User talk:Eaglestorm/Archive 3

not to be rude
not to be rude but are you a Admin for Wikipedia ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Razgriz2 (talk • contribs) 13:56, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Iskul Bukol 20 Years After
Hope you don't mind, I nominated it for DYK. :D Shrumster (talk) 10:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool. Thanks.--Eaglestorm (talk) 09:22, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

From: Pepeton
Oh, sorry. I do not know.

loloige
I considered it, but I don't think he's a sock of Truth222. He definitely has an agenda in editing the Arroyo article, but I'm going to assume good faith and treat him as a reasonable person. TheCoffee (talk) 04:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Re:Konpeki no Kantai
Thanks for the offer. Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm not very good at Japanese enough to translate the JP counterpart article. And I only know very few users here who are adept at Japanese. Maybe you can ask Kasuga for help. He/She's Japanese, so maybe he can help you. But it may take time for any response to come up. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 18:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok. I'll take it under consideration. Thanks.--Eaglestorm (talk) 04:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Yamato
Your deleted contents was that moved contents from Yamato class battleship by me. I think Yamato (film) and Space Battleship Yamato suitable here. Because they are more relevant to Japanese battleship Yamato than Yamato class battleship. What do you think?--Bukubku (talk) 08:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Try talking to climie.ca. because when he revised everything, the film and anime references were struck out as trivia. I don't know why he did.
 * I added in See also consulting The Land's opinion. Thank you.--Bukubku (talk) 12:56, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

English
Sorry but i'm not fluent in english. my english is poor. Secaundis (talk) 07:18, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * That's not an excuse for you to continue typing here. Try Tagalog Wikipedia instead ([]).--Eaglestorm (talk) 13:10, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

TAGALOG
Panget dun eh, ikaw ba gusto mo dun? magalit ka kung nagcontribute ako ng tagalog dito, sa talk page lang ako nagtatagalog! Secaundis (talk) 13:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, why don't you read this (particularly the Good Practice) first instead of ranting your way out? Oh and removing the user warning doesn't help, kid. --Eaglestorm (talk) 04:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, i'll speak in English. Secaundis (talk) 22:36, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't say it...DO IT! --Eaglestorm (talk) 17:43, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello
From the start, I dont like to contribute to the Tagalog Wikipedia, because almost no one read it, so my contributions will not be read. Here in English many filipinos and even foreigners read my contributions in the Santa Maria, Bulacan article, around 100 views everyday compare to only 5 or even 2 in the Tagalog. And all my contributions here are all english! I only speak tagalog in my talkpages and WHEN im talking to Ramz Trinidad bcoz he is not fluent in English either. I cannot say what's in my mind if I speak english (and if its too long). Maybe I could use Taglish? This is Tagalog "ang importante po ay ang mga contributions sa mga articles, not on the talk pages." Please understand me.. Thank you. --Secaundis • (myTalk) • (myContribs) 11:41, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

List of fraternities and sororities in the Philippines
I know that Friendster Links are among the worst links to have on Wikipedia. The links came from an effort that I made a while ago to attempt to reference every group that anyone had ever added to the list. If I could find anything superior to Friendster I did so. I *think* the only thing that I considered inferior to Friendster was listings on alumni.net. Unfortunately, most of the editors to that page are simply people (from IP addresses) who want their fraternity (or much more rarely sorority) listed and don't really care about anything other than that. What I probably should do is comment out the friendster links with the left angle !-- --right angle commenting so that they don't show up any more. Any additional suggestions are welcome. (Also do you want this comment moved back to Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines?) Naraht (talk) 17:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Minor characters on Cars (film)
Wanted to give you a heads-up that someone called Edokter is insisting that the Michael Schumacher Ferrari be included. Skywatcher68 (talk) 17:55, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll see later.--Eaglestorm (talk) 05:03, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: WiC
If you always do what you have always done then you will always get what you have always gotten. If WiC is that unnecessary (and I fail to see how that can be since the game centered rather heavily on the defense of the SDI program, but I do not maintain the page) then state that explicitly in the hidden message or do what I did with the Iowa class and lay out strict and explicit guidelines for inclusion. Otherwise, to answer you historically posed question, it will never end. TomStar81 (Talk) 18:09, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * That items has been removed many times because it does not add any value to the list aside from its mention. We cannot just add anything that even has mere mention of SDI. If that doesn't convince you, try talking to Dual Freq. He's removed WIC a number of times as well.--Eaglestorm (talk) 18:19, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not debating the merits of removing the mention, as I said, that was your call and I respect it. What I am driving at is that the repeated reintroductions of the material to the article will not end unless that hidden note is modified in such a way as to discourage people from adding the mention. You have not modified the note, and as such will be forced to make further reversions int he future as a result. Just something to think about. Also, since pop culture sections are discouraged by milhist in general, it may be a good idea to start citing the mentions already there. Just something to think about. TomStar81 (Talk) 18:25, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Tayong Dalawa
Hi! What seem to be the problem with my editing? Everything I posted was verifiable. I already Talked to the first complainant.--Huwatttt (talk) 10:04, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello again! I would just like to ask why my contribution was canceled. Please answer here or in the talk page of the Tayong dalawa article. --Huwatttt (talk) 07:35, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

V script review removed
Can you tell me why my addition to the V general subject page was removed and labeled as spam? I don't understand how a review of the pilot script can be called spam when it's directly connected to the subject matter being discussed on the page. What are the rules for the Wiki in this kind of situation? How is one link considered spam but a similar link not considered spam? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Screenhead (talk • contribs) 18:44, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Pearl Harbor post
I'm curious, why did you remove my contribution to the Pearl Harbor page? Was it not the worst defeat ever suffered by the U.S. Navy? Or is it simply that certain facts don't reflect positively on the Navy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by M L M 1950 (talk • contribs) 00:48, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know what you're talking about. Please, enlighten me!--Eaglestorm (talk) 02:33, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I had posted that Pearl Harbor was the worst defeat in US Navy history. This is true, and it said you deleted my opst. Why? Is there a greater defeat we don't know about? —Preceding unsigned comment added by M L M 1950 (talk • contribs) 19:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

The Amazing Race Asia 2 final roadblock
The subject between the final roadblock of TAR Asia 2 was a similar from a final leg in American version's ninth season. It is not considered as OR. ApprenticeFan talk  contribs 03:22, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Tayong Dalawa
Dude, my apologies if you felt offended with my comment on the TD talk page. i didn't know that there was already a consensus regarding the character profiles when i put them.

i still feel that the article is still cruft though. basically bcause any non-fan of the show wont get anything useful here. not even the story because the way the plot is written, it sounds more like a dvd blurb rather than a proper story outline. a brief character summary of the more important ones would help. i am thinking of linking this to a character list page where it's more detailed. to avoid the cruft tag, i'll put in actors' commentaries on their roles and production notes to provide a real world connection.

i would also want to get your opinion before i put in additional sections. i plan to put up production and reception sections. the production section will touch on the PMA's close involvement on the development of the show. the reception section will tackle reviews and criticisms of the show. what do you think is the best way to present this? Flamerounin (talk) 10:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Konpeki no Kantai episode I
You wrote: ''Good work with the added table. Have you watched the first episode on Veoh?''


 * Thanks. I have watched clips on Veoh. I also watched a number of clips that are available on Youtube. Although I don't speak Japanese, I can interpret (correctly I hope) the events depicted in the show and contrast them to the actual events that did occur. I have also taken a look at reviews that are available on the Internet in English. I hope to add more information on this series when I have the time.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 22:37, 4 May 2009 (UTC))

GTA San Andreas
Yeah, I asked this question in thee wrong site, but it is only because I have not confirmed my e-mail address in http://www.gtawiki.com. Do not call me "Mr", I am not the Prrsident of the USA. Have an awesome day, friend!--BubbleBabis (talk) 10:47, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, boohoohoo. So you knew all along that this was the wrong site...then why the hell did you persist? And did you have to ALL CAP some stuff. Jeez. --Eaglestorm (talk) 17:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

MGS Teaser update
Removed... why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soot and stars (talk • contribs) 11:40, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

semi-protection
yeah i didnt get how to file a semi-protection request and werent you supposed to sign your signature when you put those templates on top AcesUpMaSleeve (talk) 23:50, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Red Dawn plausibility
Simply deleting the addition wholesale as "original research" is unhelpful and appears to be contrary to Wikipedia policy. Presumably the distances given from Petropavlosk to Anchorage and from Anchorage overland to the border of CONUS are covered as routine calculations as outlined in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research#Routine_calculations and thus are not original research. Port capacity requirements for divisional and larger operations are outlined in army FM 55-60 ARMY TERMINAL OPERATIONS as cited. This particular scenario is a well studied War College problem, as mentioned in the preceding "Cold War" section of the article - none of what I have written is original research within this context though for obvious reasons many possible citations are not available online. The overall point that an invasion of CONUS through Alaska by the Soviets is implausible is supported by the CIA's contemperaneous conclusion, as shown in the declassified document http://www.foia.cia.gov/browse_docs.asp?doc_no=0000278541, para 11, 12 and 13.

You may still disagree with other assertions (eg, the logistic difficulties of a 3200km single-route supply line) My understanding is that Wikipedia policy is to fold in alternative points in accordance with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Balance. Please do so if you have opposing points which need to be included. If you feel further support is necessary for a particular assertion (eg, the specific tonnage capacity of Anchorage vice other Alaskan ports) please use "citation needed" in accordance with Wikipedia policy as outlined at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed.

I will leave it to you to revert the changes and edit the entry as required to conform with this policy. Thank you.


 * It doesn't matter; your argument, while it has sources, does not justify their inclusion in the article- you didn't even attempt to seek consensus on this. --Eaglestorm (talk) 02:20, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately I wasn't aware how Wikipedia worked on this level. However, seeking consensus is what I'm doing right now. That's why I'm leaving it to you to revert the article and make such adjustments as are required, in accordance with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus. I have put forward what I hope are uncontroversial facts, provided a valid reference which shows how those facts are used to come to a conclusion by experts in the field, and provided a valid reference to the conclusion made by experts in the field as it applies to the topic. Simply stating that this is not justifiable is still unhelpful. If there is a problem I am quite happy to fix it. Can you please point me at a reference explaining why this should not be included in the article?

Thank you.

Talk:Ace Combat 5: The Unsung War
Would it be better then to restore the old text, or did you already fix this in the archives? Sorry about the screw up, last I checked non-notability was cause for deletion here, but i'll ferely admit it has been several years since i looked at the guidelines. dunerat (talk) 11:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Bodyguard Pugad Baboy
Actually, it is my custom that when someone leaves a message on my talk page, I reply on that person's page rather than my own. So sorry if I decided to reply here instead of my page, as you said.

I have PB21 since about May or June, but until now, I haven't finished reading it because of many factors, so I haven't reached that point. Therefore I could not help you in building the article as of this moment. Maybe you can ask Kguirnela for help... that's if he has PB21 as well. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 12:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Noted. I'll review it tonight...and probably pull off something as good as James Bab or the latter part of Kulto was. --Eaglestorm (talk) 13:11, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Boom, it's done.--Eaglestorm (talk) 07:38, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Link removal
I would like to know why you took off my links. I am not promoting anything and certainly not spamming! I researched my article with the help of SYMA, Doug Canning and many others. My work appeared originally in Combat Aircraft magazine. I thought that as an article it would offer wiki readers some additional information - such as Barber's recollections that would have been far too lengthy to add into the Yamamoto section or the Operation Vengeance thread.

While there are some typos and sentence reconstruction to go through, I think it a well researched and well presented piece of work that has value and is not spam.

Perhaps I have misunderstood the rules. Perhaps I am not allowed to put forward my own work in which case I apologise, but I must stress there was no malice or ulterior motives behind putting up these links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 243MG (talk • contribs) 12:02, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Link Removal - why?
Hello. I have already sent an email on this topic to another admin MK-something-or-other (bear with me as I don't speak computerese and its only with great difficulty that I managed to figure out how to post this message).

I am an amateur historian, retired military officer, Phi Beta Kappa. I have created the web's only comprehensive archive photo gallery (photos in public domain) of the Battleships Yamato and Musashi. The site does not spam, sell, advertise or benefit me in any way shape or form.

Do you mean I can't link it because I created it myself for the public good? What kind of sense does that make? Anthony Tully has commended my site and even added some commentary that I have included. He is one of the most prominent historians of the Pacific War. Am I to understand that if he set up a history site and tried to link it you would delete his site too?

For an organization that is supposed to make learning easier, you sure have programmed a lot of anti-spam bots to remove site links that do not violate any common-sense definition of your rules.

Please consider rescinding your removal of my links, or at least view them YOURSELF PERSONALLY instead of having some Stalin-bot computer program with no brain remove sites that are 100% accurate, sell nothing, and only contribute to public education and knowledge.

I took the trouble to move my site to a non-commercial location (it was originally on tripod) specifically so that it would be acceptable to WIKI, yet I am now met with the exact same rationale for removal - which makes no sense at all.

Please explain.

Thank you.

"Al Simmons"
 * Eaglestorm, you are being "singled-out" because my talk page is semi-protected and the user is not autoconfirmed, and he didn't find my unprotected one. Don't think you are being singled-out though, because he sent me an email. See my response on his talk page: User talk:Al Simmons. -MBK004 05:35, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Konpeki no Kantai, Part II - Japanese troops landing on the US West Coast
From what I've been able to discern, in the books on which the series is based, the Japanese military launches an invasion of the Western United States to free the Japanese-Americans who were interned during the war. However, I'm can't determine if this plot element was incorporated into the television series. That's why I phrased the language in my last edit to suggest that an invasion of the Western United States was possible (although not necessarily executed). If I find additional information on this, I'll let you know.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 21:47, 1 September 2009 (UTC))
 * Oh! I thought it was the video you were basing it on.--Eaglestorm (talk) 04:13, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Escalating warnings
Please be careful to note the sequence of edits and warnings before unnecessarily escalating user warnings as you have done here. Your warning was for an edit that was made before other warnings were left for the user. We don't warn for each and every edit, we warn for edits up to the point of the warning. If we see four questionable edits, we can't leave four escalating warnings if no activity has taken place since the first warning. Essentially, your warning escalated directly to level 4 from no warning with no subsequent edits. The edits do not appear to be deliberately bad faith and should be treated as such. If there is some background to this particular editing pattern possibly by sockpuppets that I'm not aware of, please let me know. Thanks. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 14:36, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Strange Invader!
Do the recent implications that V ripped off Strange Invaders strike you as a bit odd? My gut instinct is telling me that something is not right here. It's especially odd to me that no similar edits were made to Strange Invaders pointing out that V may have influenced it. Next thing we know, someone will claim that I Am Legend (film) was influenced by I Am Omega, and that the Terminator Salvation was influenced by The Terminators (film)! - BilCat (talk) 17:56, 8 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I know, and that anon was too insistent on putting it in...and when we struck it out, he had to explain why he had to put them on the talk page. LAME.--Eaglestorm (talk) 03:36, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

79.78.XXX.XXX
You're welcome. Perhaps I should have also cited WP:STICK ... some people just don't take the hint. Daniel Case (talk) 17:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank
...for the comments :) Been watching the AKR page for sometime but was looking for the tamang tyempo (right time) to make those edits. I guess I felt that I've had enough, and so I cleaned up the whole thing.

Btw, you may also want to check out the similar message I left on the Mikey Arroyo article's talk page ;) hehehe --- Tito Pao (talk) 02:08, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

MGS: Peace Walker
Sorry. I didn't know that we should not put the same text from the official website into wikipedia. I will make sure I do the right thing next time. Wallyraju (talk) 19:25, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Offer to redo/retry character bios for V
Sorry then for the posting directly from the website. If you'd like I can retype them myself so it does not read like a press release. Aximill (talk) 15:18, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

V
Hey there ... the plot summary you restored to Pilot (V) may have been copied from the main article, but it was a copyvio there too (lifted from http://www.scriptedtvfans.com/2009/11/v-11309-pilot-episode-summary/). It had only been added to the main article yesterday morning here. Thanks. &mdash; TAnthonyTalk 17:10, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Heads-up: sockpuppet investigation
FYI, a new account has posted you at this SPI. Regards, Chuckiesdad/Talk/Contribs 05:16, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The bogus SPI has been deleted as a bad faith move, you can fire the lawyer. Regards, Chuckiesdad/Talk/Contribs 17:25, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I think NW did that for me. I was just so furious at the time. But anyway, let's just WP:STICK this, man. --Eaglestorm (talk) 17:30, 5 December 2009 (UTC)