User talk:Sergecross73/Archive 15

i will be recording
any issue that comes up. but i give fair warning to everyone that its being recorded once i record an incident with you in my link bank. please, avoid spreading friction between us.Lucia Black (talk) 18:12, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Feel free to write down whatever you like in your subpages about me. I'm very particular about being civil according to Wikipedia's definition, so if you're sticking to the truth rooted in reality, there won't ever be anything actionable in there. Sergecross73   msg me   18:15, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * i'm not "writing" anything, i'm merely "recording". i saved your comments for future action if deemed actionable.Lucia Black (talk) 18:18, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Alright, whatever, my stance is the same. Sergecross73   msg me   18:19, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, I'd like to point out that your list is already misleading. My comments were not deemed "uncivil". He closed the conversation because it was getting off-topic, while the issue at hand, Lukeno, already had a consensus about it. But again, misleading links like that only water down your argument, so I don't mind if you keep it as is. Sergecross73   msg me   18:30, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * the comment isn't misleading, writkeeper closed it out of "drama". and then noted it was because of you and Giantsnowman. not misleading. and i recorded his comments to further proof it's not just me. but just your comment alone is enough. if the pattern is halted after number of interactions with me that don't involve advertising how inadequate i am, then it will be removed. So all you have to do is not do it, next time, and all will be fine. its the simplest, easiest way to solve conflict (personal opinion). if you won't recognize it as incivility, and it continues, then it'll be recorded.


 * I will be asking multiple admins outside of ANI to ask if it is incivil as well before posting it in ANI for further verification of incivility. but thats only if there is significant pattern. its the only way i can provide a meaningful argument in AN/ANI without someone dismissing it because it was posted by "Lucia Black".


 * And i know this because, I almost got blocked for the second time for the same incident that's been going on throughout my ban. and previous editors have noted how much a certain editor has avoided being banned. so this proves i wasn't wrong in the past to bring it up in ANI. its too dependent on how much admins care. so if other admins, deem it incivil, then the other admins will be forced to "consider".Lucia Black (talk) 18:39, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * And here's Writ Keeper confirming what I was just saying to you. Sergecross73   msg me   18:43, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

his responces later on beg to differ. and whether he classifies it as such or not, isn't the point, when posted in ANI, it will show that it was incivil regardless if Writ calls it that.Lucia Black (talk) 18:48, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * You realize that at least two people (now three, including me) don't think it was incivil, correct? This battleground mentality of yours of "recording what people say for proof for ANIs" is not going to work out in your favor. Framing comments as "incivil" and dismissing outside comments that contradict your stance, like Writ's, is going to create even more animosity towards you. If anything, I see this as blatant harassment. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 18:56, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The person you're using for evidence for my "incivility" literally said he didn't find my comment to be a civility violation. Good luck with that argument. Sergecross73   msg me   19:01, 3 December 2013 (UTC)you can call it what you want. this isn't the first time, and if i could, i would list every single edit where this editor makes me a subject. Criticisms of, or references to, personal behavior in an inappropriate context, like on a policy or article talk page, or in an edit summary, rather than on a user page or conflict resolution page. Remember: Comment on content, not on the contributor. For dispute resolution including how best to address the behavior of others, please follow WP:DR.

^^thats what WP:NPA says. and even though it can be considered an edge-case. he has been advertising "ADVERTISING" this to dismiss any comment made by me. And even though this is considered a conflict resolution page, the subject was not done by me.

SO again, even if you all don't personally consider it. its in WP:NPA ruling. you can make claims i'm taking it out of context, but what makes it out of context? i will be recording ANY editor who seems disruptive. and i will make sure no one gets passed me, like it did in the past. not this time. you may not consider this an issue now because it looks like an isolated incident, but Sergecross and I know he's being doing it excessively in the past. So once this accumulates to a significant pattern, it will be actionable. but i give fair warnings o he can stop. if he doesn't. oh well he's been warned.Lucia Black (talk) 19:07, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * There's a big difference between "personal attack" and what I say to or about you. It's not a personal attack to mention bring up that you've made ANI reports on civility that have been denied. It's not an attack, and it literally happened. Now, if I accused you of being some sort of offensive name or something, then yeah, your above comment would make sense. But I absolutely never done that to you. Or anyone on Wikipedia for that matter. You're not going to get me in trouble for personal attacks because I literally don't do anything actionable in that regards to anyone here. Sergecross73   msg me   19:14, 3 December 2013 (UTC)


 * For the record: I found Serge's comment on ANI to be off-topic (though not as much as GiantSnowman's) and therefore unhelpful, but not uncivil. It was entirely a context thing; in a different context (one where Lucia's behavior was being specifically discussed), I would've found nothing at all objectionable about it. It's just that it struck me as particularly unwise to make such a post in a thread that was not about Lucia and where the conclusion was for people to tone it down, as such a comment would (and has) had the opposite effect. In passing, I would object much more strongly to GiantSnowman's comment, as that one really was apropos of nothing, in addition to having been worded in a much more inflammatory fashion. I am nearly completely unfamiliar with any history between Serge, Lucia, and GiantSnowman, so I make no comment or judgement whatever on whether this was an edge case or a pattern of behavior on anyone's part. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:13, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your stance on this Writ Keeper. It is appreciated. Sergecross73   msg me   19:15, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:NPA says it all Serge.it doesn't matter what you classify. you haven't stated it was taken out of context. find a way to make it seem like i'm taking it out of context, but again WP:NPA says it all. and its a personal attack because you're attempting to belittle my comment by past actions. that indeed is a personal attack Serge.


 * You have criticized/referenced past behavior in an INAPROPRIATE way (because as Writ says: not only off-topic but unneeded) and this applies to giantsnowman but he doesn't do it to the extent you do Serge. And its good to know that Writ realizes acknowledging that classifying this as an edge case would be determined by constant pattern. which is appropriate of me to save any more links to prove the pattern exist. but since the link bank was made after the pattern, i would have to add pattern that continues after the link bank was created so that I give fair warning. which this is. whether you classify this as an isolated event, or not, this warning was done so it could end.


 * And if serge chooses to ignore that, than so be it. it saves the time and effort.Lucia Black (talk) 19:25, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Did you actually read what Writ said? He literally says he has it wasn't incivil and that he has no comment or judgment on all of this in general. And you wonder why you find any consensus in your favor with these civility/personal attack discussions. It's like you're having a whole different discussion or something. Sergecross73   msg me   19:32, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * He can't make a judgement because it's not a pattern, therefore he acknowledges that it could be uncivil. And it doesn't even matter what Writ classifies it, only what WP:NPA classifies it, and if Writ says something in sync with what WP:NPA says (regardless of classification), then it is so. thats the point.Lucia Black (talk) 19:38, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * This whole angle doesn't make any sense. Its ANI. Its where we go to discuss issues regarding people. If you bring up a content issue, it's literally dismissed. So your citing of Comment on content, not people doesn't make any sense. It certainly wasn't a personal attack, it was an comment about your past at ANI. It wasn't meant to shame or belittle you or anything, it was just explaining how, like usual, your comments on civility were kind of on a different wavelength with the rest of the conversation.
 * As far as what Writ said, I'm not going to argue about it anymore. It literally said I wasn't uncivil, and it was about as non-committal, not-picking-sides as it could be (Rightfully so, I wouldn't want to get myself involved in this either.) so it's pointless to argue about your delusions that it was somehow detrimental to me. Sergecross73   msg me   19:42, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

funny how you removed only one comment, not the entire thread...."recorded".Lucia Black (talk) 20:31, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Because it was a long, winding rant, partially bad-faith nonsense, and partially rehashed arguments already discussed. I usually don't remove entire discussions unless their exceedingly ridiculous. (This ones getting there.) Am I supposed to be intimated that you made note of the fact that I removed one of your comments on my talk page, something that is neither against policy nor considered any sort of "incivil"? Sergecross73   msg me   20:40, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * then i'll be short and simple. you misunderstand the rule. the rule is that you shouldn't post comments in general. WP:GAME if you think it doesn't apply and you're free to make a comment about anyone in ANI in any way simply because you did so. was it bad faith? of course it is. but its not undeserved or uncalled for. after all, what other reason would you have had to brought up that past ANi's have failed. Simply out of a comment? Writ deemed your comment disruptive. therefore it wasn't even appropriate in the first place, even if we all establish that it wasn't a personal attack (in which it is).Lucia Black (talk) 20:46, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll keep it short and simple as well, and will revert any more additions that just tread your same argument all over again: Your interpretation of NPA and Civility does not match Wikipedia's definition. Stop threatening me with it, I'm very aware of how it works, and that your interpretation is wrong. Collect all the links you want, it's just going to demonstrate you don't have a grasp on how it works. Sergecross73   msg me   20:49, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

very well. we'll see. I will bring this up at WP:VILLAGE. feel free to remove and have the last word.Lucia Black (talk) 20:51, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

RFAs
''I passed my RFA with no real problems, but I found the whole process very nerve-wrecking.. – Sergecross73  msg me '' As a common reader to the forum, the things that really kill nominations is an oppose and others start piling on. If that happens then you know you're in trouble. If you have good support and the fist oppose comes late in the 7-day period, you'll likely succeed. NintendoFan (Talk, Contribs) 01:11, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Its true, and I think that's what happened to me too. For the record, I'm not trying to talk you or anyone out of it. I just wouldn't want to be te one to initially talk someone into it, because I'd feel guilty if it went wrong. I hope that makes sense, or that you didn't take it the wrong way. :) Sergecross73   msg me   01:27, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Jessica Nigri and User:Niemti
Hi. Thanks for your "thanks". Do you think you could offer your point of view in my current discussion with Niemti? I have a feeling that he/she is going to reject whatever I say, as he/she doesn't seem amenable to reading the policies I've linked to. In addition, I think there's a strong possibility that he/she may revert the article during our discussion. I could be wrong (and hope I am), but if not, could you protect the article and prevent any reverts if that happens? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:17, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I gave you the "Thanks" because I've argued with him many times about his CIV/NPA issues. As an Admin, many editors have come to me complaining about this. But, since I've argued with him since well before I was an Admin, I'm too involved to take admin action against him. As such, I can't really protect the page for that same reason. However, yes, I will participate in discussions and do what I can. Sergecross73   msg me   02:52, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * (Thanks for moving the discussion, Sjones. I realized it was in the wrong area, but hadn't wanted to try to move it while using a phone...) Sergecross73   msg me   03:51, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

propose
a two-way light interaction ban between us. i know this wont affect me at all. but for you...it depends on how much you care about telling other editors about things that don't matter.Lucia Black (talk) 22:13, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Why would I agree with this, when not a single person has agreed with you? Nor does any policy support what your saying. Drop the stick, go away. I'm not humoring you any more. Any more circular, rehashed arguments or ludicrous suggestions are reverted in the spot. Find someone else to bother.  Sergecross73   msg me   22:26, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

The Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds image removal
You deleted the image I uploaded to this article with the comment: "This isn't really a comparison though, there's nothing here from LTTP. If the reader hasn't played LTTP, it illustrates nothing."

I don't think this is fair in the slightest. If you want to take that line of reasoning, you could also delete the other image, as you could claim that without having played A Link to the Past, the fact that "A Link Between Worlds is played from an overhead perspective like its predecessor" is meaningless. Similarly, the summary used for that screenshot makes explicit reference to A Link to the Past in a way which might presume knowledge of the game:

"This image demonstrates the gameplay and art style of this Legend of Zelda title. The art style shown to be reminiscent of the first game, and the articles text does not describe its merger of 3D graphics and the original games color and art style in a detailed manner. It also shows that the game differs from the Zelda games that preceded it, in that this is more like the original Zelda games with an overhead perspective, whereas recent portable Zelda games attempted to recreate a console like 3D experience, and without the image, readers may get the impression this game is like those games."

By the way, your comment that there is nothing from A Link to the Past is deeply incorrect. Take a look at this image. The Fire Rod, Ice Rod, Hookshot, Net, Hammer, Lantern and Bottles are all directly taken from A Link to the Past, as they first appeared in that game; the Fire Rod, Ice Rod, Hammer, Lantern and Net are particularly unique to A Link to the Past, and the introduction of the Sand and Tornado Rods build upon these concepts. A Link Between Worlds allows the player to upgrade many of these items to a more advanced state, which the image demonstrates. Unlike A Link to the Past, which introduced Bottles (and the convention of there being four of them) A Link Between Worlds has five Bottles, which breaks convention. The way the items are presented also directly references how they appeared in A Link to the Past.

If you'd like, you could assist in fleshing out the description, rather than immediately striking it down.

(By the way, this sort of hasty deletion is why I'm loathe to contribute to Wikipedia beyond small edits.)

--Poppy Appletree (talk) 22:36, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
 * What SergeCross was referring to in his comment is that without a similar ATTP screenshot in the article, saying "This is similar to LTTP" is useless to a reader who hasn't played LTTP. You need to give the reader visual context to make the comparison. That said, the screenshot is not particularly necessary. Just saying "ALBW has items similar to those in LTTP" with a written source is enough to get the point across. You don't need a screenshot to make that clear. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 23:51, 10 December 2013 (UTC)


 * If that is what he meant, then he expressed it poorly, and by not expanding upon his comment either in the article's talk page or mine, it came across as incredibly rude. I would be in favour of combining the image with another from ALttP to make the comparison overt, but a similar image doesn't exist on the ALttP page, and I'm not sure where I would source one from as I created the image I uploaded myself. The similarities between ALttP and ALBW are invariably noted, and references to the returning items are routine, so I think that there is definitely reason to include an image which demonstrates the similarities. --Poppy Appletree (talk) 00:06, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I appreciated Thomas's help greatly, so don't get me wrong, but how is it that I "expressed it poorly"? while he almost said the same thing?


 * Serge:This isn't really a comparison though, there's nothing here from LTTP. If the reader hasn't played LTTP, it illustrates nothing.
 * Thomas: without a similar LTTP screenshot in the article, saying "This is similar to LTTP" is useless to a reader who hasn't played LTTP. You need to give the reader visual context to make the comparison.
 * I'm sorry if it came across rude, it wasn't intended that way. (There's only so much space for edit summaries, so you have to be straight to the point.) Sergecross73   msg me   00:15, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Template:Mario franchise
Mind helping out? An IP keeps grouping arbitrary games together as "series", even though they clearly aren't, like Mario 64, Sunshine, Galaxy, and Galaxy 2. The IP first cited a Wikipedia article as basis, then pointed to at least one reference that does not say they're in the same subseries. I've started a discussion on the talk page, but the IP only chooses to discuss through edit summary and reverts. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 20:34, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks! As for Sonic Adventure 2, I did look it over a little bit, and there's areas I think can use more clarification. I'll write up my thoughts on the article talk page later tonight. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 20:45, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem. And yeah, there's actually a lot I'd change about the SA2 article, its just that I haven't had as much time to dive in full-on yet, and its partially I'm still working on remembering the game. (I haven't played it in a while.) Sergecross73   msg me   20:48, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Xbox One black Friday sales
I have reverted your edit again. I want to explain why. From my understanding, an encyclopedia is basically a summary of information and facts about a particular subject. I am familiar with the analyst you are citing, however, it is speculation and the reference contends and clearly represents it as such. Are we to include speculations in every article? Not from what I have understood and have spoken about with many admins. Speculation, is always an opinion and opinions don't belong in an encyclopedia article, no matter how reliable the source. Thank you for any response you may give.HypedBeaver13 (talk) 04:12, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Your views on speculation in regards to Wikipedia are mistaken. It's allowed as long as it is shown as speculation, not fact, and is reliably sourced. User:Masem said the same hint on the talk page, and he is and Admin, as am I, so I know admin have told you this as well. Sergecross73   msg me   04:18, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * So you are saying ANY random speculation an analyst proclaims that is negative and detracts from console achievements is necessary? I don't see this on any of the other console articles, even though it exists and your source's point goes for both consoles. They were equally out of stock.HypedBeaver13 (talk) 04:46, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * It is not appropriate for editors to insert their own opinions or analyses. Predictions, speculation, forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included.... I can't explain why any of these vague accusations of "what other articles have or don't have", but just because its not there doesn't mean its because its not allowed. It could just be that no one bothered to add any speculation. Or sometimes it can be removed out of articles for other reasons. I mean, the whole chunk of information may be removed down the line; 4 years into the console's cycle, how it did in the opening month may be comparatively inconsequential to its overall performance. Sergecross73  msg me   13:42, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * So should we go on the PlayStation 4 article and include the statement that most people didn't want to buy the PS4 because of Sony not delivering on hype? NO! Because it would be pointless from one source, but it is on the source you gave, so why not include it?TenseWookie (talk) 18:57, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Uh, if you can get a reliable source to quote a professional analyst on that, it'd be possible. But I don't think a professional analyst would ever say that, that strikes me as a really bad example/analogy. Sergecross73   msg me   19:02, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
I have taken the time to read the Wikipedia policy. I agree that you are right and it should, for now, remain in the article. Sorry for the conflict.HypedBeaver13 (talk) 19:24, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for understanding. I appreciate it, many people keep fighting instead of looking into. Like I've said, I'm not even that dead-set on keeping it in there, I just want it to be removed for the right reasons if it is removed. Sergecross73   msg me   19:29, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * My main reason for wanting it removed was the fact that I do try and keep Wikipedia articles objective and not detracting from individual accomplishments. Even though it is legal for it to be there, I am not sure it should stay for a long period of time, but thank you for linking that policy. I have read it and was indeed wrong and I apologize for being stubborn. Thanks for helping! Happy editing!HypedBeaver13 (talk) 19:32, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you too. Sergecross73   msg me   19:33, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Lack of admin candidates
You put your finger on the reason! ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  20:38, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Haha, yeah, I can certainly see how it can either burn out current Admin, or not look like a fun responsibility to gain from a non-Admin's eyes. I mean, minus being mildly irritated, I'm still doing fine, but I'd certainly get burned out if this was all I ever did. Usually I can balance it, but it seems like these dispute keep on popping up around my watchlist lately... Sergecross73   msg me   20:50, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Got a question, need an opinion...
I was wondering if you think it would be appropriate to create a page for Phil Spencer, head of Microsoft Studios. He is quickly becoming the face of the Xbox brand and there is a ton of good information on his background. Thanks for any opinion you could offer.HypedBeaver13 (talk) 02:45, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, if you feel that you've got enough reliable sources and content to meet the WP:GNG, then go for it. You may want to read over WP:BLP first, if you haven't yet - you've got to be a little more careful with writing articles on actual people. Also, WP:VG/S has a large list of sources that are deemed reliable or unreliable. Sergecross73   msg me   03:40, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Shinedown
Sorry. I wasn't really trying to edit war or anything. I was just trying to point out to you that I have already sourced the other genres I added within the prose of the article when I had reverted you. When you restored the citations for hard rock in the infobox that I had already moved to the prose, I had the feeling you didn't see that. And as for discussing on the talk page, what else is there to discuss? If I added those genres and cited them with multiple sources, then I obviously support the addition of those. I was reverted again, but if it's okay with you, I'll go ahead and re-add the other genres I had previously added. Kokoro20 (talk) 18:27, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Its common for bands that either span many genre, or have many disputes on their genre, to list only one genre in the infobox, and then list out a bunch more in the "musical style" section. (See something like Smashing Pumpkins, which does this well, or Breaking Benjamin, which is a bit sloppier/more direct example of it.) Pretty certain that's what we were working towards Shinedown's talk page, because people are continually tinkering with adding removing all sorts of genre, some more right/wrong than others. That's why we're telling you to talk it out on the discussion page. Two editors object to your changes, so its definitely necessary to discuss. Sergecross73   msg me   19:03, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, Shinedown don't really span that many genres, do they? Having only hard rock in the infobox isn't very accurate. It should be there, but not as the only genre. Three genres is not very much anyway, especially considering there were like six genres there before. As for disputes, as far as I can tell, other genres that was added before were added without sources or discussion. I really don't see why I have to discuss if I sourced them. I don't think either of the genres I added would be very controversial (they are commonly tagged as them), unlike some of the ones that were listed before. Neither of you didn't even seem to have a problem with them until now. I could see IPs trying to re-add them anyway. Kokoro20 (talk) 19:47, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Look, any time there's anything in contention, you discuss it, so stop complaining about how there's nothing to talk about. Wikipedia is a combination of what reliable sources say and what consensus dictates - its a two part, joint thing. You've only got one of those under wraps. Thus, there's something to discuss.
 * That being said, maybe you could have a point. But bring it to the article's talk page, so there can be discussion between more people than just me and you. Also, focus more on why exactly its so important that alt metal is included. Like I said, maybe you have a point, but you still really haven't even explained why, you just keep on giving "why not?" arguments. Sergecross73   msg me   20:13, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey there, I made another post on the Shinedown article's talk page regarding the addition of post-grunge as well (after all, I did bring it up in my first post, but there was no reply to that part). Can you check it out? Kokoro20 (talk) 22:48, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure. While Static's edit summary is technically correct, you didn't discuss post-grunge, there are sources for it, and I said I wouldn't bother fighting that one, so I personally don't oppose it... Sergecross73   msg me   00:20, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you very much for the kinds words, I really appreciate it. As you've probably heard me say, sometimes it seems Admin are always yelled at for being "the bad guy" when they're just enforcing policy, so I do appreciate the kind words. I hope you get the recognition you deserve too, you're a very good editor that has done a very good job of overcoming the high hurdle of getting used to this Wikipedia culture. Many have a hard time jumping in, but you do very good work! Sergecross73   msg me   18:04, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Holiday wishes!

 * Thanks Salvidrim! I wish the same to you! Sergecross73   msg me   20:13, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!
Happy Holidays, Sergecross73! Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:13, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

G-Zay
He has posted a legal threat on his latest sockpuppet page, which is. I think he has gone way too far. Can you please disable his talk page access? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:19, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Talk page access revoked. (Seriously? This person believes a block of their account is something the FBI concerns themselves with? Yikes.) Sergecross73   msg me   20:23, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Honestly, this user was a pain in my neck and basically, I've just about had it with this nonsense. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:31, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Sonic Generations/Sonic Lost World
Hi, Serge. I am planning to help make Sonic Generations and Sonic Lost World good articles. I think we should work on the entirety of these articles, using Crash of the Titans and Crash: Mind over Mutant as models. However, I have a concern here. Even if there isn't a direct link to Sonic Colors and Sonic Generations, should we at least mention these anywhere in the Sonic Lost World article? We should also mention Sonic Colors in the plot section at the beginning to tell the backstory of the article as well. Also, I think the differences between the 3DS need to be explained in Sonic Generations, such as the characters, setting and storyline. I'm discussing this here. Any thoughts about this? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:04, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I created Lost World, and am a large contributor/maintainer at the other 2, so I'd definitely like to help. I have no idea how much free time I'll have today; could be a lot, could be just a little, but I'll do what I can. Sergecross73   msg me   21:16, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Fair deal. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:22, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

About Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luo Feichi
Before I edited this articles, I checked many other articles about e-sports players. Actually, I did not see any articles which have reliable sources. I have listed some of these articles in that page. For example, article Guillaume Patry and Andy Dinh, these two did not even have reliable online resources. If you decide to delete this kind of articles, can you also check the following articles which have the same problem and determine whether to delete them? Fredrik Johansson (electronic sports player)，Guillaume Patry,Andy Dinh,Aleksey Krupnyk,Danylo Ishutin,Laurens Pluijmaekers, Manuel Schenkhuizen, Sander Kaasjager,Cannito Giancarlo,Cannito Giancarlo, Chris Loranger and Marcus Dyrus Hill. Miracle dream (talk) 01:05, 7 January 2014‎  (UTC)
 * The metric for deciding whether or not articles should be kept, is always going to be if there are reliable, third party sources that discuss the subject in detail. I don't usually go and nominate articles for deletion, I just comment on ones that have already been nominated. BUT, if I were the type to nominate them, I'd bet that there are a bunch that would probably get deleted because they don't have the sources to meet Wikipedia's standard for notability. Sergecross73   msg me   15:44, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Help with HappyLogolover2011
Hey Serge, long time no talk! I've recently been having a little trouble with User:HappyLogolover2011. Every once in a while he uploads new pictures that he took on his emulators to replace older ones. While usually there would be no problem with them, the new pictures tend to be glitchy and/or don't really present the gameplay as well as previous versions. (One good example is picture from the SSBM article.) He never really tries making a case for himself (the only actual discussion he's had with me has been User talk:The Stick Man), and prefers simply reverting my reverts while telling people to quickly delete the old versions so I can't stop him again. I'm sure he means well and I'm unwilling to take this to ANI (but if it comes to that, then I will), but I wanted another admin's opinion on this. If you could address this or point me to someone else who could, that would be great. Sorry to bother you,  TheStickMan [✆Talk] 05:29, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Just my two cents, but I think both screenshots are actually pretty shitty for their intended purpose. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  05:32, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree and I appreciate the attempt to upload a better quality picture. I just think his are worse, but he keeps on pushing them without saying much.  TheStickMan [✆Talk] 05:33, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem Stick Man, contact me whenever you need help. I'm not the biggest expect with images though, but I'll still give my two cents. It seems like we shouldn't be emphasizing emulator screenshots because they could misrepresent the game, whether it be things like glitches, mentioned above, or that, many emulators can show games at higher resolutions than the actual game, misrepresenting it by making it look better than the game does when "correctly" played on a system. Thoughts, anyone who stalks my talk page? ^_^ Sergecross73   msg me   15:18, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

G-Zay evidence page
Hey, Serge. I am trying to compile an evidence page related to G-Zay here. This is for the purpose of preparing an edit filter or a long-term abuse report if the disruption continues. Can you help me out? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:14, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Check the SPI's archive. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  02:34, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Oui. I'm working on it so we can present the report to the SPI if the disruption continues. I have a long history with G-Zay based on our interests in the Square Enix and Final Fantasy articles and disagreements we had; I am very familiar with his activity on Wikipedia. I'll go ahead and also notify the folks over at WT:VG and WT:SE so that others get involved in this effort as well. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:38, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not GZay expert or anything, I didn't ever really interact with him until after he was banned (or maybe to the point when things escalated to ban discussions, not sure) but I can still try to assist some too. Sergecross73   msg me   19:47, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Vita Sale Figures
yes it is i work for Sony Computer Entertainment and it looks like 25 million — Preceding unsigned comment added by JasonSonySalesUpdate (talk • contribs) 15:09, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, not for long, you'd be fired pretty fast for leaking info like that. But it doesn't matter, there's no way you're telling the truth, or that those sales figures are correct. Those are well beyond projections, of which Sony is expected to fall short on. Vita sales are not great right now. Sergecross73   msg me   15:15, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

just talk to Sony Computer Entertainment they will confirm it okay — Preceding unsigned comment added by JasonSonySalesUpdate (talk • contribs) 15:28, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
 * No, they won't, those sales are insane. Also, if sales figures are released, they would be available all across the internet because all the main video game websites would do and article about it. Until you have such an article supporting updated sales figures, they should not be updated. Sergecross73   msg me   15:32, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Just butting in here, but isn't claiming to be an employee of X company at odds with WP:USERNAME? -- benlisquare T•C•E 15:35, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't usually dabble in the username stuff that much, but you're probably right. Beyond that, he only seems to be interested in childish games and bogus sales figures, so I blocked him for being a vandalism-only account. Sergecross73   msg me   15:44, 14 January 2014 (UTC)