User talk:NotARealWord/Archive 1

Welcome!

 * }

AfD
Please don't make additional delete !votes on you AfD nominations. The nomination is interpreted as delete !vote. Armbrust Talk  Contribs  13:06, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I wasn't hoping to do ballot-stuffing. Just trying to put up a good argument. Should I simply edit my first post? NotARealWord (talk) 13:16, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Either edit your first post or you should write "Comment" at the begining instead of "Delete". Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  13:27, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Is there a reason you seem to be just randomly posting the same deletion nomination to a bunch of articles at once? Perhaps a suggestion they merge to a more general article (like Bay Boy (Gobots) the general Gobots article), or posting that it needs more references would be more appropriate first? Mathewignash (talk) 13:48, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Because, I do not believe them to meet the Notability requirements. I'm only doing this to relatively obscure topics. Please look at my deletion arguments/votes. If you feel they need to be merged, vote for that. If you need buttloads of Transformers articles, there's the option of visiting a Transformers-specific wiki. NotARealWord (talk) 13:56, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If you know that an article on a speficial fictional character could be merged back to a page about the fiction itself, isn't it your duty to propose that merge rather than a straight deletion? As for TFwiki, it's a private site run by a handful of fans who don't let other people in to edit. Mathewignash (talk) 14:24, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * What are you talking about? TFWiki does not work that way. Onthe topic of merging, if anybody believes a merge is necessary,they can propose that themselves and vote for that option in an "Articles for Deletion" page. NotARealWord (talk) 15:39, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I take it you don't know the TFWiki very well. It's server is run by a guy who blocked Wikipedia Transformers editors from it He has publically stated that he started that server to have a place away from Wikipedia to make his articles. Anyone who edits in a proper Wikipedia style with limiting things to notable topics with reliable sources (which is me, by his standards) gets reverted and blocked. Mathewignash (talk) 17:33, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No, its server is run by a guy who blocked YOU from it, he has publicly (learn to spell) stated that he started it to have a place away from YOU. As far as "proper Wikipedia style" goes, I have two points. First, your own talk pages show that you continually have to be reminded of what that style is and how to follow it. Second, some Wikipedia style components do not and cannot apply to a niche property like Transformers. By any reasonable standards of real world notability, there would only be about 4 Transformers articles on Wikipedia. If you check tfwiki you will see that we DO use reliable sources and are constantly removing unsourced rumors and leaks such as those that fill up Wikipedia pages on TFs. --Khajidha (talk) 14:52, 31 August 2010 (UTC) (edit under same name on tfwiki)

Improving Transformers articles
I wish to ask you a question many of the article on Transformers clearly need clean up and additional reliable sourcing. I think that many articles need better sourcing but wouldn't know where to start. I have taken my concerns to "Reliable sources for Transformers" but before I start removing them I think there needs to be debate what should be kept in regards to information for example an article like Optimus Prime. Also what needs to assessed what is fancruft. Otherwise we will have a furious edit wars. Dwanyewest (talk) 14:54, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I... don't know, really. But it does seem that the TF articles on Wikipedia seem to be a big mess. A Transformers DVD commentator blamed User:Mathewignash:

"The issue, simply, is not with "other Wikipedia users" - it is with Ignash himself. There is a reason the Transformers articles on Wikipedia are such a jumbled mess of copy-pasted partially-overly-detailed summaries, gross generalizations and list after list of Optimus Prime's appearances in Family Guy and Robot Chicken that lack any kind of consistency between each other and he is mainly it. Nearly everyone who ever tried to edit constructively there came here because he never compromises on his stupid, stupid way of organizing an article, and we neither want nor require his presence here."

(like Wikipedia, TFWiki content is under CC-By-SA) I'me not quite sure how true this is, though. NotARealWord (talk) 16:18, September 2010 (UTC)


 * Nevertheless I thought it must be started one at a time so lets start with the most famous Transformer Optimus Prime (Transformers), I am going to starting a conversation on how to improve the character articles at :See "Improving Optimus Prime" Dwanyewest (talk) 18:51, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

GI Joe articles
I think some articles are need of better work but most of them are better written and sourced than many Transformers articles. I could do with help with Power Rangers characters. I have added third person information regarding Green Ranger Tommy Oliver.

As you can see some of the other Power Rangers characters need alot of work. Dwanyewest (talk) 18:59, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Canvassing!
You are in violation of the Wikipedia canvasing rule, by only contacting editors you know will vote as you are in AFDs. Please see WP:Canvassing  D r e a m Focus  22:18, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes. Whilst I don't always vote delete on these articles (check the last few), Dream Focus is correct - you shouldn't be pointing people towards articles you think they'll agree with you on. Black Kite (t) (c) 22:23, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm deeply sorry. I guess I should limit the pointing out AfDs on project pages then. Would that be okay? NotARealWord (talk) 14:33, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

MathewIgnash and Transformers reliable sources
Hey I've been having a heated discussion here over that source book. Sarujo (talk) 18:42, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Kamen Rider AFDs
In the future, do not wait 3 days to tell the WikiProject responsible for the upkeep of articles that you've put bunch of their pages up for AFD. I thought I had more time to perform redirects and such, but now I have to ask Cirt to restore Kamen Rider Verde so its text can be used to create a Kamen Rider Ryuki Special: 13 Riders page.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 18:41, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Kamen Rider Verde
You had previously edited at the AFD for Kamen Rider Verde, at Articles for deletion/Kamen Rider Verde. There is now an AFD for a related page, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kamen Rider Ryuki Special: 13 Riders. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 20:43, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

AFD templates
It seems tom me that you mention about finding AFD templates. Although, I could be wrong. Anyway, here they are.

Hope this helps. Sarujo (talk) 18:59, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think I asked about them. But I guess they can be helpful someday. NotARealWord (talk) 00:56, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Toy patents as toy pics
Good idea about the toy patents pics for toy pics, I was mulling over that myself. I added the one toy patent pic to the Optimus Prime page, but I'm not sure I added it correctly. Do you know anything about the proper tags and perhaps uploading them to wikimedia commons? Mathewignash (talk) 22:12, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Another idea for free pictures would be pics of the real world alternate modes that are free. For instance, since someone recently removed all the picures of the 2007 movie Starscream from Wikipedia, I added a picture of a real F-22 jet to the article to illustrate what Starscream looks like. I think this is acceptable. Mathewignash (talk) 11:14, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Samurai/Shinkenger
Saying "the sky is blue" is one thing. Saying that "Power Rangers: Samurai is based off of Samurai Sentai Shinkenger (in any fashion)" is another. I am not erring on the side of caution and saying that PRS is not going to be based off of SSS. I'm saying we have nothing to verify this. The only reason anyone knows that there will be a connection is because of the assinine fandom following the production of this shit way too closely.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 02:34, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Kamen Rider Hyper Battle
In case you didn't notice because you just felt like undoing my edit rather than go through the page history to see what I've done, the article no longer consists entirely of plot summary. In fact, there is no longer any extensive plot summary. Honestly, you can't go sending any article to AFD because it has no references. Certain subjects do not receive extensive news coverage because they're not serious subjects. The Hyper Battle DVDs which get packaged with issues of Televi-Kun magazine do not receive any news coverage. They only get mentioned in previous issues of the magazine and even then, those don't really confer notability. Don't waste people's time at AFD. I'm looking to cut all of the information from this page and just put them on the TV series' articles anyway. So just stay out of my way while I improve the project in the way I know how.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 20:00, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Reply: War for Cybertron vs Prime series
I've replied to comments on Mathewignash's talk page. --Teancum (talk) 02:52, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Ironfist AfD
I thought I might drop by and explain my voting at the Ironfist AfD a little better. You are absolutely correct that, in most senses, the only meaningful vote is a vote in accordance with policy. And were I a closing admin, there's no way I'd give much weight to my argument there unless a large number of other commenters backed it with considered comments. But the way Wikipedia policy evolves is through changing practice. Sometimes, after looking at a page, and after coming to a conclusion on what policy says should be done with it, I still feel inclined to vote the other way, in which case I follow my conscience and vote that way, making the best rationale I can for why that outcome would benefit the project. Occasionally deliberately straying from policy, with detailed reasons, benefits the project. And when it doesn't, the community will spot that, and rightly reject it. It's absolutely natural that you should point out that my vote does contradict policy, but there's nothing inherently offensive about the attempt. - DustFormsWords (talk) 04:02, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Social Networking
Looking at your list of contributions here in Wikipedia, using your vast knowledge base, what articles have you contributed to or written here in Wikipedia? Or am I mistaken again, are you a BOT? Please do justify your reasoning for chastising me on my Talk Page about "nice" or the behavior of such "nice-ness". As I pointed out before, Wikipedia is not a social network. The purpose of Wikipedia is to SHARE KNOWLEDGE; to SHARE INFORMATION about a subject or topic. Your comment on my Talk page can be construed as a public appeal or solicitation. In good faith, I will assume you were not doing that. Ronewirl (talk) 18:20, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey, this sock puppet looks like you!
I guess we should investigate this guy: User:NotARealWorld, I'd guess it's Wiki brah immitating you. Mathewignash (talk) 20:19, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Sock Puppets and Checkuser
Hello there, "Not a Real Word," and Merry Christmas. Just one thought to mull over: because an editor, say Shooterwalker, was "unrelated" to Wiki brah doesn't mean he's out of the woods yet. Don't you think that each suspect editor should be screened against known exemplars of Wiki brah, Editor XXV, and Claritas (and all their socks) before declaring someone "unrelated?" Keep in mind that a wiki brah sock, Tedescoboy22, was 'cleared' once in a checkuser because he was just checked against Claritas. see here This allowed Wiki brah (Tedesco) to run wild for a few more weeks on the wikiproject. If it was me, I'd just block any new users on sight just to be safe. Well, have a nice day! Decepticon Trans Master (talk) 16:15, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Sympathies
Hi. Not sure if when you dropped the word "troll" you were talking about me or not. But taking a look at Wiki brah's presence in the SPI... I want to apologize if I gave you a hard time. I'm somewhat of a libertarian and can react strongly when it comes to privacy issues. It looks like this is indeed a frustrating and persistent problem. I wish I could help settle it so it doesn't continue to be an issue. But maybe the best way I can do that is to just stay out of the whole area entirely. Sincerely. Let me know what you think. Shooterwalker (talk) 22:15, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for understanding. If I'm to participate in future AFDs and not get dragged into the drama... can you think of a way we can reduce the drama level? Do we need some kind of centralized discussion to talk about how to handle all these transformers articles, including a fair timeline so there is sufficient time to save the articles that can be saved? Shooterwalker (talk) 15:00, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I've attempted some centralized discussions on improving articles, but I did not get much response. I'm planning to start another one, but I'm not quite sure when I'll be doing that. I need to think this stuff through and make sure I get enough response in time when I do start a major discussion. As for AfDs, I think what we're doing is already okay. A centralized AfD-related discussion was proposed (see here), but it didn't get much support nd was eventually withdrawn. I think this was mentioned in one of the ANI archives that I showed you. NotARealWord (talk) 15:06, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah I remember seeing it... it looked like a good idea but I'm not sure why it was turned down. Was it because it was perceived as a blanket AFD? What we really need is to develop some kind of guideline (or even just the interpretation of how to apply our guidelines) for how to handle these articles. Not something that says "delete all" or "merge all" or "keep all". But one that says "delete if X, keep if Y, merge if Z"... and maybe even find a compromise on how to manage the flow of discussions. Something similar occurred around the backlog of biographies of living people. Even though that topic area is much more serious (we're talking about potential lawsuits that mess with real people's lives)... the issue is fundamentally the same. We have a topic area that needs to be cleaned up... but trying to deal with the whole backlog at once could be disastrous. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:25, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

You know, once in a while I do have these misgivings about our little cabal that I need to get off my chest. It doesn't appear the checkuser blocks and other preventative measures are successful in keeping the South-American conspiracy away from the Transformers. This is the general structure of it: Claritas and his friends comprise Team Chile. Claritas is kind of the "brains" behind the operation, choosing which articles to attack and when. Divebomb/Editor XXV is the leader of Team Argentina. Divebomb is kind of our muscle, always available to use whatever means it takes to make our presence felt. He did a quite successful job of infiltrating the wikiproject before he was busted on an unrelated investigation, no? Oh well. And me, Wiki_brah, I'm the man behind Team Brasil. I'm more or less the "idea guy" and the "PR guy" beind the cabal, having become the public face, if you will, of the attacks. Of course that job kinda fell into my lap since Claritas is mildly neurotic to say the least, and Divebomb, well, is a bit anti-social at times. Now, our plan involved user User:Access Denied, who was supposed to be appointed an admin before the attacks began in order to provide some admin cover for us. But that got screwed up when he lost his bid for admin. Anyway, he decided to flame out as, but the cabal has disavowed him. After all, if it can't be done with style, there's no need to do it at all! Merry Christmas, Obrigado!! And a Happy Transformers-frei New Year! Community Beach (talk) 18:00, 27 December 2010 (UTC) Community Beach is also a sockpuppet. NotARealWord (talk) 18:37, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Abridged Series
"This might be notable, perhaps somebody else might be able to find references. I don't know who would, but this might be possible to improve. " The problem is that it's already sat for almost 2 years in someone else's userspace and they've done nothing to it. Moving it to someone else's just creates another WP:STALEDRAFT, and we don't base userspace drafs on "might be"s. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 18:22, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

I'd thank you to remove that.

 * I can't believe you actually are bringing up an arguement I had with someone on another site to attack me here. Additionally bringing up the arguements of a known disruptiong sock puppet? That's low. That is totally inappropriate, and I'd thank you to stop NOW and remove it from the deletion debate. Mathewignash (talk) 17:44, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

AN/i Notification
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.-- K orr u ski Talk 16:15, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Another possible sock?
I think this new editor Pillhead Maddox maybe another sock. With comments like this and this, my suspicions are peaked. What do you think? Sarujo (talk) 00:43, 17 January 2011 (UTC)