User talk:Havenx23

Welcome!
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Simplified Manual of Style


 * Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
 * Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
 * Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
 * Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
 * No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to [ do so].
 * Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
 * Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! JesseRafe (talk) 14:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Recent edits to Gambit
We've discussed this before. Waiting six months does not change the outcome. If you insist on bringing it up again, please do so on the talk page instead of disrupting the article. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:41, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I see you're at it again. At this point, you've pushed the boundaries of good faith into being deliberately disruptive. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:31, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

First off you need to get your facts straight, it seems to me you contradict yourself. Why you ask, well let me answer that for you. You claim on here that hulk 181 is wolverines 1st app and not 180. Well the reasoning seems to be wolverine is only in one panel in 180, but he's in most the comic of 181 and on the cover. Now you also claim gambits 1st appearance is in #266 but yet hes in most the comic of annual #14...called by name, actually takes on cable,  full appearance in costume and, oh ya IT CAME OUT ALMOST A MONTH EARLIER....REALLY. The reason hulk 181 is considered the 1st app. On here I believe is because the cover had appeal...bs the reason uncanny #266 is considered the 1st app. is because of the cover but wait for reasons stated it makes no sense... it seems to me you post on appeal rather than actual truth. Overstreet lists 180 as 1st app and 181 as 1st full app. Cgc also puts 1st app. On the slab of 180 and first full on 181...now of you want to go into the ...oh but uncanny 266 actually took place before the annual 14, then you are talking timeline and we would have to rething everyones 1st app by which comic yook place furthest back in the timeline which would change allot of first app. Like flashbacks spider man, superman or even batman may have had.

There are many comics on here that mislead collectors do to your false info.

A 1st appearance should contain at least 3 of 4: 1. full appearance in costume, 2. called by name by self or other. 3. Having a speaking part. 4. Be involved in the action in some way.

Now Annual #14: gambit has all this, hulk 180 has 3 of 4.... please explain your logic.

I believe you are knowledgeable in comics but I also believe you have fallen into this eye appeal false info. Spawn: 1st app on here is spawn #1 but with your logic flip flopping the way it does wouldn't it be Malibu sun #13. I believe it's spawn. Malibu sun was not an actual comic and the pic of spawn was just a preview of the cover nothing else. Havenx23 (talk) 04:57, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

I will continue to provide truthful changes until accurate info is provided

1st app. Wolverine 180, 1st full 181..I can agree with. 1st app. Gambit annuall 14, second uncanny 266. This is the truth. Havenx23 (talk) 05:01, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

The funny thing is, alot of people talk about this issue and don't understand or agree with your info but just do nothing About it besides talk because they think they cant. Me, I am ting to inform people of truth and facts. This sight is edited by anyone and that info at anytime can be false ore inaccurate and in your case it is whether you want to believe that or not...truth Havenx23 (talk) 05:06, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Now please tell me I am being disruptive. Provide the truth and people like me wouldn't have to fix your mistakes. Oh and one more thing. Did you know hulk 180 was considered the 1st appearance of wolverine before the internet age took off in the 80s early 90s. Funny how false info and eye appeal over something so powerfull can change things. Havenx23 (talk) 05:12, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * As previously stated - I didn't make the decision on what Gambit's first appearance was. Wizard Magazine and Overstreet did. Do you have a source for your definition of first appearances? If so, you can add it to the first appearance article. I am not contradicting myself because I did not write the Wolverine article, but because you point it out, I corrected the description. Thanks. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:58, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Since you are continuing this behavior, I have put on notice on the Administrator's board. Argento Surfer (talk) 20:35, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Ambox notice.svg There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

Really you claim your source is overstreet but overstreet actually lists 180 as first brief app. 181 as first full along with cgc and this is what this site should display as well... not a cameo. Wikipedias page also describes what a 1st appearance is, which contradicts your claim yet you claim im being disruptive. My source is overstreet and cgc as well wikipedia but guys like you alone avoid the true facts. Report me, I don't care. This site has been known to be inaccurate more times than accurate do to people like you and provide false information to those seeking truth. I don't disappear I actually have to work and take care of a family by driving a 18 wheeler and don't always have time to fix your mistakes....yes your inaccurate, false mistakes. You may not have a life but some of us do and have to work for a living. Havenx23 (talk) 04:31, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Back from your latest road trip, I see.
Please refrain from adding unsourced information to articles, particularly of the libelous variety. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:36, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Please avoid making personal attacks per WP:NPA as you did in this edit summary. And just one piece of advice, if you want to call someone like Argento Surfer dumb, I would avoid using phrases such as "ligament sources". 73.168.15.161 (talk) 21:32, 4 September 2017 (UTC)