, but what's the point? It is blocked anon-only, and TheBlazikenMaster is free to log in. Robert Ullmann (talk) 22:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)