User talk:ZakuSage/archive

Welcome
Hi ZakuSage, welcome to Wikipedia!

Here are a few helpful links to start you off: Avoiding common mistakes, How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style, Policies and guidelines, Help, Merging pages.

If you need help or are curious about something, feel free to ask on my talk page or the village pump. You can sign your name and a date stamp on comments using four tildes ( ~ ). If you have any further questions, feel free to ask, and I hope you enjoy being a Wikipedian!

Andre ( talk )A| 01:29, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)

Brightwood Page
Thank you for helping out on the Brightwood Page --Pat 22:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Playstation Portable
Hi ZakuSage! I've noticed you on Wiki- you've made a lot of good contributions to the site. Wanted to talk to you about the protection request. Unfortunately, a pre-emptive semilock on the Playstation Portable would kind of take away from what Wikipedia is. It's all about letting anyone edit, anyone at all. That means, unfortunately, that you and I and others have to erase what the raff brings in. We just have to be vigilant. Ex-Nintendo Employee 02:26, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

DRV
Just a note to let you know I dropped your DRV request on to the appropriate subpage. If you are looking for it, its at Deletion_review/Log/2006_August_16. Syrthiss 14:57, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

The article you requested has been restored. --Sam Blanning(talk) 21:39, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

About X-box sales figures
Microsoft and Sony release shipping numbers (even if they say "sold"), so better find independent source. Xbox sold about 14.5 mln in US (NPD Group.) and about 500K in Japan (Media Create), Micro stats from both this regions says aomething different, that’s why I don't trust Microsofts words. There is no official data from rest of the world (i hear somewhere there is about 5 - 5,5 mln sold in Euro), but I don't believe in 9 mln. So i think i have a right reason to change this figures... sorry for my spelling
 * Microsoft has clearly, CLEARLY stated SALES figures in their own words. You distrusting them does not mean you should vandalise an encyclopedia. ZakuSage 18:46, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

"Microsoft has clearly, CLEARLY stated SALES figures in their own words." in recent times Sony did the same thing... It's not about distrusting, it's about incompatible with other independent souroces (USA, JP). There is no official data from outside USA&Japan territorys so ok I stop do it. But I'm sure I'm right. BTW I'm not a vandal I just don't like deceive. I'm off...

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 22:25, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

New Video Game Article
Hey! I saw that you created a new video game related article- consider joining the Computer and Video Games WikiProject! I have added your article to the list of new articles, and attributed it to you. --PresN 02:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Regarding reversions made on December 24 2006 to Console wars
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 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. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. alphachimp 21:27, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

RunedChozo
I note that you've been adding notices to User:RunedChozo and User:NotAWeasel, indicating that the latter is a sockpuppet of the former. Could you please provide evidence for this assertion? —Psychonaut 21:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Zaku, either leave RunedChozo alone, or file a Request for Checkuser. No matter how much 'evidence' you may or may not have, you can't keep harrassing him like this. --InShaneee 06:08, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Your behavior in this case crossed the line into wikistalking, ZakuSage. This was inappropriate and uncalled for. Regardless of RunedChozo's actions, you provoked the situation, bent the rules, and were a primary cause of what happened here. A number of your edits, putting warnings and notices in places you shouldn't, and making acusations which were either unfounded or about now-many-months-old issues, were clearly antagonistic not reasonable admin assistance requests.

This sort of provocation and abuse is completely inappropriate for Wikipedia. That he reacted more vigorously and in a more hostile manner, and got himself blocked, does not mean that your actions here were ok in any way. 99% of aggressive arguments on talk pages are worked out without this sort of excessive drama - the way you provoked this led to this outcome and is not justified by what he did.

Please take a break, and read WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA before you contribute again. It's important for the project that people put effort into getting along and behaving in a responsible, adult manner. Georgewilliamherbert 23:10, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I concur. -- Asterion talk 23:37, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * While I don't think most of the accusations of my behavior are indeed true (it is painfully clear the actions of RunedChozo started this mess after he inappropriately labeled me a violator of WP:OWN and decided to bug the people on the admin incidents page, rather than stick to the simple content dispute), I will be taking a wikibreak and avoiding this user in the future. I don't come on wikipedia to deal with crap like this, just to edit and hope to avoid conflict. - ZakuSage 02:31, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Editors that don't provide an edit summary tend to look like vandals
I have noticed you commonly don't enter an edit summary. This causes me problems. When I patrol for vandalism, I use the summary to make a preliminary decision on whether or not the post is a vandal edit or not. If the summary is present (or at least a section header, the part inside the /* */), I commonly decide the edit is legit and move on.

However, if no edit summary is available, I typically resort to loading the diff for the edit. This takes time. For that reason, if your edits are all valid, I ask that you provide edit summaries. For more on how to enter an edit summary, please read Help:Edit summary.

Incidentally, it is not just me that appreciate having edit summaries. When you omit your summary, you may be telling various bots that you are vandalizing pages. For this reason, please consider providing that summary. It is very important. You can enter that summary via the edit summary box on edit pages (as shown below).



The edit summary appears in black italics in the following places:
 * Page history - list of changes to the page you edited
 * User contributions - list of all your edits
 * Watchlist *  - list of recent changes to watched pages (logged-in users only)
 * diff page - shows the difference between two edits
 * Recent changes - list of all recent edits
 * Wikipedia IRC channels - real time list of all edits
 * Related changes - list of recent changes to pages linked to the page you edited
 * List of new pages: shows the edit summary of the creation.

 *  Use the enhanced watchlist to see all recent changes in the watched pages, not just the last change in each page.

You appear to mainly rely on the section links provided for you when you edit a section. That is better than not providing a summary at all, but we would prefer to see you always see you providing summaries for every edit. Thanks. Will (Talk - contribs) 03:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)