User talk:MagicalHopStep

Wild Arms 5
Nothing has been removed from the article besides minor character details. Everything else has been placed in paragraph format. Please do not revert again, as that is the correct format for the article. TTN 17:32, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

You are incorrect, and if you vandalize the article again, I will be forced to report you. If you feel that what you are doing is right, talk about it in Discussion first-don't just mess around with people's hard work. I've seen hundreds of articles like this, and ALL of them have character sections, as well as trivia ones. It is you who is mistaken here.MagicalHopStep 17:54, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Vandalism is is "intentionally making repeated non-constructive edits." I am cleaning the article, so this would be a content dispute. You're looking at the wrong articles then. You need to be looking at featured articles like Final Fantasy X, Mystical Ninja Starring Goemon, The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker, and various others. As there is nothing to discuss (we have set standards that cannot be changed by a lower consensus), there would be no point in doing so. TTN 18:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


 * If you want me to help discuss how to improve the article from there, feel free to request it. TTN 18:05, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

You are vandalizing. Removing whole sections is vandalizing. The character sections are part of this article. People have worked hard on them, and you have no right to remove them. STOP DOING IT.MagicalHopStep 18:08, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Magical, assume good faith. TTN is probably just following style guidelines that have been set and discussed for a while.  I've asked him to help point out what they are, so that you both can discuss this properly.  I'm assuming it's from his reading of WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines but what do I know?  Again, don't jump to conclusions. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:35, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

You need to stop talking down to me. I'm not an idiot, nor am I assuming things. I asked him politely to stop his edits and discuss the issue on the talke page, but he has refused. To prevent an edit war, I'm seeking for a staff member to intervene. He's the one who needs to "assume good faith", not just for me, but for the many other people who've spent months working on those sections he deleted without caring.MagicalHopStep 18:39, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

As one such person, I agree with her. I worked really hard on that article, and he just deletes it like that. It really upsets me. Such behavior is certainly not in good faith.24.3.186.152 18:41, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I apologize, but I really don't see any attempt to ask him to stop and discuss on the talk page. The only post on your user talk page is an immediate "stop vandalizing".  The article talk page doesn't show any discussion attempted at all.  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:47, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I posted it on his talk page, obviously. When he refused to talk it out, I created a discussion about it on my own on the talk page, where he still has not responded. I'm trying to show "good faith", but he just doesn't want it to happen.MagicalHopStep 18:51, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

3RR block
You have been blocked for 24 hours for violation of the three-revert rule. It is patently obvious that following 3 reversions made to Wild Arms 5, you logged out and continued to edit war. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. Neil  ム  19:33, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh please
Liar - the IP's first edit to Wild Arms 5 was on 26 September 2007, 2 minutes before your first edit to the page. Neil  ム  19:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me? What the heck is your problem? You can't call people a liar and make accusations without solid proof. That IP has nothing to do with me. Man, if there is one thing I hate about Wikipedia, it's the staff members who feel they can lump any IP that defends someone into the "duplicate account" bin. You are victimizing two innocent people here, and you ought to be ashamed of yourselves. That IP is not even remotely close to mine. If you must know, my IP begins with 67. The rest is certainly none of your business.MagicalHopStep 19:51, 30 September 2007 (UTC)