User talk:Dude527

So Wesker is confirmed dead

Are you disappointed that your favorite character is no more? ;) [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.106.45.89 (talk) 22:30, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't know why you feel the need to be a pest. I never once said I was a Wesker fanboy, or even implied it. I simply saw that there was a huge edit warring issue going on, and I decided to try to give editors equal ambiguity; not having the article side either way. To be honest, Wesker's death being confirmed is good; it puts a definitive cap on all the editing warring, and gives us solids to go on. Now stop being a pest; get a life and buzz off. The Guy ^(edits) 05:42, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Brisingr

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Brisingr you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Pmlineditor 15:33, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Fuzz

So you are saying that even though Fuzz has pictures that only he would have, and information that hasn't been posted anywhere else, that http://www.myspace.com/fuzzk is not his Myspace? What more confirmation do you need? You, I, and everybody who knows Fuzz both know it is his site, so can we stop with the antics? The articles on the band members are going to be stub class and nominated for deletion if there isn't actual information there. ^TheWeak_Willed 02:50, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Quite frankly, yes I'm saying that. There is reasonable doubt because of one thing: you can't verify that to be his at all. It's a bit different with an official Disturbed MySpace or a MAAW IV website, etc, because other websites take news posted and they go, "According to www._______.com, this happened" and that eliminates reasonable doubt as to the sources' genuineness. With Kmak's MySpace (yes, I know personally that it's his), it isn't his OFFICIAL MySpace; it's his personal MySpace. That allows for reasonable doubt as to its genuineness, in the eyes of the very policy you gave me to read. No external sources have verified that to be his personal MySpace account, and therefore the information there is unreliable. Who cares about pictures? When the source goes under scrutiny, do you think "Yeah, he has pictures..." is going to help the case? Absolutely not! There's reasonable doubt here, and I can't allow this source as an editor. That, and this source would also fail WP:SELFPUB #5: "the article is not based primarily on such sources." That would be our only source in the article. It would be relying primarily on that source for its info, and so it fails 2 self-publishing verification guidelines. As an editor, I can't allow that, again. As for Kmak, I do believe personally the best thing to do is to delete his page. He's no longer in the band, and he's faded into the background and out of the spotlight before the band hit real popularity, so the already sparse supply of information will only become more hard-to-find, unlike the other band members. The Guy ^(edits) 02:58, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm talking about all the band members. The only one that has any real info is Draiman's. All the others have little info, while there is a ton of info out there and MTV or another "reliable" source such as blabbermouth hasn't set the info in stone. ^TheWeak_Willed 03:09, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

That may be so, but that doesn't mean we cite faulty sources, necessarily. The Guy ^(edits) 03:11, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

DIII art and direction

Could you please help with Art and Direction section in DIII. Guidelines for what quotes are and aren't acceptable would be nice. Once again we run the risk of the section swallowing up the entire article. Too many subjective viewpoints and not enough information.--Tyraz (talk) 00:37, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll certainly review it and see what I can dig up. The Guy ^(edits) 00:45, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Korn's ninth studio album class

I moved the class from "Stub" to "Future", which is where you put future albums. KMFDM FAN ^(talk!) 15:04, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Good work. The Guy ^(edits) 19:13, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Disturbed

Once again you are reverting my edits for no real discriptive reason, as seen on the articles Indestructible (Disturbed album), Ten Thousand Fists, The Night and Perfect Insanity, upon restoring my work I left a question asking what the hell you are doing on the article for "The Night" here. You might wanna consider answering it. • GunMetal Angel 19:46, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

You know, Gunmetal Angel, it would be more helpful if you explained your original edit. Timmeh (review me) 19:50, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Please, come off it. The only differences between our edits was tense, really. You keep screwing up the leads to read "The song is released[...]" when proper tense would read "The song was released[...]." On the albums, you're removing the caption under the album cover (which states what the album cover is, and what is depicted), giving no actual reason for doing so. And I did explain the reasons for my reverts in my edit summaries. Do you expect me to go to your talk page? So while I'm simply protecting the articles from bad verb tense and unexplained (and quite unnecessary) edits (such as removing album cover captions), you're editing small things, but making a big deal when I go to correct them. Come to think of it, you're the one who doesn't explain your edits (as Timmeh! pointed out). None of your edits contain an edit summary (besides your latest ones that ask me "what the hell" I am doing across multiple different articles), none of your edits appear significantly helpful (and are, in fact, highly disputed across multiple articles), and yet you're on my talk page asking me why I'm reverting your odd edits. So you explain yourself; I have already explained myself. Explain to me why it's proper in an article to contain improper verb tense, and how having no image caption in the infobox aids the article. The Guy ^(edits) 19:19, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

My original edits to those articles are fixing the formats and correcting links, and making changes that should be the way they are per discussions on talk pages, Disturbed are not a heavy metal band, it distinctly says they're a rock band on the lead on the article and it has been made that way among numerous discussions, two of the articles for their singles says "heavy metal" band in the lead, I changed it to "rock band" among several other fixes but once again my edits to Disturbed-related articles got reverted by Dude527 for no real significance. - Although at least now, you kept the edits, and restored the captions to two of their album articles with an explaining reason, so thank you for that! • GunMetal Angel 19:08, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The links were perfectly fine; I don't see why "Compact Disc" has to be fully capitalized, it isn't in its own article (it is not a proper noun). Sure, the genre disputes were settled for certain pages, but as the genre of the band is so controversial, as well as ever-changing, the articles can't all say the same thing (that would require tons of work come a new consensus). You interrupted other consensuses, though; ones held on the talk pages of the articles in question, just to try and coincide with ones you yourself participated in (which hold nothing on consensuses made on the relevant talk pages). However, that's all your post has tried to explain; none of your other edits are yet explained by you. The Guy ^(edits) 19:26, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Templates

I don't want to go disrupting Wikipedia to prove a point. Should I go and removed all non-articles from templates? Free (talk) ^(HRWiki) 20:15, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

That's good; interrupting Wikipedia is a bad thing, especially in the case of proving a point. Look, you're still pretty new here. Don't deliberately seek out non-article entries on templates, just the ones you edit. Not all templates, though; just the ones that aren't meant to be informative, like the one we're disputing over. I know it seems good to try and complete the database, etc, add information wherever it can go, but the template in question is only meant to be an addendum to relevant articles. A collective place to link every relevant article on the topic; not a database of relevant terms that would ultimately only tell reader relevant terms. The point is, the template has little potential to actually be informative: That is the job of the articles it goes on. The template just links relevant articles together. It is not meant to be informative. The Guy ^(edits) 21:26, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Elika concept art prince of persia.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Elika concept art prince of persia.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 14:33, 12 September 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 14:33, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Just a quick shout, you mentioned awhile back you had more sources to expand the article, utilizing them now might help deal with any criticism that would lead to merging in the bud with minimal hassle if you can.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:14, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye out; I don't have a great number at hand anymore, but I could surely find them. The Guy ^(edits) 21:19, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

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 the 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 03:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Neidermeyer's Mind (album)

Hello Dude527, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Neidermeyer's Mind (album) - a page you tagged - because: Previous article was deleted for lack of references: this version has sources. May not be notable - take to AfD if you like. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. JohnCD (talk) 13:31, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Dude527. You have new messages at JohnCD's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

PoP: Forgotten Sands

Hmm, fair points you make. I (personally) don't think there's any point in having sections when there's so little detail (while it's still a stub), but if you want to separate out the lead (so the information is contained once in the article, in sections), I've no objections! Thanks! Fin©™ 21:21, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

I tweaked it a bit, think it looks better now. Hope you agree! Thanks! Fin©™ 21:26, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Seeing as the developer, platforms, series, plot (which I've just added) and release date are all mentioned in the lead, I'm not sure what you mean by extremely important (unless you mean in the future). Thanks! Fin©™ 21:43, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good! Likewise (pleasure doing business!) =) Thanks! Fin©™ 22:22, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Elika prince of persia.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Elika prince of persia.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 03:22, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Collaboration of Punks

HEY HO, LET'S GO!!! Punk rockers—As you know, the Ramones are undeniably the first punk rock band, so it is vital to this genre that we collaborate to improve their scope! So far, I have worked on the band's first three albums, and it would be awesome if all the punks on Wiki would aid in expanding/cleaning the Ramones articles. You can see my progress here. Please fellow fans, do this for the old-school punk. CrowzRSA 17:15, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Prince of Persia the forgotten sands.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Prince of Persia the forgotten sands.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.

• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.

• If you recieved this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.

• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 10:35, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Princeofpersialogo.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Princeofpersialogo.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, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. 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 per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:41, 25 March 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fleet Command (talk) 16:41, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Disturbed remember.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Disturbed remember.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:25, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Partnership

I saw you were the editor who raised Indestructible (Disturbed album) to GA and nominated it for FA twice. Well I myself am a Disturbed fan. I was thinking of expanding from the current professional wrestling articles I edit to expanding some articles that I have interests in. Disturbed is one of those interests. I was thinking of working towards a Good Topic on all of their albums. I'm wondering if you would like to work with me on this project someday?--WillC 21:31, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm not much of a regular editor anymore, but if I ever get back in to the swing of things, I would certainly be happy to help. At the moment I usually only check on the pages to ensure that no vandalism has occurred. I hardly make large edits anymore. But as I said, I would certainly do what I can. The Guy ^(edits) 22:38, 10 September 2010 (UTC)