User talk:RainBowAndArrow/Archives/2009/Mid

Spectacular vindictiveness in your editing
For what reason are you systematically removing relevant information links from as many TDs as you can find? In what way, for example, is a link to a page containing Eamon Ryan's recent activity in the Dail "spam"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Handelaar (talk • contribs) 17:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

(Declared interest: the links you are removing are to a site I built, but I'm not responsible for the links being added)

Handelaar (talk) 17:46, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

UFC Undisputed Online Gameplay
What would be considered a reliable source for something like this? Do I have to wait for THQ or Yuke's to acknowledge there is a glaring hole in their game? If this is the case that will not happen until they patch it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpate86 (talk • contribs) 20:08, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Shell to Sea mediation
Hi! I've discussed the matter with PhilKnight, and we agree that the best way to proceed with the Shell to Sea mediation is probably to file a new request for mediation at the formal Mediation Committee's page, for the following reasons:


 * Both myself and PhilKnight are short on time to give this case the attention it needs, since it's a very widespread dispute
 * The situation has changed (altough only slightly) since we initially began the mediation, and it will be much easier for a new mediatior to start with a fresh request with up-to-date info on what's being disputed

I hope, and I'm sure PhilKnight agrees, that this will help resolve all disputes regarding the articles. Thanks. — Twinzor Say hi! 21:49, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Question
Honestly, do you do anything other than sit on your computer all day and go through the same pages and undo what other people have added?

FNR4
Dude, sort yourself out, why the hell are you reverting my roster?! These are all confimred fighters, goddamnit! It's this sort of nonsense that totally screws up this website in the first place! What the fuck is the problem!

List of indiscriminate information? Look, I'm not stupid or anything, but all I'm saying is the fighters are all there on IGN, every one, you can look if you like. I don't really care if it's split into the different weight categories or not, but either way I have no idea why you'd leave this out! What does it acheive?! The FNR3 article is bull*** anyway —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.240.166.44 (talk) 21:52, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Request for mediation accepted
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.


 * Any idea when the mediation process is likely to kick off? Things seem to be escalating with the introduction of allegations and now another editor has begun to work on the articles as well. The potential for conflict is increasing. G ain  Line ♠ 18:10, 28 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Not looking for back up or anything, just things are starting to get ridiculous again. I can see why you're not editing, I've tried to work through to agreement on some articles with a bit of success but its been slow and very tiring.  Now another editor looks like becoming involved which could kick off another edit war where nothing gets solved. G  ain  Line ♠ 18:58, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

April 2009
Welcome and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. A reliable source has the image listed (Amazon).  TJ   Spyke   21:10, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * If a regular editor does something to warrant a template, then it's fair game. Anyways, the majority of boxarts on Wikipedia come from retail sites and similar sites (very few come from the publisher), so that is reason enough to trust Amazon since they have provided many of the boxarts used here. It probably is just a plaeholder image, but we don't know for sure.  TJ   Spyke   22:18, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe it would have been better to write something more personal. I guess I am used to not doing it since my personally experience has been that most people just ignore the conversations and continue doing the reverting or edits.  TJ   Spyke   22:43, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * An image from a reliable source is good enough and is proof. I have evidence to support it being real, you have no evidence to support it being fake. Please do not revert it again as that could be considered vandalism.  TJ   Spyke   16:59, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The discussion that just started today and has had 1 editor reply? That is not a consensus.  TJ   Spyke   21:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I won't revert yet, but you were clearly wrong in removing the image. The image should be in the article unless there is consensus to remove it. It's the same way you don't change all mentions of a articles name in the article while there is still a move request going on. I ask you to put it back in (since it would make you look less vindictive if you put it back in rather than being reverted).  TJ   Spyke   21:12, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Non-English video game information
While that policy makes some amount sense, can you source it somewhere on wikipedia? I ask because it isn't something which is being done on all pages. Thanks! UncannyGarlic (talk) 01:50, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool, thanks. UncannyGarlic (talk) 18:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Steve Crossin  Talk/Help us mediate! 09:05, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Replied again. Steve Crossin   Talk/Help us mediate! 09:54, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * And again. I have all of Sunday (australia time) free, so that would be an ideal time to file a case. Best, Steve Crossin   Talk/Help us mediate! 10:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Steve here is going to take up mediation on this case. I've tried to work things through but things seem to be coming to a head. I think that another mediation case has to be set up, I don't know if you are in the process of doing this or should I.  G  ain  Line  ♠♥ 09:46, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Grand, I'm actually heading to the match (Cusack Stand!) so I'm not going to be in a position to set anything up today and depending on the result, tomorrow either! I'm not sure about how to go about setting it up so I may be on to you. I should have maybe notified LP but I forgot, I've been trying to work things through but its hard work and now has reached the point where nothings being achieved. The comments on the Michael Dwyer thread were particularly unconstructive also. I think the fact I nominated the Mary Devins article for deletion may have brought about some ill will but this was just following instruction from the BLP noticeboard, I didn't think that would be the result. Good luck getting the ticket, oh and don't worry, I'm sure O'Connell can always ask for BODs advice on captaining the lions! ;) G  ain  Line  ♠♥ 10:31, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Cool, we'll see how it pans out, hopefully things just don't peter out like before. As regards the match, I'll let this do the talking for me:-. Now to figure out how to wangle a ticket and somewhere to stay in Edinburgh from some Munster fan who's booked it last July..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by GainLine (talk • contribs)

Well that should be enough to shut the ladyboy comments up! Dont think anyone expected it, especially the Minster players! G ain  Line  ♠♥ 13:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi, any chance you could file that medcab today? I have some free time today, so can get started right away. Steve Crossin   Talk/Help us mediate! 00:35, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, just send me an email once the case is up. I check email every half hour, but wiki not so often. Best, Steve Crossin   Talk/Help us mediate! 00:46, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Poke :) Steve Crossin   Talk/Help us mediate! 21:14, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Cheers, see you in mediation G  ain  Line  ♠♥ 23:22, 6 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Just letting you know that i've asked for opening statements on the case talk page. Best, Steve Crossin   Talk/Help us mediate! 21:15, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

I've started mediation and brought up some topics if you would like to add your thoughts G  ain  Line    ♠  ♥ 16:40, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * yeh meant that, thanks for heads up

Lock the Punch-Out!! article
This article is starting an endless edit war by anonymous Wikipedia users. It needs to be locked. Parrothead1983 (talk) 15:22, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Forza Motorsport 3
Why did you remove all of the information on Forza 3? There are multiple claims of the same information throughout the Internet including credible magazines. It was nice for Wikipedia to also display the information since it is one of the first links that supplied the information in an orderly manner.--Jtsports92 (talk) 23:55, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Shell to Sea Fleet
An article that you have been involved in editing, Shell to Sea Fleet, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Smartse (talk) 01:34, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Steve Crossin  Talk/Help us mediate! 22:29, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Just letting you know that i've asked for opening statements on the case talk page. Best, Steve Crossin   Talk/Help us mediate! 21:12, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Poke :) Steve Crossin   Talk/Help us mediate! 21:49, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Keeley Hawes
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Keeley Hawes. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. 82.132.136.209 (talk) 11:26, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

NFS: Shift Requirements
Thanks for getting rid of the system requirements, I'm a bit stupid and deleted too much text. Went to revert it and fix it but well, I had a good 5 seconds to think. :P 22:05, 23 May 2009 69.81.154.218 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.81.154.218 (talk)

Job Done
G ain  Line    ♠  ♥ 22:23, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Leinster Rugby
 * Heineken Cup 2008-09

Once the clock went red the seconds seemed like minutes, Elsoms a beast! The Irish game is slightly less inspiring tho. G ain  Line    ♠  ♥ 22:30, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah stop, Leinster had all the territory, would have been heartbreak. Think the poor old canucks are battered after the likes of Mushy beating them up. Stupider mistakes than my own J4 team would make going on. G ain  Line    ♠  ♥ 22:41, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

MW2 cover
No problem. When I first saw it last night as I was poking around the retail sites I thought it was fake, but as I watched the new trailer on the official site I saw it there, too. If you had pressed me, though, I would have acquiesced (I'm not a fighter on Mondays), so I guess it's fortunate I hit on a convincing argument. :) -- Commdor    { Talk }  19:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Fight Night Round 4 release date
The official website for FNR4 gives a release date of June 30, 2009. CollisionCourse (talk) 10:16, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Need For Speed: Shift
Why did you remove the car list? ⒺⓋⒾ ⓁⒼⓄ ⒽⒶⓃ ② talk 14:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. I hadn't heard of this "-cruft", business previously. ⒺⓋⒾ ⓁⒼⓄ ⒽⒶⓃ ②  talk 14:54, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Though why remove the score list? That seems pretty reasonable. Only reason I added it was because I was looking to other articles for examples (such as Need For Speed: ProStreet). ⒺⓋⒾ ⓁⒼⓄ ⒽⒶⓃ ② talk 14:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: The Sims 3
Because in the context that EA says the original release was a buggy pre-final version, it's relevant to mention the final version also has been leaked. And WP:N and WP:IDONTLIKE does apply, WP:N because it states the notability guideline applies to articles only, not to the information in them, and since you talked about it being not notable... WP:IDONTLIKEIT because no policy states it shouldn't be included. -- Mr Stalker  ( talk ) 19:09, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Mass Effect 2 Release Date
I just reverted the citation you put in because it wasn't typed up properly. Base the coding on one of the other references in the article. If you're not sure how to do that, tell me and I'll fix it tomorrow when I have access to the unblocked site. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 11:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The site's blocked because the network I'm on is evil, not because of the site itself. As to my revert, it was only after that I even thought about contacting you. Sorry about that. Not thinking straight today. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 11:33, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * snorts* After all that and it wasn't even a real date. :P --Thejadefalcon (talk) 14:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Trust me, I'd notice. I keep a close eye on that article. :P --Thejadefalcon (talk) 14:42, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Vandal++
No worries! seemed like the thing to do! G ain  Line    ♠  ♥ 19:13, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

UFC Undisputed Online Gameplay Problems
Please add that it is uncited information as opposed to removing the section entirely. Or reword the section as you see fit. Please stop removing it entirely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpate86 (talk • contribs)
 * Moved the section down and added . You probably know this already but you're at 3RR for the online-problem-section of the article. Figured I should remind you in case you forgot/is unaware. I've also reported Jpate86 at WP:3RRN. Cheers, -- aktsu (t / c) 20:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

By-election results
Hi, would you mind waiting until the official announcements before updating the by-election results? We do have some standards here! Snappy (talk) 12:44, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries! George Lee is a certainty to be elected in Dublin South, just read he will top the poll with 53% on first count. Maureen O'Sullivan may win but there's a long count ahead in Dublin Central before we know for sure. Snappy (talk) 13:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the EU election
My edits were not vandalism. The UK election results are not yet in. You can watch them being read out here as they come: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8085850.stm

In the meantime, please stop making unconstructive edits to the election results page. 83.226.206.82 (talk) 00:33, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

External Link
Okay, I was not aware of that policy. I considered it a very relevant site, but shall leave as is for now. Take care! --~FA~ (talk) 16:54, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Garda Sicíní,
The "slang" phrase is used in daily speech in Ireland. Anyone who is not Irish would be able to look up the term here and understand it. I know The Register forum is an unusual source but it is a term that you will hear in conversation but seldom see written anywhere. What is one to do? You can't have trivia sections anymore because delitionistas want to delete anything actually interesting. Albatross2147 (talk) 13:34, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Warnings
Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mister Slimm (talk • contribs) 23:45, 24 June 2009

25 June 2009
Repeated removal of relevant information from Ferrari Challenge Trofeo Pirelli. Your blanking of information is not limited to this topic and seems to apply to a number of racing video game pages. Please only remove / change incorrect information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mister Slimm (talk • contribs) 23:45, 24 June 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Toddst1 (talk) 00:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

26 June 2009
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you delete or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing.
 * Pages such as Forza 2 and Gran Turismo 4 have happily had details of their contents for many years and it has been deemed appropriate for many years for a racing video game page to contain an accurate list of the items within it which are also listed on Wikipedia such as real-world cars and real-world tracks. I do not feel, nor has the Wikipedia community with the exception of you, that this accurate, detailed information fits into the description of "Specific point values, achievements and trophies, time-limits, levels, character moves, character weight classes, and so on." I do feel that it is covered by the dictum "articles should focus on the real-world elements of a topic."
 * Both the pages you mention still include a list of tracks. So why have you left the list of tracks there and deleted it here? Also, the car list for Ferrari Challenge is important as for most of the cars it is the only simulation / video game representation of the car available.
 * The 'average Wikipedia reader' only reads the first paragraph. So should we delete the rest of the article?
 * The vandalism warning was issued because you keep doing this and seem to be unsupported in your actions. On a lot of the pages where you have wielded the Delete key, your revisions keep trying to get reverted.
 * On Ferrari Challenge Trofeo Pirelli you don't even replace the section with an example of what you think is appropriate. You just delete it. The section you left on Ferrari Challenge makes little sense without the track list accompanying it and makes the section clearly incomplete. Removing the section on cars completely also removes the relevant information on the breadth of Ferrari's history available in the game, the games principle selling point. Also on Ferrari Challenge, why did you not remove the list of DLC tracks and cars.
 * You are inconsistent, wantonly destructive and are not contributing or reshaping positively these articles by your edits. You are simply deleting relevant, accurate, detailed information.

Mister Slimm (talk) 11:03, 25 June 2009 (UTC)