User talk:JTBX: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 15:50, 28 April 2012

Welcome!

Hello, JTBX, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ~~~~; this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! JTBX (talk) 20:04, 10 February 2008 (UTC) (From myself Lol no admin sent this to me :( )[reply]

Re: The PlayStation 2 conflict

I've replied at User talk:Dancter#The PlayStation 2 conflict to avoid fragmented discussion. Dancter 17:20, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied both at User talk:Dancter#PS2 and at Talk:PlayStation 2#Intro. Please direct further discussion of this dispute to the latter thread. Dancter 23:04, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PlayStation 2 intro

Before revert see the Talk:PlayStation 2#Intro my edit is fully explained there. --Ciao 90 11:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FROM THE PS2 TALK PAGE:

Pure numbers alone is not the only measure of "success". One must take into account other factors such as (a) the Atari 2600 and Nintendo ES dominated with 85% of total video consoles sold, while PS2 only had ~66% (with Xbox/Cube taking the rest). (b) There were 2 billion fewer humans back in the 80s, thus limiting how many units either Atari or Nintendo could sell. Smaller population == fewer opportunities for sale. (c) The fact that Atari gave birth to a new hobby for home entertainment (1977) and Nintendo resurrected the hobby from the dead (the 1983-84 crash) is also a reason why they deserve "most successful", not PS2. POINT: There's more to the word "success" then dreamt of in your limited philosophy. - Theaveng 14:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If we just consider gaming; Playstation has done alot of great things. For starters, do you really think that Final Fantasy 7 would have been anywhere near as good, if it ended up on the N64 (where it was originally headed, before Nintendo opted for cartridges)? It would not have been anywhere near as long, nor would it have been as cinematic, and basically, would not have been the masterpiece that we all know and love (and what most of us consider to be the pinnacle of the entire series). We have Resident Evil. The game was only given the go-ahead, because Capcom new that the Playstation's userbase were generally older, and on it there was a market for stronger, more mature material. Not that it never would have happened, but it wouldn't have happened the way it did without the Playstation, and it wouldn't be the game it is today.

I agree. PS2 is my favorite console (for now). That still does not mean I think it should be labeled "most successful". (See comments above.) Best-selling, yes, but not most-successful. ----- Also: Most Final Fantasy fans consider FF6 to be the best, not FF7. (See various polls.) If you've not played FF6, do so now because it's the better game. ----- And Resident Evil is not the first survival horror game; that was "Haunted House" on the Atari, plus several similar games released on Commodore, Nintendo, CD32, and IBM-compliant PCs. Don't hold-up RE as some grand-new idea, because it isn't. The RE-style genre existed long before PS1 came along. ----- - Theaveng 14:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Playstation is responsible for getting gaming out of the nerd fraternity, and into the mainstream. While this is certainly a double-edged sword, there certainly wouldn't be the market for multi-million dollar gaming epics, without what Sony's Playstation did to the industry. Not the booming market we have today, at least. Look at Gran Turismo, it was placed in bars and clubs so it would help push gaming further.

"Into the mainstream" is a well-worn urban legend that many people like to repeat (along with Betamax had a better picture & Porn helped VHS win), but NONE of these supposed claims are backed by any kind of citations or proof. The previous consoles Super Nintendo and Sega Genesis both sold ~150 million units, comparable to how many PS1s/N64s were sold. I don't see any "explosive growth" as often is claimed. - Theaveng 14:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now that the games industry is galactic in scale, more money is put into developing games. While sure, alot of crap has come of it, do you really think anyone, let alone SEGA, could have afforded to make Shenmue? Or what about Resident Evil 4? It's not like little gaming masterpieces have been stamped out. PS2 has helped elevate gaming and sold a crazy amount of units, and this all I want to sum up. But you don't read and accuse a news site for a blog? And does it mean all the news sites we use are not 'experts'? I don't want to be involved anymore, do with the article what you want. JTBX 23:58, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't reveal my real name on the public forum. That's extremely, extremely rude, and I'm sure it violates some rule somewhere. I've deleted it. - Theaveng 14:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it is extremely rude, don't reveal my name on a public talk page either, or I WILL report you. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 23:12, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images in GTA articles

I've reverted your re-addition of the images and the removal of the excessive non-free content tags because there were/are far too many images on those pages which aren't free. That quantity of images is not necessary for the reader to understand the content of the article and so are not necessary to be included. This is a very important policy for Wikipedia as it could result in legal action so using non-free screen shots must be completely, 100% necessary or it cannot happen. I hope it's clear now why the images have been removed and are tagged for cleanup. ●BillPP ^{(talk|contribs)} 20:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In respect of your re-addition of the Liberty City images, please see this policy page. The image must do more than "aid in the description" of an aspect of the game, they must be used for critical commentary. Using images just as a description aid isn't good enough. The maps, and 1 image per game of how it compares to New York are acceptable. Images of lots of different places in the game are overdoing it. If the images are just being used to describe what the game looks like then using too many is going to be a problem when it comes to fair use. The fair use policy states that only the minimum required is used and it is not necessary for many of the pictures to be there for the reader to be able to understand the subject. ●BillPP ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:45, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warhawk

Since the side articles of Warhawk are going to be deleted I think we should turn them into templates that hide, and then put them on the main article.--Playstationdude 14:47, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tried making the template, but wasn't very successful. What it is is at the beginning people put Navbox on the beginning of the template. See Template:HighDefinitionMedia. I well look more into it and ask around. Also saw that you joined the task force. Just reserved the new Ratchet and Clank. I only hope that they make a last announcement of Co-op play. Loved the L1 over the shoulder view.--Playstationdude 20:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ciao90

See Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts where I opened-up a request for comment. - Theaveng 20:15, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Warhawk (PlayStation 3 game), did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. *Cremepuff 222* 00:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warhawk

Luckily it doesn't come up on the article when I checked it. I really don't know what happened, but can you go to wp:rm and vote it to be moved to regular warhawk. Just recopy and paste your edits and I am sure someone will ad the ref later for you. Thinks for the add on of the article though, didn't know he released the information. You probably will take a long time to answer this since heroes is on.--Playstationdude 01:03, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I am sorry. Don't worry I just watched the new episode for today, and all it did was make me ask more questions then answers.--Playstationdude 01:29, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ya, I think the key to Lost's and Heros' success is the fact of cliffhanger questions. They are basically taking viewers the same way that soaps took our moms.--Playstationdude 01:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WWII Infobox

If you wish to edit the WWII Infobox, go to {{WW2InfoBox}}. I suggest, however, that if you wish to make the changes you made by substituting the template with a regular infobox, you should go to the template talk first, or you'll just spark an edit war. Regards, Parsecboy 18:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:WarhawkArbiters.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:WarhawkArbiters.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Biopredatormask2.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Biopredatormask2.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:03, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Firearms

Welcome to the WikiProject Firearms. I hope you enjoy being a member.--LWF 03:14, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ratchet & Clank

Here is what GameSpot said is bad about the new game:

There's some good humor in it, but the story isn't very interesting, and the ending is a letdown
So many different, often unnecessary gameplay mechanics that the game lacks an identity
Difficulty is too easy and only the last hour or so is remotely challenging.

I personally don't use that site.--Playstationdude 00:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Palookaville.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Palookaville.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:56, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Be Warned

if you change the Cantell School article again disrespectfully your account will be liable for deletion. 86.144.144.30 (talk) 15:33, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok seriously lolJTBX (talk) 08:31, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Palookaville.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Palookaville.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:19, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:RuthJohnson.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:RuthJohnson.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Waggers (talk) 22:51, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cantell

Thanks for your edits to the Cantell School article, I'm sure you mean well. However, we have strict policies here at Wikipedia that our content must be verifiable without WP:original research - that means ideally each statement, especially if controversial, should be referenced with a reliable source. Please add references to the text you've edited, and where none exist, please delete the statements in question. Please also remember that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view - in other words, please leave your opinion out of it and stick to published, reliable, verifiable, referenced facts. Thanks, Waggers (talk) 22:57, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Hi

Yep, I live in the Southampton area. Waggers (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your turn

Hi! It is now your turn to ask a question in India quiz. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:24, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Image:RuthJohnson.jpg, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material without the permission of the author. As a copyright violation, Image:RuthJohnson.jpg appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Image:RuthJohnson.jpg has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at [[Talk:Image:RuthJohnson.jpg]] and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at [[Talk:Image:RuthJohnson.jpg]] with a link to where we can find that note.
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on [[Talk:Image:RuthJohnson.jpg]].

However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Waggers (talk) 12:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PINQ

Hi,

Your question has been answered. Can you please confirm whether the answer is correct, so that the quiz can continue. Thanks -- ¿Amar៛^{Talk to me/My edits} 08:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wp:in quiz

Hi, Sorry for the delay, I'm on an extended wikibreak with limited Internet access. Please ask the next question. Thanks. --Ragib (talk) 03:01, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

M-1 Carbine Revert War

The M1 carbine article is currently on lock down. An administrator has requested some discussion from memeber of the Firearms Wikiproject. Can you take a look? Sf46 (talk) 19:14, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vortigaunt, notability, referencing, content and structure.

Because edit summaries aren't long enough and aren't meant as forums to debate this over, I'm bringing it here. Vortigaunt fails to establish its in its current form. Notability is not a case of "I think it's notable so it must be", it needs to be proved - especially for fictional subjects like this - and that burden of proof is on the article's editors. From WP:NOTE:

"A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject."

Look at WP:FICTION#Defining_notability_for_fiction's examples of what sort of coverage can define notability:

"For articles about fictional concepts, reliable secondary sources cover information such as sales figures, critical and popular reception, development, cultural impact, and merchandise; this information describes the real-world aspects of the concept, so it is real-world content."

Notability is best established through reception: How have these characters been received by the critics? How popular are they with fans/normal non-critic people? These need to be fully referenced to reliable, secondary third-party sources. From that extends merchandising, if available (in this case it is). Design and development commentary is a further avenue to help reinforce that notability. Currently, the article does not have anything of this type, which is why the "additional references needed" template is not enough, nor does it actually help describe what needs to be done. Without any established notability, the article's place on an encyclopedia is put in complete jeopardy. However, a lack of these things this does not mean the article has absolutely no notability and should be deleted - that is not my opinion or motivation for this. The template states this fairly clearly:

"If you are familiar with the subject matter, please expand or rewrite the article to establish its notability. The best way to address this concern is to reference published, third-party sources about the subject."

Only if they cannot be produced does an article need deletion, but I would be suprised if this and headcrab were unable to do this. However, the burden of proof is on the authors of the article.

As for the fansite template, that is because of the structure and content of article, while not written from an in-universe perspective, is written entirely from the view of a Half-Life fan - people unfamiliar with the subject will not likely understand it - and goes into far, far too much detail (conflicting with the principle of Wikipedia not being a collection of indiscriminate information) for an article on a fictional element. WP:Fancruft#Tone and focus is the area in concern here:

"One of the major aspects of fancruft articles is that they tend to focus entirely on their subject's fictional relevance, as opposed to their place in the real world."

To remove this issue, a full rewrite is appropriate, in order to properly balance real-world relevance with their in-universe role. Look at some of good status or featured status articles on similar subjects in the VG Wikiproject. Elite (Halo) and Flood (Halo), both classed as good articles provide good examples of how to properly establish notability for an in-game species and properly describe the subject in encyclopedic terms. Vortigaunt does not do this at all, which is why the templates are all completely necessary.

I want to reiterate this point one more time though, just to make sure it is clear: the issue is not that the subject is not notable. The issue is that the article in its current form does not prove in itself that it is notable, nor does it treat the subject's relevance in the real-world. It is a surmountable problem. If I didn't think it could be fixed, the template up would say "Vortigaunt is being considered for deletion", rather the current ones. -- Sabre (talk) 20:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Headcrab also exhibits the same symptoms, but with that I'd be even more confident that its notability can be established. Headcrabs are kind of everywhere in the video gaming culture and press. The real issues arise with the other creatures. These do not express notability, and I doubt that they ever can, certainly not as individual articles. A merge with locations and events into a collective World of Half-Life article or something like that (see comparable example articles under the VG project) may be able to accomodate some of them. I decided against putting similar templates on them all mainly due to the inevitable backlash from angry fans, which is why they're only on Vortigaunt, in hope that perhaps I can spark something towards sorting that article out as a start. These articles have just been in this state for so long, it seems too many people have got used to the way they are.

The same notability problem lies with characters. Freeman, G-Man and Alyx will probably have very little trouble with dealing with establishing their notability, they are cult icons in video gaming. The rest, though, could be covered in a merged article such as a Characters of Half-Life and a minor characters list, which can then deal with generalised real-world commentary on Half-Life characters (again, see examples). I won't deny the size of this task, I started dealing with the universe topics related to the StarCraft series back in June 2007, and I'm still working on it with only the characters in a reasonable state and being readied for GA nomination. But, the results can be worth it. -- Sabre (talk) 22:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

userboxes

Fixed them.--Playstationdude (talk) 01:06, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There seemed to be a missing divider in them. I found out by just comparing them with the playstation project's box. I don't remember that problem before though. I think a guy working on the Sega Project's userbox thought it wasn't supposed to be there when he was using it to make the sega box.--Playstationdude (talk) 02:26, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Biopredatormask2.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Biopredatormask2.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:12, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page Move

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to The Cloverfield creature, without good reason. They need to have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. We have some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

The topic was under discussion and I do not see any evidence that consensus had been reached. While being bold is appreciated, it's important to use or at least check discussion sections before making major changes. -Verdatum (talk) 18:17, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This references have been used and debated before. There is reasonable argument that it is not as concrete as you would make it seem to be. The concensus reached was that the page name was not optimal but sufficient until an official name for the creature was released. -Verdatum (talk) 18:29, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow or move it unilaterally while discussion about it is underway. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Thank you. -Verdatum (talk) 18:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please take this discussion to Talk:The Cloverfield creature. Thank you. -Verdatum (talk) 18:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to move pages to bad titles or before discussions about the title have ended, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -Verdatum (talk) 19:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. -Verdatum (talk) 19:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not only does the director say it refers to the monster, "mutliple sightings of case designated Cloverfield" can't gramatically work any other way. We're allowed psuedonyms - I gave the example of Thirteen in House as well - we don't know her real name, so we use a reliably sourced psuedonym instead. Will ^(talk) 19:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's just silly and a bad argument. Will ^(talk) 19:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Biopredatormask2.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Biopredatormask2.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 18:17, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

February 2008

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule . Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Rjd0060 (talk) 22:21, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked you for 24 hours to prevent your continued reverting on Cloverfield (creature). You had a warning about 3RR here and chose to continue. 1 2 3 4. During this block, I recommend reading WP:3RR and understand that edit warring is disruptive. In the future, if you have a dispute regarding certain content of the encyclopedia, please discuss things with the involved user(s), and do not constantly revert to a version that you prefer. - Rjd0060 (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

JTBX (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Sorry, but I have already learned not to do any of this again. I have added the proper discussion on the talk page of the article as well. In short, I have learnt now, sorry! JTBX (talk) 22:31, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Decline reason:

reason — Sit out the rest of the 24 hours. One with your number of edits should know better. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:37, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Well dat's just great.JTBX (talk) 22:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Biopredatormask2.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Biopredatormask2.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Alienrunner.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Alienrunner.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Wicsoviet.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Wicsoviet.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:32, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Wicsoviet.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Wicsoviet.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Hux (talk) 22:53, 6 April 2008 (UTC) --Hux (talk) 22:53, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Hitman_south_park2.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Hitman_south_park2.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Nv8200p talk 14:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot create an image that is a derivative work of copyrighted material and use it on your User page. You cannot use any "fair use" images on your User page either. -Regards Nv8200p talk 02:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image of the PlayStation is OK, if it was created from scratch. The reason is that the PlayStation would be considered a "useful object." Designs for useful objects, such as vehicular bodies, wearing apparel, household appliances, and the like are not protected by copyright. However, I believe the artistic style of South Park characters is unique enough that using a character that looks like a South Park character could be considered copyright infringement even though that exact character never existed. Your South Park character may not be transformative enough from the original work to be free of copyright. -Regards Nv8200p talk 16:59, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:WarhawkArbiters.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:WarhawkArbiters.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. NotifyBot (talk) 14:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice job

Cookies!

Here are some cookies as a way of saying "thank you" for contributing to our project. Keep up the good work! Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 19:51, 26 April 2008 (UTC) has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.[reply]

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

The cookies are for brightening the day of another Wikipedian. I saw that you were in the adopt a user program and took a look at your contributions. : ) Cheers! Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 20:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption

Hello. I used to be an adopter but I quit, but you can ask me any questions if needed. But I can't officialy adopt you. Cheers.--RyRy5 (talk) 20:32, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome. Please don't refer to me as your adopter. Maybe just a good helper. So, any questions?--RyRy5 (talk) 20:36, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Mm... well, you should read some polocies at one of my subpages located here. They should help you a bit. I know their helping me. For article writing, read WP:ARTICLE for some but not all the tips of article writing. For avoiding drama, just try not to start it and always stay cool.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 02:29, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm always here to help. BTW, you should start archiving soon.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 00:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Communism

I didn't understand your remark in the article Communism. I reverted it thinking it might be vandalism. I assume now that it wasn't. You might want to fill in the edit summary before saving. It will help other editors understand what you are trying to do. Student7 (talk) 21:41, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

EndWar confusion

Fully understandable. I've made that mistake myself before! No hard feelings about it. I went back to the Tiberium and Mass Effect articles as well, and undid those revisions; both instances were of unsourced original research, especially the ME one about the PC criticism, which absolutely needed to be sourced. Peptuck (talk) 17:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption

Hey there, I saw you were still seeking adoption, so I thought I would drop in and offer my services. Let me know if you're still interested. Cheers, xenocidic (talk) 15:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

^^ Let me know if you're still interested in being adopted, if not, we can remove the offer from your userpage. xenocidic (talk) 21:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since I didn't hear back from you, I removed you from the adoption seeking category. If you still want to be adopted, feel free to add {{subst:dated adoptme}} to your userpage again. xenocidic (talk) 03:00, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding opting out - yes, of course, any time. Adoption is really just so that you can have a "go-to" person if you need something answered. I used to create adoption subpages for people but I'm only doing that now if conversations get lengthy. Anyhow, feel free to drop by my talk page whenever you need anything. –xenocidic (talk) 14:27, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For more on nominating articles for good article status, see WP:GAN. One quick suggestion regarding your editing, ensure you are using descriptive edit summaries on every edit. If you go to Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary then you can have WP remind you when you're making a change without typing one. cheers, –xenocidic (talk) 14:37, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the expansion tag on "Reception & Legacy" on the C&C vg article.

Any hot tips you'd like to share on how to best go about expanding this section? You mean that for example I ought to include greater amounts of relevant information from those four source articles I referenced to? Kalamrir (talk) 10:10, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and because it is an important game it should have more, for example take a look at Halo:_Combat_Evolved#Reception to get an idea of how it should look like and obviously any information on influence on other games, etc. JTBX (talk) 10:19, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to this as time allows. I have access to a lot of things which can serve as reliable source material and third-party references, so it shouldn't be too much of a problem. Kalamrir (talk) 10:23, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

so

what'd you think of the sadly crappy veiw of the trailer?--Jakezing (talk) 19:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i was watching e3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakezing (talk • contribs) 20:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

classroom portion of your adoption now available!

Replied at my talk. –xeno (talk) 16:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Bioshockps3.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Bioshockps3.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:20, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Resistance 2 logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Resistance 2 logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice== Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 22:23, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

COD4

do u have call of duty 4

um yeah but whose this JTBX (talk) 21:54, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

a member from the playstation project do u play it online--DCsniper207 (talk) 21:57, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

do u play cod4 online or the local campaign--DCsniper207 (talk) 22:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

whats ur online name we can play together im 4th prestige and i can help u out--DCsniper207 (talk) 22:07, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ill just tell u mine its axhammer1 and i know its kinda cheesy ill be on around 4-4:30 maybe....maybe ok --DCsniper207 (talk) 22:12, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

they are i live in the US what time is it over their —Preceding unsigned comment added by DCsniper207 (talk • contribs) 22:16, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

its 3:30 here--DCsniper207 (talk) 22:29, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you never sent me an invite--DCsniper207 (talk) 19:34, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Back

hi, btw i found this old account. Last message 20th November 2006 lol! but yeh im back to make a cupla edits lol. Donut Gang userbox! make one Mann! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexstanek (talk • contribs) 09:56, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with File:Cantellschoolbuilding.jpg

Hello. Concerning your contribution, File:Cantellschoolbuilding.jpg, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.cantell.co.uk/images/RotatingImages/7.jpg. As a copyright violation, File:Cantellschoolbuilding.jpg appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. File:Cantellschoolbuilding.jpg has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at File talk:Cantellschoolbuilding.jpg and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at File talk:Cantellschoolbuilding.jpg with a link to where we can find that note.
If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on File talk:Cantellschoolbuilding.jpg.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you. Fluteflute ^Talk ^{Contributions} 16:22, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Message from WikiProject Alien

Hello!

You are receiving this message because you have previously identified yourself as a member of WikiProject Alien, either because your name appears on the Participants page or because you have placed the project userbox on your user page.

There is currently a discussion on the project's talk page regarding a proposal to merge the project into a task force of either WikiProject Horror or WikiProject Science Fiction. As a project member, your input would be greatly appreciated in this discussion. Do you think the project ought to be merged into a task force, or remain separate? If you are in favor of a merger, which WikiProject do you think should be the parent? Please comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Alien#Task force merger.

Thank you. --IllaZilla (talk) 03:01, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request to participate in University of Washington survey on tool to quickly understand Wikipedians’ reputations

Hello. I'm part of a research group at the University of Washington. In April, we met with Wikipedians to learn what they would like to know about other editors’ history and activities (within Wikipedia) when interacting with them on talk pages. The goal was to gather feedback to help design a tool that could quickly communicate useful information about other Wikipedians. We have now created a few images that we feel represent some of what our participants thought was important. We would appreciate it if you took a few minutes of your time to complete an online survey that investigates whether or not these images would be useful to you. Your quick contribution would be very valuable to our research group and ultimately to Wikipedia. (When finished, the code for this application will be given over to the Wikipedia community to use and/or adjust as they see fit.)

We are particularly interested in feedback from new editors! We want to make sure this tool meets your needs.

Willing to spend a few minutes taking our survey? Click this link.

Please feel free to share the link with other Wikipedians. The more feedback, the better! The survey is completely anonymous and takes less than 10 minutes to complete. All data is used for university research purposes only.

Thank you for your time! If you have any questions about our research or research group, please visit our user page. Commprac01 (talk) 23:19, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Additional details about our research group are available here.

Please update your status with WP:VG

Dear WikiProject Video games member,

You are receiving this message because you have either Category:WikiProject Video games members or {{User WPVG}} somewhere in your userspace and you have edited Wikipedia in recent months.

The Video games project has created a member list to provide a clearer picture of its active membership.

All members have currently been placed in the "Inactive" section by default. Please remove your username from the "Inactive" listing and place it under the "Active" listing if you plan on regularly:

Editing video game-related pages in the Article namespace
Participating in video game-related discussions in the Project namespace (WT:VG, WP:AfD, WP:GAN, etc.)

Ideally, members are encouraged to do both, but either one meets our criteria of inclusion. Members still listed inactive at the beginning of November 2009 may be removed. You may re-add yourself to the active list at any time. Thank you for your help, and we look forward to working with you.

—WikiProject Video games (delivery by xenobot 03:32, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Cultural impact of Michael Jackson

A tag has been placed on Cultural impact of Michael Jackson requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Rror (talk) 23:47, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Cartmananalprobe.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Cartmananalprobe.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:53, 1 November 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. FASTILY_sock ^(TALK) 04:53, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cartmananalprobe.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Cartmananalprobe.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. The leftorium 21:34, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Hitman south park.JPG

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Hitman south park.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --MisterWiki talk contribs 03:16, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

michael jackon invincible/history album

hi, i'm contacting you because your involved in the "michael jackson project",(1) the Invincible article page is semiprotected and i don't have edit ability. i am interested in the introduction to the article letting people know that jackson had six albums with Sony records, the reason for this being that of course Off the Wall , Thriller , Bad , Dangerous , History past present & future, and Invincible are what made him famous as a solo artist(2) the intro to the history album page says "child abuse allegation" shouldn't that be in the main article and not the album, i have tried to delete it but it was placed back, i thank you for your help.--68.223.247.101 (talk) 18:04, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply, Could I say he is involve in a sockpuppetry case? (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/169.139.19.117). Tbhotch^{Talk2 Me} 18:38, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- and well, as it has asked for "help", could you check this talk page and tell him he is wrong? Because I've already tried by any manner that he is not. Tbhotch^{Talk2 Me} 18:46, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this user's edits to HIStory, as I'm sure you're aware, MJ didn't have "legal problems" in 1993. They were allegations of sexual abuse. This needs to be stated as this period of his life was unquestionably affected by his treatment by police, media, etc, and this unquestionably had a very major effect on the songs on the album. This user has been blocked 3 times, and was the one responsible for getting Template:Michael_Jackson locked (because he was deleting both the allegations from it, and even his death!!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.22.22 (talk) 23:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

should you be able to help me with my request i would greatly appreciate it--65.10.26.187 (talk) 20:27, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did my talk page really have to be used for this? JTBX (talk) 08:37, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010

Hello. Before making potentially controversial edits, such as those you made to Tupac Shakur, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Otherwise, people might consider your edits to be vandalism. Thank you. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:18, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Inception

It's fair that you feel my edit was "absolutely ludicrous" but "these are present in many plot summaries" isn't a sufficient argument for inclusion of real-world information in a film's plot summary. As for "and is needed per policy," can you please point me to this policy? I don't see it in WP:FILMPLOT. This comes close, except for the part about "[writing from the real-world perspective is] not as important for plot summaries of single works, such as novels that are not part of a series." Granted, "nevertheless, some real-world language at the beginning of such summaries is often good style" offers a modicum of support to your position, indirectly. Thanks. Validusername (talk) 23:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If Validusername is saying what I think he's saying, that I would support his position. I am not in favor of confusing the plot with real-world perspective. Viriditas (talk) 01:18, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason you keep pushing opinions in the plot section? The material you are trying to add goes into an "interpretation" section, not the plot. You recently added "Cobb spins his top to test reality, but is distracted by the reunion which leaves the question of whether he is dreaming." Actually, no, that isn't true. The question of whether he is dreaming begins in the very first scene of the film. This question is not contingent only on the last scene. This is why we use plot sections only to describe the plot, not to interject different opinions about it. Nevermind the fact that the totem didn't belong to Cobb. Please take this to the talk page. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 03:54, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've started a new thread here. Viriditas (talk) 04:07, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer permission

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:46, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Hitman south park.JPGA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Hitman south park.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Marcus Qwertyus 02:56, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]Invite to WikiConference India 2011Hi JTBX, The First WikiConference India is being organized in Mumbai and will take place on 18-20 November 2011. You can see our Official website, the Facebook event and our Scholarship form. But the activities start now with the 100 day long WikiOutreach. As you are part of WikiProject India community we invite you to be there for conference and share your experience. Thank you for your contributions. We look forward to see you at Mumbai on 18-20 November 2011Collaboration of business corporations and fascist regimesI appreciate your contribution to the Fascism article. It is true that fascist regimes have had close connections with business corporations especially in the arms industry. However I do not believe that this is unique to fascist regimes, nor that it is connected to fascist ideology. Business corporations have typically been willing to collaborate with governments regardless of their political system and ideology. For instance, private enterprises have collaborated with the government of China, but this does not mean that because of this collusion that communism as an ideology is associated with collaboration with business corporations. This is not an isolated exclusive case in communist-led states, Henry Ford and the Ford Motor Company collaborated with the Soviet Union dating back to the 1920s and Henry Ford and Joseph Stalin held a friendly relationship with each other and Stalin publicly praised Henry Ford and the Ford Motor Company for assisting in the development of the Soviet automobile industry.[1]. Also just as IBM produced computers for Nazi Germany as you mentioned, IBM also produced computers for the Soviet Union during World War II at the same time it produced them for Germany and continued to sell to the USSR through the Cold War in spite of IBM residing in the "capitalist camp" of the Cold War [2]. However scholars do not associate communism and Marxism–Leninism with close collaboration with business corporations. Business corporations are focused on profit-making will deal with any government, capitalist, communist, or fascist if they are allowed the opportunity.--R-41 (talk) 04:24, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]December 2011Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Albert Einstein, as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. If you feel strongly about re-wording the sentence, please discuss it on the Talk page, first. Thank you. — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 01:09, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]Nomination for merging of Template:Criticism of Islam sidebarTemplate:Criticism of Islam sidebar has been nominated for merging with Template:Criticism of religion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you.Disambiguation link notificationHi. When you recently edited The Godfather, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Legitimate (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) 11:38, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]Talkback

Hello, JTBX. You have new messages at Gareth Griffith-Jones's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 18:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]Disambiguation link notificationHi. When you recently edited Hitman: Codename 47, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Triad (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) 10:28, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]Disambiguation link notificationHi. When you recently edited World in Conflict: Soviet Assault, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The West (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) 10:58, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]Disambiguation link notification for March 7Hi. When you recently edited Batman Begins, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bhutanese (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) 10:29, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]Disambiguation link notification for March 17Hi. When you recently edited The Patriot (2000 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chris Cooper (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) 10:40, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]The Dark Knight filmI agree with some of your edits on this article that are being disputed. Please contribute to the discussion here so we can get them implemented. Thanks. ArtistScientist (talk) 10:03, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]Disambiguation link notification for April 6Hi. When you recently edited The Patriot (2000 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American (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) 10:18, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]The GodfatherHello, I just wanted to tell you how pleased I am with your editing of the Plot summary in The Godfather article this afternoon (I'm in the UK... where are you?) and to let you know that I have put the paragraphs back as they were to facilitate comparison with earlier edits. This may help to avoid hysterical reverting of your excellent work. I have also made a few minor edits. Have a look! All the best, Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 18:22, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]Thanks, Just doing my job. I trust you know better about this in terms of why you changed the paragraphs back etc. JTBX (talk) 19:17, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]Yes I now understand why you moved them, kinda tired, sorry. I am also from the UK. Thanks again JTBX (talk) 19:30, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]Hello again!Do you remember this (above)?You seemed to be "hell-bent" on brevity then, only two months ago.We watch with great interest. Kind regards, Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 10:14, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]BrevityI still am, and still go around plots making sure they are concise and tidy, but this film is of course different, and very long. If you have read my draft please consider it, as way too many details were being left out at the expense of sacrificing notable information. --JTBX (talk) 13:57, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Sure. I was ahead of this last night, but thought you were going to wait until you had some response to your posting on the article's Talk page. Then I found my friend Ring Cinema was on the case. I am sure we three can work well together. Cheers, Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 14:08, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Your draftHi! Thank you for your congrats. Your draft version is excellent. Glad you approved my small intake. What do you expect to do with it now? -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 07:44, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]The 1945 to 1946 change was mine following a rewatching of the film last weekend ... I missed the "almost" you are correct! Right now I'm waiting for the proverbial to hit the fan. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 08:13, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Changed "should" to "would" on The Godfather Talk page ... isn't that what you meant? -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 11:11, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JTBX. You have new messages at Gareth Griffith-Jones's talk page. Message added 22:07, 21 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 22:07, 21 April 2012 (UTC) Oh, so it was an edit summary ... I don't know why he couldn't/wouldn't tell me that. I agree with you. The article is what matters, and it will continue to be a work in progress. You have done a sterling job, and deserve a big thank you. I am anxious that this does not get acrimonious ... there is far too much of that on Wikipedia. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 00:13, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JTBX. You have new messages at El duderino's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.Edit summaries pleaseThank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to General relativity does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! - DVdm (talk) 10:28, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Disambiguation link notification for April 21Hi. When you recently edited The Godfather, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Las Vegas (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) 09:52, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply] Done -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 09:35, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Don't be alarmed!Don't be alarmed! It is all still on my page – up near the top – next to earlier Godfather material. Been deleting 'stuff' I don't want. Can't be bothered with archiving – who would bother to trawl through archives? Wanted to speed up access to my page. I had reached 324,759 bytes on April 19. Still more to discard, but def. no Godfather or Sopranos. Read El Dude's page earlier this evening (he helped me out earlier this year on The Sopranos, so he's on My Watchlist) Cheers! -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 22:52, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]I don't really use email for communication I'm afraid, unless its business/organisation related so I don't how that system works on here. But yes I am going through to adminstrator resolution now. I have a copy of the draft saved in Word which I edit offline incase its never lost. JTBX (talk) 00:58, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]No, I understand that. It can be useful though if you want say something sensitive and not be seen by any person on Wikipedia. Don't be alarmed! – everything is still there in the history. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 10:08, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JTBX. You have new messages at El duderino's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.I have just posted on El_duderino's talk page (got a tb from him too) Cheers, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 06:01, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]The Godfather EffectI'm a little uncomfortable with so much emphasis given to one book and one aspect. Many people have said a lot of insightful things about this film, and the conclusion that ethnicities in America rediscovered themselves in the aftermath of this film seems to require some empirical support. Coppola saw the film as a general indictment of American culture (as it implies) and that is more easily supported. Since America has always had strong ethnic identification among its polity, it is somewhat more difficult to make the case that, say, Irish-Americans took The Godfather to heart and realized they felt a bit of the shamrock. When did they not? So, do we strike the right balance? I am undecided. --Ring Cinema (talk) 14:25, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]I have been re-reading your posting for the second time and still not clear what you are after. When you write "...one book and one aspect" ... are you referring to all three film articles, or just The Godfather article? Explain, please. On the other hand, I would like to contribute, but not sure that this 'Brit' has the qualifications to dare venture into an American ethnicity issue like this. Can you comment please. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 16:30, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]The section so entitled refers primarily to one book on the subject. So, just on general principles, I question that much emphasis, given the size and scope of the subject, on one book. There are many things written about this movie. That's what I am thinking about. That, and a lack of skepticism about the book's claims. --Ring Cinema (talk) 08:27, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Yes, I am with you now. I tend to agree with your argument. I must check out the history appertaining to this section. In my mind right now, if asked, I would say that it was born out of some of the WrathX-187-no-edit summaries-débâcle of April 1 to April 2. I shall check that out today. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 10:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Talkback: New message

Hello, JTBX. You have new messages at Gareth Griffith-Jones's talk page. Message added 15:37, 24 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 15:37, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Your complaint at the edit-warring noticeboardHello JTBX. You've posted a rather long complaint at WP:AN3#User:Ring Cinema reported by User:JTBX (Result: ). It does not appear that there is any 3RR violation. If it's a complaint of long-term warring you need to be extremely clear about what the violation is. Large explanations of your content changes will just confuse the admins, and they are not supposed to take a position on content anyway. Consider revising your complaint to make it shorter. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 21:12, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Sorry JT, but I have to agree with EdJ. I haven't read the report carefully because of time constraints at the moment but I will later. In looking for the 3rd and 4th revert, I did notice your use of the term 'bait' which you should also try to avoid in framing it like that. It could be used against you. another reason why I suggested composing a draft for E.A.R. El duderino ^(abides) 21:56, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Talkback: New message

Hello, JTBX. You have new messages at Gareth Griffith-Jones's talk page. Message added 21:21, 24 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 21:21, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]I have put all my Godfather postings together in date order (all from Section 76) Please have a look! The last one is from the admin you have involved. I have replied to him.With best wishes, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 01:53, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Talkback: New message

Hello, JTBX. You have new messages at Gareth Griffith-Jones's talk page. Message added 07:49, 25 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 07:49, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Are you okay?Just a line to ask you to get in touch with me. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 17:35, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Thank you for your post ... and your subsequent one ... I was replying to you at the time, so we had an edit conflict. I hate it when that happens. I picked up that we had no access to the article early this morning. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 21:01, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JTBX. You have new messages at El duderino's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.New message: The Godfather ... again!

Hello, JTBX. You have new messages at Gareth Griffith-Jones's talk page. Message added 12:31, 26 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 12:31, 26 April 2012 (UTC) I have been on the Godfather talk page ... well done! ... a lot of conscientious effort and well worth reading. I am still debating in my mind how to approach our return to the article. Much depends upon your relationship with Ring. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 12:24, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]I reverted your changes to the talk page, please see section "Plot Word Count" where I explained why. I did this to avoid confusion, hope you understand thanks. --JTBX (talk) 12:33, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Certainly no hard feelings ... just thought that continuity was worth while in case someone, other than we three, ever bothers to read this page (!) If you consider that, you may wish to revert your revision(?) Cheers, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 12:43, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]After the recent debacle I thought it may have come across that I was in conflict with you now, hahah, just wanted to clarify that the reverts were done because they were two different discussions and the placement of answers, such as by Ring-Cinema made it look as though it was one. Its fine now though, thanks. I would appreciate any other ideas and so on on the talk page, from you, regarding the plot. JTBX (talk) 13:01, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Have a look! (First paragraph) -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 14:07, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]Glad you approve. Shall attend to second later today. Keep well! -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 09:56, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re- this plot draft:

Having edited the first paragraph yesterday, I have just had a go at the second. It now reads thus:Drug baron Virgil "The Turk" Sollozzo (Al Lettieri), backed by the Tattaglia family, asks Vito for investment and protection through his political connections, but Vito declines and voices his disapproval of drug dealers. His enforcer, Luca Brasi (Lenny Montana) is killed when sent to spy on them. Sollozzo attempts to assassinate Vito. His eldest son, Sonny (James Caan) takes command. Sollozzo kidnaps Hagen, suggesting he should persuade Sonny to accept his deal. Whilst the Corleone family discuss the situation, they receive a fish in Brasi's vest confirming he sleeps with the fishes.-- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 18:02, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]disruptive editing at No Country for Old MenYou are engaging in disruptive editing at No Country for Old Men (film). Making changes in an article requires a consensus. Currently, you are violating that policy. After your unjustified personal attacks on me, you were told by EdJohnston that you could be sanctioned. Your response is to violate the policy on consensus. I would advise against that. You can be a productive editor, but this is not how it's done. --Ring Cinema (talk) 20:45, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]I am not disrupting the article, only improving it. I did not use personal attacks, that is simply a falsification. I am not violating any consensus, there is simply one on the plot which mentioned reducing detail and improving it, and which is what I am doing. I see it needs to be improved more and trying to be productive, but you have continually reverted my edits. Please stop. If you have suggestions, take them to the talk page. --JTBX (talk) 21:03, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]As an observation, I was appalled yesterday, when I was aware of your weighing into No Country for Old Men, and drew it to Ring's attention, as you have noticed. Not sensible, and really very obvious!-- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 09:11, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]NoticeHello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at ANI concerning you regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ring Cinema (talk • contribs)April 2012

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 15:46, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 648: / Line 648: @@
 == Notice ==
-Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. {{unsigned|Ring Cinema}}
+Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#JTBX_on_No_Country_for_Old_Men_.28film.29|ANI concerning you]] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. {{unsigned|Ring Cinema}}
 == April 2012 ==