User talk:KiTA

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome!

Hello, KiTA, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

TheRingess 08:32, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Disgaea 2[edit]

You obviously haven't played the game, and so really shouldn't be removing content from the article based on ridiculous assumptions, as this is really little more than blatant vandalism. Please don't do so again. Omgwtflolz 13:12, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it's in my PS2 right now, and I spent most of last night playing it. KiTA 17:27, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Why the hell are you claiming that all of that isn't true, then? If you have the game, you can verify them yourself. Why don't you, instead of simply deleting content and claiming that it was made up by someone? Omgwtflolz 19:54, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
Because there was a near riot on about 3 NIS forums I visit because of the text, I was attempting to belay some of that. Since, you know, story spoilers don't belong in a character list anyway. -KiTA 21:07, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Like? Omgwtflolz 20:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Sig[edit]

It's done in Javascript (which I don't know). You would edit User:KiTA/monobook.js and add in the signature-related content that I have in my monobook.js, replacing it with your signature. After saving and pressing CTRL+F5 to refresh the files, you should be able to click the signature button at the top of the edit page and it will paste in all of the code, instead of pasting in ~~~~. — 0918BRIAN • 2006-03-14 22:21

You can also simply go to my preferences and enter a signature in the "Nickname" field. Checking "Raw text" lets you edit it using wiki formatting. VodkaJazz/talk 21:33, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

using references[edit]

to link to a reference that has already been created, use < ref name=Batman / > (without the extra spaces) the reference → link at the bottom of the page points to #_ref-Batman_0, where Batman is the reference name, and 0 is the instance of the link (because there can be multiple uses of the same reference. Hope that helps! Jabrwock 14:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Regarding edits to Malal[edit]

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, KiTA! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bmembers\.aol\.com\/.+, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links guidelines for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 00:08, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Regarding edits to Malal[edit]

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, KiTA! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bfreewebs\.com\/.+, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links guidelines for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 00:08, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and will be removed. Thanks. Shadowbot 00:15, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Please stop adding the links to Malal. Our guidelines for external links mean that neither of those links are acceptable. One is in French, which is inappropriate due to this being the English Wikipedia and the other is a fansite. If you continue you will end up being blocked. Thanks, Localzuk(talk) 00:32, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Greetings! Specifically, the guidelines state "English language links are strongly preferred in the English-language Wikipedia. It may be appropriate to have a link to a foreign-language site, such as when an official site is unavailable in English, when the link is to the subject's text in its original language or they contain visual aids such as maps, diagrams, or tables, per the guideline on foreign-language sites."
The French site does contain such visual aids, as such I do believe it qualifies as an exception. The "fansite" quotes extensively from the original Games-Workshop source material, and is the only source of such outside of several long out of print (over 20 years OOP, if I understand correctly) books.
The Fansite I will admit would be better served merging the information into the article than merely linking to a website with the information on it. I will look into confirming the "fluff" that is listed on that website and work on editing the Malal article with it, rather than merely linking to the fansite.
I will, however, discontinue linking to either until I can confer with a friend who is an experienced Wikipedia editor who is much more familiar with the policy than I. KiTA 00:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

"Edit war"[edit]

It's not an "edit war". It's a "Sillygostly makes the same stubborn edits even though everyone says he's in the wrong". You're going to find that he'll try to do it during the discussion when everyone's back is turned, even when something is STILL under discussion. Watch. JAF1970 (talk) 14:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

JAF, please step back and look at what you have done over the past week or so. Can you not see that to a 3rd party, you appear to be doing the same thing? KiTA (talk) 14:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Your version is fine and acceptable - the "edit" I made was just a quick backtrack, I didn't mean to wreck your contribution - it's fine within the context of the article. JAF1970 (talk) 14:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh, Gawd. Thankfully JAF1970 has seen the light and is discussing (though still a bit aggressively). Sillygostly should do the same. I'm pretty close to reinforcing the 1RR rule here. Thanks for letting me know, though, now I can watch. Cheers, Master of Puppets Call me MoP! 01:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Help at Spore (video game)[edit]

I've proposed a vote on the terminology debate at Talk:Spore (video game). JAF1970 wants to close it but I don't think all the major players in the discussion have cast their vote. Would you care to add your vote on the matter? Nanobri (talk) 18:35, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

We want your input at the spore video game mediation, for sure. We've mostly reached a consensus, and I suppose adding more opinions could risk breaking that unity apart. But I really do believe in the spirit of collaboration, and think your opinion can be of help. Right now, the consensus is to display multiple genres in the infobox, along with a link to the section. Which genres and which section, though, is still being disputed. (I think the issues are "do we say strategy or RTS?", and "do we say see below, or see genre, or see gameplay?)
If you look here, you can see what we've got so far. It seems to mostly agreed upon. Thanks for checking in. Randomran (talk) 19:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Inappropriate contribution to talk page (don't worry! just letting you know!)[edit]

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Spore (video game) are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. The section referred to is "Clothes"


Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
for being nice to The Dark Fiddler on the Spore talk page! Samtheboy (t/c) 16:36, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Knight In Tarnished Armor?[edit]

  • If you're the same KiTA that I remember, drop me an email. JuJube (talk) 12:03, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
That would indeed be me. But forgive me, I do not know enough about Wikipedia to get your email address off it. Mine is j2ehyp at google's email service, if you are so inclined. :) KiTA (talk) 12:29, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Malal[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

An article that you have been involved in editing, Malal, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Malal. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Terraxos (talk) 06:28, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Citing Sources[edit]

Hey there, seen your edits to Neverwinter Nights 2: Storm of Zehir, great work providing those infos and sources. Just a thing if you don't mind: You should try and use sources in a nicer way, maybe even using the {{cite web}}-template (see WP:CS). It's nothing you have to do, just if you didn't know and have enough time, you might want to think about it :-) Thanks again for your edits and regards SoWhy 20:43, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to the Dungeons & Dragons task force[edit]

Rpg video game.svg Hi KiTA! You are receiving this message because we've noticed your edits on Dungeons & Dragons video game-related articles. We could use your help at the D&D task force! Don't be shy, head over to the project page and help us enhance and increase the coverage of D&D video game articles on Wikipedia!

Levi van Tine (tc) 11:43, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Singularity[edit]

You start by saying that it’s not about raw power or raw speed, quote: “I believe if you think all the technological singularity theory is raw computer power magically solving all problems, then you haven't read enough about the theory” unquote. But you seem to be missing the point. The point is that power and speed are not sufficient to create a singularity. Do you see? We have no evidence to support the belief that a singularity will occur purely by increasing power and speed. And lets just clear something up. The singularity is the moment when a machine becomes self-aware and intelligent, right? It’s not about having tools that are more efficient than we are, because we already have that. Computers do tons of things faster than we can. But then you go on to say that power and speed will create a singularity. That is a contradiction. But why do you believe that anyway? What argument or evidence do you have to say that power and speed are sufficient to trigger a singularity? If you have a logical argument that doesn’t rely on power and speed, then let’s see it. But one can’t say it’s about power and speed, because intelligence does not logically or physically follow from those things. Do you see? Its actually a primitive argument. You are basically saying that as computers get faster they will eventually become self-aware because of some singularity. But what evidence is there to support such a belief? And don't confuse computing power with intelligence. Computers are already better than we are at many tasks, but we don't say they are intelligent. The point is that technology has already beaten us at lots of things. But that technology has not become self-aware. It’s important not to get confused by these two separate issues. So the question remains: why do you believe that power and speed are sufficient to trigger a singularity? Best regards. WillMall (talk) 16:41, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

You are still missing a key point. Singularity Theory states that inventions and new technology are helped along by the creation of new technology. That new technologies will lead to new technologies until the process starts going faster than what we can predict or understand. The current obvious path to this is augmented intelligence -- either human augmented, artificial intelligence that's more intelligent than us, or something similar. Once a sentient, sapient intelligence can think faster and better than a human... everything goes out the window -- we couldn't begin to figure things out. That is why power and speed are so important, but other things, such as mind-computer interfaces (we're already well on the way to those), memory augmentation, etc will also get us there just as fast. That is why I, alongside a lot of other futurists, believe that the singularity is inevitable, barring external forces. KiTA (talk) 07:34, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

IF technology becomes conscious, then you are correct. But it’s a big and completely unsubstantiated IF. You say: " Once a sentient, sapient intelligence can think faster and better than a human..." but you haven’t given any reasons why you believe that technology will become sentient. Some people believe the world will end in 2012; they even believe that they have good reasons to believe that. But that does Not mean it will happen. What evidence do you have to assume that technology will become sentient? You keep talking about exponential technological progress. But technological progress, exponential or otherwise, does not entail self-awareness. Sure, you can choose to believe that technology will one day become conscious; but, unless you can provide some evidence, it is just an unfounded belief. WillMall ~(Pv~P) (talk) 21:39, 15 April 2010 (UTC)