User talk:Pedantic79

Re:Matsumoto[edit]

Actually I only removed the link to Kubo's name by accident. I have restored it. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 02:51, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Information[edit]

Why does that not surprise me? – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 07:31, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling[edit]

There is still some conflicts on the spelling of "Orisi" as it was printed in the August 2006 issue of SciFi Magazine (The official Magazine of the SciFi Channel). SciFi Magazine, "TV in Focus" Stargate SG-1, Page 18, August, 2006. This may be more reliable then GateWorld. Morphh 16:33, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Opinion Adria article[edit]

As i cannot prove that the Prior spoke in latin, it cannot be likewise proved that Tomin's words are a translation. Vala did simply said "What is it, Tomin" as a reaction to his sudden emotion. Therefore his subsequent phrase could be a personal utterance. The show does not indicate precisely it is a translation. Consequently, the translation thing is just a personal opinion. It seems editor Fenton is less eager to remove that than to threaten me with reporting me.89.32.1.82 19:30, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like editor Fenton slowly begans to be reasonable and edit changes to the article, changes he forbade me to do under the threatening of reporting me for vandalism. So kind of him he offered himself to "vandalize" the page for me. What a fair person.89.32.1.82 19:59, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Assume good faith and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. This is not a contest about who is right or wrong. – Pedantic79^(talk) 21:15, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it's not. It just becomes annoying when people like Fenton make preferencial use of the accusation of vandalism just to sustain their point of view. I couldn't make those edits because i was to be considered a vandal. Now that he made them for me wouldn't be fair that he too should be warned for vandalism like i was? I am specifically referring to the removal of the Latin quotes as they had no purpose being mentioned there. Vandalism was for me to remove them, fairness was for him to do that instead of me. spare me!89.32.1.82 14:15, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And it's annoying for you to complain to me because I would consider your edits vandalism as well, and his not. Wikipedia isn't fair. Please read WP:BRD on what is generally accepted as the how to be bold. Remember assume good faith. However, your edits will always be considered more likely to be considered vandalism because firstly, you are an anonymous IP. Secondly, you do not summarize your changes. Most vandalism attempts do not have a summary, consequently edits without summaries are more often considered vandalism. Thirdly, you can never seem to make just one edit, you must make one large edit and then 3 small edits to that. While everyone does do this once and a while, it's difficult to follow what changes were made. Learn to use the "Show preview" button and the "Show changes" button. Also reread what you write. Fourthly, you have a history of vandalism, and revert wars. Vadalism: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. There are many more talk page edits to talk pages I would consider vandalism.– Pedantic79^(talk) 16:16, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, please refrain from referring to me with the numerical ip. Secondly, some vandal edits you mentioned do not belong to me i.e the Kyle XY article edits. Thirdly, i will soon be using a personal account. Fourthly, your attitude does not contribute to bettering the general situation. Fifhtly, ..oh never mind.89.32.1.82 17:37, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are an numerical ip, so I will continue to refer to you as such. Secondly, it does not matter if they were not you, that is just another reason to get an account. Thirdly, I am hoping this finally persuades you to create an account. Fourthly, notice how your attitude change towards me after I listed why I would consider your edits vandalism. It was meant to point out what you did that was considered wrong. Remember assume good faith. – Pedantic79^(talk) 17:46, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

please spare me the truisms. and the reason i asked you to stop referring me as a numerical ip because i'm not the only guy using it.89.32.1.82 19:46, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why create an account? Perhaps you should consider creating an account, otherwise the only way to refer to you is by your IP address. – Pedantic79^(talk) 19:56, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ok, stop that.89.32.1.82 16:00, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maito Gai[edit]

I don't know how to use this talk thing, but... Please don't send anything to my IP address through here. I had to make an account to send a message back because I couldn't figure out how. -__-; The person who made those changes wasn't me, as IP addresses tend to often change, especially if one is using a 56k modem. I'm not even into anime. -__- On top of all this, why not include both names in the articles if people are fighting over it? I don't suggest going and flagging every change you don't like as vandalism. Just include both names and maybe everyone would be happy. Anyways, sorry if I did the talk thing wrong. Never done it before. Toxicpeanut 21:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]