User talk:Gungadin/Archive 12

Wow
Your talk page is majorly clogged with image notifications! Talking of images, do you have one of Disa? I think hers is the only article without one, and I noticed you were doing her family's articles today. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 13:49, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


 * lol, I know, they are all the orphaned minor images. I need to delte them all, but I cant be bothered. The only epsidoes of Disa I had was during December 1990. Each time she's seen in those episodes, in cardboard city, or giving birth etc, it's always night time, and you can barely see Disa's face, especially as she has jet black hair. So I deleted the images. I thought it was better to wait util I can get hold of some 1991 episodes again, where she will hopefully be seen in daylight. Perhaps she's a vampire! Gung  adin  13:53, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, the only one image I have of Disa is her on her back in the dark, giving birth! -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 13:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, I have that one too Gung  adin  13:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey
Do you still have MSN or have an e-mail address I can contact you on? There's something I need to talk to you about off-wiki -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 16:22, 13 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Sure, it's sherripie@hotmail.co.uk Gung  adin  17:48, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

You'll like this
Ln of x makes an appearance on the Digital Spy forums -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 01:45, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I cant read it :( looks like it's been deleted. Gung  adin  15:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * It was - he got really bad and paedophilic (is that a word?!) -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 21:57, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


 * What a sicko. Maybe he's the one who has kidnapped AP! Gung  adin  23:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Jeez
You've been busy with the sources tonight! -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 22:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeh, I had tons of them clogging up my favourites list. I sometimes bung them there when I come accross them and then they stay there indefinitely. Ive still got tons more to add, but it's very time consuming putting them to talk pages :) Gung  adin  22:55, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Stacey
Hi, I was just wondering why there are no pictures on the Stacey Branning page except her profile picture. Being relatively new, I am inexperienced in putting up pictures, and I was wondering if you or someone else would perhaps download a few pictures to put on her page which represents her time in Walford.

Thank you--Gossipking (talk) 12:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I will see what I can do. Gung adin  16:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much, I don't mean to be a pest. It's just once I tried to upload a photo of Bradley and Stacey on their wedding day but was unsuccessful. Seeing as you regularly update the EastEnders profiles I turned to you. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gossipking (talk • contribs) 17:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


 * My pleasure. Happy to help. And you're not a pest, that's what my talk page is here for :) Gung  adin  17:54, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Just saw the pictures and I have to say that they're great thanks! I was wondering if you could tell me, though, where you get your pics from and how you upload them Gossipking (talk) 11:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Most of my images are personally captured screengrabs. This basically means I pause EE, press a capture button on my digital box, and then transfer it to my PC to uplaod via USB. Other people capture them from clips online. To do that you may have to alter the hardware acceleration in Desktop settings, else the screenies come out black. We're not supposed to use other people's screenshots from other websites unless we have permission, and BBC publicity photos generally arent allowed here.


 * To upload to Wiki, you need to click on "upload file" to the left of any page on wikipedia < From there you have to choose the file you are uploading, so television screenshot for instance. Then you need to give it a fair use rationale. Image:Stax.jpg on this image, the rationale is the template under the picture, and for each image we have to specify why we think it's fair use in a given article. This is because the image is copyrighted to the BBC, so per wiki rules, it's an unfree image and we have to clarify why we should be using it on a free  encyclopedia. The image also has to have a licensing tag, to say it's a copyrighted screenshot. If it doesnt have these things, or they arent done properly, the image will eventually be deleted.


 * Here's some guidelines you might find useful to read, Uploading images and Images and Image use policy. it's a shame as nobody has given you a welcome message yet, as that usually contains all the useful links for beginners. Gung adin  15:25, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok thanks, I think I know what I'm doing now. But just one more question, do you have any pics of Stacey when she first arrived, because they seem to be the only ones I don't have. Thanks a lot Gossipking (talk) 17:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I might have seen one when I looked through my file :) But she doesnt really look any different tbh. I'll check again. Gung  adin  18:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey, me again :) Hate to be a pest, but do you happen to have any pics of Tanya Branning? Her page seems to be a little bare also. Thanks Gossipking (talk) 14:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I don't think I do. Gung adin  14:03, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Barnstar
I just wanted to say a quick thank you for the Barnstar - it put a real smile on my face. So thank you very much! Frickative (talk) 23:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Charity
Sorry, Gunga. I was busy over the weekend (Iron Man at cinema, Relatives, etc). In response, I'm not a 100% sure about her coming back. Conq. 6 May 2008 14:47 (UTC)

London Meetup - Sunday May 11th
We're hoping to have regular meetups for wikipedia enthusiasts in London. The next one is this Sunday lunchtime (May 11th) see Meetup/London 9. in Holborn. Come along! -- Harry Wood (talk) 15:17, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Hi

I just wondered why you changed my edit of the Steven Beale page. --Lizzie Brookes (talk) 18:14, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok that's fine. I'll write it in simpler form this time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lizzie Brookes (talk • contribs) 19:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Todd Carty    In HELLO MAGAZINE dated July 30th 2002-Carty  was front page with his partner Dina and children James and Thomas in an exclusive interview.
Headlined - TODD CARTY - THE REAL REASON WHY I AM LEAVING EASTENDERS Sets the record straight about his shock departure. He had already decided to leave the series two years before and had known long before the headlines his date of departure, according to the article. Todd was appalled at the word AXED and other such headlines in such as THE SUN and News of the World.

"Dina wanted me home and the family wanted me home and that is what is most important to me", he says in HELLO article. He went on to say, he wanted to be with his two young boys more and watch them grow up and move on to other projects as an actor. So more quality time with his family and a change of course with his career. And out of respect to the actor, I thought Gungadin, that your presentation on TODD CARTY is a lot better presented than my previous efforts, only the word AXED may yet stick out in confusion to a reading public, who may not see it as the character AXED, but the actor. Even though the actor himself has stated he did not like the word AXED associated with his leaving the show, when it was his own decision entirely.

I would simply ask you to consider that one change, as to me, Carty is a great actor right back to Tucker days and deserves the respect in relation to the true story from the actors own mouth in interviews, about his departure from the square.

I will be adding any updated information that comes my way in the future, and out of respect for your excellent imput to the biography. Of course I stand corrected by you if you deem it neccessary.

Good to be able to communicate and discuss, I am reasonably new to this and thanks a million for making contact.Roberto — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomassoroberto (talk • contribs)

RE: Alma Halliwell
Hiya Shirley. I think I may have made a mistake in Alma Halliwell's profile by including 1984 in the duration years. So you can delete it as I can't seem to find anything either that says she appeared in 1984. Shakirfan (talk) 00:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Matthew Marsden
I dont see your logic as regards Matthew Marsden.You insist on putting his ex girlfriends in the article yet do not want to put in about his boxing training.Laim Neeson was a trained boxer... is that not relevant? He is not still dating those women so why put them in if that is your logic.

Also there is nothing to suggest that he is NOT still boxing as that is something that he is likely to continue as he is still playing parts in action movies.

Your moderating is biased and unbalanced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.4.227.89 (talk) 18:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * What exactly is your problem with listing his ex-girlfriends? Just because he no longer dates them does not mean that we cant say he did in the article. Especially as sources are provided for all of them. It is a biography which includes his history. It's not just about the here and now. By your logic we would remove all his old film credits once the films were completed. Plus, those women were notable for being in the public eye and it's of interest to readers. You seem to have a problem with certain women, particularly that girl from the Honeyz. You leave some, remove others. So what's your logic? This is just a case of "you dont like".


 * The stuff about his boxing training etc is not suitable for a "personal life" section unless it can be shown that he continues to box. Put it in his career section next to the film credits if you really want, but make sure it's all sourced. What has Liam Neeson got to do with anything? If Matthew Marsden is a trained boxer, who continues to do boxing a s a hobby/sport, then it's relevant. If he learnt a few moves for a film, it's not suitable for a personal life section. Gung adin  19:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

You are mistaken.It has nothing to do with "Not liking".It is called being balanced and consistent.

Marsden trained for over a year for the role in "Shiner" and as far as i have seen from interviews he continues to do that.It is relevant that it was said that he could have become a pro boxer by a world champion. Same as it is relevant that he is a black belt in Taekwondo. If you want to list women that he has dated and think that is relevant then other things that he has done in the past is relevant, not just things that "You like". Apparently he is married now and doesnt "do" those women any more so why list them? I would contend that there is only one woman on the list of his ex's that is known to the public.

Why is Neeson relevant?Well it is listed that he was a trained boxer and a keen footballer.It appears that you have one set of rules for one, another for another. This is the problem with these sites.You have also been quite comfortable having people post derrogatory things on this page yet you have jumped to edit what i have written.To be honest i don't really care but I think you are inconsistent with your editing.

Have a nice day.:) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.4.227.89 (talk) 06:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * You might want to look at the policy Biographies of living persons. Of particular interest to you should be No original research, which says "Wikipedia does not publish original research or original thought", and Verifiability, which says "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". When you say (as you did above), "there is nothing to suggest that he is NOT still boxing as that is something that he is likely to continue as he is still playing parts in action movies", that is original research because you are making assumptions. Nothing you included was referenced. It all could be true, but you havent proved that it is, and if you want your stuff to stay in Biography articles, then you have to add references. If it's an interview on television, cite the television show using cite episode template. If it's from an online newspaper, link to the interview. If you read it in an offline publication, then cite an offline reference with date, page etc. If you have problems doing that, ask me and I will help.


 * As I was saying, If he continus to train in boxing, then cite a source to say so. Otherwise, site a source to say that he trained (Past tense) for over a year for the film Shiner and add it as prose in his career section. If you learn a specific skill for a job, then that's part of your career, no? Unless you continue to box as a sport/hobby, and if he does then a source should back that up, which you can include and there will be no problem here. Just so you know, I really dont have an aversion to that info being included. If you find a source for these things, then you can say almost anything you want. I'm no fan of this actor. I added most of the sourced info there, not because I follow his career, but because I saw that the article was a mess of original research and unverifiable facts. So I rewrote and sourced, just as I do with any article I might happen to stumble across.


 * You removing sourced information is hardly being "balanced and consistent". You have a clear dislike for listing some of those women especially that Heavenli woman, and that is about what suits your taste, not what's best for the article. I, on the other hand, dont have a problem with you including any information, the only thing I ask (well Wikipedia policy asks for this actually), is that you source it, which you didnt do. I'm not removing that information for any other reason. If people write derogatory things on that page and I havent removed it, that's because I hadnt noticed it. This is nothing personal. I just happened to check the page after your edits. It has a long history of someone removing sourced information, but i'm sure you know all about that... Gung  adin  11:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Matthew Marsden
Seems that white girls must be on the list but black girls must not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.17.96.119 (talk) 19:21, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Cant be bothered to argue with you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.4.227.89 (talk) 20:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I dont think there's any evidence to suggest that racial prejudice is his/her motive here. I thought Carly Carter was white anyway. Gung adin  20:29, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

It's Carley, not Carly. She is black. Check it by yourself:

http://www.famous.uk.com/preview-action-nl.do?a=search-action-nl.do%3F%26searchstring%3Dmatthew%2Bmarsden%26page%3D0%26searchfield%3DC%26searchtype%3Di_only%26orderby%3Ddesc&searchstring=matthew+marsden&prevbarcode=04504715

http://www.crawfordscommercials.co.uk/profile_women.php?modelID=287&cat=browsewomen —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.17.96.119 (talk) 21:09, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh right, I had seen this model of the same name and assumed it was her I stand corrected. I cant say why that user is deleting these women from his page, he/she has repeatedly not answered that. Perhaps it's censorship. Marsden's personal life was all over the British press in the 1990s, not all of it was very positive either. Gung  adin  21:29, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Matthew Marsden
I wouldn't believe anything that is in the national press anyway. It has constantly been shown as unrealiable. I also question anyone who would sell their story about a celebrity for money. There is no news if it is good news. Quoting tabloids does nothing for your credability.

I have also noted that you are inconsistent with your editing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.189.72.6 (talk) 12:49, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I dont really care what you think of my editing, so I dont know why you keep telling me. I'm bored of you and your whinging. You have just proved what I always suspected, that you are trying to censor anything negative from appearing on Matthew Marsden's page. You are probably some groupie, or maybe his mum, but it's not as if the derogatory tabloid reporting is being cited on his page, is it? so what's the problem? A lot of negative things could have been said which have been left out. All wiki's page does is list that he dated these women. The reasons for his breakups, cheatings etc have not ben added. So move on. Gung  adin  13:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Cheatings? What evidence do you have that he has ever cheated? To be honest I question YOUR obsession with this actor.The Album "say Who" was not released although you are able to purchase copies of it on amazon. It seems that you have an agenda, leaving out most things that are positive about him and putting in gossip and negativity. It illustrates the danger of a site like this and how someone like you can manipulate things to appear negative.Your omission of his training as a boxer is silly.It is a piece of trivia that people could be interested in yet you would rather talk about his girlfriends. I see you are obsessed with soaps....says it all really. Oh and I certainly am not his mother. Although I do think that you are clearly disrespectful to people, especially the childish comments like that. Too much time on your hands methinks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.229.236.26 (talk) 05:23, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "methinks" - Sadly, I don't see much evidence of you thinking at all, certainly not logical thought, anyway.


 * I can't imagine where you got the impression that I care about your opinions of me and my interests. I've had split ends that have caused me more concern. How ironic that you say I've got too much time on my hands. Clearly you haven't realised how much time you are spending on wikipedia talking about Matthew Marsden, deleting facts about Matthew Marsden, adding unsourced information about Matthew Marsden, and whinging about Matthew Marsden on my talk page. And you call me obsessed! Talking of obsessions, i'm noticing that you seem a little obsessed with me now. Please do not post on my talk page anymore, any further posts from you will be deleted without being read, and if you continue to pester me I will report you for harassment and you may be blocked.


 * You are having trouble grasping the way wikipedia works, despite me explaining things to you multiple times. I will spell it out for you in capitals, let's hope you can process this. Don't worry, I won't use any big words. IF YOU WANT TO INCLUDE INFORMATION IN BIOGRAPHICAL ARTICLES, IT NEEDS TO BE SOURCED. THIS IS DONE TO STOP EDITORS INCLUDING POTENTIALLY FALSE INFORMATION ABOUT PEOPLE. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH YOU INCLUDING ANYTHING. FIND A SOURCE TO BACK UP YOUR CLAIMS AND FEEL FREE TO ADD WHATEVER YOU LIKE TO THE ARTICLE. IF YOU DON'T DO THIS, THE "TRIVIA" YOU ARE SO DESPERATE TO INCLUDE CANNOT REMAIN ON WIKIPEDIA. THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS YOURS.


 * Your claims that I am adding negativity to this second-rate actor's article is just your imagination. Posting my thoughts about him on my talk page is not the same as posting them in his article, you dont seem to be able to differentiate. No matter how much I like or dislike something or someone, I dont add that bias to articles I edit, and there are various users on this site who can vouch for my contributions. Sadly, it's you who adds bias by attempting to turn Marsden's wiki page into some kind of fan tribute site. Everything I wrote in the article was taken from external sources, not from my own memory, unlike your additions. The masses of gossip concerning his split from Rachel John and the way he dumped Heavenli for the model have not been included in the article. It merely states that he dated these women, and as I have already said numerous times, THE REASONS FOR HIS BREAKUPS HAVE NOT BEEN INCLUDED. I have not manipulated anything, so it would help if you actually knew what you were talking about before making accusations like those.


 * Finally, if you are able to purchase his album then it is inaccurate to say it is unreleased. That's a contradiction in itself. Please don't post here again. Gung adin  17:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Alma Halliwell
Thanks for adding references to Alma Halliwell but http://biographybase.com can't be used as a WP:RS source since it is a 2004 copy of wikipedia itself. See Mirrors_and_forks/Abc. Quale (talk) 15:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok, thanks for letting me know. Gung adin

AnemoneProjectors
Hi Gungadin,

I'm an editor on The X Factor side of things and a user we both know is AnemoneProjectors. He used to be heavily involved in Wikipedia, but I have noticed that he hasn't made an edit since 11 March 2008. Do you know what's happened to him? He's my opposite number when it comes to editing X Factor articles, and, seeing as the fifth series is about to begin, his help and knowledge has never been more needed. Thanks :) Wiki edit Jonny (talk) 22:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Jonny, AnemoneProjectors's disappearance is a bit of a mystery to me too, and i'm afraid I can't shed any light on it. It's very strange that he just stopped editing like that, because he's edited pretty much every day since he joined and even for about a year before that when he was under a different username. He hasn't logged on to messenger since either, and no one has had any replies to emails. In the past, if he was going away, he always put a wiki-break notice up, which makes it even more puzzling. It's possible that he just grew bored and gave up on wiki completely, and I really hope it's just that and nothing bad has happened to him. Sadly, there isn't really any way to find out, but if I do hear from him I will let you know :) Gung  adin  23:40, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Damn I wish AnemoneProjectors was around. I know he'd back me up on this discussion for the deletion of Leona Lewis on The X Factor. The article is a shambles and just because most of the people adding opinions to the debate are fans (rather than informed Wikipedia users) it looks like the article's going to be saved... great. Wiki edit Jonny (talk) 14:51, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * lol, I agree. Gung adin  15:50, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Well said ;) Wiki edit Jonny (talk) 12:40, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Frank Butcher protection request
Semi-protected for 6 weeks. CIreland (talk) 01:05, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Biting Newcomers.
I noticed the message you recently left to. Please remember: do not bite the newcomers. If you see someone make a common mistake, try to politely point out what they did wrong and how to correct it. Me ta gr aph comment 10:33, 13 June 2008 (UTC) FYI, that user is not new, he and his numerous socks have been here for a very long time now, making the exact same erroneous edits, reverting changes that differ from his own, and refusing to acknowledge anyone when they ask him to stop. Plus, there was nothing bitey about my messgae. I asked a question as to why he is continuously adding false information to the article after he has been reverted continuously, behaviour that has nothing to do with whether he's a new editor or not anyway. Thanks for the warning though, you might like to read Don't template the regulars. Gung adin  17:27, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * He should have been tagged then, as to avoid confusion. What you said was biting the newcomers/borderline personal attack. DTTR is a essay, not a policy. The template would have said exactly what i would have. Me ta gr aph  comment 20:53, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Do you have any proof she/he is a sock? You may also wish to read WP:DTTR, specificly 'It is not a policy or guideline, and editors are not obliged to follow it.'


 * The stock message was fine here, a personalised one would not have been any different.


 * To the user, if they are a sockpuppet, they should be tagged as one so editors like me don't come along and see people like you in effect being exteremly rude towards them and assume they are new. Grouping or implying that all annon's are vandal's is bad practice and also not assuming good faith, but i guess thats irrelevant as well. Just try and be nicer next time. Best wishes, Me ta gr aph  comment 20:30, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

To add more, i appologise if you felt i was being impersonal. It wasn't my intention. I gave you a template because what i would have written out would have sounded almost exactly the same. Me ta gr aph comment 20:49, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Do not give me orders for a start, no one said you were obliged to follow WP:DTTR did they? But as I have been editing here since early 2006, you can safely assume that I already know the policies here. If you cant be bothered to do your research then that's your problem, not mine, and the fact that the message below mine on User talk:88.109.170.11's talk page by another user, Trampikey, says "The time it takes to revert the things you add to the articles (under a multitude of user names and IP addresses) could be used more effectively to improve them", should have given you a bit of a clue that this user has been here under different guises before. But perhaps you only bothered to read my message and warn me. How thorough of you.  There was no personal attack in my message to the ip. Please read it again and tell me where the personal attack is please, and where exactly have i been "extremely rude" to him? Also, perhaps you should take a look at the definition of hypocrite while you're at it, because I notice that you were quite happy to "bite" this so-called new-user, not once, but four times. You also threatened to get him blocked, which makes your warning of my post (tame in comparison to yours) even more ridiculous. Thankyou. Gung  adin  21:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Not bite, warn. Me ta gr aph comment
 * That poor new user may not agree with you there. Four warnings on the trot seems like biting Gung adin  22:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I never once warned you. Its a user message, not a warning. Me ta gr aph comment


 * If you don't think it's a warning, then why did you use the edit summary "biting newcomers warning", when giving me the warning message? Gung  adin  22:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You implied that i need to read the policy like i'd done something wrong. Me ta gr aph comment


 * Yes, I implied that you needed to read it, never that you were obliged to follow it as you inferred, though that might be an idea. Gung adin  22:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * 'Under a multitude of user names and IP addresses' could refer to other people, and i assumed it did. Again, the sockpuppet tag would have done nicely here. Me ta gr aph comment


 * I don't see how you could think that refers to other people when it's a message directed to one user clearly about one user and his multiple accounts, but nevermind. Gung adin  22:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't automaticly assume every annon is a sock of a user, why would i think differently on this case? The talk page was not tagged. There was no evidence. For all i knew, this was a editor new to the site, why would i investigate he was a sock? Me ta gr aph comment


 * As I already said, the message from Trampikey was a major hint. Gung adin  22:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * 'so that anonymous users like you can't edit it.' I don't know about you, but that sounds pretty rude to me. Me ta gr aph comment


 * Not rude, a fact. If I get the page protected, then anonymous users like the ip cant edit it. Fact. By your standards, that's merely a warning anyway, not a bite. Gung adin  22:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I wasn't refering to me blocking him, huggle automaticly refers editors after their fourth warning to be blocked. I didn't want to revert his edits again, so simply told him to stop. Me ta gr aph comment


 * You said "before i end up reporting you to be blocked." And if simply telling him to stop is all you were doing, then how can I be told off for doing the same. Plus I actually tried to find the reasons why he was making these errors too. Gung  adin  22:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Obviously, your not in a good mood so i wont reply for a few hours unless you raise any more valid points. Please try and be civil, it was a simple user message and i didn't expect such a backlash. Me ta gr aph comment 21:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Being civil works both ways, and perhaps you'll think twice before giving patronising "messages" to users in the future, especially when the content of the message is not applicable to that user. Gung adin  22:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Its a notice as per WP:UTM. I retracted the last two warnings. I said 'i' because a new user wouldn't know what huggle is, and i am responsible for its actions. This user did not need to be blocked, which is why i stopped warning him. As to Trampikey's warning, it was not clear. Just because it was clear to you doesn't mean its clear to anyone else. Tag sockpuppets with a sockpuppet tag. Just get over it. Remove it if you don't think you deserve it. I couldn't care less. Don't go calling him a poor user, you haven't stuck up for him once. Just try to be nicer to users in the future, thats all i wanted to say.  Me ta gr aph  comment 23:59, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * If it's a notice don't refer to it as a warning then. If you are responsible for Huggle's actions, then how can you say that you would not be responsible for trying to block him then, you cant have it both ways. Trampikey's message was abundantly clear, saying it isn't just reflects badly on your comprehension, not the clarity of his message. If you don't care less about the message, then dont give it in the first place, especially when you give it out incorrectly. I will call him a "poor user" all I want, because I just feel so wretched at the amount of times you gave him warnings. I just hope you havent frightened him away for good. Please remember in the future, don't bite newbies. FYI, I have helped a lot of new users, this was a special circumstance, which you overlooked in your haste to bung a template on my talk page. Anyone would think you were trying to raise your talk page edits, wonder why that would be?! And as I have said numerous times, I was not even rude to him, that is just your interpretation and it is wrong. My message explained what would happen if he continued to include false information to the article i.e it would be protected, and I also tried to ascertain why he was adding that false information in the first place. Regardless of this, don't bark orders at me, and possibly start taking some of your own advice too. Gung adin  00:18, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Ugh, your probably one of the emotionally charged editors i have ever met. You cant remain civil during normal conversations, edit emotionally, and don't assume good faith. Its too difficult to deal with you, so im just going to retract my notification. My warnings we're legitimate. Why would i want to raise my talk page edit count? Why would i want to raise my edit count anyway? What are you implying? You escalated a simple user message to a conflict, so im going to back down. It was suppost to be a helpful message. Best, Me ta gr aph  comment 00:51, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Ha, I see you're getting personal now, I could spam you with a template for that, but I'm not one of those editors who gets off on that kind of thing. I edit emotionally? You know nothing about the way I edit, and if you did you would realise that that claim is just as ridiculous as the way you spell "suppost". It's supposed btw. Also you may want to look up the difference between your and you're. Gung adin  01:08, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Pauline Fowler
I know she's a work of fiction but other past characters are referred to in the past tense. I'm just curious as to why her article is written in present tense. I could understand if EastEnders was a defunct serial, but it's not. I'm just asking why. Conquistador2k6 13 June 2008 23:29 (UTC)


 * It's all to do with it being a featured article. It was changed because wiki manual of style says all plot description has to be written in present tense. I tried to stop that happening by writing it all in an OOU fashion, but ultimately I was outvoted and other users on the FAC changed it, and I dont particularly like it, but my opinions were not really listened to and you can read all about that on the Pauline talk pages. You'll notice Pauline flits from past to present throughout the article. Real world discussion of the character /storyline is in past, plot description is in present. While I dont like present in the main, I do now believe that all characters should be introduced as "so and so is a fictional character" instead of was, because they are a fictional character whether they are past or present. Saying she was a fictional character implies she no longer is one, if you see what I mean? Gung  adin  22:40, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Bianca Montgomery
Hello

I wanted to ask if you can cast your eye over the Bianca Montgomery article, and in particular the discussion page and the topic headlined "References!!" Your input would be appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.163.184 (talk) 18:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Certainly :) Gung  adin  18:42, 26 June 2008 (UTC)