User talk:Sergecross73/Archive 25

Settling the "Xeno vs. Xenoblade" debate
We're both civil editors who only want the Smash-related articles to be as good as they can be, so rather than continue with the endless back and forth, here's my definitive arguments for why I really think we should be using Xenoblade Chronicles as Shulk's series/title of origin rather than Xeno as a whole:

1) It doesn't make sense to reference Xeno as a whole in the context of Super Smash Bros.-related articles, as only Xenoblade Chronicles is referenced in any capacity in-game while Xenogears and Xenosaga are not. It's no different from how KOS-MOS is referred to as a Xenosaga character in articles like Project X Zone instead of a Xeno character.

2) You say Xenoblade Chronicles isn't a series and therefore Xeno should be used in its place. However, with XBCX coming out (hopefully) next year, Xenoblade IS a series now. The only difference is that there's no article for the subseries as a whole, so linking to the original game's article (i.e. the one that Shulk originates from anyway) is more appropriate in this context.

3) MOST IMPORTANTLY: You've previously made the argument that Xeno is the series because Iwata designated it as such in the Iwata Asks for Xenoblade Chronicles. However, please take a look at this image I captured from SSB 3DS. You'll note that the trophies are listed under the "Xenoblade Chronicles" heading, not "Xeno", further emphasized by the use of the Monado (an item exclusive to XBC and not the other two Xenos) as the series icon. This is clear evidence that Nintendo treats Xenoblade as its own entity, independent of past Xeno titles. Furthermore, precedent has already established that, if they are treated separately by the Smash Bros. titles, we list characters who have spun off into their own subseries under those banners rather than their parent. Hence why Yoshi and Wario are not listed as Mario characters, but Ike is not a "Tellius Series" character.

To put it simply, when it comes to Smash, Nintendo's word takes precedence, and as such, we should be using their standards when it comes to categorizing this information, as we have in previous edits made up to this point. If you're still insistent on the Xeno banner, however...well, I have no stronger evidence then that, so I suppose there's no changing some minds. -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 18:07, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, Nintendo says he comes from that game. That chart is labeled "series/franchise", so I feel Xeno is more appropriate. Xenoblade Chronicles itself is not a series, nor does it have a series article. I really think you're making a mountain out of a molehill here, its a minor detail that people are going to understand either way - the series article, and the template on anything Xeno related, show very easily the relationships here. Sergecross73   msg me  18:36, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, but can't the same be said for yourself? I mean, let's look at things: Nintendo is treating Xenoblade as a series in the context of Smash Bros. (and again, Xenoblade IS a series, even if it doesn't have a series article). There is precedent for using Nintendo's official designation as the same one we use in articles (I'll remind you that you initially argued in favor of Yoshi and Wario as Mario characters until users presented the same counterarguments I have here). Also, multiple users have attempted to change the listing to Xenoblade, and the only one continually reverting it or arguing for Xeno is yourself. Does it really make sense that your own personal opinion should trump all that? -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 19:45, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, you keep reminding me of that other conversation, and I do not know why. There, much like here, my general was was "Why are we still arguing about this? Why does this matter?" Then I stopped arguing because a very small WP:LOCALCONSENSUS had formed. Sergecross73   msg me  20:19, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * So if it doesn't matter, then why do you keep reverting it every single time someone tries to change it or asks for it to be changed? Why concede that time and not this time when the argument is literally the exact same? Doesn't the fact that multiple users have attempted to change it and you're the only one changing it back not indicate a near-consensus on the part of the pro-blade crowd? I keep bringing it up because I seriously don't understand the discrepancy. -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 20:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * If it doesn't matter, I don't see why it needs to be tinkered with. Also, who are these legions of people who are taking issue with Shulk being listed as being part of Xeno. No one else has bothered to say a word to me about it. Sergecross73   msg me  20:25, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm looking back at the history. Between all the Smash articles, I've seen at least four or five different people change it to Blade or ask it to be changed to Blade. Either way, though, we're just arguing in circles, and it's not like I could make the change if I wanted to anyway. The only thing that can definitively settle this at this point is the input of a neutral third party, but like you said, it's probably not a big enough deal to justify calling in someone else to weigh in. All I'm saying, though, is that Nintendo is treating Xenoblade, not Xeno, as a series in the context of Smash Bros., and the article should reflect that. But I suppose my opinion doesn't count for much, so whatever; do what you will. -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 20:40, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Tales of Rebirth
I know you have an interest in the Tales series, and wanted to share something about Tales of Rebirth. As incredible as it seems, I'm planning some major editing work to get it into something approaching a descent state. I've found roughly thirty references that I could use for things like gameplay, development and reception (and the characters, I guess), but I don't feel like tackling writing the story section. I know there are subtitled walkthroughs floating around youtube, but there's nothing like a story summery or a cutscene collection hanging around. Could you help with this bit of things if you're not too busy? Obviously, this could take ages and be hanging around on my end as I've got two GAs, an unfinished FAC (wish someone would do a source review for it, then I'd be easier in my mind) and the reception section of Hearts to see to. --ProtoDrake (talk) 16:32, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * - I'm not all that big into writing story sections, so I don't think I'd be a good candidate for that part, but I will definitely help with cleaning up the article in general. I had actually planned on cleaning it up years ago, when they announced a fan-translation for it, but that project seems to have lost steam, and thus, my interest in it did as well. But I'll definitely help with it some. Also, very nice work with Hearts and Type 0, both of those are looking really good these days! Sergecross73   msg me  16:37, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Rewrite done. I actually managed to flesh out the reception section quite a bit. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:47, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Wow, you really got right to that! It looks good too, especially for JP-only release. (Though I think this got more attention from English sources than most JP-only games, since it was close to Symphonia, which was big, and people thought this would be coming over too...) Sergecross73   msg me  13:55, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Update for this and future Tales projects. I've found a Bandai Namco-published magazine called NOURS/B-NOURS which appears to be archived in Bandai Namdo's site in PDF form and contains contemporary development information on Tales titles. And I found information on both Rebirth in its PS2 and PSP forms. This article may just make it to... dare I say it... GA! And those magazines could be a mine of information. --ProtoDrake (talk) 21:16, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * - That's awesome! It looks like its in Japanese only though? Still, good info. I'm sorry I haven't been as active in the Tales articles as I once was. I lost a bit of interest when majority of the titles were announced for platforms other than what I typically use. Hopefully Tales of Hearts will get me back into it at some point. Sergecross73   msg me  13:23, 20 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Completely unrelated, but is it just me or does the ToR cover art look like absolute shit? Like, a 6 years old's drawing. I dunno, it just struck me. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  21:37, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Especially if you compare it to contemporary titles like Symphonia, Abyss or Legendia... ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  21:40, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Agreed, though there is a reason for that. They were pumping out so many Tales games at that time, that they had several different teams working on different entries. Symphonia, Abyss, and Legendia were all made by different teams. Rebirth was made by "Team Destiny", who utilized that crappier style of cover. (Like Tales of Destiny and Tales of Destiny 2 too.) (*Feels like a nerd for knowing all of this.*) Sergecross73   msg me  22:07, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * It's early Mutsumi Inomata (who has been doing the 2D titles since Destiny). Her style took a while to mature. Not like Fujisaka or Okumura (still find the latter's Corpse Shell design for Xillia 2 somewhat hypnotic). But I do agree to a degree, the cover is not the best in the Tales series so far (that goes to Zestiria without a doubt). --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:16, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Agreed, Zestiria is looking good. I hope you're reading this fascinating stuff!! haha  Sergecross73   msg me  13:23, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * It's kind of a shame I never really got into a Tales game... I only ever really played Phantasia (on GBA). Are there any released in NA on PS4? ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  15:43, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * No, they haven't made the move to next gen yet, still on PS3. PS3 to PS4 remasters are big these days though, and their next one, Tales of Zestiria, is coming out for PS3 pretty late in the life cycle, so you never know though. They have hinted that's the next platform they're going to though, since the series sells best on Sony Home Consoles it seems. That's what always bums me out though: so many of the handheld one don't end up being translated to English, and that's where I do the vast majority of my gaming. (or Off TV Play). Sergecross73   msg me  15:49, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Genre warring
Binksternet has been removing sourced genres from the article Deftones, claiming genres should "aim for generality" and not quantity as his reasoning. I seem to remember you saying that there's no such thing as too many genres if there are sources, so go after him. --63.155.164.33 (talk) 14:02, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
 * All I see is you edit warring. Sergecross73   msg me  14:08, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
 * More accurately, they should aim for representativeness. Sure, "rock" is more general than "nu metal", but Linkin Park's first two main albums, their demos, and all of their supplementary material from before Minutes to Midnight fit into nu metal, so it'd be silly not to include that. Sometimes it gets to be a problem when there are, like, ten genres, even if sourced, there's often no clear line as to what should and shouldn't be included, which is why talk pages exist. Tezero (talk) 16:36, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Slime Mori Mori Dragon Quest 3
I found out about this game while stalking your contributions (I don't think that's even stigmatized now, to be honest) and was curious about it, so I found a few sources: GameSpot, TechnoBuffalo, VG247, Nintendo World Report, Destructoid, and Kotaku. Strangely, none of them are reviews or seem to be covering the game in-depth - was it ever released outside Japan? I'll consider creating a page if you don't want to, assuming these sources are enough, though I still haven't gotten around to playing a Dragon Quest game yet.

Oh, and thanks for protecting Sage. In a way I do feel bad about it, because I don't want to catalyze their game's potential DMCA claim and I trust that the sources aren't inerrant, but at the same time, Wikipedia policies do exist and I'm just going by them, and you can't just expect us not to write about things because you want to keep them a secret; that's not how journalism works. Tezero (talk) 13:55, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Haha, no problem about the "stalking". My personal stance is that its fine as long as its not done for the purpose of harassment. (ie purposely following me around at AFD !voting against me every time, following me around and reverting all my edits on topics that seem unlikely for the other to be on, etc.) I have no problem with the way that you or Salv do it. (In fact, I like it, it can help facilitate discussion.)
 * I have no problem with you writing the Slime 3 article. The merge was simply on the grounds that there was very little content present, so it was better presented at the series article. As long as you expand it out farther than the "1 source 1 sentence" approach "Coin" always used, I have no problem. (Well, don't COPYVIO like he did either of course.)
 * No problem about Sage. The game's getting coverage, so the deletion requests are bogus, and if they are unhappy with information presented by the sources, they can contact the sources about correcting it, or do a new interview that corrects it or something. There are ways of them fixing this that still fall within the confines of how we do things here. Subjects of articles should not have too much control over their own Wikipedia articles, or you fall into problems with WP:NPOV or WP:PROMOTION. There's an essay I've read before about how that's why one wouldn't want a Wikipedia article about themselves, because they can't control it. I can't remember what it was called, but I'm reminded of that. I guess that wouldn't apply, since they didn't create the article, but surely someone probably would have by the time its released, if it in fact is. Sergecross73   msg me  15:07, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

PlayStation Vita: undo Revision 635658444
Hello Sergecross73, I wanted to know why you consider, in the english wiki, that vgchartz.com isn't a reliable source. Indeed, it's considered to be an OK source for at least the french, Dutch, spanish, German and Italian versions of wiki. furthermore, it doesn't have a reputation of bad accuracy (as I know) when it comes to the hardware totals – Best regards, Twymx (talk) 19:19, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * , I can't speak for Serge, who may have more experience with cases in which it has or hasn't proved unreliable, but I think it accepts user contributions. The concept of a reliable source is, first and foremost, that fact-checking is involved, and if people can just add whatever they want, there's no reason to believe it. Even Wikipedia, which demands sources for all non-obvious content, can't be cited for this reason. Tezero (talk) 19:51, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * There's an active consensus saying it's unusable, so even outside of my opinion, others have deemed it unusable.
 * There's a number if ways that they don't meet the definition of reliable source. They're a bunch of people with no credentials. They don't reveal their methods. They're commonly wrong with their figures, and change their figures on a whim.
 * Others may have other reasons as well. Ultimately, you need to change consensus before using. Sergecross73   msg me  20:26, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Hopefully!!!! ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  22:06, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Nope. Dammit. Oh well, at least I've been pretty active lately... Sergecross73   msg me  22:10, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Check Special:Preferences? And you're sure it's not going to junk mail? ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  22:13, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Sigh, it appears a week ago Google randomly decided the emails Ive been receiving for like 5 years are spam. >:( Thank you for your help, Salv.  Sergecross73   msg me  22:21, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * NP. I suppose Gmail detected that you always deleted the e-mails quickly without replying and somehow assumed they were spam. The same happened to me for Youtube upload notifications a while back. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  22:24, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I actually never delete emails, because they're so small in comparison to how much space you get. (I mean, after years of use, I used like 2% of my space.). Who knows I can fix it once I'm on a computer im sure. Sergecross73   msg me  22:30, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm a but of a hoarder too, but for notifications like that, there is no point keeping. Communications I always archive. At work I never delete a single e-mail. In 2.75 years, I've got 3Gb (our of 5Gb) of mails. :p ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  22:42, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Mega Drive/Genesis
Why have you reverted my edit? It's grammatically and factually correct, I haven't changed the meaning of the sentence, nor have I changed the original sentence structure: the Mega Drive was released in Japan in 1988, later known as the Genesis in North America. You can rewrite an equally factually correct sentence from the North American perspective: "the Genesis was released in North America in 1989 (released in Japan in 1988 and Europe in 1990 as the Mega Drive)" if you really wish... 87.81.143.227 (talk) 15:02, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Either are fine, and it didn't need to be changed. Pretty sure the original wording is what was decided upon in its Good Article Review. Sergecross73   msg me  16:35, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The sentence you prefer is both factually and grammatically incorrect, which is why it was changed and is not 'fine' as you claim. Please reconsider this and unlock the article. 87.81.143.227 (talk) 17:10, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * What is your grammatical objection? Sergecross73   msg me  17:12, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * "Released in Japan in 1988, the Sega Genesis (known as the Sega "Mega Drive" in Europe and Japan)" Three objections. 1. Factually incorrect: the sentence expresses what was released in 1988 was called the Genesis, when it wouldn't get that name until a year later in North America. 2. Grammar: to mention Japan twice in one short sentence is unnecessary. 3. Grammar: the quotation marks around Mega Drive aren't needed (I don't see them in common usage in that context on Wikipedia?), and personally they sound patronising and almost perjoative. Not sure what the right term is, but the quote marks imply falseness or a double meaning – does that make sense? Additional: As I said, I'm not against rewriting the sentence to a North American viewpoint, but I'd then question why it needs a North American bias as opposed to writing in the context of the product in and of itself. 87.81.143.227 (talk) 17:39, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Your "factual argument" has been debated endlessly, and consensus is to word it like that, so I'm not interested in that one. The quotes aren't scare quotes, they're just denoting the beginning and ending of the name, since they are two words that could be used in other contexts (opposed to something like Wii, which has no use other than a name of a product. The same cannot be said of "Mega Drive".) Mentioning Japan twice may not be ideal, but I don't believe it to be incorrect. I'm open to suggestions on solving that one though.  If you're unhappy with my response, you may propose things on the talk page, but beware, most people have next to zero patience with these Genesis/Mega Drive arguments anymore.  Sergecross73   msg me  18:31, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * You've misunderstood my point – I'm not debating whether the console should be referred to as Mega Drive or Genesis (I'm aware of the debates), my objection is that the sentence is simply incorrect and completely inaccurate as it's currently written. Consensus/compromise on the name is fine, but should not at the expense of accurate writing. Please don't belittle and misquote me (with added scare quotes) with the phrase "factual argument". As for rewriting the sentence while keeping it US-centric: if you'd care to re-read my initial comment, I've already provided a suggestion. Re the quotes marks: I did say I hadn't seen them in common usage across articles. Plus, Family Computer are two words that could be used in other contexts but aren't found in quote marks. 87.81.143.227 (talk) 19:43, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I've already commented on the talk page but is it safe to assume from your lack of reply thus far that you don't acknowledge any of the points I made as to why I find your reasons invalid/flawed at best, or my suggested rewrite and are happy to keep the article under semi protection? 87.81.143.227 (talk) 05:49, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I was waiting for more input in the discussion you created. Sergecross73   msg me  12:05, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

About the Thank you on the Bravely Second edit
Hey thanks for the thank you! That's very nice of you. I didn't even know that was a thing. Is this a new feature on Wikipedia or was I just oblivious to it until now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karasuhebi (talk • contribs) 20:48, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
 * - No problem! I just appreciated that you were updating an article that I created, that I've kind of been neglecting to update myself. And yeah, its a "new-ish" feature? Like, it's not new as of this month or anything, but was probably started...early 2014? Sergecross73   msg me  21:10, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Reverting Talk Page Comment
I didn't see the Talk namespace, so I thought it was an article. Next time I'll try to look more carefully. Hailey Girges (talk) 04:45, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * You...thought...this...looked like article? Sergecross73   msg me  13:46, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Avril Lavigne (album)
Two different IPs added unreliable sources like hardrockhaven.net, guitarsweepstakes.com and Muumuse (see References section below). 183.171.181.120 (talk) 02:31, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The articles not very active (7 edits this month, the last 50 track back to August.) You should be able to make the changes yourself without much opposition... Sergecross73   msg me  02:43, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Question about SPI
Do these things usually last several weeks? Because this has been a nightmare all around, and I'm not sure I can or should take much more of this, as this has been ongoing for almost 12 weeks now, and it's very discouraging and demoralizing. Rationalobserver (talk) 22:32, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Huh, I guess I was too late?, it seems the SPI clerk determined that you are a sock? That's too bad, I hadn't thought so. I'd help if there is anything you feel that is conclusive that could defend you... Sergecross73   msg me  00:08, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

A pie for you!

 * - I'm glad things worked out for you. I do hope you'll stay away from interacting with Dan56 though, as sometimes, even if its not your fault, if too much drama seems to revolve around you, you may find yourself in the ANI/blocking hot-seat regardless. I personally recommend, in times of Wiki-drama, to find yourself a nice obscure, non-controversial article to work on in solitude. But its up to you. Hope to see you around the project though. Sergecross73   msg me  13:43, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll do my best to honor your advice. Thanks again! Rationalobserver (talk) 15:58, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

FAC for Of Human Feelings
Hi! Since you are an experienced contributor to WP:ALBUMS, would you care to review or comment at my FAC for the article Of Human Feelings? Dan56 (talk) 00:23, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I apologize, but I really don't work on GA/FA related things. I work a lot on album related discussions on guidelines and source use, but that's really just to establish systems and precedents for people in a general sense. Sergecross73   msg me  18:39, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

GA-related present
As a king of late Christmas present to you, I preset a revamped and ready for action Tales of Rebirth, reviewed and given GA icon courtesy of Tezero. Unfortunately complete with terrible cover art. --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:27, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
 * - Wow, that's awesome. Was just looking it over - it looks great! Thanks for the "present"! I'm hoping 2015 will renew my interest in writing about Tales games so I can be more active in helping you. I received Tales of Hearts R for Christmas, and still have Tales of the World: Radiant Mythology to play too, so it seems very possible. Sergecross73   msg me  14:15, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

 * Unacceptable! Just kidding! Thanks ! Sergecross73   msg me  04:15, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Falongen is back,...
See User_talk:Falongen. Sigh. I really don't know what they're getting out of this! Mabalu (talk) 10:24, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Blocked again. Let me know if you catch him again a month. Sergecross73   msg me  14:01, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Hullo - I spotted the ISP: [60.241.116.90] popped up, went straight to Emperor of Europe for example, and moved it right back to Falongen's dodgy redirect. Looking at their contribution history is VERY suggestive - you may want to compare and contrast. I'm also seeing the same predilection for weird redirects/similar subjects. If this ISP has been active during any of Falongen's block periods, then it implies someone was block-evading - making it even more likely that they know exactly what they're doing. Looks like User:Smuckola may finally have grounds for requesting a sock investigation into this user. Mabalu (talk) 17:19, 4 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Smuckola; Sergecross73.... take a look at this. Quack, duck, quack. Sock, sockpuppet, sock. Mabalu (talk) 12:13, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Sigh, I really don't get this guy. I'll intervene though. Sergecross73   msg me  15:28, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I have reverted quite a lot of their edits/redirect moves. It's got to be the same person - in the middle of their edits was a random redirect of "pencil dress" to "pencil skirt" - as if all the Falongen-sque "empirical" redirects weren't enough of a giveaway. They clearly set up this sock account in order to evade the permanent ban. Sigh. I don't get this guy either. Mabalu (talk) 18:35, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * If he doesn't answer me soon I'm going to indef both accounts, considering his original account was at his final warning, and the new one is pretty clearly him. Refusing to address me would confirm a DUCK situation to me. Sergecross73   msg me  19:11, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * He removed my warning without any discussion, so they're both blocked until they show any ounce of effort in explaining their actions. Sergecross73   msg me  01:54, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * This is totally insane. People like this do much deranged damage.  Aside from the analysis you guys said here, they also plagiarize redundant content between articles and inject lots of OR.  It seems to me, between the evaluation of the contributions and the final banning, that all contributions should be undone.  I went through just the two latest articles they'd butchered, and it took a lot of time and effort to research and undo it.  WTF.  WP:FAIL — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 09:23, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it really puzzles me too. What a strange, passive-aggressive way to attack the project. Go figure. Sergecross73   msg me  02:12, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Is there a way to automatically revert all of one user's edits? — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 17:27, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I usually just go to their contribs page, and click "rollback" over and over again. There might be better ways of doing it though, I'm not sure. Perhaps a will know.  Sergecross73   msg me  17:32, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
 * What about all their redirect creations too? Mabalu (talk) 01:48, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry, forgot to respond to this. If there's ones that meet speedy deletion criteria, I can delete them (though I may need a bit of explanation because I'm familiar with all the things we wrote about.) There's WP:RFD for less obvious ones. There's also just fixing them or leaving them be if they don't especially seem to be detrimental. Going forward, since both accounts are indef blocked, if its obviously Falongen again, we can just revert them on the grounds of block evasion. Sergecross73   msg me  17:33, 8 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Hijuklet We have a quacker. It starts off with exactly the same robotic process of pointlessly creating User and Talk page with 'a' and blanking it, and then making the same kinds of edits to the same articles. Just like Falongen and Onestance.  I already reverted the major piece of plagiarism of large blocks of content from another article into United States of Europe.  Again.  Did I do the right thing by adding  to the relevant Talk pages?  But don't worry; I asked him if he's Falongen and he said "No.". Serge, I guess you have WP:CheckUser access?— Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 08:34, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, when people purposely go in and make edits just to get rid of the redlinks in their own name, that is usually the sign of a person who had been here under another name - it wouldn't make sense for a completely new person to know how that works, or why one would do it. That being said, a lot of people do that, so this in itself isn't super strong of a connection to Falongen. I don't have WP:CHECKUSER access, I usually just block people per WP:DUCK on rather obvious cases. If you've got more concrete proof, like he's making literally the same edits on the same pages, I can help you, but otherwise, if you want to further pursue this, it should probably be sent to WP:SPI or a checkuser. (I think is one, so you could try him. Or maybe not, I'm not entirely sure how active he is these days.)  Sergecross73   msg me  16:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes that is exactly what I just said. Many of them are exactly the same edits as with United States of Europe.  Salvidrim, if Serge isn't doing WP:DUCK on this one again, can you hit up WP:CheckUser and/or WP:DUCK?  Thanks. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 09:55, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I assume you're talking about this, as Onestance, and this, as Hijukelit, correct? They are pretty similar both in their content and lack of sources. Let me do some more digging. Let me know if you've got any other good difs. Usually SPI/Checkusers require a bunch of them before they'll look into anyways, so may as well. Sergecross73   msg me  13:36, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Right. ok. :-/ — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 11:34, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
 * No need for the sad face! Your confronting him in itself has made him stop, so that's good (and could be a sign that it's Falongen knows he was caught again.) I do see similarities in the edits; unnecessary redirects and unsourced edits in the realm of Geographic/economic/government type subjects. I want to see if the account makes any more edits to confirm it, but its looking increasingly likely... Sergecross73   msg me  14:09, 26 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Please can I ask for a second opinion on this reversion of a Hijuklet edit. I think I was right to revert it, but would appreciate confirmation - it just seemed inappropriate to link to the actual organisation's page if the one in the novel is a fictional version, as if implying that the real Europol is the same as the one portrayed in the novel. Thanks! Mabalu (talk) 11:30, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * *WINCE* I hate when I malaprop in edit summaries. I meant Europol, not Interpol, in the edit summary. Mabalu (talk) 11:55, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey bro. I am not familiar with the material, but it's unencyclopedic to imply things, period.  So yeah whether it's a specifically delusional propaganda move, or whether it's an unintentionally overreaching edit by an obviously delusional (sockpuppet) user, or whether it's a simple oversight by an innocent user, it's effectively the same thing.  :( — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 07:31, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's pretty close to my stance as well. If this is Falongen, he does have a history of questionable associations like this, whether it be through weird redirects or wiki-links, so that's reason for caution. Even if its not him, if you think there's reason for concern for misinformation in a situation where there's no room for rewriting/clarification, then you're probably doing the right thing. Sergecross73   msg me  13:13, 2 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Kufojut And another one. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 07:24, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I can't help but notice that, in addition to the behavioral similarities, Hijuklet stopped editing as soon as you confronted him of being a sock, and then Kufojut was created on the very same day. I'm blocking them both, but stating that I'm open to unblocking if they can convince me I've made a mistake. Sergecross73   msg me  14:21, 2 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Fokstonaf. Quack.  The day the account was created, I reverted all edits (all of falongenian nature) and I put the  tag on there, with no further activity.  No response.  According to how we've been handling it, this is the same evidence we've used for indef banning so far. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 10:48, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
 * He made so few edits, and hasn't edited for a week, so I want to hold off on blocking him for now. Certainly seems possible, and it was good to document his name here, in case either of us ever decide to take things to SPI or somewhere in the future, (like if there were to be a scenario where DUCK couldn't be applied, but the editor was actively editing and being beligerant or something.) Sergecross73   msg me  18:16, 15 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Linskon - We have YET another quacker. Active since October 2014, so clearly block evading. Exact same editing signatures. Mabalu (talk) 19:30, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, this one made more edits, and they seem more clearly connected to the other. Blocked. Both of you guys, please let me know if you ever see any of these people actually responding to my block message, saying its a mistake. I want to hear them out if we do happen to make a mistake... He usually doesn't even contest it when we find him...which doesn't seem like the reaction we'd get if it was just some random person, so I feel we're correct so far, but still. Sergecross73   msg me  20:34, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Exactly. :-/ — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 05:57, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Did you undo all the contributions? — Smuckola

(Email) (Talk) 06:04, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm just doing some now, I see you already picked up some too. Nominated the redirect of World dictator for deletion as, more so than usual, it was remarkably contentious. This is completely insane. Some of the redirects seem perfectly legit, and others - such as this - are just nuts. It makes it very confusing. Mabalu (talk) 10:31, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah this is a sick mind. With the frenetic, bloody-minded, single-minded, robotic, perseverated patterns of editing, coupled with the globally cataclysmic subject matter, it'd like that of autism or schizophrenia. Some sockpuppets actually have multiple personalities, so they don't know what they did before.  I mean that doesn't affect how we handle the situation, but it kinda helps to compassionately consider how such behavior could come from suffering and illness.  I mean if we have to suffer, we want to ascribe meaning to our own suffering. ;) — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 10:38, 19 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Stinjon Goin quackerz. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 05:57, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * He actually just deleted and readded his name from my list of suspected sockpuppets of Falongen, lololololol. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 06:53, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I've blocked him with the same message as the last few times, the "If this is a mistake, tell me" message. I also protected that United States of Europe article, since that's the first place he always seems to go. Smuckola, I understand your frustrations with him, but please do not ask him about personal mental illness or anything. That could be perceived as a personal attack, or an invasion of privacy. I don't want you to get in trouble over this person's disruptive edits... (I'm not saying that as a threat, I'm saying it'd be hard to defend if other people started accusing you of it, that's all.) Sergecross73   msg me  13:47, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * You just described how every abuser (especially sockpuppets) interprets literally everything we do about them. Everything we say, everything we do, every policy written, every interpretation of every policy, every action taken upon them, and everything we even think in our own minds.  If a person was to interpret a simple, logical, and compassionate question (after a year of battering us with abuse) as being an invasion of privacy (full disclosure: I lack psychic power) or as a personal attack, would be delusionally narcissistic.  I hope nobody here is losing sleep about how the narcissist perceives being authoritatively told that everything they do is wrong, followed by the taking away of all their toys! When deprived of their global playpen and soapbox, they could resort to a tantrum worthy of having to call 911, and then that'd magically be our fault through a hyperbolic victim culture of association and perception too! :-D  Nope, the only victims are the ones posting to this thread.  But.  As for the perception by looney victim culture admins, okay. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 16:34, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Narcissism, delusion, and tantrums run rampant around here, no doubt, but I believe its crossing the line to observe these problems and make a "diagnosis" to connect it to medical dysfunction though. We're not doctors, we're not qualified to say that, and they have no real responsibility to disclose that information either. It's not a defense for anyone, Wikipedia is not therapy, but its not something we need to ask about either. Sergecross73   msg me  16:55, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, brother, that's totally inapplicable confabulation upon what I said. That's just reciting a generic taboo.  I didn't say or do any of that.  It didn't happen.  You are literally telling me that you can't tell the difference between an honest question and a judgmental statement, which I know isn't true either.  I didn't diagnose him; I asked if he'd find it in his best interest, as some others have, to share whether a doctor actually did.  That has helped people tremendously in not getting blocked, and having people take a special interest in stewarding their special needs, even when they go berzerk.  Because then we would know why, and that it's legitimate.  Disclosure of any variety of personal issues has worked.  It's something I've probably asked about twice in my entire life on Wikipedia, with the most incorrigibly and unavoidably extreme cases because Wikipedia policy begs these people to come back and force me to fix their stuff or walk away.  If it ever arises again, I could maybe think of a wordsmithier approach since you mention the taboo, thanx.  There's no diagnosis from me, just a simple and compassionate offer to engage in dialog and understand a potential problem as a last resort, just like any other, and it didn't connect, so case closed. :) — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 14:25, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Regardless of whether or not Wikipedia has a policy against it, I humbly request you do not ask such things when working with me, because I feel my blocks are done without "mental dysfunction" being a factor in my decisions. Plus, I'd rather not be part of some "Serge-Deals-Blocks-For-Depression-Gate" controversy. The world loves a controversy, and everyone seems all too ready to blame Admin for the website not being what they want it to be, or not aligning with their personal/political/religious/social/whatever beliefs. I just don't want to feed the fire... Sergecross73   msg me  01:58, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I got yer back. ;) — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 15:07, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for understanding. Sergecross73   msg me  15:52, 22 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Do we have anyone else in mind to do simple checkuser requests? — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 16:37, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't have a go-to person for Check Users. Most of the socks I deal with are blatant and just blocked per DUCK, or I just take them to SPI. Before I was an admin, I had a go-to admin, but...I don't really agree with how they handle things in recent years, so I don't want to consult them or send you their way. Sergecross73   msg me  16:55, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry to hear that. I hope the hard life at Wikipedia didn't change that person. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 14:27, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I appreciated that he took care of some obvious socks for me back in the day, but I've seem him be pretty careless with some of his blocking decisions since I've become an Admin and began to better understand how to do things. I'm not sure if things changed, or if he's always been that way, and just happened to be right with my interactions with him. Sergecross73   msg me  15:52, 22 January 2015 (UTC)