User talk:Boatscaptain

Black Mesa (video game)
Please do not label an editor's good faith edits as vandalism. Also please discuss your additions on the article's talk page before re-adding, as they appear to be controversial. Thank you. Doniago (talk) 15:13, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

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 several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

You are making it increasingly difficult to assume good faith, edits like this are not acceptable, your wording uses a wording that should be avoided as it'll introduce a bias in the article. This is a real issue and you have just ignored this - are you actually here to contribute constructively? Your actions have so far shown a stubbornness in listening what people are trying to tell you. I am not willing to enter into another edit war with you, and you like to give you a chance to explain your actions before I take further action. Rehevkor ✉  01:16, 12 September 2010 (UTC)


 * User clearly has an agenda, as he's edit-warring over my rewording of an WP:OR statement, and refuses to engage in discussion on the talk page. User argues by repetition of incorrect statements as fact, and then accuses others of showing "a stubbornness in listening to what people are trying to tell you." Comical! Boatscaptain (talk) 01:34, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not going to be trolled further, you have made your stance clear. Cheers :P Rehevkor ✉  01:38, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:25, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

ANI
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Rehevkor ✉  03:50, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Please join the ANI discussion and explain why you should not be blocked for edit warring. You've made seven reverts to Black Mesa (video game) over a 3-day period. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 05:52, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Further, we here at wikipedia have very strict rules regarding copyright violations. Post the links again, and you will probably find yourself unable to edit, not that I'll be doing the blocking.—  Dæ  dαlus Contribs 06:14, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Unless you can find conclusive proof that the links are not copyvios, then I'd strongly suggest you don't insert them again. Black Kite (t) (c) 10:21, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

FYI this is blatant bias on the part of BM:S editors; the entire project is a "copyvio" of Valve Software's intellectual property, therefore the only possible justification for removing images which add to the encyclopedic nature of the article is that the BM:S developers don't want the images included. If articles are censored based on the whims of the article's subject, what's the point in having an encyclopedia at all? That page is the "BM:S Developer Blog Fan Promotional Page" and not an encyclopedic article. Boatscaptain (talk) 18:29, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Black Triangle image
The image at the top of the Black triangle (UFO) article was made by an artist for the article and gave permission to use it copyright free. It was put there after several non-free images were used and deleted when the copyright holder complained. Instead of using a bunch of blurry photos of lights that could be anything, SkeezerPumba provided one to more clearly illustrate what witnesses are seeing. Therefore it should remain in the article. I moved your image down to a lower section. Cyberia23 (talk) 04:08, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I think an actual photograph which a reliable source (the UK Ministry of Defence) considers to be a "Black Triangle Class UFO" is more appropriate/informative/encyclopedic for the Black Triangle article header than an artists rendition that looks like it was done in MSpaint. I won't revert your change myself, but you should think about it. Boatscaptain (talk) 18:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)


 * The photo you added is of a bunch of blurry lights, and I'm not saying it's not a photo of a Black Triangle, but doesn't really show what people reportedly see very clearly now does it? Skeezer's image, although drawn, better shows what people are describing IMO. By the way, it happened to be drawn in Adobe Illustrator and colored with Photoshop - a bit more sophisticated than MSPaint I think. Cyberia23 (talk) 18:57, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

July 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Judas (song), please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Can you provide a source at the talk page for the composition? — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 04:53, 11 July 2011 (UTC)