User talk:Super Knuckles

Just so you know
We have 3 different official sonic sites, and each states different bits of info. We can't play favoritism and selectively note only one source and use that over another. Also I reverted your edit because of grammar, not the actual information.--Neofcon (talk) 01:05, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

If you don't like my grammar then rewrite the sentence as it should be. User:Super Knuckles 01:09, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

It's not about liking it. It's about presentation.--Neofcon (talk) 01:10, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok then, I was just trying to improve the article with this "new" info. User:Super Knuckles 01:13, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Though I will admit, I did revert the whole thing, sorry.--Neofcon (talk) 01:19, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Response (hopefully in the right section this time)
Thank you, Super Knuckles. And I did realize that you were looking to restore, moderate, and even compromise on the article. Afterwards, I realize I should have said something other than "guys"! Publik (talk) 16:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Re division
Sorry but the Re division did exist as such, because it was made mainly from warriors that came from Heliopolis whose patron god was Re. Egyptzo (talk) 17:56, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

No, it was called P're, that is the same as Re, even if the meaning is the same the original meaning is P're. User:Super Knuckles 18:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

There seem to be no documents supporting your claim. Most modern scolars call it Re, although it is indeed sometimes but rarely called P're. Even the article about Ramesses II calls it Re! Egyptzo (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:07, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Thats because most people don't know that P're also means Re, but the article as redirect link from P're to Re, so I don't see what your problem is. In fact the Seth division should also be called Sutekh. User:Super Knuckles 19:14, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

So why not write something that is more commonly used. So are you going to call, for example Shoshenk - Ššnk because it is like that written in hyroglyphs or Ramesses- Ramss because of the same reason. Egyptzo (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Battle of the Delta
Thank you, I will try to do my best. Cheers! Egyptzo (talk) 07:55, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Kadesh
Hi, Super Knuckles. I knew that it was Egyptzo, rather than yourself, who had added the content (again). Sorry if the sequence of edits made it appear that I was addressing anything you had done. I didn't revert it (again) for the same reason as yourself - it would just get added back in and start an edit war. Thanks for trying to take some steps to change it into original wording. I'm not sure it should be in there at all, since it is speculation on the part of the original author, but it has been "published", so is therefore legitimate by ikipedia standards, as much as I may think it goes beyond the original sources. Cheers. Publik (talk) 15:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Can you give me a summary of the issues to speed things up for me and cut through the rhetoric? Thanks. Doug Weller (talk) 12:07, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't have any summaries on the Battle, but I'm starting to read my sources and as they make it clear there are aspects where there is controversy, (eg a lot of people disagree with Breasted), that all should be brought in. Maybe I should mirror it on a page I can add to my userspace and edit it there and people can look at it? It isn't just a question of one version vs another I think, it's using good sources for the whole article too.Doug Weller (talk) 18:07, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but Wikipedia is very clear about removing copyvio content. It'll be a better article anyway.Doug Weller (talk) 12:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Kadesh: 3RR reminder
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Woody (talk) 13:31, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Vote on Battle of Kadesh Version
Thanks. I'll keep an eye out for it. Publik (talk) 00:54, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll definitely be voting for your version. --Taiwan boi (talk) 03:52, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

New version Battle of Kadesh
What tags did I take away? Yes, the battle section is far too short, but I didn't see any way to get rid of stuff that was copyright without going back to a version that had none of it. We can quickly put back some stuff, eg the table of Hittite allies, and anything that had a reference to something other than historynet. The Healy book looked interesting, I was searching it earlier today. But we need to show where different sources disagree, does he do that?Doug Weller (talk) 17:26, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

The book you got is mentioned here, which has a ton of resources most hard to get: http://history.memphis.edu/pbrand/handout_Ramesside_Military.pdf Why did you mention Hyksos and Fifteenth Dynasty?Doug Weller (talk) 18:31, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, Wikilinks. I didn't remove any, I don't know what happened. Don't tag anything obvious, that is don't overtag, it makes it hard to read.Doug Weller (talk) 18:40, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * See WP:MOSLINKDoug Weller (talk) 18:41, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not quite sure how Wikipedia works in terms of "new messages", but for the sake of making sure you know I replied, I've added some comments to my own discussion page. Publik (talk) 01:40, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Yikes! Looks like the Battle of Kadesh article has been severely cut. I wonder if it makes sense now. However, I don't have time to focus on it as I have a full time job. Maybe 1 or 2 edits at the most. Leoboudv (talk) 06:23, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Healy's book is a great source on the battle. It is accurate and cautious at the same time. Unfortunately, I visit my alma mater UBC only 2 or 3 times a year and have plenty of other articles to copy from. Regards, Leoboudv (talk) 07:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You get notified of new messages up at the top of pages you look at.Doug Weller (talk) 11:15, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

The Sega project invitation
Thanks a lot, I will gladly join you. Super Knuckles (talk) 11:31, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

The Sega Task Force Newsletter (Issue 5)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  16:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

RE: Knuckles
The information doesn't belong in the characteristics section of the Knuckles the Echidna page because it only appears once. Knuckles in Sonic 2 and Sonic 3 is only achieved thru lock on with Sonic & Knuckles so really only Sonic & Knuckles has the transformation (Sonic 3 and Sonic & Knuckles were even supposed to be one game). There is no argument being made that it didn't exist or whatever but Wikipedia is not a directory of everything that exists or has existed nor is it a crystal ball trying to predict the future. One offhand remark in a second game doesn't constitute another occurrence or guarantee that it will recur. However elements that aren't recurring can go into the article for the game in which they are important (a description of Super/Hyper Knuckles, Hyper Sonic and Super Tails could go into Sonic & Knuckles, Darkspine in Sonic and the Secret Rings, Werehog in Sonic Unleashed, King Arthur in Sonic and the Black Knight, etc). CIGraphix (talk) 17:06, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm still not convinced of your argument but I think this is something we should be discussing on the article talk pages so that other editors can weigh in since it concerns the fine tuning of what counts as recurring. CIGraphix (talk) 21:29, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Please update your status with WP:VG
Dear WikiProject Video games member,

You are receiving this message because you have either Category:WikiProject Video games members or User WPVG somewhere in your userspace and you have edited Wikipedia in recent months.

The Video games project has created a member list to provide a clearer picture of its active membership.

All members have currently been placed in the "Inactive" section by default. Please remove your username from the "Inactive" listing and place it under the "Active" listing if you plan on regularly:
 * Editing video game-related pages in the Article namespace
 * Participating in video game-related discussions in the Project namespace (WT:VG, WP:AfD, WP:GAN, etc.)

Ideally, members are encouraged to do both, but either one meets our criteria of inclusion. Members still listed inactive at the beginning of November 2009 may be removed. You may re-add yourself to the active list at any time. Thank you for your help, and we look forward to working with you.
 * —WikiProject Video games (delivery by xenobot  03:45, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Knux:Super,Hyper,etc
I know Cigraphix just doesn't understand that there is a Super and Hyper Knuckles and etc,but just ask SEGA on their facebook account,they will give you an answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.52.26 (talk) 21:57, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

What did you ask on SEGA's facebook? Knuckles super form is called Super Knuckles, he had a hyper fomr, but we don't know if it still canon. Feel free to prove us otherwie. Super Knuckles (talk) 23:55, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Nothing,I'm telling you to.


 * And I am telling you to ask yourself, or the page will be as we say. Super Knuckles (talk) 10:43, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Don't have a face book account and I don't want one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.52.26 (talk) 14:46, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Then stop guessing about what SEGA might had said about this. we already had discussions about this article and it was decided that it should stay as it is. Super Knuckles (talk) 14:51, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry I didn't notice your posting on my Talk page earlier than this, I haven't been on Wikipedia that much recently. CIGraphix (talk) 04:36, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

3RR warning
Your recent edits seem to have the appearance of edit warring&#32; after a review of the reverts you have made on Knuckles the Echidna. Users are expected to collaborate and discuss with others and avoid editing disruptively. Please be particularly aware, the three-revert rule states that: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Yunshui 雲水 14:55, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

I've openened a talkpage thread to discuss the issue here. Please get consensus before repeating your edits. Yunshui 雲水 15:01, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!