User talk:Sergecross73/Archive 38

Saturn failure factor
I've restored the Sonic X-Treme cancellation being a factor of the Saturn's failure in the intro of the Sega Saturn article as you believed it omitted information. However I must stress, I personally believe that the Sonic X-Treme cancellation was a low-level factor, and that the biggest reason of its failure was its surprise May 95 launch. From what I've seen so far, the Sonic cancellation is not often considered as the main reason of the failure, but rather the early western launch. --G&#38;CP (talk) 22:50, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * This article is a Featured Article. It's gone through extensive peer reviews. You need to discuss these things on the talk page first, as significant research has gone into them. You also need to read WP:LEAD, and stop adding these unreliable sources to the intro paragraph. Sergecross73   msg me  23:01, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Something rather weird
I can't help but this that this is weird. Looking through User talk:Drvasanthms' talk page and its all on the same thing: Shrevin. And they keep making articles and draft pages on that for years, with them always getting deleted. I don't know what to make of that but its overall unproductive. But I don't know if that violates anything. GamerPro64 15:24, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That is rather bizarre. I was going to just give them a notification about WP:NOTDICTIONARY, but it looks like that has been explained to them about every time it was rejected at AFC, so they must know. Also, I know that what he's submitting is not acceptable, but I'm not entirely when it is appropriate for an article about a name to exist - I mean, articles like Jennifer (given name) or Daniel do exist.
 * If it keeps happening, I may intervene, but if he just keeps on lazily submitting the same draft to AFC a few times a year, then I'm content with letting AFC handle it. Sergecross73   msg me  15:35, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

nu metal
I linked the word "we" in the quotes on Nu metal so that readers can know who the quote is talking about. Statik N (talk) 00:06, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Read the whole paragraph though. You say things like "Tim Commerford of Rage Against the Machine" at least twice prior to the link. It's readily apparent what band he would be talking about in the quote. Sergecross73   msg me  00:35, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Robert Conquest
I want to thank you for the block of Robert Conquest. I should have it requested days ago instead to go on a editwarring with the others. Now I hope they will understand they are not totally right on what happened. Until now they did everything possible to put any blame on me, who I am still a beginner here. Truthfully, wheter were your intentions, thanks again. -- Flushout1999 (talk) 07:31, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem. I just happened to stumble upon the article in following someone's edits (not yours), and decided to intervene. I have no stance in the matter, I've never even heard of the person, I merely wanted to help facilitate discussion. Thanks for your comment though, as the usual response to me doing this is wild, baseless claims of agendas, favoritism, and corruption, when again, the truth is, I have no personal interest in this. Sergecross73   msg me  12:55, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry to bother you again on this. Could you please put back the POV tag on the top of the page? The discussion is still ongoing but somebody took the POV tag away before the page was blocked (maybe you did it? Don't know, but issue is not solved at all. I am still being attacked in the talk page, as it seems some users do not want me to edit or discuss the issue in any form). Thanks -- Flushout1999 (talk) 18:43, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Page on getting deleted.
Hey I got a message saying the article I wrote on "Hippo Campus (band)" might get deleted. How do I make sure it will not get deleted and that it will fix guidelines? This is getting to be a pretty good band and popular. How do I make sure it won't get deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluesaxophone12 (talk • contribs) 17:48, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi there. The biggest of problems was that you wrote the article without using a single source/reference. On Wikipedia, articles are written according to what reliable sources say on a topic. See WP:V for the concept, and WP:RS for how Wikipedia defines them. (A list of a bunch of sources that are acceptable or not acceptable can be found at WP:MUSIC/SOURCES.) So, as you can imagine, if articles are supposed to be written entirely by what other sources say, its rather troublesome when there is not a single source present. (I suppose "The Current" source was put at the bottom of the article, but it wasn't actually used to cite anything, so it was probably overlooked. Just as well, 1 source is not considered enough anyways.)
 * The General Notability Guideline (GNG) is the general rule on whether or not a subject should have an article. It basically says that, reliable, third party sources should dedicate whole articles of their own on the subject. Again, sources like ones found at WP:MUSIC/SOURCES. Album/EP reviews, article discussing a bands upcoming release or concert, etc.
 * If people find an article that lacks sources, and/or they feel fails the GNG, they may mark it for deletion in a few different ways. That's what someone did.
 * At that point, an Admin, like myself, looks at the request, and makes a call on it. Usually, this results in either deleting it, or removing the tag, claiming that it should not be deleted. I declined the request, as I felt that, if the band was big enough to book a show on Conan, there's probably sources out there on them.
 * In theory, people can still nominate it for deletion. I fixed a lot of formatting/style issues that made the article "stand out", so at least it shouldn't attract as much negative attention, but its still lacking in sources, so its still possible to get tagged again. I can try to help out with sources in the coming days, I just haven't gotten around to it yet.
 * A person on the talk page mentioned that the article was created by someone from the band or their management. Please know that Wikipedia has a conflict of interest guideline that strongly discourages people to edit articles that have an obvious connection/vested interest in, as they generally have a hard time staying neutral. As you created the article, I assume they're talking about you. So, please keep this in mind.


 * Short answer:
 * To make sure its not deleted, many more reliable sources that are third party (ie not the band's website, press release, social media, etc) need to be added to the article. Usually 4-5 keep people away from targeting it, in my experience. If the band has had any album/EP/song chart in any major chart (ie Billboard (magazine)) that helps a lot too. Sergecross73   msg me  02:58, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello
I'm new to wikipedia and i don't know what to do SafetySponge (talk) 20:08, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi there. Is there something in particular you need help with? Or just in general? If its just in general, you can read up more on Wikipedia on the various links given on your talk page. (User talk:SafetySponge) If its something more specific, let me know and I can try to help. Let me know. Thanks! Sergecross73   msg me  02:34, 25 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you! :D SafetySponge (talk) 12:13, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

JG genre discussions - Rise Against/KSA
Just wanted to let you know i had permission to add the genres so you just blocked me for no reason Jg9443 (talk) 01:38, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
 * You were blocked because you were given a last warning to not add/change genre without adding a source. Then you added/changed genre at Killswitch Engage. That is why you were (rightfully) blocked. I've been lecturing you on this for months now, you really should understand this by now, and yet you still seem clueless. If you need help on this, ask about it, but if you just go and add/change genre without a source again, you're blocked indefinitely. Sergecross73   msg me  03:24, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

I know but the user i talked with said that if they were provided sources to the genre witch i did when i added mathcore and hardcore punk into the genre i am  sorry if you dont understand  that but its true Jg9443 (talk) 21:49, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I blocked you for this edit and this edit. Where did you add a source exactly? Sergecross73   msg me  23:13, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

I mean at the time i have not edit annythingJg9443 (talk) 23:30, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I do not know what you're trying to say, but my links above show concretely that you changed genre without adding a source, which you were warned many times not to do. If you do it again, you're blocked again, its as simple as that. If you still don't understand how to add references, then do not make edits yet. Instead, focus on reading through WP:REFB again. This is a basic necessity to editing Wikipedia. If you cannot or will not follow the instructions, then I'm not sure you're ready to be editing Wikipedia. Sergecross73   msg me  14:44, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Example

 * Here is how you should go about adding/changing music genre on Wikipedia:

I'll use an example of a band I've been working on lately - Third Eye Blind. I feel they could be called alternative rock. Here's how I would go about adding the genre of alternative rock to their article:
 * 1) I search for a source that backs up this claim. Do this by doing a Google search, like this.
 * 2) Search through the results to find a source that directly calls them this.
 * 3) After searching, I come to this source: http://www.altpress.com/news/entry/third_eye_blind_release_video_for_get_me_out_of_here - it directly calls them "alt-rockers", which can only really refer to the genre of alternative rock. Also, I note that "Altpress" is a website considered reliable on Wikipedia. See a list of usuable/unusable sources at WP:MUSIC/SOURCES.
 * 4) Then I would go to the Third Eye Blind page, and make this exact edit. The exact text I'd add is:  Alternative rock,

That's how you do it. The source should directly and literally back the genre added. You cannot give Youtube link and say things like "Come on, listen to it, it's clearly a certain genre". That is original research and is not allowed. The source must say it directly, as in my example above. If you cannot find a genre that directly backs it, then you should not add the genre.

Let me know if you have any questions. Sergecross73  msg me  15:08, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

More source talk
After all this time i got proof that they are in the hardcore punk scene https://vimeo.com/killswitch engage entrire set from this is hardcore festJg9443 (talk) 23:56, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Did you read the example I gave you? Does the source literally and directly call them the genre? Sergecross73   msg me  00:06, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes i did i read and all of them Jg9443 (talk) 00:16, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, can you give me a direct quote of the part of the source that literally calls them a certain genre? Sergecross73   msg me  00:17, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

I got the source that calls them hardcore punk ... Invocation of Nehek It Dies Today Killswitch Engage Last Perfection Locked in ... Categories: Metalcore genres | Hardcore punk genres This guide is licensed ...Jg9443 (talk) 00:44, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Can you provide with me with a direct quote, or a source I can double check to see that you're doing things correctly? Sergecross73   msg me  00:47, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

This is my proof that killswitch engage is the hardcore punk scene... Invocation of Nehek It Dies Today Killswitch Engage Last Perfection Locked in ... Categories: Metalcore genres | Hardcore punk genres This guide is licensed ...Jg9443 (talk) 01:35, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * And where does that come from? You haven't provided any sources, you just keep typing sentences that don't make sense and cannot be verified. -- ferret (talk) 01:37, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * What is this supposed to be? A website? Magazine? Book? Can you please use a source that I can double check to verify you're doing it right? Sergecross73   msg me  01:40, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes absolutely i can provide the sources with you i"ll be happy to helpJg9443 (talk) 20:07, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, please do. Sergecross73   msg me  20:29, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Just to make sure i have full permission to add the genre rightJg9443 (talk) 20:44, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No... You don't. List the source here first. -- ferret (talk) 20:48, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No, you don't. I want you to present a source right here. One that I can double check that you're understanding how to do it correctly. Because you have not done it right yet. Sergecross73   msg me  21:03, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

I finally got some provided  sources that calls them hardcore punk Killswitch Engage's Mike D'antonio Discusses '90s Hardcore ...Jg9443 (talk) 01:40, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Can you list them here? You have been refusing to do that. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 01:49, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, please link to an actual website where what you're saying can be verified. I'm losing my patience here. We've been discussing for 48 hours and you haven't presented a link to a single source yet. Do you not understand what I'm asking you to do? Sergecross73   msg me  01:55, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I hesitate to do this, but I'm certain he means this Blabbermouth article. However, the source does not refer to KSE as hardcore punk, and the video deals mostly with Mike's other projects. -- ferret (talk) 01:57, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * If this is true, then I agree, this is not an acceptable source, as it does not directly label Killswitch Engage as hardcore punk. Sergecross73   msg me  02:02, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

I got some proof that killswitch engage is hardcore punk this what the bassist had to say http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/killswitch-engages-mike-dantonio-discusses-90s-hardcore-scene-video/#1FQeDfdD8G0LUEuh.99Jg9443 (talk) 02:09, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for finally providing a link to a website finally, I appreciate that. But where does it literally and directly call the band "hardcore punk"? Sergecross73   msg me  02:23, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

I finally i have the source they admit that they wanted to be hardcore punk just like the bassist also the band http://music.my.id/mp3/file/lagu/scuzz-meets-killswitch-engage/Jg9443 (talk) 03:26, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

They said it but is that they said differently they meant to say that they use a fusion with hardcore and metalJg9443 (talk) 03:34, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

P.s even with the killswitch engage on of the websites call the hardcore saying that Horward Jones is has more of a hardcore vocal then Jesse Leach Jg9443 (talk) 03:41, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Can you give me a direct quote so I don't have to listen through the whole thing, especially since...
 * 2) ...based on your description, it does not sound like they directly stated it.
 * 3) It seems like a lot of your sources just have the word "hardcore" in there somewhere. Are any calling them hardcore punk? There are many variations of hardcore music besides punk.  Sergecross73   msg me  13:50, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

I got the sources and the quotes that calls them hardcore punk Killswitch Engage is a five-piece metalcore band from Westfield, ... purists would argue that since they're metalcore, they're merely a form of hardcore punk. and here is the sources to it http://tvtropes.org/Jg9443 (talk) 03:49, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * TV Tropes is not a usuable source. It's like Wikipedia, where anyone can edit it at any point. Someone could fly on and change it to say any genre. This one is no good. Sergecross73   msg me  13:45, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That's a silly statement anyways. Metalcore is a fusion genre of metal and hardcore punk, so saying "They're metalcore, but merely a form of hardcore punk" is meaningless... :P -- ferret (talk) 14:07, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, I didn't think about the actual argument, I just gravitated to the "TV Tropes as the source" issue. Yes, also the argument doesn't conceptually make sense either. If it was a good source, it would only prove that they're metalcore, which I'm pretty sure is already sourced and covered in the article. As I keep on saying, it should literally and directly state something like Killswitch Engage is hardcore punk. If it's not that literal, then find a different source.  Sergecross73   msg me  14:17, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

OK but i can prove i am verry sorry to bother you with this but i can prove that rise against is not american melodic hardcore band is american punk rock this is my proof https://www.punknews.org/Jg9443 (talk) 16:27, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * People have already presented sources that show that critics call them both genre. Either is acceptable, unless you can show that one is used more prominently than another. You haven't been able to show one usuable source yet, let alone a lot of them, so...I don't think you're ready to take that argument on. Sergecross73   msg me  16:33, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

And this is the video to prove it www.vevo.com/.../rise-against/help-is-on-the-wayJg9443 (talk) 16:44, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

and this is what they admit that they are punk rock http://fuse.tv/tags/from-the-vaultJg9443 (talk) 16:47, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * These links aren't working. The second link indirectly links to a video that says "History of Rise Against in under 30 minutes". If you're going to link to a half hour long video, you really need to say at what point they say it, and what it is they say word for word. Sergecross73   msg me  16:52, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Question does urban dictornary count becuase they also agree with and there is a user that also agress with can i link you that rise against urban dictornary or would it be the same thing just like Wikipedia ?Jg9443 (talk) 16:59, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Urban Disctionary is not usuable. It's like Wikipedia, where anyone can edit it. Any website where anyone can make changes, is not going to work. It needs to be written by a music journalist, not just a random anybody on the Internet. Sergecross73   msg me  17:13, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Well i got a music journalist that says that they are but just to let you iv"e tried to find the website just like alternative presss and these other stuff like that it is on you tube that"s the bad part but the guy said that they are what they is punk even you said that that you tube does not matter but i got the evidence saying they are like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqaFbwAhKFgJg9443 (talk) 17:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That video is from "Backstage Press". If it's the same as this website - http://www.backstagepress.it - they describe themselves as "just another Wordpress blog". (Google "Backstage Press" to see it.) Anybody can write a Wordpress blog. You could if you wanted to. So it's not a reliable source. Sergecross73   msg me  17:32, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Is www.punknews.org/ relible sources ? because i guaranteed you i"ll find were they said they are punk Jg9443 (talk) 17:39, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Out of curiosity, what exactly are your trying to prove? It is already established that Rise Against is a punk rock band to some degree, and punk rock is included in their list of genres. That they are a melodic hardware band (Listed in the lead) is to indicate their most prominent genre, which is backed by more sources and reflects their current direction. -- ferret (talk) 17:44, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

One qustion does facebook count can i put the link to give it to you becouse it says punk rock is that relible source?Jg9443 (talk) 20:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No. Facebook is not a reliable source. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 20:49, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No. Again, it needs to be from a music journalist. See WP:MUSIC/SOURCES for examples. Websites like Blabbermouth. That is a reliable source, it was only rejected when you presented it before because it didn't actually say what you said it did. Sergecross73   msg me  20:52, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

I got Evidence on rise Against  that they are  Chicago native punk  band
I got the fact that the sources says that rise is an Chicago punk band Chicago-based punk act has taken in some time. Read more at http://www.blabbermouth.net/.Jg9443 (talk) 22:55, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

And i also forgot i got the proof of the website that said RISE AGAINST's 'The Black Market' Cracks U.S. Read more at http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/rise-againsts-the-black-market-cracks-u-s-top-5/#xph8O6dCTp9cwgKe.99Jg9443 (talk) 23:11, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Congrats, that is a legit source for a genre. Good job. Punk rock is already listed at the Rise Against article though... Sergecross73   msg me  23:41, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

I know they are punk rock is listed i mean the title even thoe i gave you the source but that just for title i don"t want the genre to change i know that punk rock is listed i just did it so you can see my point of view is not melodic hardcore it rise against is a Chicago punk rock band that"s what i"v been trying to explain to you Jg9443 (talk) 00:02, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * You did a good job of finally showing a reliable source that proves they are punk rock. I congratulate you on that. But finding one that proves punk rock doesn't disprove hardcore. It can be both. Which is how the article currently is. Sergecross73   msg me  00:21, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Question your going to change it to melodic hardcore to punk rockJg9443 (talk) 02:27, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Question: You've read what I have to say on this, to you, today, on this? Sergecross73   msg me  02:48, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry dude i am very new at this but to be honest do not understand what your saying inst going be punk in the title or the same thing?Jg9443 (talk) 03:02, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, think hard about what you're proposing. Every time someone finds a source for a genre, should it cancel out all other sources for all other genre that have been put in the article so far? What if, tomorrow, someone finds a source that refers to them as "alternative rock" and no other genre? Would we go and remove punk rock, and sub in alternative rock? And then week, someone finds a source that calls them "hard rock"? Then we remove it all and start over with hard rock?  Sergecross73   msg me  03:20, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

OK i understandJg9443 (talk) 15:12, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

sorry just one last thing and i leave is are going to change it rise against is a Chicago punk rock band or curtley yes or no simple question yes or no?Jg9443 (talk) 16:38, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * No. Sergecross73   msg me  17:12, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

And again i found evidence it was biggest success anyway but i was thinking since i have a project page i was wondering if i cant sending it to your page because it says you cannot send pages without permission so i am just asking for permission Jg9443 (talk) 20:49, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what it is you're asking... Sergecross73   msg me  20:57, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Alright you know about Wikepedia simple English right?Jg9443 (talk) 21:06, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, vaguely. You mean Simple Wikipedia? Sergecross73   msg me  21:17, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

yeah so when i scrowled down it said that you have to you have  permission send the article Wikipedia Jg9443 (talk) 21:42, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

So i was wondering if i can send my page to the article?Jg9443 (talk) 21:50, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * What do you mean, "your page" though? Sergecross73   msg me  22:14, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I mean if i can sent my page to Wikipedia articles?Jg9443 (talk) 22:16, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * That makes even less sense, and doesn't define what your page is. Sergecross73   msg me  22:19, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

That"s why i am going to show you what the article that defines it just like this https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Rise_AgainstJg9443 (talk) 22:27, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

And also i am going to link this to you what the quotes said also like this DO NOT SEND COPYRIGHTED WORK WITHOUT PERMISSION! Do not copy articles directly from the English Wikipedia, because they are usually too complex, and can use templates that are not here. Any writing you send to Wikipedia is legally released under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License 3.0 GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). If you don't want your writing to be edited, erased, or copied by others, don't send it here. Only free resources ("Royalty-free") that are not copyrighted can be copied word for word. This does not include most websites. By clicking "Save page", you are promising that these are your own words, or words copied from a free resource that is not copyrighted, or is available under a compatible license. Templates used on this page: This page is a member of 1 hidden category:Jg9443 (talk) 22:29, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Serge, I think Jg9443 has ownership issues with the Simple Wikipedia article for Rise Against, he has "claimed" it is his article before. I think he's confused that posting a link is a copyright/licensing issue. It looks like he has moved the Simple Wikipedia article out of main space and into the WP space. I can't fix it, looks like you might have to be autoconfirmed first.
 * Jg9443: Other Wikipedias cannot be used as a source. The basic fact is that anyone can edit them, as you have done. If anything, the Simple Wikipedia version should be changed to match Enwiki. You should consider changing "your" page to list melodic hardcore, which is backed by more sources and reflects the music they are currently producing. -- ferret (talk) 22:43, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Scratch my back i"ll scratch yours
I"ll put rise against is an american melodic hardcore band in my page if you change rise against is Chicago punk rock band instead of rise against is an american melodic hardcore band do we got are self"s a deal?Jg9443 (talk) 23:19, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * That's just silly. You'll change Simple Wiki to melodic hardcore (Which I already did, anyways), if we change Enwiki to Chicago punk rock? Both should say Melodic Hardcore, and right now, they both do. You should probably just give up on this. -- ferret (talk) 23:44, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I am not an Admin at simple wiki, nor do I edit it. You're not "scratching my back" in any way here. I'm not interested in it (though I still recommend you follow its rules). Can we end these discussions? I'm already so close to a WP:COMPETENCE block. Please. Take your newly gained knowledge of providing sources and use it towards something else more constructive.   Sergecross73   msg me  00:24, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

alright man why you changed it to melodic hardcore in the first place?Jg9443 (talk) 02:02, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I did not. I'm not sure I've ever made any substantial edits to that article except for protecting/locking the page. Sergecross73   msg me  02:13, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I got some prove that they are punk rock Rise Against is a punk/hardcore band from Chicago, Illinois https://www.punknews.org/Jg9443 (talk) 21:37, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Please present any further sources at the discussion I started to mediate the situation, at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rise_Against#Primary_genre_discussion - Thanks.  Sergecross73   msg me  21:45, 2 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I hope you don't mind me closing the discussion, Serge. I know it's only been six hours, but it's dragged on for far too long.  4TheWynne (talk) (contribs)  03:49, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I reverted your close. It doesn't need to be ended yet. You don't have to discuss any further if you don't want to, but I want this to stay open s but further, as it will be the final word on this for a while, barring any new developments. Sergecross73   msg me  04:28, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

So you are going to finally change it simple yes or no ?Jg9443 (talk) 04:26, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * No. No one has shown that punk rock is more commonly used. Sergecross73   msg me  04:28, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Not quite vandalism, but would appreciate thoughts
Currently having a bit of ongoing fun with an ISP editor who we'll call "Relevant" due to their edit summaries. They do have a fondness for "relevant" pictures which appear to incline towards the sleazy (upskirt pictures, creepy stealth shots of women, very scantily-clad dancers) which they ALWAYS describe in the summary as "relevant." The articles are Miniskirt, Skirt, Microskirt, and others. To be fair, they aren't responding to the reversions, but just coming back and adding "relevant pic" from a new ISP. Also, to be fair, a couple of the edits (other than their dubious taste in pictures) have actually been okay, so it's definitely not a vandalism issue, at worst, it's mildly disruptive and difficult to pin them down and say "look, please be more careful with your picture choices." Just wondered if I could ask you to keep an eye on the articles over the weekend, particularly any ISP edits, as I will be going away for a few days from Thurs morning. No worries if not - I'm not really expecting any too egregious surprises when I get back. Thanks so much. Mabalu (talk) 10:42, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Spoke too soon, they're now getting huffy on Microskirt. Mabalu (talk) 11:28, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I've protected the three pages for a week. See if you can get much of a dialogue going with them on the article talk page, and let me know if the problem persists. Sergecross73   msg me  12:36, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * User:Sergecross73, as a result the editor outed their ID (when logged in they're Utbindas) and has continued hopping between various articles mainly relating to short skirts, Japanese schoolgirl fetishism and skimpy underwear, both as a logged in editor and as an IP. I don't think they're actually breaking any rules as there is no block evasion taking place (unless they have been barred under an earlier ID) but their IP edits are attracting less than positive reaction, see (User talk:117.197.34.65, and are usually reverted by others. I suspect it's very bad form to "out" the IP editor's login, though. Any advice? I think they ARE trying to edit in good faith and when prompted, have produced acceptable sources, but they DO get a little antsy when their appreciation for certain pictures isn't shared by other editors. Mabalu (talk) 10:44, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not real involved in the clothes-related areas of Wikipedia, so I'm not very familiar on their ways, but some general ideas:
 * See if "WikiProject Clothing" (or whatever the equivalent is) has any established guidelines for or against this sort of thing. If so, let me know, and we can work on informing this editor of them. If they do not stop at that point, then blocking would be in order for continually editing against consensus.
 * If no such guidelines exist, then consider starting up a new discussion on it at that respective WikiProject, or one of the related talk pages of a more heavily visited article in question.
 * An alternate approach - this editor doesn't seem very active or prolific. As long as you don't get into edit warring, you can just revert him. It'd be better to discuss moreso with that approach. Sometimes, with editors who make few and poor edits have most of their edits naturally cleaned up by people like yourself who catch it.
 * There's nothing wrong with suspecting an editor is also an IP, but as you say above, and I say above as well, if he's not block evading, he wouldn't be blocked for it, and unless he's editing against an active consensus, they probably wouldn't warrant a Sockpuppet Investigation. It'd be bad if he's editing under multiple IP/usernames, but I'm not sure there's enough evidence to definitively say he's necessarily doing that yet either.
 * So, there are some thoughts on it. Let me know what you end up doing/finding with this. Let me know if you need my intervention at all (though you're obviously free to do things like warning him yourself too.) Sergecross73   msg me  16:59, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Reply
hello sergecross73, i was only helping out for nonsource stuff, or as the solution with the amiibo, if im doing something wrong and need to explane it, i'll do that, i apologies if im reverting something wrong and i'll double check in the future Aozz101x (talk) 18:10, 10 September 2015‎ (UTC)

Dreamcast
Serge, can you look at Dreamcast and semi-prot? There's a request in RPP already but... After much back and forth from multiple IPs, a new editor replied to an old section of the talk page. That's when I noticed having replied to same section, and noted his history of edit comments being very similar, and that you last blocked him for socking. I suspect based on edit summaries and behavior he might be back. -- ferret (talk) 01:11, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocked, especially since a lot of sources are reporting your number as the Dreamcast number, since the Wii U just recently overcame that figure. Sergecross73   msg me  01:26, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I see the articles you're talking about. I wonder if that's what triggered this spate of number changing. -- ferret (talk) 01:43, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I think it is. The story is making the rounds, several websites on my Twitter feed reported it. Sergecross73   msg me  01:46, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

You blocked my changes. Now I want to put forward my argument. The sources that point to 6million sales are from sites such as IGN. I did further research and I read the Japanese Dreamcast wiki. THe Japanese site has worldwide sales at 9.13 million up until 2014. The source is CESA. They are a recognized organization of sales tracking for Japanese companies. The 10.6 million figure has no valid source. I suggest updating the English wiki to match the Japanese.

Best wishes Ben. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.45.9.134 (talk) 01:47, 30 October 2015 (UTC)