Jump to content

User talk:Another-anomaly: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
second message
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk_page_guidelines#User_talk_pages
Line 68: Line 68:


:Little troll likes to watch this page, yet accused me of stalking him once ([[User_talk:Alastairward#A_friendly_hand|here]]). Just find it ironic, especially when I found a link to this section in 2 places (so I renamed it). Needs a job or something. [[User:Another-anomaly|Anthony cargile]] ([[User talk:Another-anomaly#top|talk]]) 23:08, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
:Little troll likes to watch this page, yet accused me of stalking him once ([[User_talk:Alastairward#A_friendly_hand|here]]). Just find it ironic, especially when I found a link to this section in 2 places (so I renamed it). Needs a job or something. [[User:Another-anomaly|Anthony cargile]] ([[User talk:Another-anomaly#top|talk]]) 23:08, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

== On your remark at Some guy's talk page ==

A little while ago you and I have a small conflict about a big of South Park episodes articles. I gave you a warning for a [[WP:NPA|personal attack]], which you seemingly did understood by removing it. Later I redid that warning, not knowing the correct guidelines on that. I apologized for my actions, which you understand and apparently forgave me (see [[User talk:Another-anomaly#About the warning|About the warning, two discussions up]]. Your words on November 3: ''lol, nah its cool.''). I let the whole thing rest, South Park episodes and all.

Now, in a random act of looking trough my old edits, I came upon an conflict with [[User:Some guy|Some guy]]. On his [[User talk:Some-guy|talk page]], I spotted your message:

:::::::::::I for one support your edits, although the namecalling was not appropriate according to the rules which soethermans ignores anyways. I personally think he's just mad you removed a tag he placed, and because you corrected him regarding the cites on the talk page being original research. Thats enough for some hardcore WP nerds to go off and argue until their fingers hurt, apparently, although the comment was still pretty funny (and true). [[User:Another-anomaly|Anthony cargile]] ([[User talk:Another-anomaly|talk]]) 21:02, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

This is not cool.

I do not ignore the rules on [[WP:NPA|personal attacks]], eventhough I've been called names. Don't assume my reasons for editing: I want to make Wikipedia a better place. I wasn't mad at Some guy for removing the tag, I just think its more than a bit unnecessary to call me a douchebag. Better yet, I wasn't mad at all, just surprised that another Wikipedian would so easily resort to those words. Please, take a good look at your own edits before calling me a WP nerd, do I really have to remind you how hard you've fought for those South Park articles citations? --[[User:Soetermans|<small>'''Soetermans'''</small>]] | [[User talk:Soetermans|<small>'''is listening'''</small>]] | [[Special:Contributions/Soetermans|<small>'''what he'd do now?'''</small>]] 21:11, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

::Pointless vendetta? Look the word up before you use grown-up words. This isn't a vendetta, I'm pointing out your flaws. Learn from it. --[[User:Soetermans|<small>'''Soetermans'''</small>]] | [[User talk:Soetermans|<small>'''is listening'''</small>]] | [[Special:Contributions/Soetermans|<small>'''what he'd do now?'''</small>]] 12:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

:::And you know what? This will not stand. I won't leave your talk page alone till you utter the words: "I understand the message Soetermans, I'm sorry for my harmful words". The funny thing is, if you'd go knock at some admin's door to complain about my fully understandable and decent behaviour, they'll just see a polite Wikipedian asking for satisfaction, and of course your disrespectful words.

:::I'm not joking around, Anthony. I'm tired of Wikipedians like yourself who think they can do and say whatever they want. This isn't a forum, this is Wikipedia. If you want to be part of, you're also part of its [[WP:COMMUNITY|community]]. --[[User:Soetermans|<small>'''Soetermans'''</small>]] | [[User talk:Soetermans|<small>'''is listening'''</small>]] | [[Special:Contributions/Soetermans|<small>'''what he'd do now?'''</small>]] 12:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:51, 1 December 2008

This talk page is in need of vandalism.
Please destroy it in any way you see fit.


Protection

Now back on. --Herby talk thyme 15:11, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

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 6 August, did not appear to be constructive and has been removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --CalendarWatcher (talk) 00:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting Alastairward

Hey Anthony, i need you to testiy for me on the Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts page. I started a new section against Alastairward regarding his manipulation of Wikipedia articles and controlling the information that is put on articles such as the China Probrem. I really appreciate everything you have done to show Alastairward that he is wrong and now i think we can address it to the admins because he did the same thing again. I am also going to ask Stijndon if he can testify. I will support you to stop Alastairward from controlling articles --J miester25 (talk) 11:39, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have commented on the wikiquette page. I hope I did it the way you're supposed to. Stijndon (talk) 12:54, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would be happy to. I'm at work ATM, but when I get off I will get to that. I'm honestly sick of this whole thing including the admin above choosing sides here, I have enough to worry about rather than some douche editing articles and being an ass to any opposition and I hope this puts a stop to it. Anthony cargile (talk) 13:53, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He gets a lot of credit for not using rude words, which I hope you will also avoid when writing your contribution to the wikiquette page. I am also heavily disappointed by all of this. Not only do I just personally want the cultural references to be in the South Park articles because I LOVED reading them after watching every episode (me not being american and all, thus not getting al the jokes), I also firmly believe that they should be there. What use is an article when it just states the story, in pretty high detail? You can rewatch the episode to see the story again. Or read a way shorter synopsis. The reason you would want to go to a South Park article is to check the valid and sourced cultural references. An I do believe that non-editable blogs hosted on newspaper websites count as sources for cases like this. Because valid references are obvious, you just need something to show you didn't think of it yourself. The China Probrem is just some sort of Vietnam in the cold war that is Cultural References in South Park articles. Stijndon (talk) 14:11, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I left a borderline speech on the page that I think accurately sums up this whole thing, including admin view of the situation and why the references need to be there. Support Wikipedia articles mentioning SP cultural parody, lest I completely stop using WP for any entertainment research at all. Anthony cargile (talk) 14:15, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your cooperation --J miester25 (talk) 14:18, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to put this on the page before the section was deleted, storing it here in the meantime:

The South Park studios website (where Matt and Trey directly contact the outside world without Viacom/Comedy Central) is certainly a valid source, especially since primary sources should be even more highly regarded for credit than secondary sources, which many times are, in fact, user-editable websites, and even at that anybody with a job title editing a website for pay or as an official position is a USER, so even those can be disregarded almost as easily as any old blog or wiki, and many news websites are calling themselves blogs just to add to the confusion. But Alastairward is right on something for once: We are here to really discuss his etiquette on WP and his snide remarks in the removal edits of the content everybody so enjoys, despite his opinion against it for whatever reason. The issue of his removal of properly cited content is a part of this discussion because thats what everyone is so angry about, since (again) cultural references/parodies/satire constitute a large portion of south park episodes, and a decent list of them should be present on the actual article since it is just as (if not more) important than the plot itself because of Matt and Trey's emphasis on it. Moving them to the talk page as you stated still gets them to us one way or another, but seeing as they are a major part of every episode, why not move the plot to the talk page? Or the Picture? Or the episode number? I'm sure that constitutes a "compromise", since the only sources for the episode number is the South Park studios website itself and God forbid we place any primary sources for a major part of the episode. South Park acts very much like a median to parody popular culture in a satiric manner, so removing the cultural references is utter blasphemy to a SP article, and causing harm to Wikipedia's coverage of the subject, and Alastairwards hostility to anyone believing this not only gives me the impression that South Park goes completely over his head (he is a Star Treck follower/editor as well, a completely different breed of show), but also causes edit wars between him and a few too-literal non-specific WP policy followers and the rest of the South Park fans/WP users that actually know more on the subject and what it stands for than the opposition. At times its like an English major is editing an article on computer science, citing references without knowing anything about the article's target, although they (at least believe) they are "following" all the guidelines written for doing so for every article, not just special topic-specific rules. If we can use the actual episode as a source for the plot (which constitutes only roughly half a SP episode, the other being satire), why can't we use it also for the satire itself and add the cultural references to the article, not the talk page, where they belong alongside the plot so that the entire episode is thoroughly explained, not just a minute (completely secondary source referenced) plot description? Anthony cargile (talk) 21:12, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate everything you have done. I have set a final destination to this problem. Since the admins in the Wikiquette alerts won't help us, it seems we have to take matters into our own hands. I am calling for a 4 party plus admin that includes me, you, Roger (admin who will help us), Stijndon, and Alastairward in the Talk Page of The China Probrem. The new discussion will be called Final Compromise and it will discuss this issue and it be regarding what Alastairward has done (we can copy paste what we posted in Wikiquette), have administrative guidance so that Alastairward will learn his lesson, include insite from Stijndon in this matter. I will be posting information from time to time, and i hope that you and the others will as well. Again, Thank you for all your time. --J miester25 (talk) 22:33, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Don't mind spending a little after hours time on this since I seriously hate this guy (though not personally) and his stupid edits to SP articles. I have watched South Park since the original unnamed at the time episode that circulated via email in the 90's (wish I still had it). I get annoyed when some Star Treck fan starts deciding what should and should not go into WP SP articles, since he obviously has no idea what south park is about. I go here a lot after viewing reruns and new episodes, which I watch quite a big online, to see which movie they were poking fun at, and Alastairward removing them takes away one of the reasons I visit WP in the first place. Wish he would just go away and leave things be. He has such a lack of a life as to follow WP policy to the point where he is the only one supporting his edits, and I really wish I can find the page where it says an episode is a good enough source for the corresponding plot, but I can't. I'll continue to fight this as much as I can.

Anthony cargile (talk) 22:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Stijndon found the link. Look under the discussion of The China Probrem. I think the link is there under Trivia is Incorrect. --J miester25 (talk) 22:48, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any time. Nightscream (talk) 05:01, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've reported Alastairward today after he reverted my edit at least 5 times within less than 24 hours. I'll be more than happy to put a stop to this travesty. If I can be of any further help, let me know. NotAnotherAliGFan (talk) 17:56, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah this is kind of old, we already put him on the wiki etiquette page, had a looong discussion on the china probrem, informed administrators and yet he continues to screw south park articles over. South Park has its own wiki that he can't deface by removing cultural references (without fear of the admins there of removing him), so google it and just use that. Everyone here is sick of fighting him, and we all have better things to do.
I find it ironic that a South Park episode of all things is being controversial on Wikipedia since they reference Wikipedia all of the time only for others who don't get it to go and edit out everything except the plot on the WP articles regarding the episodes. But rules are rules, which he constantly reminds us of while silently breaking them himself here and there, so I'll just have to find the references somewhere else, which is sad because I use Wikipedia for quite a bit (easily 30 articles a day) although I edit very little.
Its over as far as me, JMeister and others are concerned, but feel free to argue the points we did on the various talk pages, including the china probrem since not only were they admin-backed but they have yet to have been shot down, and even Jimbo Wale's talk page confirmed one of them. In a nutshell I have too much to do rather than bicker on some website all day, which has already consumed way too much of my time. I will no longer use Wikipedia to research south park episodes, and if I ever get a chance I want to email the south park team the URLs to the pages with the worst arguments, with hopes they'll make fun of people like Alastairward in a future episode since they reference Wikipedia enough as it is.
Anthony cargile (talk) 22:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
5 times? That's just warming up. You'll get your "My edit got reverted by A.W. 25 times and all I got was this lousy T-shirt" shirt when you've earned it :)
Yeah, it's thoroughly annoying. But you cannot do anything about it, since we do not own the articles in question, whereas others do. Also, you cannot question others' behaviour, since they are right and righteous. We are vandals with malicious intent. Yeah, you didn't know it, but we're the dark side o_0 Thanks for chiming in, though. Keep up the good work. R-E-S-T-E-C-P! Stijndon (talk) 08:24, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe... indeed could've been a nice episode, telling the story of Alastairworm on Wikipickia, maybe teaming with Professor Chaos or something. NotAnotherAliGFan (talk) 19:59, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

lol, I'm really going to look up matt and trey and send them these links, telling them to really name names! Given that ProfessorChaos is butters' alter ego, it would make it perfect! Anthony cargile (talk) 20:49, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Check this out - care to contribute? Wouldn't blame you if you didn't... I guess you really grew tired of this $#!+. Still, I'd like an opinion. NotAnotherAliGFan (talk) 20:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About the warning

My apologies Anthony, for re-doing the warning I gave you. I didn't know the guidelines on that one. Who watches the watchmen... eh? Sorry! --Soetermans | is listening | what he'd do now? 00:40, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

lol, nah its cool. Anthony cargile (talk) 01:04, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhat Funny

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Stijndon#New_edit_war

Just reusing his own arguments. Thought you might get a chuckle out of this.

Little troll likes to watch this page, yet accused me of stalking him once (here). Just find it ironic, especially when I found a link to this section in 2 places (so I renamed it). Needs a job or something. Anthony cargile (talk) 23:08, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]