User talk:EVula

user page // talk page

admin • opining • matrix • fun • awards

This is EVula's talk page, which shouldn't be a surprise if you clicked the link...
My general guidelines:
If I (EVula) left you a comment on your talk page, please just respond there, not here, so that conversations aren't spread out. Similarly, if you post something here, I will respond here.	Sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). Place new comments after existing ones (but within topic sections). Separate topic sections with ==A descriptive header==, and put new topics at the bottom of the page.

An honest mistake

Thanks for correcting the incorrectly placed warning tag. I'm always happy to let the administrators get together and slam my mistakes. Shinerunner (talk) 11:44, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

If that's the worst thing you do this week, you're doing better than most people. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:51, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi and about Catwoman in MK vs. DC

Hi, long time no see, how are you? WP:MK had little activity recently, so I felt like saying hi to you! Anyway, I shall ask you that how we can't add Catwoman to the confirmed characters list of Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe, since her full render has been released in Total Mortal Kombat, and TMK is one of the legit MK fansites that post true and confirmed information. Plus, if she isn't confirmed, who has designed this render? I think you got the point :) So, what are you saying? Master Spider (talk) 19:26, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, whenever I try to access that link, I get a 404. I was able to at least find a reference to it, saying it was taken down, but that's still a little bit weak for my taste. We're at a bit of an impasse, though I think we'd be just fine if we held off on it; after all, a render isn't actual confirmation, it's just evidence that someone did a render of it. Perhaps it's a render that the team did when they were sorting out who to put into the game, and they decided not to use her (not saying for sure that it is, merely pointing out a possibility). It could also be a render that someone else entirely did; I've got some friends that can do some fantastic things with 3D.

We can wait, though I will admit that I'd be surprised if she wasn't in the game. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, I haven't realized that it was removed... In case, Mortal Kombat Blackout (formerly Kamidogu.com) has the upper-part of the render displayed. I respect your friends lol, though I highly doubt that this render was made by someone else. We can wait for sure, but there is an edit war on MK vs. DC about the confirmed characters, half of the edit debates are vandalisms and the other half of them are about Catwoman. That's why I've asked you because as long as we wait, numerous edit wars will happen (darn fanboys...), especially about Catwoman. Why? "bcuz wii have teh render of catwoman released!!!!!!!! she's confirmddddd!!!"... See what I mean?

Anyway, if you're saying so, I'll wait... In the meantime, I'll add the MK vs. DC renders of Scorpion and Sub-Zero to their respective articles then. Thanks for your time! Master Spider (talk) 00:56, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Formal complaint

I was appalled to discover that this article not only does not provide the phone number of the local McDonald's restaurant, as it also does not mention the local McDonald's restaurant at all!! This is unacceptable. Húsönd 02:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I will do my best to rectify this outrageous oversight. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:50, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia Weekly Ep. 51

Hey. Episode 51. Go. Listen. Comment. Enjoy. WODUPbot 04:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Don't want these notifications anymore? Remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery.

Signpost updated for June 30, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 27	30 June 2008	About the Signpost

Private arbitration case criticized, vacated	Other ArbCom announcements reviewed in wake of controversy
Statistical model identifies potential RfA candidates	WikiWorld: "Mike Birbiglia and the Perils of Sleepwalking"
News and notes: Board votes released, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Sources in biology and medicine	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:18, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tanner-Christopher 2‎

Nice...I was just about to play a little game of "Find a bureaucrat" when I clicked on the above RfA and saw that it had just been closed. :) Meh...you win. :) Acalamari 16:30, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Figured it was a nice thing to do as my first edit since the long holiday weekend. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:44, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the message and the advice.--Chef Tanner (talk) 17:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

O hai

So check it... Meta is apparently in need of users with oversight. I was asked to consider who in the community I would trust with such a position, and you came to mind. So, just in case you are interested, this is the place to be. LaraLove|Talk 02:45, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Aww, golly gee, I'm gonna blush. ;) The best part is that this was the first of two messages in a very short span of time asking if I'd be interested. Either I'm very trusted, or everyone knows just how much of a power-hungry bastard I am. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:31, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

There are people that trust you? ô.Ó I mean... yea. >_> LaraLove|Talk 05:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I know! Alcohol is wonderful. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:19, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Hmm

Well how exactly do I do what you have told me to do?--Ezekiel ^†alk 14:02, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

You have two choices: you can either follow the instructions found at WP:USURP, which will take a while, or you can post either here or at Wikipedia:Changing username#Ezekiel of Howdypedia → Ezekiel 7:19 with the "Ezekiel 7:19" account to confirm that you own both accounts. Once you do that, the rename can be performed. EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:28, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Dustihowe → Dusti

Is it possible? Dusti^SPEAK!! 15:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

On July 12, yes. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:34, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

EVula, I actually think I may have created that account, is there an email address associated with it? Dusti^SPEAK!! 15:38, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't readily check that (or if I can, I don't know how). If you didn't receive the email notification sent with your usurpation request, then I'd say no. It's times like these that it'd be really handy to have checkuser access to see if two accounts belong to the same person... EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:03, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

EVula, today is the 12th, can you change my username please :) Thanks, Dusti^SPEAK!! 01:54, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done. Enjoy your new name. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:22, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Usurp

How long does a typical Usurp take? I just want to know thankyou.Electrical Experiment (talk) 15:43, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

The typical process takes around 8 days Dusti^SPEAK!! 15:54, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

thankyouElectrical Experiment (talk) 15:55, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Xenobot

Thanks for the quick rename! –xenocidic (talk) 16:54, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Would you mind flagging the bot if you have a minute? See Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Approved. Thanks in advance! –xenocidic (talk) 21:44, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

cheers, –xenocidic (talk) 22:14, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

You can improve Wikipedia

You have used your administrative privilege to squelch my assessment of the article and by extension, Wikipedia in general. I suspect that you have some psychological issues and will probably delete this complaint of your heavy-handedness. Many Wikipedians consider your (as a prime example) bullying approach (without adequate dialogue) to dissatisfaction with Wikipedia's quality to be enough cause to leave you in your self-assured myth of greatness. There may be no safe place to criticize Wikipedia's flaws within the framework of Wikipedia, if you have your way all the time, so they will leave and moan about everything you do--I suspect you enjoy this and will change with nobody, so long as you get your way wiothout direct competition for prominence on the INTERNET. It's a major reason why many have invested in making new "pedias". It's okay...nobody expects you to live up to the model of sysophood established back in the day. Who really cares? Why am I wasting my time with you, or having any concern for the state of Wikipedia these days? It's hopeless and thank you for confirming what everybody outside the Wikiverse knows--enough to stay far away from a failed utopian project. Thanks again. Depending on your response in the form of commentary or "action", it may offer additional credibility to the claims of the multitude who will not venture to Wikipedia for any reason. Feel free to cybersquat and claim this "mountain" yours to do with as you please and to hell with anybody else's thoughts. Sceptik (talk) 03:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

...honestly? I stopped reading when you said "you have some psychological issues". If you'd like to communicate with me without insulting me, by all means. EVula // talk // ☯ // 03:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Tsk tsk...you deleted and basically shoved me aside, without asking me in particular (on the talk page) what my opinion was on the article. If you have no true interest in an article, let others defend on a proper basis. Running roughshod over other people is such a fine American way; I guess you've acclimated to the American Dream (now called "the dumbing down of America" by Wikipedia). How fitting that you should play this game and fulfill expectation of standards that sysops are held to these days. Dead on with analysis of this place by everybody I encounter, whether educators, coworkers, family members, news reports or clergy. You prove it with everything you've done or written that I've thus far seen in your editorial history. Fine job of a self-fulfilling prophecy if I ever knew of one. Defencive as always, that old canard. It used to be that honourable people let no controversy be joined to their persons, but held the upper ground from start to finish. Thank you for your help in improving Wikipedia! Sceptik (talk) 04:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

...yeah, okay, whatever. Three cheers for not so blatantly insulting me this time. EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:03, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Ghandi said to be the change you want to see in the world, so I will not try to change Wikipedia for the better, but abstaining critical editors'--whose names I will not invoke for you to smear--collective inaction may help it go all the way to the bottom, thereby having no place to go but up. Don't worry; you're not alone in the cookie jar, so inasmuch as misery loves company, it is not anyone's fault in particular. That way, everybody can deny their part in disaster, all the while staying silent and pretending the accusations are crazy (or as you prefer, insulting), that you could be wrong, then pretending like everything is all back to normal when the criticism, but not the systemic problem which incites criticism "goes away" for a moment in time. Fine, upstanding fellow. At least you're not a suicidal pedophile terrorist cult leader, or is it too much to call Muhammed what he was, a spade for a spade? Wikipedia is good at skirting around the obvious and explaining it away with filler material to excuse all kinds of abominations to human rights and the part we call "sapiens" after the "homo", rather than "sexual" or "phile" after the "homo". I will now take my leave and feel fine and fancy free without such a convoluted worry that you lampoon by bearing the admin title and completely making it seem worthless. Sceptik (talk) 04:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Go away. I've got better things to do with my time than read this. EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:21, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi EVula, this editor has also been causing trouble with his first documented edit to the Michael Jackson talk page (which I later removed), seen here. Considering the complexity of that first edit and his general Attention whore attitude, I'm inclined to believe this isn't a new editor. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 11:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that. I was tempted to remove it, but figured that I'd just earn his verbose ire all the more. *shrug* EVula // talk // ☯ // 13:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

thank god

thankyou for reverting the MK vs. DC Universe Characters roster S02178 (talk) 06:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure. I'm tired of seeing bogus characters getting listed. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 13:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Request

I'd like some basic feedback, if you don't mind. I recently began assisting at ChU and I'd like to know if I have made any error's. So far, I've taken silence as my answer. I'd appreciate your response, when you have time, on my talk page. I never watchlist a crats talk page for high traffic reasons (and the assumption there of). Also, I see you've been doing a great job in the area I once questioned you during your RfB No longer a thankless job, eh? :) — _Maggot^Syn 16:17, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Wait, so I can say whatever I want here and you won't read it? Mwuhaha...
Responded on user's talk page. EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

No, I will eventually respond here. I appreciate your response. Thanks you. — _Maggot^Syn 17:32, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

just incase

just covering my butt here as i was curious of how you got your layoutfor your userpage looking so smooth so i had a look at it in the edit page. thought id let you know just incase it came up saying i edited it. Sincerely S02178 (talk) 03:13, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

No worries. :) The main components of my userpage are User:EVula/header, which appears on every page, and User:EVula/sidebar2, where I document my (considerable) better on-wiki accomplishments. EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:09, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Question

Ive filed My Usurp on july 7th, when can you estimate for it to go through? Electrical 00:24, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

NVM ElectricalExperiment 18:24, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 7, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 28	7 July 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: Transparency
Wikimedia releases 2008-2009 Annual Plan	Defamation case against Wikimedia dismissed
WikiWorld: "Charles Lane"	News and notes: Adminbots, abuse filter, ArbCom, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Style guide and policy changes, June
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:29, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

need help fast

people on the Soulcalibur IV are adding characters not knowing if they are playable or not so they decided to add a new section which to me is a big spceualtion. Also adding a small picture that is very hard to see twice. I really need your help.--Lbrun12415 22:05, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Not sure what you want me to do. The two characters listed under "Characters of unknown status" actually do have sources, which makes me feel like it's perfectly valid to place them there. EVula // talk // ☯ // 00:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Useight's Test → Pikachu

I'm not sure I would have performed this request. With SUL now live, I worry about the global position. SUL:Pikachu shows quite a few contribs to other projects, with the home wiki for the account being plwiki. So the person with the best claim to the account is the Polish editor. If Useight ends up being renamed to this name, he ends up with a better claim to global name and the Polish editor may ultimately have to give up the name. I think it could cause quite a bit of cross-project bad feeling if we are seen to be allowing Wikipedia users with high edit counts to maneuver into beneficial positions to claim popular names as global account. This is new so I don't think there's been any discussion about this between bureaucrats, but I think we need to be cautious in giving names that already have non trivial edits on other projects. Creating new SUL conflicts seems a little counterproductive to me. WjBscribe 03:50, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I've made a couple of points about the effect of SUL on rename requests: Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard#Effect of SUL on certain rename requests. See what you think... WjBscribe 04:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

How unnerving

EVula, looming over my talk page, fixing the headers on messages left by other people mere seconds after they appear. ~ mazca ^{t | c} 21:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It's far more insidious than you thought; I'm looming over your userpage too, moving comments somehow left there onto your talk page. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:58, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh damn, looks like you beat me to the adding to your talk page, while I beat you to the removal from your userpage. Well, it's still looming in my book. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. Well loomed. ~ mazca ^{t | c} 22:07, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The fun never ends!

... Ever... ≈ The Haunted Angel 11:30, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Oy vey. Blocked. EVula // talk // ☯ // 13:36, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Usurp of Adolph78...

Today my request was denied by another admin. I was told by not only you, but another couple admins that there would be no problem with my usurping this other account. I made a new account per our discussion, but nothing ever happened. Then today someone else denied the usurp because the other account was blocked. Is there any way you can still do the usurp for me, or am I going to need to file a new report and wait another week? - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Need advice

Hi EVula, :)

I realise you're busy, but could you stop by your talk page on the Half-Life wiki and check my latest message? Your input on a number of issues would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. --MattyDienhoff 09:15, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

I can't help but feel that this guy is overcompensating for something... WJBscribe (talk) 00:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar... ad nauseum

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		You have so many barnstars it is starting to get silly, regardless... Thank you for reversing uncreative page move vandalism. Chillum 00:20, 22 July 2008 (UTC)