User talk:HungryPaperweight

I'm afraid I'm going to be taking a Wikibreak. This isn't because I'm having problems with Wikipedia or its users. I just have too much to do in the real world and not enough time to do it. Hopefully I'll be back soon, but I'm not expecting to return for several weeks. If you need to contact me, your best bet would be my GSU talk page (that place is a lot smaller so I'll still be hanging around there). Just make sure it's important. Until then, TTFN.

Welcome to my talk page. Feel free to make any non-vandalism-type posts here. I only have two rules (even though the second isn't really a rule): Just keep these two things in mind and there shouldn't be any problems.
 * 1) Please remember to be civil. I'm generally against deleting talk page edits, but I will if you start attacking people or swearing or anything else like that. "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all."
 * 2) If you start a conversation here, this is where I'll reply. If I start a conversation on your talk page, I'd appreciate it if you responded there (don't worry, I'll be watching it). Of course, since some people will respond here instead, I'll keep talking on yours, but I'll put links at the tops of the conversations so that passer-bys can find the other half of the conversation if they want to. (I honestly don't understand why people reply to their talk page on another person's page.)

Proof?
Proof? What do you mean proof? Some random user kept removing info for no reason. What crap are you talking about? --Naruto134 00:00, 26 august 2007 (UTC)
 * First of all, I'd like to say that I don't want to see foul language on my talk page (in other words, no d*mn, cr*p, sh*t, f*ck, or anything else I can't think of right now). Secondly, I didn't really see much point in explaining myself seeing as the user in question was obviously a vandal. However, the edit I reverted happened to be an inclusion rather than a deletion. He/she said: "It well have a new Ghostfrek." (Yes, that's how he/she typed it.) I figured he/she just made it up and decided to include it, but I felt I should explain myself anyways. So to answer your question, the "no proof" is because he/she just randomly said that a new Ghostfreak would appear. (For those thousands of you who don't know, we're talking about Ben 10: Secret of the Omnitrix.) The world&#39;s hungriest paperweight 16:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Omnitrix
Hi, thanks for disclosing your discussion with your brother. It's not a serious problem, and it's not like it's possible to expect people to keep things on Wikipedia and only on Wikipedia, but there are some concerns that can arise from such discussions. Off-wiki decisions and actions have caused problems on Wikipedia in the past, when they lead to inappropriate behavior on Wiki, or just unsupported actions. And of course, if you share an internet connection, it can be possible for folks to think you have some sockpuppets. I suggest using due care in the future. Perhaps if your brother has something to say in a discussion where you're already involved, you can take his arguments and present them, as it's not like decisions are made simply by numbers. FrozenPurpleCube 23:36, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the concern, and I'll keep this in mind, but I don't know if I made myself perfectly clear. I had no intention of getting him involved (hence a half-confession), and I had no idea that he would get involved. After all, I can't read minds nor control the actions of others (especially him). I simply mentioned it to him because...actually, now that I think about it, it was probably just a reaction thing, not a "well thought out" thing. Still, it's all water under the bridge for now. The world&#39;s hungriest paperweight 00:18, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Nope, I don't expect you to do so, but the fact is, there are people who may see such things poorly, especially when no notice is given. The best suggestion I can offer if he wants to comment is full disclosure, by saying he's your brother and you talked about it offline.  That might at least address sock-puppeting.  Ah well, at least at this stage, it's not likely there's going to be a consensus to delete.  I do think some consideration of the best way to present the information is appropriate, but that's another discussion.  FrozenPurpleCube 19:24, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that is one thing we all should be able to agree on. As I keep trying to say, deletion is not the best course of action. Editing is a far more reliable, efficient, effective, and less controversial method. But for some reason, many delete advocates are getting too caught up in "the letter of the law" to see this. Next time I'm going to point them towards this.
 * Wait, are we talking about the Omnitrix itself, or the discussion? Ah, well, that doesn't change my opinion. The world&#39;s hungriest paperweight 19:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Me either, as soon as this discussion is closed (should be in the next 2-3 days), perhaps we should start up a discussion on how to proceed with the article. I can think of at least a few ways to go.  I'll go ahead and put something on the talk page now.  FrozenPurpleCube 19:52, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

hyuuga-sama
For the full conversation, see User talk:Someguy0830.

One doesn't need to assume good faith when there's evidence to the contrary. The user has been told repeatedly not to use talk pages as a forum and persists anyway. I do realize it seems rude, but I've been dealing with him/her for a while now. The user pops up every now and then to start a chat thread or something like that, then disappears for days only to return and continue. Just clearing it saves time, instead of eliciting personal attacks when someone tries to explain it. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 17:42, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Courtesy
For the other half of this conversation, see User talk:Kaburicho

Hey there~ Did you notice how long that argument was lasting? No one was saying anything and it seemed like the original poster didn't get the message or was being fueled on by the replies he was getting. Is using CAPS, THAT scary? *kaburicho 16:58, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Why do you think I wrote it in " ", because I normally don't use it - it's used in forums and places like Smashwiki. Smashwiki is what it is though. It's not an encyclopedia, it's a wiki, and that's it. It obviously doesn't care about grammar (an observation I've made that is based on fact). *kaburicho 03:32, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

So...
I understand from your user page you like userboxes? ;) Well, if you're still intersted, this page might be what you're looking for. Happy editing! — May the Edit be with you, always. ( T | C ) 22:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, most of them I "borrowed" from a friend's page. The only two I made were just random ideas that I decided to act upon. So I wouldn't quite say that I like userboxes, but that's mostly because I'm not too familiar with them. As for that link, I already found it but haven't had time to look at it much. Wait, why am I even saying this? You probably won't see my response anytime soon. Oh well, thanks anyways! I mean, it's the thought that counts, right? The world&#39;s hungriest paperweight 05:05, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Um, you know I took the time reading that little bit of info about you replying on your talk page when discussion is started there, don't you? I mean, it is at the top of the page. ;) — May the Edit be with you, always. ( T | C ) 22:23, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Oops. It's so new even I forgot about it. Oh well, I mostly meant I didn't think you'd go to the trouble of seeing whether or not I responded. That should teach me not to make assumptions (emphasis on the word "should"). Plus, I'm sure there are people out there who don't bother reading these kinds of things. I'm glad to know you do. The world&#39;s hungriest paperweight 04:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I think you'll fit in quite nicely here. :) And before I forget:



T-borg has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

— May the Edit be with you, always. ( T | C ) 14:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Images
For the rest of the conversation, see User talk:Someguy0830

A few reasons for the last two:
 * 1) Benmummy yanks Ken out of a vent. Hardly a substantial appearance.
 * 2) Way Big, likewise, delivers a few big punches.
 * 3) So as to keep the fair-use patrol at bay, best to limit it to ones which appear in more than two episodes. They can be justified better that way, though in all likelihood it wouldn't suffice.
 * — Someguy0830 (T | C) 06:00, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 24 November 2015 (UTC)