User talk:Nightscream

Welcome to my Talk Page. If you're new to Wikipedia, you can leave me a message about a new topic by placing it at the bottom of this talk page, under a new heading with a title that refers to the article or topic in question. To create a header, just put two sets of equals signs on each side of the section's title. Please sign your message by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of the message, which also automatically time stamps them. Thanks. :-)

• Archive 1: March 17, 2005 - April 22, 2007
• Archive 2: April 26, 2007 - August 10, 2008
• Archive 3: August 12, 2008 - December 26, 2009
• Archive 4: December 28, 2009 - March 21, 2011
• Archive 5: March 25, 2011 - August 13, 2012

Dawn Marie Psaltis

I see that you are an Admin. That makes me even more perplexed, because you should know BLP policy better than me. I must be missing something big. (If you know what, please educate me, I can learn something new. I am being sincere.) Right now I don't understand by any reach, that adding a Youtube ref as an RS that constitutes an attack on the integrity of any BLP subject, can be consistent w/ policy. So I reverted it. (Which according to my understanding is the prescribed thing to do, to protect both the BLP subject, and WP.) User:ChessPlayerLev re-added the Youtube ref. You added a supporting ref, but when I looked at it, it seems to be a blog report made by a voluntary contributor/user of the site, and it simply affirmed the existence of the Youtube video, and proceeded to give personal speculation. (The site seems very gossipy as a result, and how could this be a reliable source? And even if it was, how could simply affirming the existence of the video, be a contribution of anything, how could it be an RS giving any support to any content. [The existence of the video doesn't need a ref to support its existence.]). Looking forward to your answers. (I also opened thread at WP:BLPN.) Thank you. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 09:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

User:Nightscream, thanks for your response at the article Talk. I have some followups, would prefer to discuss them here, feeling it'd be more appropriate than article Talk. (Is okay? We could copy any conclusions arrived here, to article Talk, then.) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 10:45, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

User:Nightscream, can we discuss the BLP violation here? Or I will continue it at the BLPN. Please let me know. I'm subjected to ad hominem and personal attacks at the Talk:Marie Psaltis, and, I would really rather avoid that, by discussing the issue here with you rather than at the Talk:Marie Psaltis, where I'd likely be subject to more ad hominem and personal attacks. (BTW, you are admin, and so are in a position to quell ad hominem personal attacks used by an editor to bully or intimidate another editor in order to squash discussion which might challenge material said user reintroduced. Again, said user reintroduced the material without discussion after my revert of it, even when article Talk thread had been opened for discussion. It's my understanding that incendiary material such as an accusatory Youtube video is supposed to be removed at once, even without the necessity of edit summary.) You are an involved admin and the article reflects the status that you want, but I disagree with this, and would like to discuss, in a discussion forum where I'm not on receiving end of a stream of personal ad hominem attacks. Does that sound reasonable? Thanks for your consider. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 10:38, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

User:Nightscream, I had reverted the accusatory Youtube video according to my understanding of BLP policy, where such a ref is supposed to be reverted on sight, even without edit summary. Did I do wrong? You provided argument at the article Talk, that normally a Youtube video is not adequate as reliable ref, but in this case, that the accusatory Youtube video was okay as a ref in the BLP, *because*, the person making the Youtube video, the person making the accusation against the BLP subject, was himself notable. However, I do not see how that argument is valid. (For example, assume BLP subject 'A'. Person 'B', who is notable, makes an accusatory Youtube video, attacking the integrity of person 'A'. Person 'C', also notable, has a different grievance against person 'A', and makes an accusatory Youtube video against person 'A'. Person 'D', also notable, has an entirely different grievance against person 'A', and makes an accusatory Youtube video. Person 'E', likewise. Person 'F', likewise. Person 'G', likewise. And so on. Are you saying, User:Nightscream, that because persons 'B', 'C', 'D', 'E', 'F', 'G', and so on, are each notable, then the accusatory Youtube videos that each makes, may be included as refs in the BLP of person 'A'?) This seems completely wrong to me, and your argument that keeping the accusatory video made by person 'B' against the BLP subject, also therefore equally wrong. Are you saying it is right? If my understanding of BLP policy is wrong in this regard, then I would like to correct my understanding. Please remember at the time of my revert, there was no mention whatever in the BLP article about the BLP subject response to the accusatory Youtube video. My reversion was based on the condition of the article at the time of my revert. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 04:00, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Can you respond, please? Ihardlythinkso (talk) 14:54, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

User:Nightscream, you replied to my above question, at the article Talk, that in your view, it would be alright to add the accusatory Youtube videos in the BLP article of person 'A', made by notables 'B', 'C', 'D', 'E', 'F', 'G', and so on. It's frankly an astonishing response from you. For example, let me try and refute it, even without referring to WP policy (I'm not a policy wonk anyway), but instead using the following thought experiment ...

Let's say *you* (User:Nightscream) are a notable person and a WP BLP article exists on you. And you rub shoulders with lots 'o famous (notable) people. Let's say you're a tough business guy. And beat out many notable business people in the marketplace, who as a result, given their shortcomings as human beings, and jealously over your success, you have gained a lot of "enemies" (lots of notable people who don't like you so much, even though you are a really nice guy). Okay ... To even their grudges against you (in fact, in attempt to *smear* your reputation and ruin you), each of your enemies makes an accusatory Youtube video, impugning your reputation, that you were a cheater in their business deals with you. As a result, your BLP article on Wikipedia, is filled with refs to Youtube videos made by the individual notable persons 'B', 'C', 'D', 'E', 'F', 'G', 'H', 'I', 'J', 'K', 'L', 'M', 'N', 'O', 'P', 'Q', 'R', 'S', 'T', 'U', 'V', 'W', 'X', and 'Y'. (My gosh. You really made some enemies in your career! Now they've all fabricated accusations on Youtube, and every single one of the vids has ended up on your BLP article as a ref.)

If you were that successful businessperson in the thought experiment ... how would you feel about the condition of your BLP? How would you feel about Wikipedia for hosting a BLP in that condition? (And, do you still keep your answer to my original question posed above?) Thanks, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 19:59, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Mike Manning

Hi! I actually didn't update Mike's since you said a friend of his shouldn't update it, so I had a friend of mine (who doesn't know him) update it. In that article it does say the movie is getting great reviews though. He did however give me a picture that he owns that he'd like on his page. Thanks! Krenda5 (talk) 18:07, 14 August 2012 (UTC)krenda5

No worries! I'm sure you've read a lot of these things all day so I totally understand. I just had two more questions, and I promise I'll be out of your hair. :) How do I change his birth year to 1990? Is there a way to do this? (I don't mean to go against the close friends code. It even says on IMDb that that is his birth year) Also, I would like to do the free-license image for his page, but I can't for the life of me figure out how. :( Krenda5 (talk) 20:12, 14 August 2012 (UTC)krenda5

Richard Benjamin Harrison

You said: "This is not grammatically correct, in light of the way the sentence is structured (with the word "While" at the beginning of it, which creates a clause that's incompatible with the conjunction "but").)"

I had to study the sentence for a few minuets before seeing that you're right. I did make an error in grammar. The word "While" is what sunk me, a result of me not reading the text carefully. I made another error. ..."he has indicated that". This is a bit ambiguous because it can refer to either Harrison.

Entree read as follows: "While Harrison's son, Rick, has mentioned that his grandmother stated that they are descendants of Presidents William Henry Harrison and Benjamin Harrison, he has indicated that he does not give much credence to this idea."

I wonder who "he" refers to. I think the pronoun is pointing to the elder Harrison, but it's still a bit ambiguous. I think that the entire paragraph is clunky and wordy, so I smoothed it out a bit.

I change it to:

"While Richard "Old Man" Harrison's Wife believes that the family are descendants of Presidents William Henry Harrison and Benjamin Harrison, The Old Man is skeptical about the relationships."

Note: I added "about the relationships." because it's more technically correct. Do you think that maybe the sentence should end at "skeptical"? It might sound better, even though it's chopping. Yosemite Todd (talk) 20:12, 14 August 2012

The way I read it the first time is that it was the old man who didn't give much credence to the idea.

Are you 100% sure that it was Rick expressing doubt and not old man? With no doubt? If you have even a slightest doubt, then you need to find out for sure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yosemite Todd (talk • contribs) 00:33, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

You changed my edit back. And this has me very discouraged. And the reason why is that I know that the prose of my last edit was the better one. I studied grammar and prose. My edit was better because it conveyed the same idea with about 10 words deleted. And the prose was much smother.

You have lock down the page. And this has made me very angry. I believe that this violates the very principles of Wikipedia and all wikis. This is why I believe my anger is justified and your behavior is completely inappropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yosemite Todd (talk • contribs) 17:52, 15 August 2012 (UTC) -Yosemite Todd- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yosemite Todd (talk • contribs) 17:43, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Lohan comment

You also removed my comment on the Michael Lohan talk page. I remember reading (Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Others.27_comments) that this is actually discouraged. Spelling Style (talk) 02:32, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	For your tireless and substantial maintainence of the Richard Benjamin Harrison article. Bonkers The Clown (talk) 06:02, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Saga (comics)

It depends what you are after. If you think it is in reasonably good shape, stick it up at WP:GAN; there doesn't seem to be anything glaringly wrong with it. This is usually a pretty good way to get general advice and improvement when an article is already good. The other option, particularly if you are unsure if it is OK, is to get a review at WP:PR. However, this can be hit-and-miss; it may sit there for a long time, and there are only a few editors who regularly review, and they have to do a ridiculous amount of work these days so progress can be slow. And I'm never sure PR is the best thing for GA, it is better for FA. Or, if you want me to have an informal look, I'm happy to do that. Let me know. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:27, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Poltergeist edit

You have every right5 to revert it, but don't claim it was a 'personal view'. I was merely stating a fact.60.224.160.192 (talk) 20:34, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

The New 52

Nightscream, what an interesting life you must lead. First of all, reread the edit notes. I never claimed the current picture is "uncopyrighted." Second, since when is that other image mine? I found it in the edit page of the article, you ignorant twit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.92.122.8 (talk) 01:30, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

1. Your edit summary stated, "Replaced copyrighted image with uncopyrighted image." So yes, you indeed made that statement.

2. Wikipedia requires editors involved in disputes to do so in a manner that is civil. Please do not attack other editors as you did above (and as you did on my talk page), as doing so can result in being blocked from editing. If you come into dispute with another editor, try to stay cool while doing so. Thank you. Nightscream (talk) 01:45, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Nightscream, the edit note reads, "Replaced copyrighted image with uncopyrighted image." I know you probably didn't attend an Ivy League institution like me, or even a top 100 college for that matter, so let me make this easy for you to comprehend. That statement suggests that I replaced an image that was copyrighted with an image that I believed to be without a copyright. Yes, I did used the term "uncopyrighted," leaving out the hyphen, which is most likely why you put in quotations. I do, however, hope you appreciate that "un-copyrighted" is, in fact, a word in our great, English lexicon. However, that's not the point. You wrote, "That image is of a cover of a comic book published by DC Comics, so it is not 'uncopyrighted', as DC Comics indeed owns the copyright to it." Here, you are talking about the image that is currently on the article page, which is the image that I referred to as "copyrighted," not "uncopyrighted." Now, I know you have a 3000 calorie lasagna plate in the oven, so please do ponder the semantics of this linguistic exercise while you stuff your Italian face. After observing your edit page, I can see that you are rather contentious in nature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.92.122.8 (talk) 02:53, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Nightscream, tl;dr. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.92.122.8 (talk) 03:27, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Frank Cho

Hi, this is Frank Cho, the creator of Liberty Meadows and Marvel writer and artist. I tried to correct and clarify couple of the the statements on my biography but you removed them, citing unreliable source. I like to think that I'm a reliable source of my life. If you have any question or concern about me, please contact me directly through my website, www.apesandbabes.com or wwww.libertymeadows.com

Thank you.

Frank Cho Frank Cho 1971 (talk) 21:06, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually, there's no way of knowing if you're really Frank Cho, and Wikipedia has been hoaxed before by very convincing-sounding impostors. So have Facebook and Twitter, which is one reason Twitter now has the "verification" process.

But even if this the actual, for-real Frank Cho, Wikipedia disallows what it calls original research such as claimed personal knowledge. That's why we have to use reliable published sources. Otherwise, as I'm sure you can understand, anyone could say anything about themselves. Would you want an encyclopedia where, say, Dick Cheney can go in and say anything about himself that he wanted to? --Tenebrae (talk) 21:10, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Counting Cars

I've never edited a semi-protected article before and saw the Counting Cars article you created so I don't know what the procedure is other than go to the user's talk page and inform them. I edit a lot of TV series articles and I watch this show. I added an intro section and updated the production infobox to help further improve the article. I hope that's okay. If not, then by all means you can delete the info. Sue Kastle (talk) 18:31, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Steranko and Starheroes

You tell 'im, bro'! I can only assume that people like that are just kids too young to be editing here. 'Cause if they're adults, God help us! : )   --Tenebrae (talk) 04:03, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Rob Liefeld

Sorry, I was just adding to his article about the comic book greats interview. I have only watched part of the interview I don't know exactly what was discussed with Stan Lee.Msruzicka (talk) 22:18, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

The Real World

Sorry, I did not know I couldn't use that website as a source. Just so I know in the future, what websites can I use for sources? sly0981 (talk) 22:48, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

The Real World references

Have you seen the movies 21 Jump Street or 10 Things I Hate About You? Well, both movies have Real World references in them. In 21 Jump Street, there is a RW reference at a party scene, while in 10 Things I Hate About You, a girl is watching a clip of The Real World: Seattle on a TV in her bedroom. In the Parodies, derivatives, and references section on the main Real World article, there is only one statement that is sourced. Hmm, what do you think? DPH1110 (talk) 17:06, 26 August 2012 (UTC)DPH1110

Re: Stan Lee

The reference to Stan for "Damage Control" refers to Stan the Janitor, not the real-life Lee. I also corrected the "Why I Hate Gym" reference regarding the mentioning of Irving Forbush.DanielC46 (talk) 20:29, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Stephen King influenced by William Golding

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/apr/11/stephen-king-william-golding-centenary Sbrianhicks (talk) 19:47, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

http://thrillerwriters.org/join-itw/thriller-awards/past-nominees-winners/ Sbrianhicks (talk) 23:35, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Uh, I know how to insert bare URLs but I've forgotten have to do anything else. I haven't done much Wikipedia editing or reading in a while. Usually I can get by with just doing it occasionally but sometimes the citation police catch me.

Also is King considered a postmodern author? Under his article's categories he is listed as one but I'm not sure. If you agree he is then, if it's okay with you, I'll add that to the info box as his "movement." I hope what I just typed makes sense considering I just woke up and am half asleep ... Thanks! Sbrianhicks (talk) 14:50, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

George Pérez - New 52 Superman/Action Comics timeline

Hi, I corrected an error on the George Pérez page that you reverted. Action Comics takes place five years prior to the events depicted in Superman. You're stating that it's "five years ahead", which is inaccurate. The phrase "five years ahead" that George uses in the cited article means his Superman series occurs five years ahead of Action, not the other way around. Are you actually reading the series? The timeline in Action Comics is right when Clark arrives in Metropolis. Superman is after he's been around for a bit, after he's established and known publicly. TunaSushi (talk) 03:57, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

• Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
• Research: The most recent DR data
• Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
• Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
• DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
• Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
• Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->

--The Olive Branch 19:19, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

More Real World Discussion

Hello. On the Departed Housemates section on the main Real World article, I removed Bronne Bruzgo (The Real World: Cancun). Even after he was evicted from the ME Cancun hotel for the fire extinguisher incident, he was still allowed to visit the rest of his roommates in their suite, but not allowed to sleep there. So he never did depart. Unlike his housemate Joey Rozmus, who was evicted after his firing from the group job, or Adam Royer (The Real World: Las Vegas (2011), who was completely barred from the Hard Rock Hotel and Casino for his drunken shenanigans, even when Royer returned for that season's 12th episode. As far as Brandon Kane (The Real World: St. Thomas), I feel that it is significant enough because of the serious offense that got him evicted. DPH1110 (talk) 06:24, 6 September 2012 (UTC)DPH1110

Notable people vs. Notable residents

I'm a bit agnostic on the topic, but Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline suggests that we use "Notable people" rather than "Notable people". I've never been one to slavishly adhere to a standard if it contradicts common sense as I see it, but I see no reason not to conform in this case and I have the change made automatically as I work my way through New Jersey articles. Any thoughts on the subject? Alansohn (talk) 20:20, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure that it's me that "insists", rather than the guideline, but I usually figure that if there is no good reason to ignore it, why not accept it? Alansohn (talk) 21:21, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

John P. O'Neill

Nightscream, thank you for your input and yes, I'm a wiki rookie editor. I will learn from my mistakes. Thanks for sending me the proper procedure. Bostonlad (talk) 14:31, 12 September 2012 (UTC)Bostonlad

User:68.3.67.81

Hello Nightscream, This one has become active after several months inactivity and looks to be the same editor editing in similar fashion. From the block log, you appear to be familiar with this and I thought you may want to review. Cheers,
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:20, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Spider-Man II response

I have read your response. Even if we add some info on the List of Ultimate Comics: Spider-Man story arcs, the people should still know about Miles' first encounter with Captain America and any other important events for him to come. Rtkat3 (talk) 2:16, September 12 2012 (UTC)

The Real World: St. Thomas Reunion

Yes the St. Thomas reunion did indeed air immediately after the season finale, I just forgot to include that. I have to leave for work now. DPH1110 (talk) 18:09, 14 September 2012 (UTC)DPH1110

I just added another summary involving the topics discussed. Feel free to "trim some fat" and/or make some tweaks. DPH1110 (talk) 19:11, 17 September 2012 (UTC)DPH1110

Asking a couple of WPC admins to weigh in

WikiProject Comics Manual of Style is silent on this, but countless examples exist of comics features, such as "Tales of Asgard" in Journey into Mystery or "Iron Man" in Tales of Suspense, being in quote marks, while the title of the comic-book itself is in italics. This follows the format of songs being in quote marks and albums in italics, or short stories being in quote marks and novels or collections being in italics.

There's a conversation going on at Talk:Judge Dredd about whether the Judge Dredd feature in the anthology comic 2000 AD should be in quote marks or italics. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:20, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Anthony Godby Johnson

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anthony_Godby_Johnson&curid=2614980&diff=513264043&oldid=512786171

I don't know how to make a header so don't need to notify me that this was not done right lol.

Anyways. You pointed out that I was wrong when I replaced "2006" with "2012" Because I had no sources.

Now, this is the sentence as It was before I corrected it, and as It is at this moment:

"In July 2006 ABC ran an update to the original 2007 story, which includes an 147-page response from Vicki Johnson's lawyer in response to ABC's questions about Steve Tarabokija."

Now, anyone with a common sense would realize that "IN JULY 2006 ABC RAN AN UPDATE TO THE ORIGINAL 2007" Makes no sense, as you can't run an update from a story that happened in the future. How the hell can ABC run an update from 2007 in July 2006?....

Maybe "2012" was not the correct answer, but I urge you to correct that illogical statement that stands as of right now.

Thank you. User:76.64.22.236 September 19, 2012

Da Vinci Code

sorry, the sources u r talkin about are in Gospel of Jesus' wife article, I haven't copie 'em yet.. --Ulisse0 (talk) 13:47, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Toure: Definite improvement

[1] Thanks! I couldn't think of a concise summary. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 19:02, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Wayne NJ

Your history of interference on the Wayne page (among other pages) has shown that in the pursuit of what, in your opinion, constitutes Wikipedia standards, you have hindered the proliferation of reliable and accurate data. To me this seems to be ultimate goal of the site, although it may not be yours. Perhaps it would better suit you to edit pages about topics on which you maintain some degree of knowledge, although your spotty history has shown that this may be impossible, given your record. Since, despite your confusing devotion to Wikipedia, you have little to contribute in terms of valuable content, you should seek to help those who do offer knowledge, and learn to interpret the guidelines in a way which allows you to accomplish this goal. 69.118.24.248 (talk) 00:43, September 23, 2012

Johnpacklambert and poorly-sourced article creation

What article that I created are you attacking me for it not being notavble? That seems like an over-the-top attack. Also, there are many articles in wikipedia that have no in-line citiations at all. I remain unconvinced that an in-line citiation is required for every single fact in a wikipedia article. Lastly, the fact that you have attacked me for edits which involved merely altering categories to reflect what is already in the body of the article just seems over-the-top and excessive. I really am trying to figure out how to get more opinions on this matter.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:47, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Robert Kirkman

Good call at Robert Kirkman. Guess it's not too hard to take a reasonable guess at who'd made that change! --Tenebrae (talk) 16:37, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

The latter one.

So I got my press pass for the NYCC. Maybe we'll manage to connect and say hi this year! --Tenebrae (talk) 22:34, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Civility issue with User:217.120.23.150

Hello, Nightscream. You have new messages at Czarkoff's talk page.
Message added 22:33, 26 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Nightscream. You have new messages at Czarkoff's talk page.
Message added 22:39, 26 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Surnames in The Real World articles

Hello. I don't know if you follow The Challenge as much as The Real World, but I'm possibly headed toward an edit war with another user, regarding using a contestant's full name in the initial cast table vs. only using their screen name in an initial cast table. On the Fresh Meat II article, the aforementioned main The Challenge article and Battle of the Seasons (2012) article, a user keeps changing Christian "CJ" Koegel to "CJ Koegel," when his real first name of "Christian" can be verified. Now I don't know if this policy is explained under WP:SURNAME. I think that if a player's first name can be verified, then it should be displayed with their last name (and nickname/initials, if one is available) in its first mention. Unlike CJ, we don't know the first (non-initial) name of JD Ordoñez or MJ Garrett. What's your take regarding this situation? Thanks. DPH1110 (talk) 07:05, 27 September 2012 (UTC)DPH1110

Yeah, he did the same thing to the Cancun article. The thing is, there was no citation in the cell containing his name, so I let it go, figuring I could put off the matter until later. So I looked just now at his bio in the Cancun article, and saw that one of the sources cited indeed supports his real given name. I restored it to all three articles, and added that cite. Nightscream (talk) 12:16, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

You are missing the point. Firstly, you and the other user continue to ignore my valid point that we do know JD's first name. It's Jesus. It's all over the Internet. Secondly, Paris is not the same. CT was credited as Chris his Real World season, then changed his on-screen credit after. CJ was always CJ on-air. This is in accordance with Wiki policy. Like J.D. Salinger, CJ Miles, and TJ Lavin. Ew0sdc (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:38, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

User:124.169.99.54 and feminisim-related article content: Revert, block, ignore

The IP most recently known as 124.169.99.54 is the latest iteration of an obsessive editor who is convinced that all feminists (and their dupes) are misandrists. His particular obsessions include articles on the Lifetime Channel, Women in Refrigerators, video game discussions, Anita Sarkeesian, and feminism itself. I've removed the discussion you tried to have with him (in which you were remarkably patient) in the Refrigerators article, on the WP:RBI principle; and I've blocked the IP address since it quacked so very loudly. I thought you deserved an explanation, of course. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:41, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Look at his editing history as User:203.206.73.28, as User:203.59.21.188, as User:124.148.247.133, as User:188.100.195.242 (same articles, same language, same obsession with "gender feminism" as "misandrist" [he loves that word]), to mention the four easiest to find. --Orange Mike | Talk 03:16, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Sarcastaball.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sarcastaball.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:24, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

South Park talk page policy notice box

Hello, Nightscream. You have new messages at Koavf's talk page.
Message added 05:33, 3 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:44, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Matt Bomer photo

I don't want to drag this out on the talk page of an article. I wrote a long rebuttal of every point you made, but it isn't worth it. The oddity of this situation is that we are in complete agreement on who gets to decide which image is used, yet you seem to think otherwise. I can't control what you think, and correcting your misunderstandings looks like more work than it is worth, so I'm moving on, unless you are interested in knowing what you got wrong.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 21:00, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Spider-Man's powers and equipment

On the Spider-Man Powers page, I didn't put in the part that said "wrong." I was just reverting the page to a previous version to get rid of the One More Day nonsense that'd been posted there, and that was part of the original page too.69.120.192.173 (talk) 18:58, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Raising the Bar (South Park)

Hi. Please to not replace properly-worded material with slang, as you did with this edit to Raising the Bar (South Park). Wikipedia must be written in a formal tone, without such informal wording. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 11:39 am, Yesterday (UTC−4)

I don't know... I think it was a well-fitting exception. And what would a democratically-steered wiki be without well-fitting exceptions? --MercWithMouth (talk) 11:16, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Well... I'm pleased to see you've given this a lot of thought. MercWithMouth (talk) 17:49, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, it doesn't take a lot of thought to know the difference between slang and non-slang. But just out of curiosity, what's with all the bullets? You a gun nut, or something? ;-)

Do a Google search on 'MercWithMouth'. Then... see here: http://imgur.com/50RUO MercWithMouth (talk) 18:04, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Phil Farrand's website, Nitcentral

You were/are on Nitcentral!?! (Just read your user page). Where you there for the Star Trek nits? If so, what nits did you come up with? I'm sure I read it! I read and still read those Star Trek books after getting them when they first came out. I like to see the first minute of an episode, figure out which one it is, then quickly scan the text in the appropriate book, and spend the rest of the espisode seeing if I can spot the identified nits. I can't believe you were one of the Nitcentral Guild!!! Those must have been some wild times. I wish I knew of it back then. I would have loved to hunt for Star Trek nits. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 04:34, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Dawn Marie Psaltis, revisited

Just curious, how do you 'square' the Jimbo quote I'm finding on your User page,

Seriously, anyone who puts [...] retaining terrible content above upholding ethical and legal commitments to integrity, accuracy, and protection of a person's reputation is quite simply a massive idiot. – Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales

with the fact that you argued at Talk:Dawn Marie Psaltis, in favor of retaining a scurrilous Youtube video accusing Dawn Marie Psaltis of fraud, plus adding a ref to a tacky wrestling blog that simply confirmed existence of the Youtube video?! While all in clear violation of BLP policy, even after this was pointed out to you (by a relative newbie, me)?! (I just couldn't help asking; please forgive. [So far you've been mute on the topic.]) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 01:48, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

FYI, I've responded at my Talk to your decision to attack me rather than provide an answer to the Q I posed. If you don't want to answer the Q, just say so. If you like to continue to personally attack me with accusations of being "obsessive", "child", etc., then that is an entirely different thing. To respond to my Q with personal attacks, apparently that's your idea of good Adminship?! Ihardlythinkso (talk) 06:00, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. As an uninvolved editor, I'd like to suggest that perhaps taking Avanu's advice and dropping this, might be a good idea for everyone at this point. - jc37 06:08, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Insecurity (South Park)

Hi Nightscream. Thanks for your improvements to Insecurity (South Park). As I said several times, I was well aware that the plot summary I wrote needed help. I hope you continue to assume good faith, cheers! Hoof Hearted (talk) 20:09, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

The Real World: Las Vegas

I have begun editing to The Real World: Las Vegas article, adding episode information, just as I did for the Denver article. I have already put in the episode table to save myself time from adding to it, if that's alright with you, and I'm just going to add the episode summaries after each time I watch one. I have already watched the first two episodes. I am sticking to the basic rules of editing, however, if you feel there is something wrong with my edits and they need to be corrected, feel free to do so, and I will not be offended. Arilicious (talk) 20:44, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello again. What I had meant to say regarding my most recent edit on the RW: Vegas article, was that Alton wanted to teach Irulan to handle situations better, since she and the other girls in the house had began calling Marc a molester, Alton didn't want them to get in trouble for starting rumours about someone that may not be true. Hope you understand. Arilicious (talk) 17:21, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that was what Alton said, he didn't want her or anybody spreading rumors about someone else. If you go to the reference link that I had put there, it explains it all. Arilicious (talk) 17:38, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Alton didn't want Irulan, nor the other girls, to get in trouble for starting this rumor probably because if the rumor were to have gotten bigger they all could get in trouble and Marc could lose his job? Do you get it now? That's what I got out of watching the show and reading the summary from MTV.com. Arilicious (talk) 17:54, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Because Irulan was the one that had been laying in bed with Marc, she was the one that began feeling uncomfortable, thinking he was creepy, in a molester type way, the other girls called him that, so yeah, when you think of it that way, Irulan was involved in calling him that. Arilicious (talk) 18:02, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that is what I've been saying the whole time. And the episodes are available on the show's official website, although I think only people in the US can view them.Arilicious (talk) 02:27, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

What's Up DudeGuyManBro???!!!

I wanted to ask a few questions about your wiki Wikipedia status. Like, what do you get for editing Wikipedia? Do you get paid? What's up with the name 'Nightscream'?because it sounds a bit too awesome for Wikipedia, and also, what's your motivation with Wikipedia? With much love bra, so-me ran-dom guy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.71.209.247 (talk) 22:31, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Request at WP:RFPP

Hi Nightscream, there is a unprotection request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection on a page which you gave indef semi-protected to in 2010. Would you be able to have a look at the request? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:07, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Replied to your comment on WP:RFPP. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:30, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

NY Comic Con follow-up

Hey, Night, how's is going? Did you get any new Wikipix at the NY Comic Con, or was it just people you've shot already?

I have a question. An editor with whom I had a contentious relationship — including his going through all my talk-page posts to put together clues to my identity, leading to an admin warning him about that sanctions that would follow "outing" another editor — has left me a talk-page message asking my opinion on an article that I, along with others, have edited. We've asked each other not to contact other another. I honestly don't know if he's trying to make peace or to initiate contact for some other reason that would make me regret re-engaging with him. (He's removed all his talk-page posts regarding me, and I don't want to stir things up by linking to old, deleted content, preferring to let water go under the bridge.)

I don't want to be impolite toward a gesture of good will, if it's genuine, but engaging with someone you shouldn't engage with isn't a good idea, either. I'm not quite sure why he feels he has to ask me this particular question rather than making what seems an innocuous edit. Any advice you might give, I'd appreciate. My goodness; have you ever run across anything like this? With regards, Tenebrae (talk) 23:07, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Saga (comic book)

You have initiated an individual reassessment for Saga (comic book), but I think you meant for it to be a community one. I had a quick look at it anyway and just have a few points to make. While you are right that reviewers are not infallible gospel and can be questioned, they are also volunteers within this volunteer project. They are in essence doing nominators a favour by reviewing the articles and are under no obligation to accept your questioning or continue a review they are no longer interested in. If it is a persistent problem then they can be brought to the talk page where advice and bans have been handed out before. However, Malleus is a long term reviewer and one of the most productive and capable reviewers in the project so I doubt anything would come of it. While it is a shame you two fell out he was within his rights to abandon the review.

As to the article you can put it up for a community reassessment (an individual one won't work as the person who initiated it is supposed to close it and you obviously can not close your own nomination). However, reassessment is not the best way to deal with poor or incomplete reviews. If there was a specific aspect of the criteria that was being debated then we can help out, but we don't generally conduct full reviews (that is what WP:GAN is for). It is up to you, but if you go through the community process chances are it will be closed with advice to renominate. My suggestion would be to bite the bullet and renominate it now. Another reviewer will eventually take it up and Malleus's comments will be present in the article history template for them peruse. Either way you should probably delete the Talk:Saga (comic book)/GA2 page. AIRcorn (talk) 05:24, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Jean-Claude Van Damme

Thanks for correcting me and pointing out my mistakes--Paniraja (talk) 23:27, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

I will. Thanks again!--Paniraja (talk) 23:40, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Legendary Pictures

Hi Nightscream! You put a link to Commons:Category:Legendary Pictures on Legendary Pictures (this edit). However, the category seems to be empty. Was there a purpose for this that I am not understanding? Regards, – Zntrip 01:34, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Okay, makes sense now. Thanks! – Zntrip 02:31, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Alejandra Pizarnik Suicide

Hi! I saw your message. I added a new source for the suicide of Pizarnik. Please check it and let me know if I did something wrong. Thanks.Maga.de.noche (talk) 22:37, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Mitt Romney's 2011 FEMA Comments in Hurricane Sandy

Hi Night, with all respect intended, this is from 2011 and about FEMA. When I put something in there about last year, an editor took it out and said, it was last year...even though I thought it had weight to be put in the article like evidently you did. I just think it's too political for an article that is supposed to be about a hurricane. Would think what you had would be great in the FEMA section under something like controversies. I just don't want a beautiful piece of work like the Sandy article to be bogged down with any kind of political stuff. That's why I didn't want global warning in it. I believe in climate change, but that's not the point. One can speculate all they want about IF warming caused anything at any time. That still won’t make it fact. Wikipedia is supposed to be unleaning and with your entry, I believe it leans, even if romney said it. Respectfully Submitted. Kennvido (talk) 09:59, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Zombie

Sorry, I clicked the wrong button, and reverted your image. I meant to add that there was no indication that it had anything to do with the contents of the article. Serendi^podous 13:14, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

I meant the lack of an edit summary. And I am sure that the image is germane to the topic; however, it is outside the scope of the article, which mentions none of those people. Serendi^podous 20:53, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

There are two main problems I have: 1. article creep. This article is about voodoo zombies, not "Romero" zombies, and there shouldn't be any reference to them beyond the single paragraph that already exists. If you feel the need to add the image, it would be better placed in Zombie (fictional), which is about "Romero" zombies. 2. How is an image of a group of people not mentioned in the article meant to aid or educate the reader? It means nothing out of context, and it is completely out of context. Serendi^podous 21:08, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

The other three paragraphs are about voodoo zombies in popular culture, not Romero zombies. I think the image fits well in Zombie (fictional), though its text could probably be better placed in the main body, assuming it survives the Red Pen of Doom. Serendi^podous 21:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Asgardian

Hi Nightscream. This IP user 24.1.246.28 asked me if I thought these two IP's were Asgardcian, [2] [3] . Any thoughts on any of it? Hiding T 16:31, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Todd Beamer

The citation I used does mention Todd Beamer. You just have to click on 2002 and it says Todd Beamer explicitly.[4] 108.1.98.138 00:00, November 11, 2012

Protection of Bayonne

The article for Bayonne, New Jersey is currently hard protected against editing by any non-administrator until October 7, 2013, due to persistent vandalism. I'm not sure that there ever were enough edits to the article to justify persistent vandalism, as the article had only 2 edits in October, 8 in September and 4 in August, which would hardly seem to justify a block. It would seem that the current block should either be ended or significantly limited in scope so that legitimate edits can be made to the article. Alansohn (talk) 21:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for making the protection change. I mostly updated and tweaked, but take a look at the article with a good Hudson County perspective. Alansohn (talk) 01:25, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Your behavior at Talk:A Scause for Applause, SPI

Thanks for your follow up at Talk:A Scause for Applause, here. I am concerned, however, about your lack of civility and your sarcasm - you are better than that, and a perusal of your past edits implies that this sort of reply is simply beneath you. Compare your attitude on that page with your RfA: I always try to conduct myself with logic and reason, and without responding to uncivil behavior by others with similar behavior on my part... walk the talk man. As a reminder, article talk pages are for discussion of content, not editors. You seemed annoyed at me attempting to shift the conversation on the article talk page back towards the article which I still view as the appropriate course of action; I think there was a missed opportunity there for face-saving and deescalation between you and the other editor. As an admin, you should commit to going above and beyond with respect to behavior, a concept with which I think you agree. Thank you for considering my feedback, and I look forward to working with you again in the future.

On a tangentially related note, your input is invited at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hearfourmewesique. VQuakr (talk) 00:27, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Nightscream. You have new messages at VQuakr's talk page.
Message added 06:28, 12 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

VQuakr (talk) 06:28, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Lazenby

Hi Nightscream, I was quoting the previous editor and (although I agree with him) I appreciate the comment regarding notability. It does, however, seem to fail WP:WEIGHT in my opinion. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 13:17, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Our South Park friend

Isn't the username a clear violation of policy (under disruptive or offensive)? BusterD (talk) 04:00, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

You aren't very welcoming to new editors, BusterD. Also, YOUR username offends ME.O. long johnson (talk) 03:19, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

How to Cite a web video

I read up on citing sources, yet I am still confused...

I know that I need to place an inline citation using a ref tag. But the only example is for a book. How exactly would I type one for "Film, TV, or video recording"? Where do I place each piece of information (and the URL) in the string of code? Birdy29 (talk) 07:27, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WIKIINK listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:WIKIINK. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:WIKIINK redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 16:33, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Neutral notice

There is a discussion involving WikiProject Comics at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Grand Comics Database that may be of interest to you. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:48, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Nicole Atkins: Neptune City vs. Neptune Township

All of New Jersey's paired municipalities pose issues in distinguishing between two municipalities with nearly identical names, especially when sources are usually ambiguous in distinguishing between the two. I couldn't be any gladder that the two Princetons are consolidating, not least because it has been impossible to determine in which one of the two the notables live. I'll grant you that Danny Devito might well be from Neptune Township, New Jersey -- not Neptune City, New Jersey -- despite the fact that the source moved from the city article to the one for the township says that "DeVito was born in Neptune, N.J." But Nicole Atkins has been a bizarre case. There have been other battles about her residence, with you putting forth the position (joined by others) that she wrote an album title "Neptune City", but that she is from Neptune Township. The biggest problem here is that the source you moved from the city article to the township article (see this edit) says rather clearly that "Nicole Atkins, from Neptune City, N.J., is a marvelously talented fantasist..." This source, from The New York Times, seems to be rather clear in refering to a place of residence, not a title of an album. As I have in the past, I searched for sources supporting her residence in Neptune Township in Google / News / Archives and found none. Nor can I figure out why no source has ever mentioned the discrepancy between the album title and her place of residence, which seems to be an obvious way to go for any one covering her and trying to find an angle. As I see it -- solely based on the source provided -- she is from Neptune City. Your edit summaries of "She is from Neptune TOWNSHIP, NJ, not Neptune City." and "Wrong. She's from Neptune Township, not Neptune City. The cited source does not indicate that the album's title is necessarily a reference to where she is from." simply state what you believe to be correct without any evidence to support the claim or explain the discrepancy. I don't have any reason to believe that you are wrong, but the absence of a source to rebut the rather clear statement in the source provided is problematic, at a minimum. As I see it, the entry for Atkins as a notable should stay in the Neptune City article based on the strength of the source, until and unless other strong sources can be identified that establishes her residence in Neptune Township. Do you have any ideas on how to deal with this, or any better sources to settle the issue? Alansohn (talk) 19:34, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes

I'm calling on your powers as an admin with anti-vandalism experience and familiarity with the comics world, and because we've often edited some of the same stuff on Wikipedia. There's an editor, Dominusexmachina, who is demonstrating some irksome ownership issues at Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes by insisting on some edits that introduce grammar errors. This mostly involves the use of "composed" vs. "comprised" [5][6][7][8] (I share Giraffedata's frustration with this problem), but it also involves the occasional incorrect comma placement and other minor issues. I have reverted these errors numerous times, and even left a polite (if exasperated) explanation on the user's talk page,[9] but he appears determined to institute language he wants, regardless of its incorrectness, by reverting my fixes either under his username or under a couple of IP addresses (editing under the IPs completely matches the editing of Dominusexmachina and totally passes the quack test [10][11]). Most of their edits appear to be perfectly constructive but involve lots of minor wordsmithing rather than genuine contributions, which is why this feels like WP:OWN.

At this point, since the editor has ignored the warning on his talk page, doesn't use edit summaries, and is consistently reverting corrections that I and other editors [12][13] have made to incorrect grammar and mechanics, it'd be helpful to have an admin weigh in and intervene as necessary.

Sorry to trouble you with what seems like minor stuff, but I'll admit I've gotten irritated with this editor's refusal to cooperate or collaborate. Thanks. Grandpallama (talk) 15:52, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for stepping in, and Happy Holidays to you, as well! Grandpallama (talk) 17:06, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Although he now appears to be leaving composed/comprised alone, he's still at it, reverting to his preferred version regardless of its correctness (or lack thereof).[14] Grandpallama (talk) 15:26, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Jamal Igle

Jamal Igle is listed on the DC Comics website as the colorist on a number of their titles, listed on his profile page.http://www.dccomics.com/talent/jamal-igle 24.90.206.78 (talk) 22:56, November 28, 2012‎

Mike Lilly

Hello, my name is Mike Lilly. I tried to update my Wikipedia listing and all of it got rejected. I'm the actual comic book artist Mike Lilly. The information that was deleted was substituted with inaccurate information. My email is mikelillyart@gmail.com How can inaccurate information be given but not from the actual artist themselves? All the information I provided is accurate and true. You can look up any of those credits and see my name attached as the actual artist. How can I put up an accurate listing if the best source is the artist themselves? Like for example you said my award was not something that could be verified? I have it hanging on my wall. Do I have to go and contact the actual award people who handed it to me at the ceremony? Would a picture of the award suffice? And again, how can the listing for me on the site (which is inaccurate, lot's of credits left out acceptable but not mine, the actual artist?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.199.93.125 (talk) 05:34, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC this Saturday Dec 1

Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC

You are invited to Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC, an editathon, Wikipedia meet-up and workshops focused on film and the performing arts that will be held on Saturday, December 1, 2012, at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts (at Lincoln Center), as part of the Wikipedia Loves Libraries events being held across the USA.

All are welcome, sign up on the wiki and at meetup.com!--Pharos (talk) 07:33, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Flash mob

The community decided to exclude examples from the article flash mob to bring it in line with articles such as protest, fire, performance, etc. While there have been many notable flash mobs, protests, fires, and performances, examples are explicitly excluded as the same found in most encyclopedia's. If the event itself is notable enough for inclusion then a separate sub-article can be written about it. The reason the first flash mobs are included are because they are directly linked with the founding of it. Various discussions of this can be found in the archival talk pages of the article. Lastly, its arguable that the big bang "flash mob" wasn't really a flash mob. The fact that it was a part of the show and created for it and by professionals do not meet the definition directly. For example, a protest on a television series and a protest in real life are very different. Just like an episode made to look like a flash mob and an actual flash mob are very different things. Mkdw^talk 20:25, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Your message

Hi, I just noticed you left me a message back in August, to which I never replied. My apologies. I was on a wikibreak for about a year-and-a-half, and only popped in briefly a few times. Your message concerned Ancestry.com, and discussion about whether it is a reliable source. If that hasn't been sorted yet, please let me know and I'll contribute my thoughts. (I assume it's been settled though.) I certainly do not regard that site as a reliable source. The only exception is that the site excerpts entries (which they've obviously paid for) from the Oxford Dictionary of American Family Surnames, which is, as the title suggests, a highly reliable source. Other than that, nothing on Ancestry is remotely reliable, in my opinion. Again, sorry for the delay in getting back to you. Best regards, MarmadukePercy (talk) 21:29, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks much for letting me know, and Happy Holidays to you and yours as well! :) MarmadukePercy (talk) 22:04, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Diallo Shooting

Sorry about the unsourced edit and grammar error. I was doing multiple things at once and was going to come back to the page but never did. At any rate it's been fixed now. I want you to know that I didn't mean to upset anybody or undermine Wikipedia. My intention was to improve the site, even if that's not the effect my actions had. Again, sorry. Have a good one. 141.161.119.250 (talk) 15:26, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Corey Clark

Nightscream, should the fact that Clark is suing MTV be listed under legal troubles? Seems to me that would be more of a legal remedy for Clark than a trouble. This at the very least is an indication that what Clark has been saying for so many years may actually have some substance to it do you agree? Should I create a new section for legal remedies? Please advise since it seems you have an extensive knowledge of the subject and look to be pretty invested in the tailoring of the article about him as well. 98.240.97.139 (talk) 19:48, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Pawn Stars episode order

hi nightscream, they may have aired it wrong, but if you go back and rewatch the episodes (history website when they put it up or if you have on demand) you will see chumlee reference in the video game deal, about his real life skills of shooting guns on the show. And they include the clip from the PREIVOUS episode of the hat bet. Therefore it would be after the episode not before.

Sylvia Browne

You twice deleted an addition to the Sylvia Browne page saying: "The words "Obama" and "re-elected" don't even appear anywhere on that page."

The first time I thought it was an error. The second time, I'm wondering if you lying about either looking at the article or undertanding it.

From http://www.goerieblogs.com/news/writersblock/2011/10/my-and-sylvia-browne-2012-predictions/ :

Here are some of her predictions:

1) President Obama will not get re-elected. While not a fan, she favored Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts.

That is the third paragraph of the article. You can use control F to find the word "Obama."

Please take the time to read the article before deleting it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AbbeenPP (talk • contribs) 20:56, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

I added the Erie Times-News source. I'm not adding the ABC News page. It was there before. Your sloppy removal messed up the tags.

Please take some time and look 1) at what's being added before you remove it and 2) look at what you removed. AbbeenPP (talk) 22:01, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

WP:BURDEN

While it may be "commonly done" for an article to claim that a person is "known for" or "best known for"; without a source stating that the person is "known for" or "best known for", it is WP:OR and not allowed by policy. An actors appearance in a movie can verify that the actor appeared in the movie. But that is all it can verify. and that is what my phrasing does. An actors appearance in the movies most assuredly cannot verify that the person is "known" for that role. and no, I do not plan on setting on a quest to remove the 60,000 improper articles, but i will fix any articles that make such unsupported claims when I come across them. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 04:08, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

There is a GREAT difference between saying "He appeared in X" and "He is known for his role in X".

Ian McKellen appeared in Lady Grey London, but to state that "Ian McKellenis known for his appearance in Lady Grey London." is not a claim that is verifiable solely by his appearance in that production. In fact such a claim would be a complete fallacy, despite the fact that McKellen is certainly in Lady Grey London [15] . Without a third party reliable source making the claim that a person is "known for" a role, such claims should not be in Wikipedia articles and cannot be restored without a source that supports the claim. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:30, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

If you still believe that there is no semantic difference between "he appeared in " and "he is known for" and think that the mere appearance in a movie is sufficient verification for the claim that McKellenis known for his appearance in Lady Grey London you may take whatever steps you feel are necessary to convince you otherwise. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:20, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

I spotted this discussion, and, while I agree with you that the phrasing is common, I'm going to take RPoD's side that it actually is a WP:OR violation, especially in the variation "best known for ...". Simply saying that the person "appeared" in the works in question is infinitely preferable. There's no judgement being made about impact or notability. I'd like to see the "known for" terminology scrubbed out of our leads.—Kww(talk) 21:17, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Would you say that that reflects the community? Nightscream (talk) 21:23, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't think the issue has ever come up. It certainly represents the letter and spirit of WP:OR, so I would never revert an editor that changed "known for" to "appeared in". It's one of those stylistic quirks that got copied from some of our early articles until it took root as a part of the common Wikipedia style. The phrasing has never bothered me enough to go for an RFC on the topic, but I'd be willing to bet that the community could be persuaded to see it as a WP:OR violation. Technically, it's a WP:BLP violation, so any editor that makes that change has a pretty good foundation for claiming that he is free to ignore consensus based on the overwhelming power that screaming "WP:BLP!" always lends to what should be a routine editorial decision.—Kww(talk) 21:30, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

• Though I am not active any more because of that kind of matters. My question is that, when some phrase or passage has to be figure out, and result is "known for" or any thing els, how can be that WP:OR?. There is also a policy use common sense or ignore all rules. We should not apply the policy I do not like it. I understand the piont of Nightscream.-Justice007 (talk) 21:56, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Appreciation for your excellent copy-editing last night on the True Grit (2010 film) article  –  – Gareth Griffith-Jones |The Welsh Buzzard| 08:56, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Re: Iron Man's armor

The term "arc reactor" has not been used in the comics, yet. But has the same functions (generator of repulsor energy) and design of the one from the movie, also, Stark no longer possesses the Extremis virus in his body, he lost it during Secret Invasion. BTW, I've been contributing to Wikipedia since a long time, more than 3 years, I guess, but I stayed away for sometime focusing on the Marvel Wikia, of which I've become an admin recently. --Dourron (talk) 22:08, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Free rein

I certainly won't revert your removal of the indefinite article from "a free rein" at Peter David; but sources as respectable as Oxford and Collins regard the use of the article as an acceptable option. Ammodramus (talk) 14:11, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

BOZ (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Tenebrae (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

What can I say? Our old buddy BOZ had a great idea! --Tenebrae (talk) 16:53, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the Holiday wishes, hope you are having a great holiday as well.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 18:17, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy Happy Joy Joy

Season's Greetings, Nightscream! At this wonderful time of year, I would like to give season’s greetings to all the fellow Wikipedians I have interacted with in the past! May you have a wonderful holiday season! MarnetteD | Talk 19:33, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

• Also best wishes for your 2013 and happy editing whenever possible :-) MarnetteD | Talk 19:33, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

True Grit

Greetings! Gareth Griffith-Jones – The WelshBuzzard – is wishing you the season's greetings.
Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's solstice or Christmas,
Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus,
or the Saturnalia,
this is a special time of year for (almost) everyone.

Hi!
 –
 – Gareth Griffith-Jones |The Welsh Buzzard|
gives you this puppy!
Puppies promote WikiLove and I hope this little fellow/girl ^{(your choice)} has made your day better.
Remember! Your puppy must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever.

Merry Christmas and a happy 2013
20:10, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Delighted to receive your greeting –
 – Gareth Griffith-Jones |The Welsh Buzzard|

Doctor Octopus

whoah! 24.12.74.21 (talk) 06:07, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

How else can people know his different plots if some of the television shows he was in doesn't have a character page? Also, "Updating history" and Updating media appearance" were my common Edit Summary comments outside of "Creating new page" and "Do you have proof of the information I just removed." What comment do you want me to replace the former two with? Rtkat3 (talk) 10:52, December 26 2012 (UTC)

How will this help with my last question? Rtkat3 (Rtkat3) 11:46, December 27 2012 (UTC)

So you want me to go with "Adding detail to history" and "Adding detail to media appearance" then! Outside of that, the Wikias already have their common drop-down details which can be chosen to go with the submitted info. Maybe Wikipedia will do that someday alongside the Message Walls that replaced the talk pages on Wikia. Rtkat3 (talk) 11:27, December 26 2012 (UTC)

Well then have a Happy New Year too. Rtkat3 (talk) 11:51, December 26 2012 (UTC)

I tried to get him to break down this edit so I could actually follow what he was doing (even explained myself on the article talk page) but I wound up giving up out of frustration. 129.33.19.254 (talk) 19:22, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Sorry I've been out of touch this last week. Thanks for the nice greeting. BusterD (talk) 23:51, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Ultimate Spider-Man-response

I was only trying to spice up the plot by mentioning who makes up the Avengers in that show as the reference lists who makes it up as well as mentioning on what Norman Osborn and Doctor Octopus were making plans on the capture of Spider-Man. Rtkat3 (Rtkat3) 11:06, December 31 2012 (UTC)

I understand what you just wrote. I'm now asking how you and I can make an improvement on the first season's main plot before Season Two debuts. Rtkat3 (talk) 11:21, December 31 2012 (UTC)

I understand what you just wrote just now. I was also mentioning about getting the first season's main plot modified before Season Two debuts next month. Rtkat3 (talk) 11:30 December 31 2012 (UTC)

I see what you mean on your user contributions page with the different edit summary comments. I'll figure out a way to make common versions of the specific brief summaries by the time 2013 starts tomorrow. Rtkat3 (talk) 11:50, December 31 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Celebration and Mini-Conference in NYC Saturday Feb 23

Doing the "Open Space" thing at one of our earlier NYC Wiki-Conferences.

You are invited to celebrate Wikipedia Day and the 12th anniversary (!) of the founding of the site at Wikipedia Day NYC on Saturday February 23, 2013 at New York University; sign up for Wikipedia Day NYC here, or at bit.ly/wikidaynyu. Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues!

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience!--Pharos (talk) 02:56, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Comic characters categories

When you created Wikimedia Commons categories such as Category:Blade and his cast, Category:Hulk and his cast, Category:Iron Man and his cast, and so on, what did the phrase "and his cast" mean? — O'Dea (talk) 16:59, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Photo

I wish that I'd taken that picture, but it came from a photographer I've been in contact with for several years now. He's provided hundreds of photos to Wikipedia, and they seem to improve in quality each year. I have a DLSR and highly recommend it. I'm just never in situations where I'd get to photograph celebrities... --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 17:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

That looks like it would be a lot of fun, great job on adding that many photos! I did go to Comic-Con this year, but only for a couple of hours and didn't make it to any of the panels. I believe GageSkidmore has a press pass for the event and he gets some really great photos from the panels. I usually only photograph other events I go to, but haven't really uploaded that much of my own photos recently. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 18:00, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Mind MGMT

I'm hoping to get this article up to GA or better quality, and any help or suggestions you could give would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Argento Surfer (talk) 21:39, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Ha, no. Just a happy coincidence. If I'd been following all those, I'd've asked sooner! Argento Surfer (talk) 21:54, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for all the suggestions! Argento Surfer (talk) 14:27, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Dan Brown

Sorry, what's the problem here? Brown's book is listed on Amazon, with a release date of May 2013.[16] Why are you challenging something so basic? Sources of course need to be provided for information that is challenged, but this seems an odd thing to issue an "Original Research" warning for. --Elonka 06:09, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Fight of the Century

Thank you for your instructions on sourcing and citations, I found them to be most helpful, and will do my best to follow them in the future.

The quotation that you removed from the Fight of the Century page was not taken from an Ali-Frazier I Film, but rather a documentary entitled Thriller in Manila which documented the entirety of the Ali-Frazier saga. The quotation cited was read by the narrator, Liev Schreiber, and takes place in the first 45 seconds of the clip that can be found at the following link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IbTi9ZUPbE Thank you again for your help. LawrenceJayM 06:52, 17 January 2013 (UTC)06:52, 17 January 2013 (UTC)06:52, 17 January 2013 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by LawrenceJayM (talk • contribs)

Ira Flatow

I see that you recently worked on Ira Flatow. I was listening to Science Friday, which took me to his article. I decided to source all of the information in it. I removed some early life stuff because it was in none of the sources in the article and I could find nothing on the Internet to verify it. I rewrote a number of the sentences because they were copy and pasted from sources. I think now, at least, all of the information in it is verified by reliable sources.--I am One of Many (talk) 10:37, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Asgardian_appeal

Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard#BASC:_Asgardian_appeal. As you were involved in edit wars with Asgardian you may be interested in commenting. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 00:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Well done. It's a shame anybody has to remember where to find all those examples of A's past behavior in order to link them. Your comments on his talk page were smart and showed either a great memory or a great ability to hunt that junk down. Best wishes. Doczilla _STOMP! 07:49, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Footnote

After being away for about a week, I've responded to your followup on the footnote location issue on my talk page. I'm not going to revert you on the article right now...but it seems to me that the guideline you yourself cited seems to support my version. Let me know what you think. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:58, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rick Rescorla, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Columbine Massacre (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Gene the Dean

Thanks for the head's up. Man, I had a typo in every one of those three cites! Hoping you're well and shutterbugging away! --Tenebrae (talk) 02:26, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Holy fuck. I am so, so sorry to hear that. But data-recovery guys, they're good. Even after stuff gets deleted, a lot of it stays on the hard drive somehow. I hope they retrieve it. And y'know, external hard drives for backup are really cheap these days — I got a 2 terrabtye drive for about $200 like four or five years ago, and you can probably get four times that memory for the same price now. (I'm not wild about storing my stuff on the cloud, though I do for some stuff.) Fingers crossed for you, buddy. --Tenebrae (talk) 02:43, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank goodness for family! --Tenebrae (talk) 03:19, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Ultimate Spider-Man-related

Hey Nightscream, have you noticed that the episode list for Ultimate Spider-Man is on view source mode due to an edit war. This prevents me from correcting the link to Rhino. I have enjoyed the Season Two premiere episodes which featured Lizard and Electro (who was revealed in the credits to be voiced by Christopher Daniel Barnes). The episode debuting that show's version of Rhino is going to be tomorrow. If you have seen the two episodes this past Monday, what do you think of them? Rtkat3 (talk) 4:00, January 26 2013 (UTC)

The C in "comics" has been capitalized when it should be lower-cased. I think the episode page should be under it's semi-protected page so that the contributers can add more details to the episodes. Especially when it comes to detailing the upcoming episode featuring Rhino. Rtkat3 (talk) 4:30, January 26 2013 (UTC)

Semi-Protected so that registered users can go on that page while the anonymous can't. Does that help with your question? Rtkat3 (talk) 4:55, January 26 2013 (UTC)

You're right about the edit war that LoveWaffle was involved in with an anonymous user. The administrator DeltaQuad was the one who put the page on View Source mode in the first place. Rtkat3 (talk) 5:33, January 26 2013 (UTC)

I have just seen your recent work there. Rtkat3 (talk) 7:33, January 26 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Star Trek into Darkness

Hi, Night. You or another admin might want to stop by Star Trek into Darkness. Though every mainstream periodical from Time to The New York Times, plus the filmmakers themselves, spells it in non-standard form with a capital I ("Star Trek Into Darkness"), editors on the talk page reached a compromise that opens the article with "Star Trek into Darkness" (styled as "Star Trek Into Darkness)."

Virtually every editor on the talk page was willing to go with that compromise solution in order to reach stability and peace. Exactly one editor disagrees, and against consensus doesn't want to allow the compromise. I wouldn't ask for help during the debate over lowercase/uppercase "into," but now that a consensus compromise has been reached and one editor is trying to wreck it, I thought it'd be good to get an admin's opinion. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:38, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Couldn't have said it better myself. I know — it's lunacy. Probably if you go to the section titled "Actually..." and go down from there you'll get the gist. Believe me, I'm embarrassed to ask, but given all the sturm und drang I think a lot of people there just want to have some peace and move on. Oy! --Tenebrae (talk) 02:40, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

As indeed I'd already done; despite the length of the thread, it was mostly only about a half-dozen people involved. I dunno — I've always gotten the impression Wikipedia encourages compromise and discourages absolutistism on contentious issues. One editor trying to veto a compromise that even five editors want doesn't seem right to me. Still and all, it's important that a sensible admin outside the discussion be aware, especially given the high-profile subject. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:18, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I was looking at the most frequent and involved recent commenters — the discussion had gone on since at least Dec. 11 — so I probably should have been clearer that I was talking about the editors currently involved. As you note, quite rightly, eight or nine people supporting a compromise and one against would seem a consensus.

You admirably examined the page with more detail than I did, and we ultimately reached the same, I believe sensible, conclusion. Ay yi yi — or should I say, "I I I" ~!   --Tenebrae (talk) 19:59, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Dude! Have you seen what's going on at (what is now, at least) Star Trek Into Darkness? Apparently a couple of websites latched on to the debate and made satirical hay out of it. It is pretty freaking hilarious! And just think — we were there in the beginning!   : )   --Tenebrae (talk) 03:57, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Just read the Australian article (which was very well and veyr knowledgeably written; seems Andrew Ramadge is quite a respected tech and music journalist), and ... wow, just ... wow! What a great read.

Green or not, you did good then. You did exactly what someone needed to do. And I think you did the right thing again at the Trek article, leaving the compromise version up that, ultimately, gave people a choice on the article page itself. I don't envy all the extra work an admin takes on, having to make Solomonic decisions in often moronic arguments (and smart arguments, too — I just couldn't resist the rhyming parallel!). My hat is off to you, bro'. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:17, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

You're admirably humble, and while I'm sure a lot of it is the type of housekeeping you note, that's still a lot of work. I've said consistently through the years that you guys deserve a lot of credit for taking on the extra burden. (I wish I were more selfless in that regard, though I do put in much time helping, I think, to better this altruistic free encyclopedia,) --Tenebrae (talk) 18:56, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Ultimate Spider Man And LoveWaffle

hey m8 can you plz tell that stupid lovewaffle guy to stop removing my info as vandalism and unsourced stuff when they clearly are sourced and not vandalism's if you can plz do it coz it will be a big help. i've been putting info to that page since s01 and never had to deal with a jerk like this guy :( 175.157.1.119 (talk) 04:13, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Talk: Star Trek Into Darkness

I appreciate that you thought that you were doing the right thing when you refactored my titled thread but, as an admin, you are aware of the inherently problematic issues surrounding refactoring the posts of others. You claimed that you did so to make it less uncivil. However, your altered title did not reflect the frustration inherent in the post that I felt with an overly stupid stalemate as to grammar and spelling use. I have been here in Wikipedia a while and know what I am doing. My post was designed to accomplish three very specific tasks. First among them was to embarrass and shame the crap out of a small group of editors engaged in a protracted and utterly WP:LAME edit-war over whether a single word in the title should be capitalized or not. The second purpose of the admittedly provocative title and post was to dislodge the loggerhead of polarized views and bring about a solution. Thirdly was to discover where the sources of polarity where originating. I think there is little doubt as to who those agents of polarity are now. I actually knew who one of them was before I even posted, as I had dealt with their behavior before. Shining a light on their behavior was just a bonus.
I do not appreciate any refactoring of my posts; at least, not without contacting me first, so I can address the matter or at least explain via email my intent. I know you had the best intentions in refactoring my subject title, but I would ask you to make more of an effort to talk to me before you do so, in the future. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 17:43, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

And I would appreciate you not characterize my action as admitting to incivility; it was no such thing. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 20:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Btw, I apologize for taking up space on your talk page with the Shiney bit. I don't have that many buttons to push (at least, not that many that are easily accessible), but Shiney managed to push some of them. I should have simply withdrawn or boarded it after the first request to stop. Again, sorry. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 16:59, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

I too apologise for the back and forth on your page. MisterShiney ✉ 19:42, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

No problem at all

You were nice enough to let me know in a straightforward, constructive way ... and hey, you are a buddy!

I'm amazed the IPs appear to originate in different states since the first two numbers and the edit were identical; makes me wonder if it's some computer whiz (this is the King of the Nerds article, after all) who used proxies or packets or whatever they call those things to prevent IP addresses from being easily traced.

I'll try the level-1 image next time there's a similar situation. Thanks, NS! With regards,-- Tenebrae (talk) 15:20, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

The Courtier's Reply

There seem to be problems with The Courtier's Reply, see also Talk:The Courtier's Reply In sorting these problems I think I need help from Wikipedians who are more familiar with the very complex rules and guidelines here than I am. Proxima Centauri (talk) 18:40, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

I note you spent nearly 2 hours sorting out The Courtier's Reply, thanks. Proxima Centauri (talk) 08:53, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Jonathan Frid

Hi. I just noticed this was taken off the article on Mr. Frid. Any reason on why? I put a lot of heart into what I do on here. http://www.hamiltonnews.com/news/remembering-jonathan-frid/ Hired Ghoul (talk) 00:33, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Martin Freeman

Hi, thanks for the advice on the edit I had made, I've re-made it, and have used a source, I used the template to make it, and I'm not entirely sure what some of the fields mean, such as the "first name" field; could you please explain them if you have time? Thanks, Meeeeeeee39 (talk) 07:20, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Neutral notice

As a veteran WikiProject Comics editor, you're invited to a discussion at Talk:Marvel ReEvolution#Merger proposal. --Tenebrae (talk) 10:28, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Short film style guides

I don't know where you got the idea that short films are quoted rather than italicized, but this is not the case. Per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films), "film titles, like the titles of books and other works of art, are always italicized." Please do not change these again. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:19, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Itzkoff, Dave

A tag has been placed on Itzkoff, Dave, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a nonexistent page.

If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Michaelm55 (talk) 17:05, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Secaucus, New Jersey

I am sorry that I am still amking mistakes. All the info I listed is confirmed in the attaced source.. I dont understand. I guess if you are a novice a wikipidia, then you have nothing of importance to add? Just a little help here? Weinhack (talk) 16:54, 13 February 2013 (UTC)]]

Disambiguation link notification for February 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jae Lee, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Paul Jenkins and One-shot (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

WP:BLPPRIMARY and Gene Colan

I'm not sure how that part of the BLP policy applies to Colan, since he is deceased? 129.33.19.254 (talk) 20:34, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Mark Bingham

Can someone explain this aversion to crediting the AUTHORS of sources? Or why the access date is indicated but not the publication date, which is far more important[17]

I don't have an aversion at all, just making mistakes that a new contributor / editor / WikiGnome novice should be
RobinInTexas (talk) 18:39, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Saga (comic)

While I appreciate your concern for vandalism, you have mistaken my edit for vandalism. But Urban Fantasy is a genre, and I believe that it's a genre the Saga comics fit in very well and would be a better way to describe them in the article besides the generic term of just Fantasy. 98.236.11.198 (talk) 04:47, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Accessdate/publication date

I saw your edit summary on Ray Comfort, and I'm wondering why you think that accessdate is only needed when there's no publication date? Date of access is required in both MLA and APA citation format; why wouldn't you think we should use it here? I do agree that we should add publication date when available, but I think that accessdate should always be used for internet sources. The point is that you're declaring to the reader (here or in an academic paper), "I'm citing what I read on the page as of such and such a date, but due to the ability for stuff on the internet to change, it's possible the page was different either before or after I accessed it." Qwyrxian (talk) 15:27, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Celeste Anderson

First, I want to thank you for your expertise in the Wikipedia style, and your will to contribute so much of your time into improving Wikipedia articles. You can probably tell that I'm an inexperienced Wikipedia editor, so excuse my naivety. Second, I was wondering about an edit summary note you posted, "spaces go before cite, not after." I'm not quite sure what you meant by that so if you could show me, that would be great. Thanks. Kyudan2 (talk) 19:29, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Scott Allie

I agree with you that the image first provided by Scott Allie was not an improvement, even if he preferred it. I requested that he provide a better image, which he has done. I hope you agree. See more at Talk:Scott_Allie#Image_choice.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 16:58, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Bill Biggart

This is my last warning about your deletes without discussion. If you have a problem with material I have added, talk first. If you do not stop, I will report you for edit warring. Crtew (talk) 14:48, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

If you have a problem with material I have added, talk first. Wrong. If you want to add material in an article that isn't about that article subject, which violates both policy and basic, common sense guidelines about good article writing, then it is you who has to justify doing so to the rest of the editing community, and only after the discussion to that effect has concluded. Given your apparent ignorance of various policies and guidelines, you have zero authority or credibility to be issuing warnings to anyone, any more than you have to be giving orders to other editors, as you did repeatedly on the Biggart talk page. But if you really think that another admin will look upon your behavior kindly, then be my guest and "report" me all you want. Nightscream 16:23, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Regarding your talk section

Hello there, there must have been a mistake in here, but I don't remember ever talking to you, or ever editing Bill Biggart or its talk page (or else you removed my edits from the log), and yes, if I have warned you, in fact you probably engaged into a edit war and I'm well aware of its policy, when two, three or more editors engage into edit war it is customary to notify the relevant parts and proceed to 3RR noticeboard. And wikipedia is based on consensus, if someone edits something, a resolution must be followed, so if there is ever a problem with anything I do, please tell me or talk to me. I'm going to appreciate your feedback. Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 16:56, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Nightscream, are you sure your comment on my talk page was directly forwarded to me, I'm still confused of what wrong I have done. Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 17:03, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey there, lol, you really scared me, I could put that on village stocks tho, anyway, that made me lol. Regards Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 17:16, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Firsthand

I weighed in, but these things keep growing more awkward for me. I organized a Comic-Con panel with Scott. I'd have stayed out of it rather than dropping names (because that could get old), but the photo I'd have picked for a stranger just doesn't look as much like him. Doczilla _{@SUPERHEROLOGIST} 09:27, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Contradiction

Just curious, doesn't your user quote contradict your vehement protection of pages for "internet famous" people you happen to like? 24.114.252.242 (talk) 17:30, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Consensus proposal

Nightscream, If you can agree to get rid of any reference of the word ONLY in WP:Bill Biggart or any appearance that he was the single media-related death, then I think I'm willing to come to a consensus. I just can't stand to think of the word ONLY there or the appearance of it while 7 other people are forgotten. That's my only motive here. But if you can see to it to agree to change the language as other people (cool, less passionate minds) are telling us, then I'm willing to let go of this (I'm persistent as hell ;-) as you are)! I'm also willing to let bygones be bygones. In fact, I'll buy you a beer at a Wikipedia-sponsored event (This is no way meant as a bribe.), or if you don't imbibe than a tea or coffee. One more favor -- Please don't give me a long-winded answer with colors, bolds or italics :-), hahaha.Crtew (talk) 22:57, 7 March 2013 (UTC)