User talk:Dreaded Walrus

Dreaded Walrus, Fun fact, eBaumsworld DOES infact steal things from other websites to use on their own for profit. Maybe if you did research and weren't such a prick by calling it nonsense and actually looking into things, you would have noticed the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wildarms7000 (talk • contribs)

Hello! Thanks for the kind comment! To be completely honest with you, I do not like eBaum's World myself, and I know that they have taken things from, say, YTMND in the past without giving credit. But this is an encyclopedia, and if you turned to any page in a real encyclopedia, you wouldn't expect to see comments (poorly formatted) suggesting that they engage in anal sex with dogs.

If you spend time actually reading the article, you will see that it mentions that they have used things from other websites without permission, and without giving credit. We feel, as a community, that portraying the facts in cases like this often is a much better way of conveying what a website/person/idea is about than simply getting rid of everything on a page and putting the letters "NEDM". --Dreaded Walrus 04:44, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dreaded, just wandered over from YTMND, and thus via eBaum to your page; I'd like to salute your dedication to Wikipedian policy. I don't like eBaum either, but at least we can keep it to the facts.--Unnatural20 02:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thank you for the (genuinely) kind comment! Like I say, on subjects like this, Adolf Hitler and Jack Thompson, it is best to merely list the facts, and they will often speak for themselves. It almost beyond logic that someone who hates something that deserves hating so much, that they would get rid of all the facts on those pages and replace it with, for example, "hitler sucks cocks". DAMNING indictment there!

But seriously, thanks for the compliment, it looks like you've been doing some vandal fighting too, so have a big pat on the back from me. And another reason I like you? The contribution you made before this one was to Mother 3, so have a high five for that. :) --Dreaded Walrus 06:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

d'oh.

Hey sorry about the accidental vandalism! Bad form on my part - I'm new to the whole wiki thing and didn't do my homework well enough it seems. The content of the part of the article I deleted is incorrect. Since it can't be edited or deleted, can it be disputed? :)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghostgirl (talk • contribs)

Don't worry about being new, everyone's new at some part, and I made mistakes back then too. The thing with that section is that it can't really be "disputed", as it can instantly be proven or disproven. What needs to be discussed is what part of that section you feel is incorrect, and in what way it is incorrect. Feel free to discuss this on the talk page of the Oblivion page. In fact, I'll give you a bit of help here. Click this link and you're all ready to start typing. And don't forget to sign all your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~), as that will automatically change to say who wrote that bit, and when they wrote it. Thank you. :) --Dreaded Walrus 10:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like

I like how you mark almost all of your edits as minor, as if you're too humble to suggest that anything you add is major. The Mekon 12:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am a humble man. My only love is for the goaste.--Dreaded Walrus 12:17, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brothers in Arms 3

About the camera in BIA3, it is a camera placed inside a 3rd person character. I know there are other games where you can see your feet, but they are not really there. They are attached to the camera as well as the gun and what you see is different to everyone else. The level of detail on the gun you see through the camera is a lot more detailed than what others see when they look at you, say in multi-player. Some games when you reload, you see your hands and pulling the clip out, but when others look at you, its a low res gun and the clip doesn't even move. Gearbox has said their idea is new and called "first-person actor" so it's worth having the info there. X360 07:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A poem

I have left you a personal poem on your user page. There is no need to pay me for this service. The Mekon 14:25, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism revert

Thanks for reverting that vandalism on my talk page. I am very grateful. Kingutd 06:43, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, no problem mate. I have your page on my watchlist from back when you did the Football Manager templates, and I just happened to see it, that's all. :) --Dreaded Walrus 06:45, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lair (video game) vandalism

I didn't see the original request when I first posted and only spotted it later, I was reading up on the info in the original request when your message arrived. Would the best course be to remove my request or just mark it as being a mistaken multiple request? - X201 13:48, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd probably just leave it there, to be honest. We'll see what they'll do. It might just make the urgency of the matter clear. As most of the vandals seem to be either IP or new, semi-protection will probably be what they'll choose, but either one is probably necessary, I'd say.--Dreaded Walrus 13:54, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mossley

I thought you may be interested in this. Could set a standard which other users would want to role out elsewhere, such as Barrow-in-Furness. Hope you can contribute. Jhamez84 23:01, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About the personal attacks...

About that but I'm just fed up on your miss of collaborating. And you knew it was Mr. Scare who first offended me. Also Painbearer--Fluence 22:33, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers

For saving my user page from vandalism (even though I enjoy it a lot when it happens) The Mekon 06:49, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Cheers for your comment! I hope you can do something about Tiscali soon! Marbles333 16:33, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry.

Apologies for removing your comment from my talk page, but I had to revert back to get rid of Fluence's insane Keane powertrip. I wouldn't worry about what he thinks of you, if you're not in Keane then you're just a tiny-faced insignificance to him. Mr. Scare 09:15, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's alright. I was trying to look through Wikipedia policy, because I know there's a policy against editing others comments, let alone other people's comments on that person's talk page in response to someone entirely unrelated to the editor. Poor Fluence, he only wants to help (Wikipedia to have poor English articles on every aspect of Keane's lives). --Dreaded Walrus 09:18, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fluence strikes again! Cheers for spotting that. Mr. Scare 11:26, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for reversing that personal attack on my talk page.--Bedford 01:19, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I was just looking through his contribs, and saw that. He also said something on the Talk:Rush Limbaugh page, but I'm not really involved in that debate, and I don't want to get involved, so I'll just leave that there for now. I did leave a warning on his page though, just a template.

How to put a reference properly:

In order to read this properly open the edit function and then show preview.

...(text of the article)...^[1]...(article continues)...

at the end of the article your text ...(what should be listed as your reference)... gets automatically listed below the following command:

^ ...(what should be listed as your reference)...

More information can be added on how the refernces appear:

Wandalstouring 20:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that. I just felt it was important to add it to the article, hoping that someone else would be able to change it to a proper reference, rather than just an external link. So thanks. :)--Dreaded Walrus 20:26, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gitaroo Man

Hiya!

What's up? Do you like Gitaroo Man? Or did you just write the article? By the way, It's REALLY awesome! Thankz for the info cuz now I have the game!! Woot!

Thankz much:) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Demonstarr (talk • contribs) .

While I can't claim that I wrote the article (I didn't - most of my edits have been minor changes, or reverts), I can say that I am a fan of the game, and I have been for a couple of years now. You don't need to thank me personally for the information, because again I didn't write it, but I appreciate the kudos all the same. :P

Also, just as a guideline, remember to add ~~~~ to the end of the post, and it will expand to your real signature, which will include a clickable version of your name. Just helps for future readers, you know? Anyway, if you ever have any questions about Wikipedia, feel free to ask. :) --Dreaded Walrus 20:38, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey bro

Thanks for trying to help out with the article in my sandbox. However, the reason I put <nowiki> for that stuff was so that 1) the Fair Use Image would not be displayed in my Userspace, which is against Wikipedia policy, and 2) so that the code for inclusion of this article into various categories could be retained without actually putting a dead article into them. If you don't mind, I'd like to keep it that way for now. Sorry if I seem like I'm stepping on your toes; I appreciate your help. —Lantoka ^{( talk | contrib)} 10:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. =) —Lantoka ^{( talk | contrib)} 10:54, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(after edit conflict, in response to first post) - No problem whatsoever, I hadn't thought of it like that. I reverted my own edit. Also, remember to remind your friends over at Genmay to sign their talk page comments (if they would sign up for an account too, that would be even better), as it helps keep track of who said what, and respond appropriately, e.t.c. --Dreaded Walrus 10:55, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You know the funny thing bro? My account over there is broken. I haven't posted there in years! Your comment on the discussion page should do the trick though. ;) Thanks again for your help. —Lantoka ^{( talk | contrib)} 10:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I've added it to my watchlist, so that I can keep an eye on things, and in the rare possibility of vandalism, revert it e.t.c.

Also, I will be able to respond to comments on the talk page that way, and add any unsigned templates that will almost certainly be needed from time to time. --Dreaded Walrus 11:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again

Hey again! Thanks 4 the advice- I'll be sure to do that soon! see- look! ^-^

Demonstarr 19:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS3!

Hey once again:)

Well, today is release day 1 of the PS3. I heard that some guy got shot for loitering. Do you think that the PS3 will be worth the wait? AOTS doesn't think so. They say that the Xbox 360 will kick it's ass. My friend says that there were a lot of people waiting there for it. I think they'll all be dissapointed with the results. I was watching the Tokyo Game Show last night and there are a lot of great games in Japan right now. What do you think? Personally, I think that the Wii is the dominator. They say it's gonna be casual to play, too.

P.S: Gitaroo Man rox!!

Demonstarr 14:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You'll have to let me know what you think of the PS3, because I don't live in North America. I live in England, and it doesn't come out over here until March, at the earliest. :(

Hehe, I'm looking forward to the Wii though, and that is coming out over here in December, which isn't too long after the NA launch. Nintendo Loves Me. :P --Dreaded Walrus 15:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Cheers, Old Walry. The Mekon 17:10, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. It seems some people just can't see sarcasm, poor people. --Dreaded Walrus 17:17, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey Bowl Deletion Nomination

I've nominated Turkey Bowl for deletion [[1]], if you'd like to take part in the debate. Thanks for directing me to the AFD instructions, too. Héous 18:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all. I'll make my way over there in a little bit. One thing I should mention is you've got to be careful about leaving messages such as this on users' talk pages, as it may be regarded as soliciting votes, which is against policy. As I was involved in the talk page just moments earlier it's fine, especially as I had already mentioned that I, too, agree it should be deleted, but just as a general warning in future be a bit careful. :) --Dreaded Walrus 18:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that wasn't my intention. I'll be more careful in the future. Héous 18:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nicolás Millán

I have added the citation you have requested. With Thanks Kurt000 22:18, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I know how to do them, I just can't get my head round it.

Like rugby. --Dreaded Walrus 00:08, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Military brat

Hey Walrus, Just out of curiosity, other than the problem with the focus of the article being on the US, what did you think of the page military brat. I'm working on improving it, but don't know where/what needs to be improved. Unfortuantely I can't find anything on non-US brats right now... so what else can I do to improve it? I'll watch your page for a response.Balloonman 16:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't read the whole article - I was just browsing Wikipedia, saw the template and a quick speed-read made me think that it deals with the US side of things, so I just swapped it for the correct, more precise template.

The problem is, I would say that the whole "military brat" thing is a lot more common in the US than elsewhere. They do exist elsewhere in the world, such as here in the UK, but it's nowhere near as common, and I don't think the same term is used. I suppose it's similar to soccer mom. Parents with similar kinds of ambitions for their children exist over here too (although very rarely), though the term soccer mom is rarely used, as we prefer the term football over here for the sport, and for the parent the terms mum, mam or even mother are used.

Going back to the whole military brat thing (sorry for the sidetrack, I often do that), I aren't too clued up on the military in general, though my brother is in the army, and I could ask him in a couple of weeks when I next see him. Until then, there's always google, when you select results only from the UK.

As for other ways the article may be improved, again I only had a quick scan through, but perhaps a section on references to the term in popular culture, or how the media uses the term, or links to similar terms, as in the article on Chavs.

Sorry I couldn't be of any more help. :) --Dreaded Walrus 16:53, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the thoughts... I'm probably going to add another section to the article because I've been investigating this weakness... and apparently, most of the funding for research into military brats has been from the US military. So I'll probably add a section discussing the research funding and why it is US centric and why the conclusions may not apply to non-US brats. I've also been told that British service members live off base more and might move more while their families stay put...Balloonman 19:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, I went back an added a section on the research into Military Brats. My own experience (which is rather limited) is that the research had a heavy US bias and relatively recent (past 20 years.) While reading a compiliation of sociological studies, I came across two interesting facts:

Most research is relatively new as the subject has only been studied for the past 20 years.
Most of this reseach is sponsored by the US Armed Forces.

Currently there is extremely little done in other countries. I was wondering if, based on the bias within the research and the explanation in the article, would it be appropriate to remove the template? I won't do it because I'm biased, so I thought I'd have you take a look at it. PS respond here, I'm watching your page.Balloonman 17:29, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I've done that now. I've also modified some of the references, as if you look at the references in the old version, some of them (such as reference two) end in the author, but don't have a space after the full stop (or period), which looks a bit bad on the eyes, so I added spaces to all of them, too. I've also added the page to my watchlist now, so I can track it for the next couple of days :) --Dreaded Walrus 18:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

your rv on pinkerton

why did you wipe out those notable alumni from pinkerton's page? granted they arent FAMOUS, but they are somewhat notable. --[sebsmoot] 04:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I never even looked at the edit history. I was just browsing Wikipedia, as we do (a friend I was talking to online goes to Pinkerton Academy, it seems), and all I saw was a clearly POV alumni section. So firstly I just removed the clearly POV words (which looking at the history would have been a full revert of the previous edit, and nothing else), and then I saw that there were people there that did not have articles. Generally, most notable people in lists of notable people are links to articles that exist. I can't claim to have heard of any of these people bar Alan Shepard, not being from the US, so I just figured these people might be little-known TV personalities, you know? Either way, I'm sure you know more about the subject than I do, so feel free to re-add those people if you like, my edit was mainly for removing those POV words. :) --Dreaded Walrus 04:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Dawkins

Re these edits: please don't wikilink bulldog and rottweiler in the Dawkins article. WP:NOT a dictionary; and only makes links relevant to the context. Mikker ^(...) 17:12, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sorry. I just figured that as there was a chance that some people might not know what those breeds of dog were, that there was at least a small level of relevancy there. Still, the secularism link was appropriate, right? :) --Dreaded Walrus 17:48, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK

Sorry for that but I'm just fed up of people saying the same thing about Chaplin for months even though the page has been protected in the past. I won't do it again--Fluence 01:19, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Health Wiki Research

A colleague and I are conducting a study on health wikis. We are looking at how wikis co-construct health information and create communities. We noticed that you are a frequent contributor to Wikipedia on health topics.

Please consider taking our survey here.

This research will help wikipedia and other wikis understand how health information is co-created and used.

We are from James Madison University in Harrisonburg, Virginia. The project was approved by our university research committee and members of the Wikipedia Foundation.

Thanks, Corey 16:22, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No PS3...? Wii rox!

Sorry to hear that they don't come out until late:( It's a shame.... The PS3 seems.... well... I don't know. But the Wii seems to be making a comeback even though a lot of people at my school say that it sucks. Actually, my cousin just got a Wii on it's release day of Thanksgiving:) He's not going to get it until Christmas (his mom didn't know what it was, so he came with her...) Oh well. Truth is, I think that the Wii is much better... Have you seen the reviews of 'The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess'!? It looks like such a blast, even on the Gcube, but with the Wii, it's probably better.... What do you think?

Demonstarr 22:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. The PS3 could be said to be the antithesis of the PS2. Instead of being full of great games like the PS2, it's just full of crap.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.254.86.180 (talk • contribs).

Why are you messing with my user "talk" page?

You took it upon yourself to remove some material from there without explanation here; care to let me know why? And please refrain from doing so in the future. +ILike2BeAnonymous 19:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the "WikiHalo" from your userpage because it was awarded illegitimately by User:AwarderofHalos, who went round adding Halos to random users. See here. The WP:HALO project is about awarding Halos to users who the community decides (via the voting process seen here) are worthy. As your Halo was awarded at random, and the proper processes were not gone through, it is not a legitimate Halo, and therefore having it on your userpage implies endorsement where there is none.

This is the reason I removed it last time (I didn't mention a reason because I felt the removal of the Halo by User:67.68.5.189 back in January was for the same reason.

Due to the reasons provided in my first paragraph above, I shall be removing the Halo again. It is nothing personal against you, but the Halo is not there legally (for want of a better term).

Also, that was your Userpage, not your talk page. Thanks. --Dreaded Walrus 20:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, my bad, that was my userpage.

So tell me, "Dreaded Walrus" (is that what your friends call you?); just how do you know that this wikihalo was wrongly awarded to me? Isn't that kind of an epistemological impossibility? I mean, how can you climb inside that user's head to determine that it was erroneously awarded?

Not that I really give a shit about wikihalos one way or the other. +ILike2BeAnonymous 20:28, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My friends (outside of the internet, anyway) don't call me Dreaded Walrus, just as your real life friends don't call you ILike2BeAnonymous. But that is neither here nor there.

With regards to how I know that particular Halo is unwarranted, you will see above I linked to the nomination process for receiving a Wikihalo. The user that added the Wikihalo to you (and to many others within a very short period of time) did not put you up for nomination, he simply added the template to all of your userpages, with the exact same stock wording each time. He was blocked indefinitely for his actions, if I remember correctly.

Perhaps one day someone will nominate you for a Wikihalo, and you may well receive one then.

You will notice I didn't remove the Barnstar on your userpage, as that doesn't require a nomination process or any nonsense like that, and the user who gave it to you was not breaking any kind of rules themselves.

Again, I hope you take none of this personally, as that is certainly not the intention. --Dreaded Walrus 21:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, no harm, no foul. You have to understand I'm a bit irritated, as you're only one of about 3 editors the last couple days who's been doing this kind of meta-editing on either my user page or my talk page. +ILike2BeAnonymous 21:22, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Gamevideos links

I'm new to linking and editing to Wiki and looking more at the guidelines you sent over I can see I was skipping some steps sorry! I'll add to the talk page instead. Thanks for taking the time to explain.

-Jay

[1] ...(what should be listed as your reference)...

[1]