User talk:The Circle That Must Be Broken

Welcome
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
 * Welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style


 * Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
 * Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
 * Maintain a neutral point of view – this is possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
 * Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page to follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons' policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
 * No edit warring and sock puppetry.
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to [ do so].
 * Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 09:44, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you, but since this is a WP:CLEANSTART account, I am aware of all this. --The Circle That Must Be Broken (talk) 09:45, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Make it so, captain. Plot your course and make your way, best to you and a following sea. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 10:03, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Heh. Thanks, I needed that. --The Circle That Must Be Broken (talk) 10:04, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Most admins know that I have a penchant for sniffing out troublesome editors, see how easily my "i" befell on you? Just know this:- Trolls, banned editors, and mental defectives will try to annoy you, if you are an active contributor. Do good work anyway. Revenge yourself on your enemies by not becoming like them. Best. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 10:11, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

i.e. Lio Convoy
I'm sorry that you see it that way, but I do not. At no point do I think I expressed my point of view, as what I said was true. The first English name was Leo Prime, Furman acknowledged the name change and chose to ignore it; these are true and I fail to see how I was pushing my point of view. Further, if what was said before me is true that a google search now yields far more results for the name Leo Prime than Lio Convoy, then it is clear that the character's most widely used name, as you put it, is in fact Leo Prime. I made references to past name issues, such as with the character Jazz, to act as examples in my argument. I'm sorry, but that isn't "pushing my point of view," that's debating. And seeing as the whole issue is a "name debate," I'm pretty sure what I have done is acceptable. Further, I would like to assure you that, if I were one to push my pov, I'd have argued back in 2004 that Nemesis Prime was an English name for Big Convoy. But I don't and wouldn't do that, because that is my point of view. That said, I am pleased that the page has been reassigned to an official name, as the name Lio Prime was completely unacceptable. However, I do find it strange that the article was moved from Leo Prime to Lio Prime and then, rather than simply revert the edit back for an unwarented move, the whole name debate, which had been addressed and agreed upon previously to use the name Leo Prime, was dragged up once again. But whatever. It's an official name now, and that's all that matters. --TriPredRavage (talk) 12:56, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * You are attempting to get the article to present a name used only on three obscure toys as the most common name. NPOV forbids that.
 * Either you are POV-pushing, or you are unaware that English name does not automatically trump foreign name. WP:Article titles is policy, and it says that the name that must be used is the one "most commonly used in English-language reliable sources". I suggest you examine the sources in the article. Unless we are looking at different versions of the article, you will come to the conclusion that the name "Leo Prime" is only used to refer to the toys I have already mentioned. The rest appear to use "Lio Convoy".
 * You have cited Google-hits. It is my observation that they are completely irrelevant. The article has been called "Leo Prime" for ages, and its high usage means Google ranks Wikipedia high: you are now simply seeing the effects.
 * Unless you have proper sources to back your claims, please go away. --The Circle That Must Be Broken (talk) 13:27, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but that doesn't make a lot of sense. The google hits are not because of Wikipedia at all.  They are in fact because of the three figures that you cite as "insignificant."  You can see this in the search results.  It has nothing to do with Wikipedia at all.  Therefore it is the "most commonly used in English-language reliable sources", as you put it.
 * Furthermore it was decided on the Transformers WikiProject page that the article should be under the title of Leo Prime. Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Transformers/Archive_3 Thus, the article should have been reverted to that version, rather than for this debate to have been fired up, as I am fairly certain that is actually Wikipedia Policy, which you so avidly uphold.  I'm sorry, but your moving the page to Lio Convoy was unwarranted and in error. --TriPredRavage (talk) 16:32, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Blocked
I've blocked your account for being a sockpuppet. You've claimed that this is a clean start account, but if you read Clean start, it says that it's acceptable "where the old account is clearly discontinued and the new account is not merely continuing the same kinds of behaviors and activities." You've done exactly that - gone back to the same old habits and battlegrounds. And even if you did want a clean start, the way to go about it is not to continually create sockpuppet accounts. As I see no change in your behavior from before, it strikes me as unlikely that you'll change your tune from here on out. I think a few months off will give you time to clear your head a bit, and maybe after that you can request an unblock. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 21:36, 11 February 2011 (UTC)