User talk:Wageslave

Welcome
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:
 * 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:
 * Please respect others' copyrights; do not copy and paste the contents from webpages directly.
 * Please use a neutral point of view when editing articles; this is possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
 * Do not add unreasonable contents into any articles, such as: copyrighted text, advertisement messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Adding such unreasonable information or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism, and will result in your account being blocked.

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 vote pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Dancter 20:04, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Wii technical issues
Your recent edit to Wii technical issues (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 15:41, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your edits to Wii Technical Problems:
A tag has been placed on Wii Technical Problems, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a. If you can indicate how Wii Technical Problems is different from the previously posted material, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template hangon underneath the other template on the article, and also put a note on Talk:Wii Technical Problems saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 4 under General criteria. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we request you to follow these instructions. --L3TUC3 15:58, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edit to Wii Technical Problems (diff) was reverted by an automated bot. You have been identified as a new user or a logged out editor using a hosting or shared IP address to add email addresses, phone numbers, YouTube, Geocities, Myspace, Facebook, blog, forum, or other such free-hosting website links to a non-talk page. Please note that such links are generally to be avoided. You can restore any other content by editing the page and re-adding that content. The links can be reviewed and restored by established users. Thank you for contributing! // VoABot II 19:31, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Wii_error_110213.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Wii_error_110213.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 10:18, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Starting Deletion Process
Hi wageslave. I'm just letting you know that due to lack of improvements on the Wii technical problems article, I am beginning formal Article for Deletion procedures. This will give you about 5 days to improve the content of the article while the editors debate on its merits. If a consensus is reached to delete the page after that time, the delete will be carried out and made permanent. --Jbanes 17:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Xbox 360
Hi there. I noticed you changed all Live to LIVE, because "it is the correct name." Note that Wikipedia has its own set of guidelines, like Manual of Style (trademarks), that clearly indicates Capitalize trademarks, as with proper names. and that Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules even if the trademark owner encourages special treatment: avoid: REALTOR®, instead, use: Realtor In other words, although the trademark is "Xbox LIVE", Wikipedia uses "Xbox Live" for consistence. Thanks for understanding. -- ReyBrujo 03:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi there. The same guideline has a subsection, here, which explains that Lowercased trademarks beginning with a one-letter, separable prefix do not need to be capitalized if the second letter is capitalized, but should otherwise follow normal capitalization rules: avoid: EBay is where he bought his IPod. instead, use: eBay is where he bought his iPod. As you can see, the guideline states that something like LIVE should be modified to Live, but something like eBay should not be modified to EBay, and while you could change that to Ebay, it is not necessary. I suggest you discuss in the guideline talk page if you want to remove that exception from there. -- ReyBrujo 20:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I see you are a member of WikiProject Xbox, but please try to remain neutral when editing Xbox 360. Thank you.--Kozuch (talk) 00:21, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Trust me. If you seen the internal Microsoft documents that I have you would not be so skeptical about the RROD rates. Also I freaking love my Xbox 360. --8bitJake (talk) 04:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Removal of Wii Sports
You recently removed Wii Sports from the bundled games section on the List of best-selling video games article. Wii Sports is bundled with Wii in all regions (except Japan). In the future please double check before removing information from a page. Zomic_13 03:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Removal of comments
Hello. You may not have been aware of this, but removing other people's comments from talk pages is generally frowned upon here. Bladestorm 22:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Even if the comment is ridiculous? Like, if I went to the page on Carrots and started a discussion about how Carrots are repsonsbile for killing babies? Wageslave 04:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you know that's a significantly different case. :)
 * Although, if the person had a link discussing babies and babies dying, and you could tell that he really was being serious, then you'd really want to think twice before outright deleting it. Generally speaking, outside of your own talkpage(meaning you can delete what I'm saying right now if you want), only the most abusive of comments should be removed. Bladestorm 04:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of PlayStation 3 technical problems
PlayStation 3 technical problems, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that PlayStation 3 technical problems satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/PlayStation 3 technical problems and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of PlayStation 3 technical problems during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Oli Filth 00:06, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Live messenger xbox 360.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Live messenger xbox 360.png. 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 04:24, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Xbox live arcade1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Xbox live arcade1.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. KipSmithers T/ C 21:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Xbox live arcade1.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Xbox live arcade1.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 15:37, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Stephen Harper
Just curious. Have you decided yet, if/how you're gonna add the Cadman stuff? It deserves some mentioning. GoodDay (talk) 21:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 20:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

8bitJake
I appreciate you letting us know about what he has been doing. As a result, I will be keeping a eye. Best wishes.--Blackwatch21 (talk) 18:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 05:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Xbox 360 technical problems
I see you have been working on this article for long period of time. Do you feel that the article is clean, well-expanded, and full of correct information. I'm trying to remove articles that have been asked to be clean up. Please respond on the project talk page, I've added this question there too. Thanks DJS --DJS24 (talk) 16:38, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

XBox 360 technical problem talk page
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute 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. Dibol (talk) 09:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Your IP stalker
Yes, there is a way to check IPs and cross-ref to actual user accounts, but only certain users have the ability to do so. It would have to come by way of a sockpuppet investigation, StaticGull gave you some good advice at my talk page. Sorry for the late reply. xenocidic (talk) 20:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Greetings
Hello, it is my intent to wish you greetings and salutations. I hope everything is well with you. It is my endeavour to accomplish the feat of becoming a wiki-friend to everyone on this website. Will you oblidge to help me, by becoming my wiki-friend? I hope you are able to help me out with this fetish of mine.

216.229.227.142 (talk) 15:42, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Archived discussion on 360 page
Which one did you want restored? Since no one had commented on Talk:Xbox 360/Archive_12 in nearly a month, I figured we could archive it. But I can restore it if you want. xenocidic (talk) 17:44, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Done.xenocidic (talk) 19:53, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Monique davis worst person in the world.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Monique davis worst person in the world.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot (talk) 06:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for that message
I look forward towards working together. These kinds of edit waring grow tiresome.--8bitJake (talk) 02:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Your edits(on sony/Microsoft articles)
Having looked at your edits over the past few days(and some from before), I cant help but notice that what you are doing on Wikipedia may be having a negative effect on some articles. At this point, several editors have commented on your edits and yet you continue to attempt to put as much negative content on any PS3 related article and remove all negative content from any Microsoft related article. Every time you are confronted over this you reply with WP:AGF, however I have mentioned before, this has its limits. I would like to discuss this with you here rather than constantly meet you in random discussion pages and bicker over many minor changes. John .n-  IRL  18:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I wholly reject your characterization of my edits as "negative". Its quite clear that some articles are being maintained with POV problems. Some have Neg-POV and others have Positive-POV.
 * You've been essentially stalking me, and the arguments against my proposed edits have amounted to nothing more than ad hominum attacks, violations of WP:AGF and WP:PA.
 * I would argue that you're interest is to prevent any balance of opinion. The items I am proposing be included in the articles are not my own opinion, or OR but well verifiable, relevant. apropos and totally within the scope of the articles I am attempting to improve.
 * Instead of making baseless attacks on my purpose, please address try and work with other editors in good-faith.
 * Wageslave (talk) 18:15, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Its ok, im watching this page so you can talk here.
 * This is not a personal attack, I am here to ask you about your edits. I completely disagree that your edits are done to improve the quality of an article. Such as you edit here, a small edit but one which changes the tone, and perhaps implication, of a quote. Also adding ref tags to a perfectly well sourced stub. While the refs are not in the correct format, the article is 5 lines long, the refs take up nearly as much space as the article.


 * That is a lazy mistake on my part. When I read the passage, I screwed up.
 * Two things happened there; Without the in-line citations, I didnt see (frankly, I was tired at the time), the references. I saw a large block of text, and added  in places where the claims were made.
 * The line "We're beginning to feel the effects of the Geometry Wars clones on our sales via Microsoft now and are beginning a process to begin to more robustly protect our copyright and intellectual property" seemed unnatural. On reading it, it seemed "via MS now" was "added-in".
 * With your notice (and an evenings sleep), I've returned to the page and read all the references at the bottom of the page. I see that that line was accurate.
 * I've gone back and added the citations in-line for others.
 * Wageslave (talk) 14:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Since you have claimed I am stalking you, I will explain my actions. I have seen many editors question your intentions here, and so rather than look back and see edits which I could easily take out of context, I decided to look at ones you make over a short period of time. John .n-  IRL  18:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Instead of violating WP:AGF, why dont you address the material content of the edits instead. Thanks.  Wageslave (talk) 18:39, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Since you refuse to discuss this I will leave it, apologies if this annoyed you or you felt this was a personal attack. All I ask is that you become more neutral in your edits. John  .n-  IRL  18:55, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * No apology necessary, I'm not offended - I'd just like to try and stay on-topic. I'm quite happy to discuss my edits, but reducing the discussion to an assumption of bad faith is a method of diverting away from the topic at hand.  I really dont want to engage in a discussion of character, as I think it really doesnt serve the purpose of improving the content of Wikipedia articles, which is my sole goal.  As I said, I'm happy to discuss the merit of the edits I propose.  I'd also like to ask you to be more neutral in your edits.  Thanks.  Wageslave (talk) 19:05, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Your edits(on sony/Microsoft articles) - continued
Greetings. As you no doubt have noticed, many users have called you out on your POV edits to PlayStation, Nintendo, and Apple related articles on Wikipedia. I have almost had enough of this behaviour, and if it continues I will not hesitate to initiate an RFC about you. Over here, I have compiled a short report on your POV edits since you joined. This report will be used as a basis for a future RFC, should you continue your behaviour - though I hope the very existence of this draft convinces you to stop.

So basically, what I'm saying is, please stop with the POV editing, or you will be formally investigated. Thank you.

Regards, Frvernchanezzz (talk) 08:16, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Please, I invite the RFC. My edits are not OR or opinion, but sourced.  Please begin the RFC.  Until you do, please cease harassing me with threats.


 * Wageslave (talk) 13:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * To perhaps provide some clarity as to why various users have been frustrated with your edits, a quick look through your contribs shows that you push for the removal of criticism from Microsoft pages while simultaneously adding criticism to the wikis of their various competitors. Based on that, it appears as though you're acting on personal bias rather than simply adding "facts". Please don't think of this as harassment; it isn't meant as such. I'm just trying to help explain things.


 * HitotsuOne (talk) 19:34, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


 * My edits improve neutrality, perhaps you should consider WP:POV. The purpose of harassing me for my edits is to control the POV of articles in a manner that violate WP:POV
 * Wageslave (talk) 20:17, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


 * How does adding nothing but negativity to an already neutral article constitute "improving neutrality"?
 * HitotsuOne (talk) 05:46, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The material is accurate. It is neutral.  That's the point.  Wageslave (talk) 06:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


 * You're kind of missing the point. Okay, flipping the coin for a moment, specifically how can the act of your removing accurate information pointing to negative aspects of Microsoft-related articles improve "neutrality"?
 * HitotsuOne (talk) 20:55, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

RFC/USER discussion concerning you (Wageslave)
Hello, Wageslave. Please be aware that a request for comments has been filed concerning your conduct on Wikipedia. The RFC entry can be found by your name in this list, and the actual discussion can be found at Requests for comment/Wageslave, where you may want to participate. -- Frvernchanezzz (talk) 06:52, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Insight
I only had time to briefly review the information wageslave, and being a newer Wikipedian, I'm going to refrain from commenting on your edits. But for my part, being a self-professed "Xbox 360 Fanboy", I try to stay away from "the competition's" articles, unless it's for vandalism reversion, or the work I did with List of PlayStation 3 games to make the treatment of "console exclusive" games match how List of Xbox 360 games does it.

That being said, the Xbox 360 articles (both Xbox 360 and Xbox 360 technical problems do seem to have an overly negative slant - I'm just not sure if you or I should be the ones to rectify it. Perhaps focus your attentions to other issues, such as improving game articles, etc. which you may find more fulfilling and less adversarial. xenocidic (talk) 16:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * That is wisdom I probably need to internalize. I tend to be a contrarian by nature, and I've found that there are POV problems with these articles.  The articles that some editors want to be neg-POV are this way, and same method is used to assure other articles are given pos-POV.
 * I'm also not a well-experienced editor, but I'm fast loosing faith in Wikipedia.
 * It seems that the bar is set incredibly high for inclusion of anything critical in some articles, but the same bar is virtually subterranean for other articles. Double-standards and lack of universal standards.  That kind of thing is being enforced by a dominant cabal who takes "ownership" of articles.
 * I'm incredibly frustrated. It seems that the best way to maintain that is to intimidate, threaten, attack and frustrate.
 * I'm really just learning about the "culture" here on Wikipedia, and I've become saddened by what I presumed would have been a community more interested in neutral-POV, instead, the articles are maintained with distinct POV.
 * Wageslave (talk) 17:02, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I made a tag for you


Please accept this gift. I think it will go well with the rest of your user tags. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HitotsuOne (talk • contribs) 00:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

3RR on Metal Gear Online
You have been blocked from editing for in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below. EdJohnston (talk) 02:42, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Bravo
Good lord, you have killed a LOT of articles by the look of this page. Bravo! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.167.201.103 (talk) 23:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Good work, make it appear that you agree that I negative intent without saying so. Say "bravo" to convince people that negative editors would agree that my edits are not worthwile. Is that you Karl Rove? Wageslave (talk) 01:33, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Wageslave Defence
Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages such as Wageslave Defence, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Kesac (talk) 23:10, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Specifically, you need to edit the Requests_for_comment/Wageslave page, instead of creating a page in the mainspace to respond. Kesac (talk) 23:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

My scratch pad
User Page for wageslave

Wageslave Defence

I made a tag for you


Please accept this gift. I think it will go well with the rest of your user tags. Preceding unsigned comment added by HitotsuOne (talk • contribs) 00:37, 22 April 2008

Users's certifying basis for dispute

 * Frvernchanezzz,
 * John.n-IRL,
 * Mahjongg


 * 1) Dibol
 * 2) HitotsuOne
 * 3) On the other side the other side
 * 5) Mahjongg
 * 6) Ciao 90 90
 * 7) Chocobogamer

Wageslave Defence
This looks like it belongs in userspace or Wikipedia space. I moved it to User:Wageslave/Defence. NawlinWiki (talk) 23:24, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

RE:Hello Again
Wageslave - Can you give me a BRIEF summary of whats going on. I've have been off wiki for weeks now, and I'm trying to read this stupid report made about you. Also, can you tell me who filed the report, they mention "I" several times, however he/she doesn't sign their name. If they're going to file a report they need to understand signing their name is a MUST. Please get back ASAP. DJS --DJS24 01:14, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

R.E

 * No. It's easier to read the way I put it. I responded to each line, and it would be harder to follow if they weren't like that. On the other hand, you should go to the actual RFC page, and right a response in the "Response" section, which is where you are meant to respond. And it doesn't need to be signed as the one section of diffs and evidence was written by the one user, but you went ahead and edited after each line - the very thing you're now complaining about. I, at least, indented and italicized my writing.

And you need to write a response in this section of the real RFC, not on your personal user page. Thanks. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 08:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Readability in my response
I posted the following to Frvernchanezzz talk page;

Please stop editing in the middle of a paragraph diffs hereand here. Please go back to the RFC page and remove your edits from between my paragraphs. Please add your comments below my paragraphs, as the manner you're doing it now makes my own commentary absolutely unreadable. Thank-you.

For you have done this:


 * Both those articles included relevant cited claims. Wikipedia's threshold is VERIFIABILITY not truth.
 * Citations, yes. Reliable sources, no.
 * You say "as the replacing of the HDD does not void the warranty" but the citation said otherwise.
 * As I said, if you used a reliable source, (like, say Sony's official website, or even looked at a PS3 manual), you would have found that it doesn't void the warranty.
 * You say "regardless of how inferior the PSN is to Xbox LIVE, this is not a technical/hardware issue with the console." Why do you presume "technical problems" must mean hardware? It is a "technical problem" discussed widely, did the citation or language say otherwise?
 * I didn't presume it only meant hardware. "Technical issues" as a term means that a product (hardware or software) doesn't work as intended; thus the RRoD of Xbox 360's is a technical issue, but the inferiority of the PSN isn't as it works exactly as intended.

When it should be (easier to read);


 * Both those articles included relevant cited claims. Wikipedia's threshold is VERIFIABILITY not truth.
 * You say "as the replacing of the HDD does not void the warranty" but the citation said otherwise.
 * You say "regardless of how inferior the PSN is to Xbox LIVE, this is not a technical/hardware issue with the console." Why do you presume "technical problems" must mean hardware? It is a "technical problem" discussed widely, did the citation or language say otherwise?
 * Wageslave (talk) 23:03, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Citations, yes. Reliable sources, no.
 * As I said, if you used a reliable source, (like, say Sony's official website, or even looked at a PS3 manual), you would have found that it doesn't void the warranty.
 * I didn't presume it only meant hardware. "Technical issues" as a term means that a product (hardware or software) doesn't work as intended; thus the RRoD of Xbox 360's is a technical issue, but the inferiority of the PSN isn't as it works exactly as intended.
 * YOUR SIGNATURE

Then, he edited my comments from his talk page calling them "Removed a messy, harassing comment from my page". and posted the R.E you see above.

My user page is my defence, if it needs to be pasted into the response section of the other page it is no matter. At present, because of the manner frvernchanezzz is editing in between every sentance I've written instead of in blocks on a per-point basis, my own writing is now co-mingled with his (unsigned) writing. It makes it absolutely impossible to read anything I've written.

I've asked him kindly (see above) to cease, and he simply edited away my objection -- calling it 'harassing' and continued as he pleased. How am I supposed to provide a defence if Frvernchanezzz refuses to allow it to be even read? To note, because Frvernchanezzz is editing my responses on his own talk page to render them unintelligible, I'll only be discussing this here. So, I've posted a link on his talk page to this.

16:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * To be honest wageslave, frvernchanezzz is only responding in a manner similar to your own, replying after each point. I will ask frvernchanezzz to mark them out so that it is clear what is written by who. Please also leave some comments at the actual RFC, not on your user pages. Thanks. (Also, removing something from your own talk page is fine, and is seen as a sign that it was read.) John  .n-  IRL  16:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


 * My responses are in paragraph (blocks) done per-bullet-point, while his are in between my sentances.
 * If you see above the difference is pretty clear.
 * Look at the iphone bullet, the italicized text is breaking in between virtually every sentance, it makes my own writing unreadable.
 * Wageslave (talk) 16:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The similarity is that your edits are in the middle of the RFC, while they should be at the end. John  .n-  IRL  16:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Perhaps I should edit my response to just the bullet points (taking out the claims) and past the lot into the RFC response. Wageslave (talk) 16:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You can respond in anyway you like, it should just be in the response section. All the points are numbered so you may just number what you have already written in the same fashion. John  .n-  IRL  17:00, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

It is much, much easier to read with Fravnche...whoever's answer after each of your replies to each of the accusations. I can't believe how obvious this should be, otherwise you'd have to backtrack in the text the whole time. But how about using coloring instead? Huh? I know that takes some work and my look cheesy, but I'd gladly volunteer to do it, and it would get rid of all the signatures disturbing the text. —  Emil K.  (talk''' 11:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Resolutuion
Hello Wageslave. I've thought of a resolution to the current RFC. It's not at all perfect, but it could work if all parties involved agree to it. I'll write it up on the RFC page when I'm not busy. Thanks. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 03:24, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Your RFC
You should take a look at the resolution that was proposed on the talk page of your RFC and post your comments about it. Ignoring the situation won't make this go away. In fact, ignoring it is probably the worst thing you can do. People are already talking about getting an administrator on the case and that's something you don't want to have happen. It would be in your best interest to help resolve the conflict. Again, I strongly urge you to take a look at the resolution, post your comments about it and help bring this conflict to an end. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.217.222 (talk) 16:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)


 * This whole thing is ridiculous. From what I have seen I havent seen anything wrong.  Weve worked together on a couple different articles as well and saw nothing wrong.  I think these people are just pissed off because he is making your non-neutral articles neutral.Dvferret (talk) 14:29, 18 May 2008 (UTC)


 * These people are helpless... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dvferret (talk • contribs) 14:33, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (July 2008)

 * Newsletter delivered by xenobot  03:45, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (August 2008)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  22:27, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter for August 2008

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  01:52, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (September 2008)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  12:56, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia help templates
I removed "Category:Wikipedia help templates" from User:Wageslave as it caused mis-categorization. -- davidz (talk) 00:00, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * also User:Wageslave/Defence -- davidz (talk) 01:15, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (October 2008)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  16:29, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (November 2008)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  20:14, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (December 2008)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  22:27, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (January 2009)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  00:24, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (February 2009)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  00:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Battlezone xbla.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Battlezone xbla.png. 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) 05:19, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (March 2009)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  17:06, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

A note regarding the WPVG Newsletter
Due to an apparent lack of interest, the WPVG Newsletter will be switching from a monthly publication schedule to a quarterly one. The next issue be delivered on July 1, 2009, and will pertain to the second quarter of the calendar year. If you have any comments regarding this, or suggestions to improve the newsletter, please post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Newsletter.
 * —VG Newsletter Contributors
 * Notice delivery by –xeno talk 15:24, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (Q2 2009)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  15:47, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (Q3 2009)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  04:26, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (Q4 2009)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  21:28, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (Q1 2010)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  17:19, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q3 2010
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 19:02, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q4 2010
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 18:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q1 2011
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 03:19, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2011
–MuZemike 14:36, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q3 2011
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 07:57, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q4 2011
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 06:46, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q1 2012
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 19:50, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2012
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 22:05, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q3 2012
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 16:04, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter (4th Quarter 2012)
 The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter

Volume 5, No. 4 — 4th Quarter, 2012

Previous issue | Index | Next issue  Project At a Glance As of Q4 2012, the project has:


 * 150 Featured Articles
 * 50 Featured Lists
 * 6 Featured Topics
 * 3 Featured Pictures


 * 45 A-Class Articles
 * 555 Good Articles
 * 12 Good Topics

Content


 * Changes to Featured and Good content
 * News items and announcements


 * Feature: "Strengthening and utilizing WP:VGs inter-language links"
 * Interview: Khanassassin

Project Navigation

To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list. This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 03:01, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * VG Project Main pages
 * Main project – talk
 * Project category – talk
 * Portal – talk
 * VG Project Departments
 * Assessment – talk
 * Cleanup – talk
 * Peer review – talk
 * Reference library – talk
 * Newsletter – talk
 * Video game images – talk
 * Video game images – talk

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2013
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:22, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q3 2013
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 11:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2014
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:06, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q3 2014
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q4 2014
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:22, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q1 2015
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:45, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2015
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:19, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q3 2015
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:55, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q4 2015
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:35, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q1 2016
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2016
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:02, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q3 2016
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:32, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q4 2016
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q1 2017
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:39, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2017
 The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter

Volume 10, No. 1 — 2nd Quarter, 2017

Previous issue | Index | Next issue 

Project At a Glance As of Q2 2017, the project has:


 * 211 Featured Articles
 * 70 Featured Lists
 * 11 Featured Topics
 * 1 Featured Portals


 * 28 Featured Pictures
 * 1,172 Good Articles
 * 23 Good Topics

Content


 * Changes to Featured and Good content
 * News items and announcements


 * Feature: Shiny Wikipedians - A Featured Content Leaderboard
 * Feature: Final Fantasy VII postmortem

Project Navigation

To opt-out or sign up to receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to update the distribution list. (Delivered 14:32, 9 July 2017 (UTC))
 * VG Project Main pages
 * Main project – talk
 * Project category – talk
 * Portal – talk
 * VG Project Departments
 * Assessment – talk
 * Cleanup – talk
 * Peer review – talk
 * Reference library – talk
 * Newsletter – talk
 * Video game images – talk
 * Video game images – talk

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q3 2017
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2019
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:10, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Video games Newsletter Q2 2020
03:23, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Video games Newsletter Q3 2020
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q4 2020
 The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter

Volume 12, No. 4 — 4th Quarter, 2020

Previous issue | Index | Next issue 

Project At a Glance As of Q4 2020, the project has:


 * 239 Featured Articles
 * 88 Featured Lists
 * 10 Featured Topics


 * 33 Featured Pictures
 * 1,650 Good Articles
 * 28 Good Topics

Content


 * Changes to Featured and Good content
 * News items and announcements
 * WP:VG Talk Page Digest


 * Feature: Don't fake your work
 * Follow-up: VG editing in a time of COVID
 * Interview: TarkusAB

Project Navigation

To opt-out or sign up to receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to update the distribution list. (Delivered 08:33, 4 January 2021 (UTC)) --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * VG Project Main pages
 * Main project – talk
 * Project category – talk
 * Portal – talk
 * VG Project Departments
 * Assessment – talk
 * Cleanup – talk
 * Peer review – talk
 * Reference library – talk
 * Newsletter – talk
 * Video game images – talk
 * Video game images – talk

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q1 2021
 The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter

Volume 13, No. 1 — 1st Quarter, 2021

Previous issue | Index | Next issue 

Project At a Glance As of Q1 2021, the project has:


 * 241 Featured Articles
 * 89 Featured Lists
 * 10 Featured Topics


 * 34 Featured Pictures
 * 1,684 Good Articles
 * 31 Good Topics

Content


 * Changes to Featured and Good content
 * News items and announcements
 * WP:VG Talk Page Digest


 * Survey: How does WikiProject Video games determine character notability?
 * Interview: Namcokid47

Project Navigation

To opt-out or sign up to receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to update the distribution list. (Delivered 13:41, 9 April 2021 (UTC)) -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * VG Project Main pages
 * Main project – talk
 * Project category – talk
 * Portal – talk
 * VG Project Departments
 * Assessment – talk
 * Cleanup – talk
 * Peer review – talk
 * Reference library – talk
 * Newsletter – talk
 * Video game images – talk
 * Video game images – talk

Latest (and most likely final) issue of the WP:VG newsletter
 The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter

Volume 14, No. 1 — 1st Quarter, 2023

Previous issue | Index <div style="border-left: 2px #eeeeee solid; border-right: 2px #eeeeee solid; border-bottom: 5px #eeeeee solid; margin:0em;padding:1em; background:#FEFEFE;">

Project At a Glance As of Q4 2022, the project has:


 * 259 Featured Articles
 * 95 Featured Lists
 * 10 Featured Topics


 * 35 Featured Pictures
 * 1,862 Good Articles
 * 31 Good Topics

Content


 * Changes to Featured and Good content
 * News items and announcements


 * Survey: How does WikiProject Video games determine character notability?
 * Some news regarding the status of the newsletter

Project Navigation

To opt-out or sign up to receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to update the distribution list. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:40, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * VG Project Main pages
 * Main project – talk
 * Project category – talk
 * Portal – talk
 * VG Project Departments
 * Assessment – talk
 * Cleanup – talk
 * Peer review – talk
 * Reference library – talk
 * Newsletter – talk
 * Video game images – talk
 * Video game images – talk