User talk:Cameron Scott

About your edit of my additions to the Merritt Butrick entry: Your arrogance is really annoying. Ferrante Albrizzi (talk) 11:59, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Srry, not to annoy you, Cameron, yet I would know if at all possible: why do you blank your page with only three or four messages? I am curious, and confused. No offense, but wouldn't everything still show up on History? And how would it disrupt the clarity of the page. (I know this is none of my business, but if it is because for some reason you have taken offense at my messages, please let me know) Aidoflight (talk) 02:01, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I am moving the references to the introduction.Eros of Fire (talk) 17:00, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Not to annoy you or anything, but as you seem to be an expert on organization, shouldn't Marvel Zombies or Marvel Zombies vs. The Army of Darkness be shortened or at least more clearly organized? Sorry, but as you deemed pages such as Doctor Strange or Dark Reign worthy of erasing such information, it would seem you would not advocate excessive information in other such pages in a in-universe fashion. I mean, Strange has been part of Marvel for, like, decades, but his article is now, well... I know the books are hugely popular, yet I liked Doctor Strange too. However, I have come to ask only for advice, and if I am wrong, and the pages should stay put, please forgive me, as I, too, have made mistakes. Aidoflight (talk) 20:25, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Very well, thank you, answer only this: how could the zombie virus infect Galactus, Strange, and Phoenix? and is there going to be a marvel zombies 5? Aidoflight (talk) 20:29, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Wait, Cameron, hold on, I thought I read somewhere Galactus was a physical cosmic entity, as he needed technology and appears to show genuine emotion? Or am I the one wrong? Aidoflight (talk) 20:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I know, but after the 4th one, will there be another? Aidoflight (talk) 20:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Just on this, I had occasion to look at the Doctor Strange page whilst tidying up Dormammu. Given that this article is in a disgraceful state, I am going to rework the entire thing. I'd like you to take a look once complete as here it is not my intent to recount every appearance since the early 1960's, but rather create a truly good article for both layman and fan alike. Stephen Strange certainly deserves better than the rambling POV and lists that pass for an article at present. Asgardian (talk) 08:07, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Could I possibly ask you another question, if you do not feel very irritated by me this moment? Well, since those Marvel Zombie books are enormously popular, why hasn't Marvel just cancelled writing superhero genre and just fully move into horror; I mean, it would be good for business. P.S. I have not edited the Doctor Strange page since the major revamp (as it is now rather just a waste of my own time), and thus I should point out that Asgardian is basically calling the edits of others "disgraceful"; also, did the current version not be affected greatly by your own edits? Really, how is it "disgraceful" or POV? Could you just let me know, precisely, since Asgardian always deletes my replies to his own messages to me? Thanks. Aidoflight (talk) 21:16, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

BNP

Hello there - remember me - I have finished my exams at leeds (need to get a job :( ) and have some time for some editing - I see you arebusy with the skinheads and thought I would lend a hand - I plan to do mainly comics stuff however, got anyarticles you want fixing? --Coxsmith (talk) 13:56, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm out

I've got to confess I forgot how much work it is to get things right on contentious articles like the BNP. I'm getting out before I get hopelessly involved. I hope you all end up with a good solution in the end. Before I go I just found that I also have access through Cambridge to Wood et. al., and they have just the kind of quote I was looking for:

Academics studying right-wing extremism argue that the organisation is still fascist¹ and has strategically masked its core ideology behind the deployment of ‘moderate’ language (e.g. Carter, 2005; Copsey, 2004; Renton, 2003; for an earlier discussion of this with respect to the National Front, see Billig, 1978).

¹There is a great deal of debate over definitions of fascism. Billig (1989) identifies three core features: nationalism/racism; anti-Marxism and anti-communism; and anti-democracy. In his argument that the BNP is a fascist organisation, Copsey uses Roger Griffin's (1991) characterization of fascism as a form ‘of populist ultra-nationalism which seeks the rebirth of the nation through a radical social, moral and political revolution’ (Copsey, 2004, p. 81).

Maybe it would be a good idea to incorporate this as a quote in the references. Anyway, ad infinitum I'm sure you'll work it out. Bigbluefish (talk) 14:46, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Your unfair (and wrong) "coatracking" accusation...

I've responded to your comment on my talk page. ₪— CelticWonder (T·C) 19:50, 8 June 2009 (UTC) "

An award for your "help" with my subpages, RantMedia, and apparently now by extension Rizzn

LOL, wow, you're a sport... ₪— CelticWonder (T·C) 08:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC) "

Emely1219 sock

If you do open a case, I'd like to see the IP of Scramblecase (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) compared in a checkuser. This is another SPA that turned up to oppose me (passionately) out of the blue, lost the argument, then disappeared. I seem to be generating these socks wherever I go, and I have a suspect who I think is using libraries/work computers to make sure he's using a different IP than his usual one, thus dodging checkuser. But he may have made the mistake of creating Scramblecase and Emely1219 from the same outside IP location, in which case: gotcha! ► RATEL ◄ 15:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Of course, Ratel. You're being persecuted. Your "generation of socks" (still harping on that false accusation, I see) could not possibly have anything to do with your own antisocial and inappropriate behavior. Everyone who says a negative word about your contributions must, by definition, be the same person, because you are a pristine and heroic editor of epic proportions. As you may note, I haven't disappeared. I just find that, as much as I truly appreciate the concept and nature of WP, the enforcement of WP policies are far too lax for me to waste my time fighting for them. I continue to use the site, and I've made a couple of random corrections here and there (without signing in, so you get to continue to call me a SPA). So, yes, "you won," Ratel. Revel in your victory...on a website...as an anonymous user...over another anonymous user. I've got some of of those actual, factual, real life accomplishments to go enjoy.

On topic, feel free to do whatever you wish with whomever Emely1219 is. And feel free to do an IP check on my account. I've only ever signed in on my desktop (in my home) or my laptop (at home or on a mobile modem). Perhaps you've forgotten that I made quite clear my openness to actual voice verification of my unique identity. Your complaints are quite tiresome. Scramblecase (talk) 20:05, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

And I am you according to that editor <g> which would take some serious violation of physical laws. Collect (talk) 21:47, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

All of which tends to prove my point. Scramblecase, months after his interaction with me, continues to monitor my every move, just like we know Collect does. What an incredible coincidence. There are some sick puppies editing here. Not enough being used. ► RATEL ◄ 23:50, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

And again sorry to disillusion you, I use a "watchlist" and do not follow you at all. Nor would I wish to follow you. Collect (talk) 01:32, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

lol this is hilarious..... I didn't know what ratel was talking about when he said he's reminded of scramblecase, I thought it was some obscure policy or investigation that found sockpuppets. Ratle, cameron scott if you would like.... I will send you links to my facebook, myspace, twitter and everything else I can think of that may prove who I am and who I am not. You want my phone number as well? hahahah you guys really are paranoid as hell!

Go right ahead and send all that info to me via email. I'd like to call you and have a chat. As I'm an experienced editor, you may find my anecdotes useful in your research. ► RATEL ◄ 04:09, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Ratel, you seem to be suffering from Delusions of reference. Offline friends who found my previous interaction with you incredibly amusing (and your behavior more outrageous and arrogant than a reality show "celebrity") saw your usual paranoid silliness and sent me the link. It's also not too hard to check Special:WhatLinksHere/User:Scramblecase, incidentally. What are you, new? Oh, wait. I am. Right. So I'm not supposed to know how to use all these references.

I haven't bothered to "look" for you in the months since our exchange. I apologize profusely if this shatters your Ratel-centric world view, but I'm not that interested in you. Leave me out of your ridiculous paranoid ravings, and you'll never hear from me. It's really that simple. Scramblecase (talk) 07:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

wellll helllooooooo scramblecase!! Since we are both being accused of the same thing... being the same person.....(I'm the wide-eyed innocent version) I figured I should say hello!!!!! Ratel, check your email. ;)Emely1219 (talk) 07:25, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Per WP policies, I recommend you not give anyone personal information other than a WP admin. Too many cases of stalking and the like have occured when personal information has been sent to others, and WP can not really help after the genie is out of the bottle, or the horse is out of the barn. Collect (talk) 13:20, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

You're advising people about stalking now? Delicious irony. ► RATEL ◄ 15:00, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Please redact that charge. I have never "stalked" anyone on WP at all, and your apparent claim is highly objectionable. Thanks. Collect (talk) 15:02, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I've decided I like all 3 of you (you too cameron scott!!!) You are all so damn witty!!!! :)Emely1219 (talk) 18:54, 17 June 2009 (UTC)