User talk:FreeMediaKid!

Welcome!

Hello, Gamingforfun365, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! GamerPro64 22:34, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

My appalling problem of my recent incident

@Ferret: Yes, I have already talked about my Star Wars: Battlefront incident and my problem to death, but—I am sorry for bringing it up again, but what other choice had I when my problem is still of existence?—I cannot both help thinking about and get a grip over it. In other words, I tend to multiply my problems by ten and then multiply them again by π², therefore greatly exaggerating the actual size of my problems, so do you have tips for me not to keep both thinking about those mistakes and possibly wishing to be blocked? I really do think that there is something wrong with me when I just cannot quite work out what, and I apologize for possibly indirectly annoying you with this topic just because of how difficult I can be at times. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 09:07, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately I did not see this message till just now, the mention didn't notify me. I wish I could offer you some advice on how to handle your thoughts and worrying about things, but I am no expert. I do hope that you continue editing and working to improve articles. Just remember that there's a lot of people editing with different opinions, and a lot of things aren't meant to be taken personally. Try not to take things overly seriously and you should be fine. If a particular article seems to be causing you trouble, try just walking away and finding a different one to focus on for a bit. -- ferret (talk) 02:42, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Okay. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 02:45, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into the local language

The Cure Award

In 2015 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs, and we would love to collaborate further.

Thanks again :) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 03:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Regarding P&G-related "improvement" tags...

(NOTE: this a reply to the discussion at Talk:Windows 7#Primary sources. Replying here because that discussion is no longer about improving the Windows 7 article. I should have done the same with the "use of non-free material" discussion at Talk:Windows_2000#Screenshot. )

Ok. Then I suggest that you consider waiting until you have greater comprehension of WP policies and guidelines before tagging articles for P&G-related improvement. I want to stress the word suggest: I am not an admin and have no authority to require anything from you. I just hope you will consider my suggestions. Jeh (talk) 23:35, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

|work= vs. |publisher=

Hi.

|work= holds the website title and |publisher= holds the owner and maintainer of the website. So, instead of |publisher=''CNET'', please write |work=CNET |publisher=CBS Interactive.

Thanks. Fleet Command (talk) 09:48, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

@FleetCommand: Very interesting. I have always seen them be used interchangeably, and I have thought that, although I am aware that I have known what the parameters do, it would be okay to do that interchangeably (and therefore fill in just the "publisher" parameter with a website title in italics). I guess that we do need to scan a lot of articles and make that better because I have always done that interchangeably.

But very interesting as to why most editors (such as those on Xbox One and especially video game articles) would do that, though. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 18:14, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

I have just requested here that a bot for that purpose be programmed. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 19:46, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

You can use |work=, |website= and |newspaper= interchangeably. They are all shortcuts for the same thing. (I use "work" because it is four letters.) But |publisher= appears after |work= and is not italicized.

User:Codename Lisa has informed that she has put together a small page to help editors write the correct parameters. Here: User:Codename Lisa/Websites and their publishers. It might prove helpful for your bot idea. Fleet Command (talk) 08:39, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

• There isn't a standard practice so there's nothing to standardize. You don't ever have to include the publisher if it isn't helpful. No one really cares as long as each article is consistent. We wouldn't switch to just italicizing the Publisher field because the fields have different metadata purposes. czar 22:56, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, there is a standard: WP:FACR. It has only one simple requirement: Citation style must be consistent. So, either the entire article must forgo publisher, or the entire article must use it wrongly, or the best option: the entire article must use it correctly.

And then there is the time when the editor writes |publisher=''Website Name'', whereas |work= (or |website= – both are aliases for the same thing) are both shorter and do the italicization.

Fleet Command (talk) 08:31, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

@Czar: may like to take a look at your comment. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 18:15, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

FYI, didn't get your ping (not quite sure why). I already mentioned that internal consistency is the only real expectation, but that there is no written-in-blood standard (very few articles are held to FACR criteria). There's no expectation to do "both", especially when the sources are mostly websites. I used to use both fields but ultimately found that it wasn't worth it, especially when a work changes publishers multiple times in its existence. czar 19:23, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

@FleetCommand:One way to create a reference list that is considered consistent (and the dominant way outside Wikipedia) is to follow a published style guide.† If, for example, Chicago Manual of Style says to include the publisher for books but not for journals, and you follow that guide, your reference list is consistent.

†Help:Citation Style 1 plus the documentation on the various template pages arguably qualify as a published citation style. Jc3s5h (talk) 19:28, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

I already know. This is not the case in Windows Vista and Windows 8 articles. They have already adopted CS1 style.

Now, is that all? Isn't there any other context-ignorant talk page stalker who wants to contribute any other remotely related or totally irrelevant subject? If there is, catch me in my talk page, please. Unwatching this. Fleet Command (talk) 15:42, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Ouch. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 16:48, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

?

This edit[1] seems so unlike your other conntributions that I wonder if perhaps someone found uot what your password is, or maybe you forgot to log off at a public computer. Was it you who wrote that? (BTW, hilarious! But I prefer the theory that he is the lead singer for stryper...) :) --Guy Macon (talk) 23:45, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

@Guy Macon: Now, let me be clear about what I was doing: while actually contributing to the article (by fixing a comma), in my mind, I felt that I needed to encourage troublemakers on Wikipedia not to call Ted Cruz the "Zodiac Killer", and I have originally planned to remove the message immediately afterwards also while making a useful edit (by removing an unnecessary comma), but—guess what—too late! I apologize for the confusion, and I will (hopefully) not do such a thing again. (Yes, I am the writer. Sorry!) Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 00:00, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

@Crboyer: Actually, yes, I did; I have relocated a serial comma which was used in a list of only two items (The comma difference—beware—is subtle!), but, other than that, I apologize for generating the confusion. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 00:11, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

So embarrassing! Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 00:15, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

No harm done. Have you seen this? :) --Guy Macon (talk) 01:11, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Ugh, please ignore my revert. :) I clicked to see the funny message and accidentally hit rollback. :) -- ferret (talk) 01:13, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Blocked

Blocked indefinitely (which is not to say permanently)—either for trolling and vandalism (see the recent contributions), or a compromised account. Any admin may unblock or adjust the duration without consulting me if a reasonable explanation is given for what's been going on. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:38, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I will come back tomorrow and explain what the situation was; I have already had an awful and hard afternoon, and it is time that I take a break from editing (anyway). Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 22:54, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

On further review, probably ignore the comment about "compromised account." I've watchlisted this page, and I'm sure Floquenbeam and others have as well, so post here when you are ready. Now turn off the computer for awhile if you haven't already, please. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:56, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Dear Administrators and fellow betrayed Wikipedians,

[Removed some personal explanation]

Now for the most important: I willfully chose to be insane not to have some fun or be disruptive, but because I felt the silly "need" to be blocked because, according to my obsessions, I knew what I was doing, and that was exactly what I have wanted: to be blocked. It was so foolish for me to form several instances of my wanting to be blocked, I apologize for stirring up the trouble that I have generated, and I wish to come up with a strategy to prevent such future instances from happening.

Sincerely, Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 05:10, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

P.S. I would never damage Wikipedia articles; I would just have trouble on talk pages. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 05:14, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

• When I say WP:Wikipedia is not therapy, I say it not out of indifference, but with the understanding that this place can be very detrimental to someone with a mental health issue that is not well managed. And we are not trained nor fit to offer mental health advice. Taking off my admin hat and putting on my fellow human being hat, I would say your first step is to consider talking with your doctor. At the very least, take a break and get to a place where you feel more in control, more confident, and then come back and ask to be unblocked. I don't think getting unblocked will be a problem at that time, but it wouldn't be wise to unblock you now. I think you will find that the majority here aren't going to judge you when you come back, but we simply can't help you deal with the problems you are having now, because of policy and because we simply lack the ability to do so effectively. At the proper time, read WP:GAB for the basic info and templates, or you can ping Newyorkbrad or myself, or any other admin you choose to review. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 15:43, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, I do take sertraline and risperidone; besides that, I will come back at around 8:00 p.m. (or 20:00) Central time. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 16:12, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Oh, and one last thing: I am also worried that people would riot on my user pages just because of my ridiculous error. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 16:16, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Gamingforfun, No-one will riot on your talk page, have no fear of that - particularly given what you have written in this thread. When people have done that in the past it has resulted in their posts being removed and a warning that they will face action in the future. I wish you well. - SchroCat (talk) 17:33, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Some thoughts, since you came to my talk page yesterday, and since NYB pointed me here:

1. When you're ready, an unblock is a no-brainer once you're in the proper frame of mind. You're a productive editor here, nobody wants you gone, I'm sure the people you disagreed with yesterday don't want you gone. I'll trust your judgement, when you say you're ready to come back, ping me (or Brad, or any admin, or use the {{unblock}} template) and you'll be unblocked.
2. I think you're providing too much personal information here. I'm not telling you what to do, but I'm suggesting no one "deserves" that personal an explanation. Keep private whatever you want to keep private. Let me know if someone attempts to use this information against you unfairly, and I will stop it. If you want, and if you tell me relatively soon, I can revdel or oversight any info you don't want to remain public. Email me if this is the case. If you're oK with it, I'll leave it alone.
3. To edit here you have to be able to deal with conflict without becoming disruptive. Your edits, for example, to Walt Disney yesterday, were not disruptive; your response to criticism, at Talk:Walt Disney, and WP:ANI, was. It does you no good, the people who disagree with you no good, and the encyclopedia no good, to start insisting you be bloccked for disruption. Paradoxically, what you were demanding to be blocked for was utterly harmless; the disruption came from your repeated demands to be blocked. Self-fulfilling prophesy.
4. WP:Wikipedia is not therapy doesn't mean "go away if you aren't normative". But it does mean "you need to leave if you habitually can't productively interact with other people"; it also means "depending on your circumstances, rough and tumble WP editing might or might not be the best thing for you, but only you know that". If you can't have a disagreement without becoming disruptive, then you should, unfortunately, leave and find something else. I suspect you can, with the proper approach, but I don't know (and don't want to know) enough about you to be sure. Only you know that, with help from people who know you.

If it helps, any time you feel like you need to be "punished" for disruption, (1) "self-block" by temporarily not editing, and (2) ask me to review on my talk page, and I'll get back to you. I'm not looking to be your permanent fairy godmother here, but it looks like this comes up, what, once a month? I can do that. There are probably dozens of much better ways to deal with conflict, but this I can offer to do without inserting myself deeply into your life. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:56, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

---

Request reason:

I think that I have calmed down and am ready to resume, and I wish to take a look at disagreements as to my edits. I would also like to apologize to @SchroCat for falsely accusing him or her of accusing me of edit warring. I will take a look at Sam Walton and Walt Disney and discuss on their talk pages to see what the problems were. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 00:42, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Floq has given some good advice worth listening to. Just take it slow and I'm sure you will do fine. I've unblocked you. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 01:02, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Apologies

It has been far too long since I have personally attacked (but not necessarily harassed) @TJRC: over a dispute concerning Star Wars Battlefront. It is also the first time when I have ever demanded to be blocked as a result of what looked like my intentionally threatening people, and that was the cause of my being very offended and perceiving the mistake as "purposeful". There have been other times wherein I would view my other mistakes as "purposeful" and therefore ask to be blocked for my "vandalism", but nothing happened. I seemed to have become more and more confident in repeating those obsessions, and this became my last straw in May 2016, when I have become NUCLEAR (emphasis added) and actually tried to have myself blocked because of what (not was but) looked like my edit warring as it was suggested, and I have finally gotten what I have wanted. Apologies for @Floquenbeam: as well for my vitriol on his talk page. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 00:35, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

@Floquenbeam: What should I do when an editor thinks that I am e.g. purposely violating copyrights and subsequently warns me of a block? That from how I look at it is the wrong thing to say to me and the wrong tone to have: mentioning "despite receiving multiple warnings"—what warnings?—and then "will result in your being blocked" triggers an explosion in my head and makes me feel ashamed of my own editing. I basically reject what looks like or I perceive as his or her assuming bad faith, even if it is something that might persuade me to improve. I understand that the editors are trying to prevent trouble of the future, but suggesting that I am breaking one of the guidelines (such as especially edit warring) is what makes me as a perfectionist feel insulted. What must I do? Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 08:12, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

I wonder whether these two persons have received my ping. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 20:46, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

• I don't think I got either of these pings, but (of course) got your note on my talk page. As far as apologies are concerned, no worries, none needed (at least for me). As far as your question about copyright warnings (above, from two weeks ago), I don't really know what we're talking about here. If this is resolved, then it can stay resolved. If you'd still like feedback, please give me more info on what discussion to look at. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:38, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

@Floquenbeam: I used to upload images from Google Earth and (mistakenly) think that I have made those images by using Google Earth, and my first warning not to repeat the mistake was my last warning. Over one year later, I found the message to be very offensive (which is why I have attacked the website by uploading my own image that refers to me as "ludicrous" and an "idiot"). I now have one problem with Wikipedia: I am now threatening to vandalize the German Wikipedia and demanding to be blocked lest I go to Hell just because I have made a mistake to upload a logo without permission. The fact that the Wikipedia had logos gave me the impression that, perhaps, they do accept copyrighted logos after all (despite being told not so in the talk page of "Upload file"). Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 00:05, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

I am hurting my own reputation because I am showing signs of anger and hostility. I thought for sure that I had learned from my mistake, but I guess that this was only the beginning. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 00:16, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Let us face the fact: I have learned absolutely nothing from my own scandal. I am a true failure. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 00:19, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

I think that my wonderful editing days are over, I feel that you editors are better off without me, I think that people can not stand my anger and my hostility, and there is no doubt from my point of view that I have lost. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

I have a very hard time understanding your point of view, where you seem to know you're being self-destructive but still doing it (well, no, I guess we all do that sometimes, but not to this extent). Tell you what: I hereby ban you from editing the German Wikipedia for a week (enforced by your sense of right and wrong, not by a block). As far as warnings go, a warning template is not some badge of shame, it's a message giving you information so you can edit better in the future. Think of it that way. It's a hard life if you consider every mistake to be some kind of utter failure; learn from them, don't despair because of them. p.s. I got this ping. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:42, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

I have removed those comments of threats to vandalize the German Wikipedia and said that I would edit more constructively on my German talk page. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 01:06, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

I admit, @Floquenbeam:, on my German talk page that I was wrong to respond that way, and I also apologize to @SchroCat: for accusing him or her of accusing me of edit-warring. That is all that I needed to say. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 01:45, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. It always shows character when people are big enough to apologise. – SchroCat (talk) 17:07, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

• • Also, I'm pretty confident the reason your pings aren't working is your signature still links to your old user pages (User:Gff365, User talk:Gff365), not your new ones. So the software that checks to see if you've signed a post to determine whether to leave a ping or not doesn't recognize it as a signature, and so doesn't ping. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:44, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi, just wanted to leave a big thanks for your recent work on Worms Armageddon ☺️ --Vladimir (talk) 04:16, 7 September 2016 (UTC)