User talk:TJ Spyke/Archive 17

Re:ECW (WWE)
I have them on my watchlist, I'll keep an eye out (though I do need to go to bed soon). Gavyn Sykes (talk) 06:22, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

WWE HD
1080i is the most common isn't it?--72.186.91.47 (talk) 06:29, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

TJ, you do know you're talking to User:Hornetman16 right?-- bullet proof  3:16 06:38, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It probably is him, but I don't want be rude or anything that could get me in trouble.  TJ   Spyke   06:47, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I think it's important to note WWE going HD because it's a history making moment in the wrestling industry.--Ug88 (talk) 22:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

You wrote something on my page, so I'll reply here too... "The reliable source is common sense. 1) There is no 1080p broadcast on any network, and it's not starting now or anytime soon. 2) USA HD, CW HD, AND SciFi HD all broadcast at 1080i HD. So regardless of whether WWE's source video is 720p, it will be upconveted upon being sent to the HD complexes at NBCUniversal and CW. So it WILL be broadcast at 1080i, press release or not." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.131.129.240 (talk) 05:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Royal Rumble 2008
Did you even go to the source that is listed to see that Batista and The Undertaker are in fact on the page before you tried scolding me about it? DX927 (talk) 02:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

St. Louis move
I've added a comment to your vote on Talk:St. Louis, Missouri.Grey Wanderer | Talk 11:22, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 2nd and 7th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Edit conflict
Why don't you let me finish the review so we don't edit conflict. I'll probably be finished soon.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 00:37, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply
I watch RAW and ECW live via DirecTV. However, since I live on the West coast I have to wait another 3 hours until SmackDown! airs here. I can inform you of any changes that occur during the live broadcasts if you want. Same thing for PPVs... when I'm not in a bar or something.-- bullet proof  3:16 01:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. -- bullet proof  3:16 01:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: ROH
How is the ROH World Championship not a World Title? It was defended overseas in Japan. Technically, the TNA World Heavyweight Championship isn't a World Championship yet. ROH is a growing company, perhaps the best independent promotion today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geekboy6 (talk • contribs)
 * Except that TNA is shown nationally here in the US (on Spike TV) and internationally, ROH doesn't even have a TV deal. TNA has a monthly live PPV, ROH has a PPV once every 3 months that they tape months early and only show half of.  TJ   Spyke   03:02, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

PWI mentions ROH in their magazines. Their title histories are even mentioned in the PWI Almanac. This year's almanac would probably be no exception. Yes, ROH needs a TV deal to be direct competition, but it's still the top independent promotion today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geekboy6 (talk • contribs)

Ratings
I have removed the parentheses from the ratings in order to maintain a sense of consistency with the other ratings (the Australian ratings for instance are best known by their symbols). The ratings boxes are simply there to provide a brief summary of the rating. If readers wish to find out more information about the rating systems, all they need to do is click on the link next to the rating symbols (ESRB/PEGI/CERO etc). Plus many editors have written misleading information into the parentheses (such as age restrictions that don't exist). Sillygostly (talk) 02:55, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The OFLC refers to their ratings purely by symbol and age restriction (if any). The ratings are: E (Certified as exempt from classification [this rating applies primarily to educational software, and online games in which the content cannot be regulated]), G (General), PG (Parental guidance recommended), M (recommended for mature audiences), MA15+ (Not suitable for persons under 15, under 15s must be accompanied by an adult), RC (Refused Classification [In other words, banned]). Sillygostly (talk) 03:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The OFLC website DOES include information on the E rating (their website includes some comphrensive information on the classification guidelines and markings). However it is not an "official" rating per se. It applies mainly to documentaries, concerts and educational software (just as long as the content does not exceed the PG rating). In other words, "E rated" content is unrated. Sillygostly (talk) 03:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily. The RC classification means that the content HAS been analysed for classification, however the OFLC refuses to assign one of the 6 major classifications to the movie/game as it exceeds the constraints of their guidelines. Sillygostly (talk) 03:24, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't see the point of including both the abbreviation AND the extension of the ratings. Including both "T" and "Teen" for instance is completely unnecessary as one interpretation of the symbol renders the other one redundant and vice versa. Hell, the ESRB uses only the symbols in their databases anyway. The purpose of the abbreviations/symbols is to summarize the "extended" term (e.g. "Teen", "Mature" etc). I believe the parentheses should only be used in cases where the rating applies to a specific version of a game (for example, a PS2/Wii version of a game may be rated T, whereas a DS version may be rated E10+ and so on; or the parentheses could be used to specify if the rating applies to a censored version of the game etc). Also, including "Everyone 10+" in parentheses is completely asinine IMO. The E10+ rating is completely self-explanatory. Those who are unaware of the full meaning of the ratings can simply click on the ESRB/CERO/PEGI articles for more information. Besides, most video gamers should already be familiar with the rating systems of their respective countries. I just hope you can see where I'm coming from here. :P Sillygostly (talk) 02:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

TNA Against All Odds
Okay I will do that.I was just placing that on the page because I was expecting a match. I think that A.J. is not going to win and I put TBD to be sure. I do know that it has not been announced,but I just got caught up in editing a page because I have not been on here long and I had just started to get the hang of it,for that I'm sorry. I had saw someone do it that way before,so that's why I did it,because I thought that was the way you did it.I will not put it back on their until it is announced,Thank you.--Wrestlinglover (talk) 05:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay,I will do that.I will now be more safe when it comes to editing. Thank you for informing me of my error.--Wrestlinglover (talk) 06:43, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

The reason I put the womens title match on there is because ODB just asked for a match at Against All Odds.--Wrestlinglover (talk) 04:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

okay well to me it was announced as if it was going to be a match.But they didn't say anything about that now Cage will fight against Angle at Against All Odds,is that a match now that he won the 3-way dance--Wrestlinglover (talk) 04:24, 18 January 2008 (UTC).

UFC 83
I noticed you originally voted "Neutral" on this AfD. Since that time, more articles have come out disputing whether the UFC's April 19 event (the info for which is currently on the UFC 83 page) is going to be UFC 83 or actually 84 (example here from MMA Junkie, a generally reliable source, changing its earlier stance that April 19 would be UFC 83). I've provide links to another source on the AfD entry. Would you mind terribly reviewing that to see if your opinion is still neutral? Thanks a bunch! Gromlakh (talk) 18:42, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Battlebowl.JPG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Battlebowl.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:WW 92.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:WW 92.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:40, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

SD Live
They had several in 2001. As you mentioned, the 9/11 tribute. But they also had two live ones in August. There was also a Tuesday edition of Smackdown on September 4, which aired live. In January 2003, the Smackdown featuring the Dawn Marie/Al Wilson was live. This also occured in January 2002.

That's six times. I'd say that counts as "occasional". Mshake3 (talk) 01:14, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * And yeah, I clicked undo, forgetting the MOS change you made. Mshake3 (talk) 01:23, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

why
why wait when it's already reported?--72.186.91.47 (talk) 04:44, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't mind Hornet, TJ. I have replied on his talk page.-- bullet proof  3:16 04:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

RE:ECW
I believe before the match they had announced that Benjamin had already qualified so this meant that his match with Nunzio wasn't a RR Qualifier. -- bullet proof  3:16 05:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah I'm watching it again. It wasn't a qualifier match.-- bullet proof  3:16 05:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

D-X edits by another user
Hey TJ, I am currently in a small dispute with a "new" user on the D-Generation X article about DX returning next week to RAW. They say the headline by WWE states it and that the video states that as well, I have read/watched/listened to it and no where present does it say that DX will return and I have now probably violated the 3RR rule. So I dont want it to get it out of hand, may you please assist.-- Tr U cO 93 11 TaLk / SiGn 00:32, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

ECW
ECW may not be mentioned because it's that as big as RAW and SmackDown. ECW is kinda part of the SmackDown production. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.233.209.14 (talk • contribs)
 * Assuming ECW is included violates WP:OR.  TJ   Spyke   04:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

SmackDown
Why did you edit my addition? You lied about the new set being in the production. It should be included in the SmackDown! article.--69.233.209.14 (talk) 04:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:05, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Unforgiven
How does the aftermath look? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:23, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Question about userpages
I deleted it under WP:CSD. Nishkid64 (talk) 02:25, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Adminship
My I please get you're honest opinion on something. How would you feel if I ran for adminship and Do you think I would would make a good admin? Cheers, L  A  X  01:10, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that's all I needed to know. Cheers, L  A  X  01:17, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Portal
It probably would be, but I don't mind doing it myself. I'm currently working on adding it to the PPV articles. iMat thew  01:13, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, no problem. iMat  thew  01:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Yo, you might want to check this out
Here.--72.186.91.47 (talk) 02:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Uncensored
Erm what are you talking about? the page is TOTALLY unsourced? MPJ-DK (talk) 06:25, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Altenhofen
Anything about the guy seem familiar to you?-- bullet proof  3:16 09:47, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll keep my eye on him for a while. -- bullet proof  3:16 09:52, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Geez your quick! Thanks! :) D.M.N. (talk) 10:03, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Height/Weight templates in Template:Infobox Wrestler
Hi!

Wondering if you could point me toward some discussion on this? I now see that you changed the documentation at Template:Infobox Wrestler/doc to say to do it your way, but it got changed back a week ago, so at the time I tidied up the Velvet Sky infobox, it clearly stated that Template:height and Template:convert should be used - that's why I did it that way! So can we have a bit more of the assuming good faith and a bit less of the snarky "In the future, I suggest checking an infoboxe's page to see what you are supposed to do" comments? --Stormie (talk) 23:59, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. Just curious though: why do you prefer to do manual conversions rather than letting the templates do it for you automatically? Doesn't that run the risk of people just flat out getting the conversions wrong? --Stormie (talk) 00:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Armageddon 2006
I did talk about it on the talk page, and linked to a video of the Helms/Yang match as proof. Sorry if I didn't do anything right, which I'm sure I did, but yeah. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.196.49.23 (talk • contribs)
 * I replied on the talk page, but he did the move before winning with a roll-up.  TJ   Spyke   04:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SuperBrawl III.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:SuperBrawl III.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SuperBrawl IV.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SuperBrawl IV.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SuperBrawl IX.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:SuperBrawl IX.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SuperBrawl V.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SuperBrawl V.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:38, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SuperBrawl VI.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SuperBrawl VI.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SuperBrawl VII.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SuperBrawl VII.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SuperBrawl VIII.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:SuperBrawl VIII.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SuperBrawl X.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SuperBrawl X.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SuperBrawlII.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:SuperBrawlII.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Debra Marshall
Hey, Thanks for the recent clean up you did to Debra Marshall's page =) --92.8.32.196 (talk) 14:55, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Eddiegfan1
Well, the user has not edited for months, so I have gone ahead and deleted the userpage. Thanks for letting me know. Nishkid64 (talk) 18:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Chyna
Thank you for your concern. I went ahead and fixed the link. Since you are a wrestling fan, I'll share this with you. When I found out that "Chyna" was in visiting my city, I had nothing for her to sign, however my son came to the rescue with a "Playboy" Magazine in which she was featured. I was hoping that she didn't call me an "old pervert" or something. She signed it and now I have it stored away. Take care. Tony the Marine (talk) 22:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Articles with topics of unclear notability from Janaury 2008
I have nominated articles with topics of unclear notability from janaury 2008 for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Jfire (talk) 07:14, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 21st, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 00:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Road Wild 00.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Road Wild 00.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Road Wild 98.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Road Wild 98.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Spring Stampede 00.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Spring Stampede 00.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Spring Stampede 94.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Spring Stampede 94.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Spring Stampede 97.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Spring Stampede 97.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Spring Stampede 99.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Spring Stampede 99.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:32, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SpiderMan DS.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:SpiderMan DS.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Slamboree 00.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Slamboree 00.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:43, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Slamboree 93.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Slamboree 93.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Slamboree 94.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Slamboree 94.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Slamboree 95.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Slamboree 95.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Slamboree 96.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Slamboree 96.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Slamboree 97.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Slamboree 97.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Slamboree 98.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Slamboree 98.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Slamboree 99.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Slamboree 99.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

ok
you should know I was not experimenting just trying to make the text bold and itallic, I don't know how the box got that big. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Altenhofen (talk • contribs) 01:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Bob armstrong
Okay,well I put it that way because that's how they announced on Impact.I guess there is much more I need to learn.--WillC (talk) 05:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Impact!
MOS:TM says otherwise. Mshake3 (talk) 16:25, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

ECW logo
Actually, I uploaded that logo first. Hornetman just re-uploaded it to the format preferred for logos in Wikipedia. (PNG)-- bullet proof  3:16 00:49, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The PNG logo just has a better resolution that's all. It’s also cleaner and it’s the preferred format for logos. I'll look for a better one though.-- bullet proof  3:16 00:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well that’s partially the case. I'm just referring to the one currently on the page as the PNG logo to differentiate the two. I don't want to say older logo because they're the same logos. The PNG logo just has a cleaner look to it, that’s all. If you really want an updated logo, then it would be the one used on television (w/o barbed wire letters). I'll look for it though. I'm sure it won't take long. I'm good at this sort of stuff :) -- bullet proof  3:16 00:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Just so you know, this isn't the updated logo. That one has been up on the ECW part of WWE.com since before the HD show. The NEW one has no barbed wire.-- bullet proof  3:16 01:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * What'd I tell you?-- bullet proof  3:16 04:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Edit warring
Please stop edit warring at pedophilia. I wouldnt hesitate to revert you either. merely because you are ignorant on British spelling customs is not a reason to edit, and especially controversially. remember this is not an American encyclopedia. See this though to be honest you should do your own research. Thanks, SqueakBox 03:43, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Sigh! No, no, no, no, no. Calling several good faith users vandals is not an argument and so wont help uyou if you revert again in the 3RR report. Thanks, SqueakBox 03:50, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to agree with the other editors here, TJ. Paedophilia is a standard British spelling for "pedophilia", so adding sources for Brit-American English spelling variants isn't necessary. I understand your intentions, but I think this was one of the situations where you really don't need a reference for some piece of text. Best, Nishkid64 (talk) 06:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

NVIDIA
If the page move of NVIDIA goes through, are you planning on tidying the name on the rest of Wikipedia? I made edits to NVIDIA Quadro Plex but I can't move the page. There is probably many pages, categories and templates which will need to be tidied. I dont have a lot of time for Wikipedia editing but I will help if I can. Tigeron (talk) 18:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Royal Rumble
Are you watching the PPV?-- bullet proof  3:16 01:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well... If you want it... There's always... [link removed] -- bullet proof  3:16 01:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * If you refresh the page the Ustream.tv vid might work. -- bullet proof  3:16 01:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I found that hilarious. -- bullet proof  3:16 03:53, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually he was disqualified...Source from WWE.com>> T r U C o 9 31 1 04:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Finlay was DQ for using the Shillelagh (sp?) Secretaria —Preceding comment was added at 04:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I did, Big Daddy V and Mark Henry were about to throw Hornswoggle out of the ring, but then Finlay came and hit them both with the shilelagh, and then he and Horny walked out of the match. WWE just lists it as a DQ.-- T r U C o 9 31 1 04:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * For Hornswoggle yes, for Finlay No...for him its DQ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Truco9311 (talk • contribs) 04:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * But WWE lists it as a DQ..so we have to follow their official statement. T r U C o 9 31 1 04:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Protection requested
Hey I seen you have been helping revert vandalism WMXXIV page. Just a heads up, I requested the page be protected. I figure with the Rumble ending and 'the road to Wrestlemania' heating up, this page will be a huge target for vandalism and unsourced junk. -- E n d l es s D a n  16:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Rumble
Just wondering your opinion on the table I suggested on the project talk page. I respect your opinion a lot. LessThanClippers (talk) 00:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Kane
totally forgot about Yankem. Maybe we can make it a little clearer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LessThanClippers (talk • contribs)
 * Agreed.  TJ   Spyke   00:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

No Way Out 2008
The matches were made at the SmackDown! taping. They will be broadcast on air. I will withhold from adding them until then though. At least call the Elimination Chamber already there, the RAW Elimination Chamber. GuffasBorgz7 (talk) 03:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * True, but they are having two Elimination Chamber matches which are exclusive to the two different brands and their championships, (Excluding that big daddy v is in the Smackdown chamber match). It will be less confusing to distinguish them by calling them the Raw and Smackdown Elimination Chamber match. GuffasBorgz7 (talk) 03:23, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It just sounds a bit confusing to me to have to Elimination Chamber matches their without any clarity of where they came from. GuffasBorgz7 (talk) 03:31, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I am relatively new to Wikipedia and I was just fooling around to get to know it better. I tried to change it back, but it came up with an error. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GuffasBorgz7 (talk • contribs) 05:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

As long as it says which brand it is, that is fine with me. GuffasBorgz7 (talk) 08:34, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

WWE Raw
Yeah ok whatever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mal1988 (talk • contribs) 08:47, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 28th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:24, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Your welcome
same as above--lord kass (talk) 09:20, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

conflict
I see you deleted were it said DQ Before entering for finlays elimination. in my opinion it makes more sence as DQ before entering because it explains how he got eliminated by himself better.--lord kass (talk) 09:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

A little thank you note
Thanks for helping out Spyke. Aereon was a rather annoying little guy, but he's a newbie so... Thanks! --Soetermans (talk) 12:23, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Out of line
TJ, I dunno what I did to your Wikipedia to make you so upset with me but allow me to explain a few things to you that would server you in the future when interacting with other Wikipedia members.

First off, assume positive intent. You did not. In fact you went so far as to spam other pages about how terrible I am, very immature for someone in their 20s. You also chose not to discuss the issue. It seems you were not aware that a conversation regarding the naming convention of the pages was taking place in Talk:Dance Dance Revolution Extreme, a subject that should be brought to light with the entire video games project. Dance Dance Revolution games are tricky, it's easy to reformat them with "encyclopedic" rules but the titles are so convoluted that some of them are going to come out looking little like they were intended. If you read the comment I left on the talk page you'll see an example of how "proper" formatting leaves the title looking worse than having occasional caps.

You also made some very simple mistakes, and going so far as to call me a "newbie" might have been premature in light of some of the things that you did. First, you edited another user's entry on a talk page, that is not very smart. I realize that the old version of the table had active links but that was not yours to edit, it's archives for posterity and should not be altered, even by the person who posted it. Second, you made a series of needless changes to the DDR Navbox, editing the links is fine, so that each link is bold when viewed from the respective pages but your edits to the visible text left the box looking sloppy.

You also did not follow procedure when moving pages, as an admin had to walk around behind you patching double-redirects that you created due to not properly checking the "What links here" page for each page moved. Since you brought this editing streak upon yourself you should have at least taken the time to properly reseat all the redirects associated with each page, and made sure that they all worked before moving on to the next. And there are probably more redirects that the admin who worked diligently to correct your mistakes may have missed.

Finally, as for the edits you made and had made for you, more discussion is required. The case of DDR pages and how they are titled are not simple, some DDR titles are but some are not. And you made some mistakes with the moves you performed as well. According to the policy you passed out like candy, DDRMAX should be DDR Max and there in lies the problem I outlined on the DDR EXTREME talk page. So some of your changes (according to you alone) need to be changed again, and again, this issue needs to be brought up with a larger group of people that are experts on DDR and video games before a final decision can be made. And aside from the titles I will continue to spell the game names correctly and with proper syntax because it would be misinformation to do otherwise, if you have an issue with this as well I would suggest bringing it up with the video games project also.

I'm reverting the talk page you edited, I'm also reverting the visible text on the DDR Navbox, again objections should be voiced before acted upon. I wonder how much you personally know about the DDR series, although that's a question likely to remain unanswered. Nevertheless I'm going to continue to improve the articles with the best of my knowledge as that's why I am here, why everyone SHOULD be here for. --AeronPrometheus (talk) 12:51, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It's a shame that so many people have to hide behind policy to get their way, as you exhibited today. So many users forget why Wikipedia exists.


 * I know you have a set of rules that you want to follow, you think that policy is golden, right? The only problem is that you seem to only want to follow a personal selection of policy, you're not even consistent with your misinterpretation of the law. You spent so much time reciting MOSTM that you forgot things like Assume good faith and Be polite. You were hasty and so busy trying to make yourself look good that you thought I didn't know what I was doing, using a derogatory term to define me then backing up and claiming that there was no adverse feelings behind it. Even if I were a "newbie" you broke your precious policy in that regard as well by not being Welcoming. Oh and No personal attacks, you managed to ignore the four major rules of communicating between users all at the same time... And you want people to side with you while you quote policy?


 * You need a refresher course in Wikipedia policy and guidelines and since that's the language you speak you may as well speak it correctly. (And yes, they're only guidelines). Start with Policies and guidelines, pay attention to the first paragraph. Also, Etiquette since you've forgotten these altogether. Believe me, I want to believe that you're trying to do your best to help, I've had run ins with other users... some listen to reason and some don't. But the lofty attitude you carry yourself with combined with the haphazard way you conducted your edits and how you now defend yourself by repeating what you've already said and ignoring the mistakes you made... How am I suppose to regard you?


 * Funny though, after all was said and done, you admitted that you weren't "100% sure" of how to deal with the problem. That's the first step. The second is to leave this problem to people who do know how. I would be one of them, and while you obviously have a tender sore for the way I uphold policy I know this series very well and you for lack of a better word, don't.


 * Even funnier, if you really do uphold the letter of the law over the spirit of the law, you have to admit that out of all of them I referenced the only one that "trumps" all others (At least according to the creators of Wikipedia); Ignore all rules. --AeronPrometheus (talk) 18:34, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

admin
would you be OK if I requested for you to be an admin? I think you would be a wicked administrator. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Altenhofen (talk • contribs) 23:02, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Question
I don't want to bother you,but I felt you were the person to ask.Where do you go to find out more about editing?Not sandbox,I mean,to know stuff that isn't known by newbies. I know that was probably a dumb question,but I just wanted to know,so I don't mess up anything and to learn more,so I can be a valued member.--WillC (talk) 07:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much.I will try your suggestions and sorry for any inconvenience.--WillC (talk) 00:48, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

After the dust has settled
I think I've settled on a happy ending for the DDR articles. After you finished your page moves I went through the list and through it over. Something I will thank you for is your boldness made me see an option regarding the title formatting I had previosly not. For instance...

Dance Dance Revolution 2ndMIX got moved by you to Dance Dance Revolution 2nd Mix. It looks bad to seperate it like that so I then moved it to Dance Dance Revolution 2ndMix.

Keeping the compound, which according to the all mighty, unyielding policy, is discretionary. And in this case that's how the game title is formatting, save caps, so that's how it should be listed. I changed a total of 10 or so pages, some you had moved, some that had stayed in place, and in one case Dance Dance Revolution SuperNOVA 2 (North America) one you overlooked entirely. Now there's a real flow to the pages again, even more so than before your edits. The only thing that remains "against" policy is the four pages with "DDRMAX" in the title. I think that serious, consensual discussion would be required to sort that one out or perhaps it should simply be left alone, as per the spirit of the law. Even hard policy states that no changes should be made simply for the sake of change.

I actually agreed with there needing to be something done about the titles, they didn't even match either way, but something that large should be discussed even if you can't find the discussions in progress. Just make a new one! In a place where a lot of people can see it, that way there will be involvement. While I did not start that discussion I believe it fell on me for taking part of it and not advertising its existence to the VG project, a mistake given that there are others on Wikipedia like yourself. The only thing I disagreed with was the childish manner in which you treated me, and the unorganized manner in which you conducted your changes.

Just be more careful next time, I almost reported your moves as vandalism because you were doing such a bad job of it and talking down to me in multiple locations. Policy not withstanding. What you don't see is how rude you came off, try re-reading your comments to me, then mine to you and see where the differences lie. Also there are bots still combing and correcting the redirects you made doubles of (I'll probably help out a little sooner or later).

I noticed that some people think you'd make a great admin. Maybe someday you will. But from this viewpoint you've got a long way to go. --AeronPrometheus (talk) 04:06, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Signature
Hello TJ Spyke. I was wondering if you could tell me how to make a good looking signature like you have? GuffasBorgz7 11:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

No Way Out (2008)
Just because 1 or 2 people agree that it is redundant, doesn't mean that everyone does. Even though it is not redundant, since WWE have announced it as the RAW or the SD!/ECW EC match, we will as well. Please do not change this. The majority of people in the Talk section of no way out agree. GuffasBorgz7 (talk) 05:47, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 4th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:46, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

My removal of dead links
I have over 800 edits to my credit and I am still a newbie! Thank you for pointing out my mistake of removing dead links. I really should have replaced them in the first place. I should have known better.Asher196 (talk) 22:46, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

past actions
what do you mean your "past actions"? did you vandalise wikipedia? and also, do you think if i did more work around the site i would have a chance at being an admin? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Altenhofen (talk • contribs) 23:34, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I hope you know
That you are still under a 1RR revert parole and can be reinstated for an indefinite block for continuing to revert war on the Judgement Day article. — Save_Us   †  02:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

WWE template changed to indef semi-protection
Per your note, I changed the template to indef semi-protected, so you should be able to go edit it now.

If there's another spurt of vandalism on it, I may reprotect it fully, but we can always have any admin temporarily unprotect if that happens when future changes are needed. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 00:29, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: WIA
Oh, okay. So, are my edits considered vandalism, since I removed them? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:59, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Face-grin.svg|35px]] Alright, thanks for the heads-up, TJ. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

218.101.69.13
Well, they are certainly being disruptive, whether it's intentional or not. Although the user might have bad intentions, it's best to assume good faith and leave a nice note on his user talk page regarding what he is doing wrong. Nishkid64 (talk) 06:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: Archival
Thanks for the opinion, but I really don't think my talk page receives enough talk to warrant using a bot. I had a look at WP:ARCHIVE, so I think I'll give it a shot. If it doesn't seem to be working out, or I end up getting too lazy, I'll definetly ask a bot to do it. Thanks, though. Appreciate the kindness! ♥ Nici ♥ Vampire ♥ Heart ♥ 04:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you sure your talk pages are archived older than 7 days, I see some that are from January?-- T r U C o 9 31 1 04:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, probably use the one used on WT:PW.-- T r U C o 9 31 1 04:58, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

GA Passed

 * You are also entitled to display this userbox>

 T r U C o 9 31 1 14:34, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Benoit, Rhyno & Spanky vs Cena & FBI
How do you know this site is reliable? Have u actually seen this PPV? TheHeartbreakKid15 (talk) 23:59, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Acutally, his point is that he's right. You're welcome. Mshake3 (talk) 02:06, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

How can that be an unreliable source when it's a video showing what happened in the match?! Yet you're saying (from obviously not having watched the PPV) that a wrestling results website hosted by fans is TheHeartbreakKid15 (talk) 00:17, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

This is clearly a case of Wikilawyering. "Misinterpreting policy or relying on technicalities to justify inappropriate actions." Mshake3 (talk) 02:33, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

See? You're still doing it! You're relying on a technicality (illegal video) to justify inappropriate action (continued to use a wrong source despite the 100% undisputable evidence saying otherwise). This is just sad. Mshake3 (talk) 02:55, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I saw this PPV, I own the DVD........what is the topic of discussion? The match happened, if that's what you wanted to know.--Lord Dagon (talk) 19:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Woah, never mind, ignore what I said.--Lord Dagon (talk) 19:37, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Wii
Why did you change the "sold" back to "shipped" at the Wii article? The reference seems to show the units sold. I think only Sony keeps score with the number of units shipped. TheCoffee (talk) 14:25, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough.. TheCoffee (talk) 12:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Bushwhackers and Royal Rumnle=
I don't have the source, but the guy is right. They went as "Bushwhacker Luke and Bushwhacker Butch". 18:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Here on Wikipedia, we go by sourced content.  TJ   Spyke   00:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Please kill my creation on my behalf
You're the only one that I trust is capable enough to put an end to any mentions of Hornetman on WT:PW. This whole thing starting up and ending in bulletproof's block is my fault to begin with for being such an idiot, but I really want to follow through with this retirement. To prevent any future repercussions, please kill any discussions that may pop up related to Hornetman in my stead. I would really appreciate it. Peace,  Sexy Sea  Bass  21:36, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks TJ, that meant a lot coming from you. *Sigh* yet another failed retirement. With Mshake still acting up, probably wanting to strangle everyone, and new disputes popping up everywhere this is no time for me to leave. When things settle down I'll try again. We need all of the dispute-hardened editors we have to keep it together right now. Peace,  Sexy Sea  Bass  04:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Ratings
I don't see why you persist on including both the rating symbol AND the expanded form of the symbol. Besides, movie ratings are treated the same, so why should video game ratings be any different? That's like typing in "NC-17 (No Children - 17)" every time the NC-17 rating appears on the site (and so forth). It's just unnecessary clutter. I merely want the ratings to be consistent between articles (symbols only). Yes, I understand that not everybody is completely familiar with the rating symbols, but that is why we place the rating organization article's link next to the rating symbols so that readers can learn more about the ratings. Sillygostly (talk) 01:03, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * OFLC also used words in video game ratings (prior to May 2005). But the ratings were still largely known by their symbol. How is this even relevant? The point of symbols is to abbreviate the expanded form of the rating. What's the point of including both E and Everybody for instance? It should be either one or the other. I have stressed this numerous times, if people do not understand the rating symbols, they can click on the rating organization's article. Sillygostly (talk) 01:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, the ESRB uses the rating symbol, and places the meaning of the rating in a small banner above the symbol. The OFLC used to display their ratings similarly to the ESRB, but they now place the meaning of the rating on the back of the video game cover. Still, you're not taking into consideration the fact that the parantheses add unnecessary clutter. The rating symbols are self-explanatory. IMO, parentheses should only be used to differentiate between alternate ratings (see the GTA:SA article for an example). Sillygostly (talk) 01:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Clean up/Copy-edit
Can you clean up/copy-edit Over the Edge (1999) if you have time?-- T r U C o 9 31 1 02:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Uncensored 00.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Uncensored 00.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:27, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Uncensored 1998.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Uncensored 1998.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Uncensored 95.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Uncensored 95.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Uncensored 96.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Uncensored 96.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:WWE Bottom Line.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:WWE Bottom Line.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 03:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: 3bulletproof16
I would have to agree with you on everything you've said over this discussion. I believe the block was unjust and that calling someone "lame" is not a personal attack; however, I also feel that he should've just served his time and put this all behind him instead of making such a big deal out of it (even though Hornetman, and not bulletproof, was doing the stalking). I agree with what Caribbean H.Q. said about him falling right into his trap. If you feel I did not do what you asked or have any other questions, comments, or concerns, just hit me up. -- L A  X  08:39, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: Category:Over the Edge
Um, maybe. However, I think we should keep the categorization sorting in a similar format to one-another. D.M.N. (talk) 17:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Survivor Series
Really? Cause when I looked at it, it was bunch of red links.  Sexy Sea  Shark  16:33, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CTR.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:CTR.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 18:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Hog Wild.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Hog Wild.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 11th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 14:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Jeff Hardy
If you go to this link, you'll find that the announcer clearly states that Jeff is from Virginia. http://youtube.com/watch?v=5mR8U4-NPMc —Preceding unsigned comment added by Superwhitekid (talk • contribs) 02:00, 15 February 2008 (UTC) But, he was still billed from there once, so it does deserve to be put on the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Superwhitekid (talk • contribs) 02:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC) There is no was that YouTube could delete all of it's videos that are copyrighted, please leave it on the page, I have that source, Jeff was billed from there once, so let's give it justice and leave it on his page. Your a dumbass —Preceding unsigned comment added by Superwhitekid (talk • contribs) 02:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: NPD
For the United States it's every month, while Canadian figures are rarely released monthly. --Silver Edge (talk) 07:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You're right. I didn't notice that until searching for NPD articles on GameSpot, since previously searching on IGN, Gamasutra, and Kotaku for Canada NPD data yielding very few to no articles. However, the "Console sales – March-June 2007" chart in the source (which doesn't mention if it uses North America or United States NPD data) uses NPD US sales figures: March 2007, April 2007, May 2007, and June 2007. --Silver Edge (talk) 09:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Attacking
YOU attacked me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rfcucl1972 (talk • contribs) 14:24, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

FYI
Please note this page where an editor has opened up a Deletion Review of an AfD debate you were involved in. Whilst such a request is clearly within their rights that editor has only contacted one or two of those who took part during the AfD process. It would in my view be more appropriate to include a notice to all persons (including yourself) that were interested in the first Article for Deletion debate, and I provide such a notice and link here. Best wishes -- VS talk 22:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Futurama
go futurama Baseball16 (talk) 01:55, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I Don't Understand
I don't edit often but how come you reversed it? It seemed right to me... Correcting the entrances for the SD elimination chamber? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr Mordecai (talk • contribs) 02:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)--Mr Mordecai (talk) 02:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah fair enough sorry, I see my misunderstanding, I did it as order of entry into the chamber... A rookie mistake if you will :D --Mr Mordecai (talk) 02:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:Big Show
He looks in great shape. A little thicker than Kane, but alot less than how he was in 2006. His face is now not very round as it used to be, its kinda straight and no fat marks, like double chins. He looks great, too bad he came back as a heel. You can see his picture on WWE.com.-- T r U C o 9 31 1 03:19, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * can you do me a favor, and revert the IP edits. They add that Show was bleeding in a non-encyclopedia like sentence. The word, physical confrontation is used, and I don't see a reason for them to add more than that. Help, as I have probably broken the 3RR rule.-- T r U C o 9 31 1 03:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Wwabelt.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Wwabelt.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 04:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SS 93.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SS 93.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:37, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

No Way Out 2008
Do you know if anyone is expanding it? I would like to complete the event section.-- T r U C o 9 31 1 15:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Edit summaries
TJ, you are a good editor. I want to see you retain the respect you deserve. Please try to refrain from using bad language in your edit summaries regardless of how frustrated you might be. Take it easy, --Naha|(talk) 16:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Big Show's nose was obviously messed up. Since you didn't see the PPV, you couldn't see him, but Mayweather gave him some pretty stiff shots, and must have accidentally messed up his nose.  Lex   T / C   Guest Book   19:23, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * and : these are also unacceptable. Calling someone slapnuts and swearing is rude. I'm very tempted to start a new section at an admin board. You've been warned about abusive edit summaries prior to the one given by Naha. The edit warring because of borderline vandalism at the Jeff Hardy article is also unacceptable. RobJ1981 (talk) 21:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * No need for sources if you have seen it was broadcasted on TV, and you saw it with your own eyes. Template:Cite episode can be used for this.  Lex   T / C   Guest Book   00:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Sega Superstars Tennis.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Sega Superstars Tennis.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:36, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

signature
hey, how do i make a custom sig? Samrulz123 (talk) 05:29, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: WWE No Way Out
I write funny things when I lack sleep. Casull (talk) 17:45, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Phantasy Star II.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Phantasy Star II.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 18:23, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Cimmo
Did you see what Cimmo did to his user page? It kind of reminds me of yours. -- L A  X  01:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think he'll listen, he has clearly shown time and time again that doesn't listen to warnings given. -- L A  X  02:08, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Clarification of arbcom injunction
Well you can't to use the Arbcom injunction as a reason/argument for keeping an article. The discussion for whether or not an article should exist should occur as normal but if the discussion produces a delete/merge/redirect result then the discussion is kept open and the article be deleted/merge/redirected only after the Arbcom ruling. In summary the arbcom injunction is suppose delay the delete/merge/redirection of articles for episodes and characters and not force a result. -Sin Harvest (talk) 12:39, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Ugly Betty (season 3)
I do not want to touch that one with a ten-foot pole. Bearian (talk) 13:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

How
How do you change/move your userpage even though i only joined yesterday User:Edgebelow (talk) 16:05, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

By the way, have you even TRIED to wrestle in some sort of wrestling promotion? you are into wrestling so much User:Edgebelow (talk) 16:05, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

6/8 men in MITB 4
I looked through the source, I could not find where it says 8 men would compete, could you show me please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sepmix (talk • contribs)
 * Replied on talk page.  TJ   Spyke   00:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Then I think it would mame more sense to put one TBD in the article —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sepmix (talk • contribs) 13:11, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: New user
Thanks for informing me about this. No, it is not appropriate for a user to redirect their user page to an article or vice versa. Per WP:UP, his page may be deleted through MfD, and since there is one already up, I'll watch it and close it once a consensus has been reached. -- L A  X  23:01, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Stop
There is serious opposition to your reversions of the templates. Please go the the project talk page and at least respond.  Sexy Sea  Bass  04:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

You have 15 minutes to respond before I rollback your edits in the name of project consensus. With your 1RR rule, you will be unable to do anything about it.  Sexy Sea  Bass  05:01, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

And concering personal attacks in your commentary and in your edit summaries, this is your first warning. — Save_Us   †  02:23, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was refering to your explictives shouted and the use of the word hypocrite. The basis of WP:NPA is commenting on the content, not the contributor, and calling me a hypocrite certainly falls under that. — Save_Us   †  02:36, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Brand Extension
Hey TJ, I am expanding the Brand Extension article in my Sandbox, does it look good (the article). Also for the Draft, does the table look good or is there another way it could be formatted to?-- T r U C o 9 31 1 05:35, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm, but there will be alot of notes added though..Ill see what I can do. Also, is there a way I can make the Brand columns to only say RAW and SmackDown! once, and be able to put it into the middle of the column?-- T r U C o 9 31 1 05:40, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The thing is that there was no real order, at most sources I look at, they have pick #1 and the two superstars chosen. What if I added a background color to the superstar and eliminated the brand column?-- T r U C o 9 31 1 14:54, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually I changed my mind, now look at it.  T r U C o 9 31 1 21:33, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, now may you please read this and tell me if you have a solution?-- T r U C o 9 31 1 21:54, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm, so if I follow that, I would have to format the table different for the second half of the draft, since there was no order like the first 10 picks right? T r U C o 9 31 1 22:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I guess your right. The only time that they didnt was when Flair went twice in a row. But not too much of a difference, so I will just alternate, and plus that it was a draft lottery so each side got a superstar at the same time.-- T r U C o 9 31 1 22:21, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Royal Rumble 2008
I am sorry for the unsourced comment. I will try to find a source, though I do not know how to incorporate it into an article. Please be forgiving. Tech43 (talk) 06:18, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Rock Band
Unfortunately, you're wrong. If you check the history, you'll see that it was redirected to Rock music one day before I simply moved it back to Rock Band (video game). The Rock Band title was originally created as the article about the game, and was moved to Rock Band (video game), creating a redirect to it. Regardless, no editor needs consensus to change something merely because it has been the status quo; consensus is only needed if it is apparent that there is conflict, which only you have caused in this case. -- Renesis (talk) 03:51, 24 February 2008 (UTC)