User talk:Sergecross73

32 Leaves

I don't know how to respond so I'll post this here. You can delete if when you've read it. The lead singer is in a band called Codec (Facebook search: Codec Band) and their bio states they broke up in 2010 I think it was. I messaged them a while back and they said via MySpace message that they'd broken up.

This time, I come in peace :D

Arkhandar has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Holiday wishes!

Sergecross73, I wish you excellent holidays and a glorious 2013! I hope you'll have great meals, memorable family reunions and joyful times with those you love. :) Salvidrim!, signing off on my best year yet, thanks in no small part to y'all!

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q1 2013

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 6, No. 1 — 1st Quarter, 2013
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q1 2013, the project has:

• 154 Featured Articles
• 53 Featured Lists
• 7 Featured Topics
• 5 Featured Pictures

• 43 A-Class Articles
• 589 Good Articles
• 9 Good Topics

---

Content

• Changes to Featured and Good content
• News items and announcements

• Feature: "A-class: Is It Worth It?"
• Interview: Teancum

---

Project Navigation

• VG Project Main pages

  • Main project – talk
  • Project category – talk
  • Portal – talk

  VG Project Departments

  • Assessment – talk
  • Cleanup – talk
  • Peer review – talk

   

  • Reference library – talk
  • Newsletter – talk
  • Video game images – talk

To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

FYI

Hi. I don't really know if you are aware of this, but Fladrif is involved in a discussion regarding his block/unblock and incivility at ANI. Just wanting to give you a heads up on the matter. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:25, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

I took a look after you told Salvidrim. He looks like another one of those editors that is bound to be indef blocked sooner or later because of his unwillingness or inability to place nice. Sergecross73 msg me 00:48, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

All right. Thanks. By the way, in spite of our disagreements and controversies that we have been involved, I want to also commend you for your work as a video game contributor and an administrator, in addition to Salvidrim and others who may be watching. I also want to apologize if I was ever uncivil in anyway or caused issues with users in any way whether its intentional or unintentional. I honestly didn't mean for some of the past and current things to happen. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:57, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words! I don't believe you've ever really cause me any trouble, I just hope you don't cause yourself undue stress when dealing with difficult editors. But you know your limits better than I. Congrats on the Sonic Adventure GA. I'm sorry my wiki-attention span is so random, sporadic, and fickle that I don't always assist you as much as I initially intend. Sergecross73 msg me 02:35, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

No hard feelings at all. Thanks. At least I have moved on from that dispute with Niemti. In fact, a user has apologized to me since he realized that he made some observations that were in a negative light. Now then, Sonic the Hedgehog has a peer review in case you are interested in it. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:47, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Meh

No offense, but I see you as a bias admin. Niemti clearly did something wrong, and other editors are continuing to follow that trend. And you agree and allow it? What is that? I may be difficult, but definitely not impossible. I prefer every ANI encounter dealt by some other Admin.Lucia Black (talk) 00:03, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Well then, again, best of luck. You've got a lot of uphill battles ahead of you at this rate, with your attitude and interpretations of policy. Sergecross73 msg me 00:13, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I am trying to help Lucia Black calm down and have pointed out relevant information of policies. I've also reminded her if she wants to let off steam, she shouldn't do it on Wikipedia, which is a collaborative environment. We'll see what happens. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:17, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Look, if someone has a personal issue with my attitude, fine. Its not like I'm like this with every1. Example: Some editors in WP:SE seem to find me reliable. Just as another specific editor has made it difficult to discuss, with constant cursing when irritated, constantly deletes discussions in his talkpage without closure. Etc. Interpretation of policies are fine.Lucia Black (talk) 00:29, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

If you have issues with others, I think it's always best to apologize to the users if that makes you feel bad. Lucia Black, I do see you as a good editor. However, I do feel that it's best if you should distance yourself from difficult editors who are causing you stress. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:37, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your efforts, SJones. I won't interact with her, as to not cannibalize your efforts. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 00:58, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I just don't want her or myself to get involved in contentions confrontations with other users who give us extra trouble. Judgesurreal777, a fellow member of the Square Enix WikiProject, supported my comment at User talk:Lucia Black#Notification regarding the possible issues she may have with other users. I am sorry she feels that way about some other users. If someone asks a user not to post on their talk page, they really shouldn't unless they have to. They will have to take extra steps to be respectful. Posting on a user's talk page after being asked not to violates the Wikipedia harassment policy. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:02, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Farewell

I am sending this message to the users who I have closely collaborated with. I will be taking a temporary Wikibreak for at least 5-7 days to let off some steam and get myself reenergized. Some of the stress has got to me, so I think it's best if I should take a couple of days off. I also have final exams coming up as well, so I have more important things to worry about. I, however, will be here to contribute to some articles that I have worked on. Until then, farewell. With my very best and warmest regards, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:31, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Oops, just responded at WP:VG. Anyways, that's always good, to take a break so you don't wear yourself out. (Since its ultimately just a hobby, you have to make sure you enjoy it, or you won't feel the need to come back.) This way, you can concentrate on wrapping up school too. (Or if you already have, you can just take it easy a bit.)

Enjoy your time off. See you around. Sergecross73 msg me 20:42, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Part of this Wikibreak could also stem from my frustration over Wikipedia's inability to deal with a couple of persistently disruptive users (i.e. those with a bullying or battleground mentality in general or those who seem to be oblivious to their own uncivil behaviors), combined with my frustration and realization of my immaturity in some of my approaches to dealing with these users, and also my realization that a couple of users' comments towards me were in a negative light. Also, some users have recently subjected me to very serious personal abuse and constant uncivil behavior, but I have mostly moved on from that. Some of those things can basically say that "some things are just not worth the risk", you know? I will still be around though during my Wikibreak, just having a lot of things on my mind at the moment (especially the last weeks of my last semester before graduation, it's crunch time) until my break ends, at which point I will be reenergized. I will also still partially work on proposal that I have in mind, which is at an RFC at the moment. I think this will be my last message before my Wikibreak. Best of luck in your future endeavours as well. See you on the other side, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:51, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

PlayStation Vita - IFixit

As stated earlier, you guys could be a bit more thorough when reverting edits that _seem_ like they're breaking the rules at first, but then it turns out that they don't.

iFixit is not a "self published blog" by some random blogger. It's a company. A fairly known one, to be honest. A simple googling would've found the same thing from things like CNN anyway. --Diblidabliduu (talk) 15:39, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

• Well, its most definitely a blog, as seen in http://www.ifixit.com/blog/2012/02/16/playstation-vita-teardown/, and much of it is self-published, as seen its tagline "iFixit is the free repair manual that you can edit., though I do see that not all of their info is self-published.
• Yes, one editor did revert mmy edit, but that doesn't mean either of us is right or wrong yet. There is no WP:CONSENSUS yet on whether or not its a useable source. Per WP:BRD, the next step is "Discuss", of which I have in fact followed through on; I've started up a discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources#Ifixit Please give your opinion there. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 16:12, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure in which one are you planning on continuing this, but:

Ok, let's get the facts straight. iFixit. It's not a blog. It's a company that posts their _guides_ in a "bloggish" fashion, since they merged that section with the main site. This site also sells parts for people to use with these guides to repair their devices, as well as providing a forum for any further questions.

Now the "random guy" argument. Again, we are talking about a company with multiple employees in an attempt to create reliable, easy-to-read information on your device and guides on things like how to deal with it when it breaks down. The fact that they had a blog doesn't mean that's all they are, or above all that it's written by a _single_ person.

And finally, as it already turned out in the CNN article, they were right about what they said.

I don't understand why is it so hard for you guys to admit when you're wrong. --Diblidabliduu (talk) 17:07, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Please see my response at the link above, as I've addressed most of that already, and keep the discussion in one place. Sergecross73 msg me 17:13, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game) peer review

While I am still on a semi-Wikibreak due to exams and the stress from dealing with other users, mainly those who cause intentional disruption Wikipedia or posted things in a negative light about me as well as the now-indef blocked Fladrif's personal attack on me and other users, namely Dreadstar, AGK, Penbat (who was being wikihounded by Fladrif) and Ched, which was really hateful and condescending (that has already been dealt with), I am almost recovering my enthusiasm and am almost ready to serve the community since the final exams have already been dealt with. I was wondering what we should do to the Sonic the Hedgehog video game since the peer review for the Sonic the Hedgehog video game is still active. I think we should use Crash Bandicoot (video game) and Super Mario Bros. as good models for articles since they are both GA. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:45, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree. I commonly use Smb personally, but it might be better to use the Crash one in this case since it seems to emphasize the dev section, which would probably be good for the very first Sonic game. Sergecross73 msg me 01:53, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I think that's good enough for me. I think the development section on this article should be expanded. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:57, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Czar raises some good questions in the peer review... But I don't know how many of the answers are actually available. I guess we'll see... Sergecross73 msg me 02:53, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I understand where you're coming from. Now, about Sonic Shuffle, we may need to continue working on that as well. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:24, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Also, having discovered the comment by Fladrif posted on my talk page over a month ago, which I find to be utterly disgraceful and resentful, was actually a venomous comment part and later became part of a larger discussion at ANI (Keithbob, a user familiar with Fladrif's history, called that comment part of the condescending and offensive way Fladrif treated me and other users) which resulted in an indefinite block on his account because of his personal attacks and heckling (I know of his history before the ANI incident took place and find his comments off-putting from the beginning), at least I don't have to put up with these issues anymore (since that was totally beyond my control) and I feel that my faith in the community is partially restored. That's all water over the dam now. But back to the Sonic the Hedgehog article, we should find some more development info from reliable sources. If there are, would that be acceptable to post on the article's talk page? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:20, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that comment and didn't like that either. Not sure if you noticed, but I did warn him for it. He removed it, but it was restored in his last ANI discussion at least. Sergecross73 msg me 19:41, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I did notice that obviously. At least I don't have to put up with that nonsense anymore. :-) But I digress. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:45, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't sure, he removed it almost instantly. Anyways, in the coming week, I'll try to help some with both Sonic 1991 and Sonic Shuffle. Sergecross73 msg me 20:48, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. In any case though, I think it's best not to get involved in contentions confrontations not only on Wikipedia, but in real-life in general. I think that all of Fladrif's comments and people viewing me in a negative light is what I considered to be unjustified and I am shocked to discover that people have posted ongoing questionable aspects on my behavior (i.e. getting involved in civility disputes as an established editor) which I feel to be shameful. Such comments are disgraceful and that's one of the reasons I refuse to deal with users who cause me undue stress or get involved in contentious confrontations on Wikipedia out of my own free will. In any case, I am not at all humiliated nor am I a liar, but if one takes a look at my User:Sjones23/Barnstars, these can easily dispel any false allegations that anyone (even those that are being abusive or disruptive) has about me. Best wishes. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:28, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey, you don't have to convince me. Though, don't forget, even if you were completely hated and looked down upon...they're all just random people you'll never meet in real life, or have an impact on your real life. As long as your content is still there, then it doesn't really matter what they think of you. But that's just a "worst case scenario" type thought, don't let a few bad apples let you think you are despised around the place or anything. I'd think you're largely respected around here, so don't give the others a second thought anymore! Sergecross73 msg me 20:01, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I understand. A lot of people think I am well-respected, but I will leave it at that for now. More importantly, I think other users should be moving on from contentious confrontations to do other things like contribute to video game and anime articles for instance. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:22, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

In fact, in this comment on my talk page, Ched has realized that he "made some observations in the past that were in a negative light" about me and apologized if he has offended me personally since I did apologized to him on the talk page if I have caused any trouble or was uncivil. That also made me regain some faith in the community somewhat. So, with that, I have nothing more to say about the past problems for now. But back to Sonic the Hedgehog, the development section needs to be expanded on somewhat. Also, I think Sonic Generations should be expanded on as well as Sonic Adventure 2. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:36, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Anyways, I've started to work on the Sonic the Hedgehog article and fixed up some of the peer review concerns as well. Even though I stand by my opinions about disruptive editors, some discussions on the drama boards were just not the right place for my opinion to be expressed. I'm sure that I have lost my temper with people on occasion and posted some regrettable things. However, part of that’s one of the things that separates me from my dealings with some disruptive editors that I have been referring to in the past. I always regret my outbursts, I have apologized for them and I try not to do those things like that again. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:39, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about any of that anymore, no one's taking you to ANI, and you don't really need to impress anyone (except GA reviewers I suppose). Content creation is all that matters. On that topic, did you hear that they're making a "3D Classics" port of the original Sonic? Its already in the article, but we'll have to be on the look out for any developments on that, if anything substantial comes from it. (It may not, it may just be a pretty basic port w/ 3D graphics.) Sergecross73 msg me 19:46, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I see. So anyways, we should be on the lookout for it and include it in the list of Sonic the Hedgehog video games, which I intend to make it a FL. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:49, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

While a new Sonic game has announced, I did manage to apologize to both Kurtis and Georgewilliamherbert if I have caused any trouble and explained what happened after the AN discussion concerning me which Ched's comments cast me in a negative light and I have mentioned you on GWH's talk page. Just wanted to let you know about this. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:00, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm glad you've gotten closure on all that. (Though, I can't imagine people still being upset with you on how you've acted. You never really, as far as I've seen, outright attacked anyone or anything, it just seemed like sometimes you pursued things a bit too far. If you stop bringing it up, you may very well find that not only are people not upset about it, but that they've forgotten about things altogether. I think you worry too much!) Sergecross73 msg me 14:14, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Yep, and I found almost all people are not being upset at me about these issues. Kurtis was not really upset at me, but also pointed out to me that "[the non-interaction agreement] is not a reflection of poor judgment on [my] part so much as it is [his] hope that everyone can come to some sort of a solution involving as little drama as possible" and I think that has made things mostly easier for everyone. So with that, most people are not upset about it, not even Kurtis and Ched. I'm not upset about it either but that's all water under the bridge now. I never worry too much as I don't care about getting involved in disputes since it is not my thing anyway. Some people's accusations towards me are very disgraceful and people can drag up some of my past problems with other users, but I have nothing more to say on this matter for now. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 14:33, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm glad it all worked out then! Sergecross73 msg me 14:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Yep, I feel that almost all of it sure has. Even though I stand by my community decisions and I try not to go too far in my dealings, I am obviously willing to forgive users if they change their behavior completely and follow the civility policy, but I cannot really forgive those that don't change. In any case, I am not at all upset when I try to explain the truth of my actions and when I bring some things up to set the record straight, but it was really nice enough for Ched to apologize to me for his comments at that AN discussion (that apology did mean much to me as a veteran Wikipedian), so at least that has also restored some faith in the community for me. Sometimes it's best to try to let the chips fall until the time comes. Almost everyone thinks that I am a well-respected user, but there are a few who don't and are quick to point out many faults because they don't know me or they are just being contentious. Now then, getting back to the Sonic the Hedgehog discussion, what do you think we should do: address the PR concerns now or, since I am a member of the guild of copy-editors, request a copyedit from me or any of the guild's members? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 14:53, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

I think we should work on some of he PR stuff first; I think there's no rush to move too fast with a C/E because I wonder if there may be some stability issues with the release of the 3D port to the 3DS... Sergecross73 msg me 17:03, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Re: Mario Party 3DS

Thanks for your comment. I still think it should be moved; I just thought that it wasn't really worth the effort as there is nothing especially wrong with the current title and the release name is probably going to end up being "Mario Party 3DS" anyway. The current title just is slightly confusing as people may think that to be the game's title; when in reality it's "Mario Party" but for the 3DS. The original title is more accurate. Thanks. Satellizer el Bridget ^ツ 23:00, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I just went ahead and moved it back, as I didn't see any rationale or discussion for the first move, and we both feel the same way. In theory, per WP:BRD, if the other editor still feels strongly about it, they'll start up a discussion on the talk page, and we can explain ourselves there. Sergecross73 msg me 13:30, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Sonic the Hedgehog (2006 video game)

Yeah, that's what I meant by "it could be moved to the first if not removed" in my original edit comment. That said, that would further clutter the first paragraph which is already quote-heavy. (I also question the notability of Common Sense Media in this context). –Gunslinger47 20:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

My concern was that your rationale in the edit summaries was more about where it fit in the paragraph than the actual content. I'm pretty sure it can be fit in one way or another. As far as CSM goes, they strike me as a reliable source. If you check their "About Us" page at http://www.commonsensemedia.org/about-us/our-mission you can see they clearly have an editorial policy, clearly defined staff, a mission statement, etc, which is usually a good indicator of reliability. As far as expertise goes, they cover "media", something Sonic and video games clearly fall into, so it doesn't seem like they're outside their experise either. If you still disagree, and want to discuss further, we can, but we ought to have it on the article's talk page, or WP:VG or something, where we can get more input. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 14:08, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

The issue

Given the issue, and my error, I will take a break from dealing with Lucia and the related pages for the time being. With a bit of a break, it did come across as a bit rude, especially from an outside view. The matter may already have been decided as pointed out, but the damage is done and has cost much support before I could formally announce it. I doubt I even have Bumbelzellio left and while I intended it to be a sort of taskforce it needed to be formally separate for many reasons I gave. I'll just busy myself with creating and improving other pages, like the DBZ one so when that AFC closes I can push the page out. I cannot resolve the problem by myself, and being nice and begging for cooperation doesn't help either. I am glad Knowledgekid87 has accepted my apology, I do not want to fight with editors here. It causes more hassle that results in damage to content and a waste of time. I just do not know how to handle it, and I want input on how to proceed after my self-imposed break from that area. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 20:20, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, when dealing with difficult editors, if you can't get a clear consensus that supports your stance, and discussions are deadlocked, it can be best to work on something else instead, on or off Wiki. I personally recommend to work on more obscure articles, rather than something more mainstream like DBZ, when I need a break arguing with other editors. That can help because there's usually less collaborations or strong feelings about them, and thus, less confrontations and arguments. Some time working in that sort of environment can help you have more tolerance/patience when discussions get more heated at other articles later on.

Anyways, feel free to ask me for advice or commentary whenever. Sergecross73 msg me 20:43, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

If I create accounts, do administrators know my ip address? How to know my ip address if I create accounts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fceefyahoo.ca (talk • contribs) 22:58, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

E3 2013 sources

Okay. I added in the sources that IGN's wiki used instead. However you did delete some things I had added that were not using the wiki in the first place. Please make sure you know what you delete before you do so. Thanks! UberPyro64 msg me 23:33, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for finding new sources. Sorry if I removed some that weren't bogus. Sergecross73 msg me 00:04, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Ibuki

I eventually moved it to rec myself. Since you care about it so much you decided to misdirect the attention, for some reason. --Niemti (talk) 15:55, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

It wasn't meant to be misdirection, it was an explanation in response to your "outrage" how no one's really listening to you at ANI. No one wants to waste their time helping out someone who is difficult and condescending every step of the way, and has been accused of doing the same exact thing (ownership issues) in the recent past. Feel free to continue to be bewildered and "severly disappointed" with Wikpedia, but the truth is that you keep shooting yourself in the foot by the way you act. Sergecross73 msg me 16:09, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

It's not about "helping out me", it's about REPAIRING A HUGE DAMAGE DONE to Wikipedia (and stopping it from occuring further). How many times I need to repeat it's not about me to make clear it's in fact, guess what, not about me? --Niemti (talk) 16:38, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

How many times must you be told that I won't give the time of day to someone who can't show an ounce of respect? (That's you.) If things are as dire and widespread as you say, then perhaps someone with more tolerance for attitude and disrespect will hear you out. (Not me.) Sergecross73 msg me 16:43, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Whoever told you to give your time "to me"? Not me. (And fact you're giving your time to me right now. But anyway.) I can force my way through alright, it's about all those who didn't. --Niemti (talk) 17:06, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Responding to you takes a couple seconds. Researching your qualms with TOJ would take a bit more. Best of luck with your "forcing", its been working great for you so far... Sergecross73 msg me 17:08, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

It would be also better if you at least didn't try to misdirect attention while "giving your time" to show how much you don't care. (Also, onc again, it's not "my qualms". I was citing only other people.) --Niemti (talk) 17:10, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Why are you still talking to me? I don't understand. Just arguing for the sake or arguing? What next? Would you like to question why why I used a colon instead of semi-colon in one of my responses or something? You can stop the theatrics, we're just on my talk page now, and far fewer people are watching. I've already explained my comments weren't misdirection, and its very clearly "your qualms" too if you're the one pushing for it at ANI. Any argument otherwise is just semantics. The point is, you're not getting anywhere here, so go away. Sergecross73 msg me 17:30, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Virtual Console 3DS

May have a potential problem at List of Virtual Console games for Nintendo 3DS (North America). An editor made a bold modification to the list of the games, but I've undone it as it's a fundamental redesign of the article and have requested discussion. I'm not making anymore changes to avoid an edit war, but I would like a second set of eyes on this. Your opinion is most welcome. --McDoobAU93 16:11, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Yup, I was watching it and leaving a comment on the person's talk page at the same time you were writing this. Will comment on articles talk page if things keep going this way. Thank you for the heads up anyways though, it would have been easy to miss. Sergecross73 msg me 16:16, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I did notice the timing was rather quick. I don't think I'm in the wrong in this case, but if I'm handling things incorrectly, please let me know. I accept any and all constructive criticism of my work. :) --McDoobAU93 16:19, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

No, I agree with you in keeping it at its original state, but I would like to hear more about the other person's rationale. The only reason they gave was "convenient sortabilty"...but I would find it to be equally sortable in either scenario. If anything, it seemed to be better organized for sorting with separate subsections. Sergecross73 msg me 16:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

A voice of reason

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		For recognizing the value of de-escalation in a recent dispute, I award Sergecross73 this Diplomacy Barnstar. The Interior (Talk) 01:12, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

• Thank you. At the time, I wasn't even sure if anyone was listening to me. Thanks for the reassurance! Sergecross73 msg me 06:04, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

TheUnknownNinjaNN2

Would you mind helping me reason with this user? He keeps insisting that his arbitrary, unsourced, and somewhat messy edit on Bowser (character) is actually cited or notable because "it implies so in the game" and the addition "changes the air of the character." --ThomasO1989 (talk) 04:27, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Today looks like it may be a busy day, and it looks like at the moment you've got it under control as far as the actual article goes. Here's my thought; next time he adds a troubling edit (I completely agree with what you're doing, his edits aren't warranted as is.) start up a new subsection about him/his OR on the article talk page, and I'll jump in and try to get through to him. At best, we'll get through to him, at worst, there's likely to be a defined consensus against him. Sound okay? Sergecross73 msg me 14:21, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

To be honest, this person has exhausted my patience. He can't be reasoned with and is constantly twisting/ignoring all points made against him. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 05:54, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Luckily, between the other users he's arguing with in his contribs, and his posts on WP:VG, he's made himself and his lack of understanding public knowledge. I don't think he'll be able to get away with many bad edits. I'll keep an eye on him as well. I don't blame you for tiring of his antics, he seems to enjoy arguing just for the same of being difficult. Let me know if it looks like he's done something wrong and I've missed it. Sergecross73 msg me 10:43, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

No, that is not true. I am not trying to be difficult. Oh my... you are geniuses. Using OR on me to point out my error. Problem is that I don't always realize that it is OR. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheUnknownNinjaNN2 (talk • contribs) 02:53, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Its fine that you don't understand OR at first, it can take time. The problem is that experienced users are telling you you're doing it, and you fight with them every step of the way rather than trying to learn/understand it. Also, your stance of "write first, come up with sources later" is backwards to how things are done here, and probably part of the reason you don't understand OR very well. Start with a source, and base your writing around that. Sergecross73 msg me 10:42, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I guess I was having trouble explaining myself. I don't mind being told it can't go in an article. What I was discussing is how my actual statement was wrong. Besides, if I see something in the game, and I look sources to prove it, then how us it backwords. I am finding cites to effectively support my "psuedo-OR" (since true OR cannot be backed up). I like to determine the details of storylines in videogames, hence I right about them. Besides, what is wrong with being backwards in my methods? In the end I get the same result: acceptable or unacceptable (as long as I determine what requires research{cause articles might not cover everything in their cites})

TheUnknownNinjaNN2 (talk) 04:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I feel like it'd be easier for you to avoid OR if you start with sources. Then you'd be more likely to stick to the useable information in the source, and less likely to veer off into your own personal observations. Anyways, I'm tired of debating this with you. If you've got specific questions, feel free to post them at my talk page, and either I, or one of my buddies who watch my talk page, can help. Sergecross73 msg me 22:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Would it help to post a question as to wether the article already supports it before I go hunting for cites uselessly? Is that allowed? Also, how do people usually write articles? They have to have something to go on when editing, right?

TheUnknownNinjaNN2 (talk) 23:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

The first thing I do when I create a new article, is pull up 4 or 5 sources that I'm certain are considered reliable sources. WP:VG/RS has a large list of ones that are always useable, or useable in certain scenarios. Then, I write the article, making sure that virtually everything I say, is also said somewhere/somehow in a source. Additionally, I always pretend like I'm explaining the game to a family/friend/co-worker who knows nothing about video games. That's the best way to make sure you're not getting into WP:TRIVIA/WP:GAMECRUFT territory. Pretend you're explaining the game to your Dad, who hardly knows what a "Nintendo" is. If you think he'd be confused about it, or his eyes would glaze over in boredom, then it's probably a sign that its not meant for general audiences, and doesn't belong in the article... Sergecross73 msg me 23:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Regarding on the current "discusssion" at Talk:Super Mario (series)‎, I think bringing up "Nintendo Land vs Nintendo Nightmare" indicates it will not be going anywhere productive anytime soon. He's not even trying to be reasonable. I feel that any further attempt to continue the discussion on his part should be seen as disruptive editing at this point. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 23:27, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I wasn't planning on responding anymore. His arguments are ludicrous and would never gain consensus, so its pointless to argue anyways. Sergecross73 msg me 23:34, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

He's now claiming I have "subject prejudice". I've tried to assume good-faith for the past month, but I've had enough. I'm sorry, but the guy is completely incompetent and should not be on Wikipedia. Nearly every edit of his has been non-constructive and he shows no signs of improving or listening to anyone. He has no true interest in improving the encyclopedia and it is obvious he only wants to advertise his fan projects. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 22:25, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

device band

Why did you remove me saying that they won a award at golden gods Wikiguy303952 (talk) 05:40, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Not only did your edit lack a reliable source backing up what you say, or any sort of context as far as what that's supposed to mean, but it was extremely sloppy. You didn't even bother to capitalize anything or put a period at the end of your "sentence". Sergecross73 msg me 05:59, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Here is a source http://www.metalinjection.net/show-recap/revolver-golden-gods-awards-2013-winners-and-performance-highlights and sloppiness can be fixed by you or others that's not reason to delete — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiguy303952 (talk • contribs) 06:56, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, you didn't leave a source, so again, I had no idea what the context was, or if that was even a notable award. So it was difficult to clean up. Also, in my experience, if someone doesn't even bother to write a full sentence, frequently its vandalism or not important. Its one thing to not be familiar with Wikipedia's ways and whatnot, sure, that takes time, but its really up to you to clean up your writing, if you want to actively contribute and have people take your edits seriously... Sergecross73 msg me 15:12, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Xbox One

Hi could you add confirm edit which means an user who edits the page and then the edit goes under pending and an administrator will ether accept it or revert it if you can add that please remove the protection on Xbox One 86.168.53.89 (talk) 18:30, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

With the level of vandalism right now (literally every time I refreshed there was a new hoax game listed) right now it definitely needs protection. Sergecross73 msg me 18:33, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

ok but are you allow to add the confirm edit thing which you save the page and is saved under pending and an administrator ether approves it or reverts 86.168.53.89 (talk) 18:35, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

If you mean edit requests, then yes, that should still be possible. (Read more about them here.) Sergecross73 msg me 18:55, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

He means Pending Changes; however, that's rarely a good idea on high traffic pages. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 21:47, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, Thomas is now done.

But Woodroar simply misunderstood my question. If you don't mind, please don't moderate unless asked. I mean no offense, its just that there were no issues.

TheUnknownNinjaNN2 (talk) 02:50, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

1. Im an Admin. It's what I do.
2. Thomas had asked. Literally.

Now please, stop the excessive arguing. Sergecross73 msg me 03:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

1. I only argured with Thomas; we but heads I guess. I will stay away from him. 2. I was saying there was no issues with Woodroar; dont assume based one discussion. 3. Read the old conversation relating to him asking you.

TheUnknownNinjaNN2 (talk) 04:44, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Wii U

Not sure I messed that up, but thanks for the revert. Tyros1972 Talk 14:38, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

No problem. It happens to everyone occasionally. Sergecross73 msg me 14:40, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Half Barnstar
	At least SOMEONE agrees with me :) ViperSnake151  Talk  14:47, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

• Yeah, sorry I haven't supported you more, but I try not to get too involved in image disputes, unless they're obvious/common sense based ones, because I find Wikipedia's image policy rather confusing. But what you're saying is consistent with what I've heard in the past, and sounds right, so I'll try to back you on that... Sergecross73 msg me 16:09, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I removed the Ouya from that list

Because it was sounded redundant to me with the Ouya being mentioned the sentence prior. "The ouya is blah blah blah. And also the ouya blah blah blah...." -Kai445 (talk) 20:03, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

WP:VG Member list

Hi Serge, sorry this is a bit random, but I thought I should mention that I just noticed you appear to be on the list of members of WikiProject Video Games twice [1]... I didn't touch it because I wasn't sure if it was meant to be there for some bizarre reason, and I don't see any major consequences for it, although I just wanted to let you know. DarkToonLink (talk) 10:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

How bizarre. No, it wasn't purposely like that. I removed it. Thanks for the heads up! Sergecross73 msg me 19:35, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Re: Stop changing it.

Please read my edit summary of the most recent change. I standardised it to use "Sega Mega Drive/Genesis" for the category etc, and the first instance of it's usage in the article. Thereafter I used "Mega Drive" as that's the international name. The title of the actual Genesis article isn't relevant as it's still in contention and was only reverted back to Genesis as it was the name the article was originally given. Also, please remain civil, you were being needlessly rude, especially given you hadn't seemed to have noticed I took on board what you said in the last edit summary and standardised it across the article as well as met you halfway with the use of the "Sega Mega Drive/Genesis" term. I don't seem to understand why you object so strongly to improving the article. --85.211.134.202 (talk) 20:26, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Your viewpoint is contrary to the current consensus, and I've said nothing incivil. I suppose we'll continue this argument at your misguided RFC then... Sergecross73 msg me 21:00, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

One could argue the fact you just called the RfC (which is exactly the correct procedure in this sort of debate) "misguided" is qualification as incivil in itself, even without tallying up the other snide remarks made since this issue started. I'd also note that current consensus concerns the Genesis article itself (and it's a very contentious consensus and hinges on the fact that Genesis was the name of the original article), not on the actual games or other articles pertaining to the console, e.g. Variations of the Sega Mega Drive. --85.211.134.202 (talk) 21:07, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I say "misguided" because the issue is far larger than "Ristar". It belongs on the Sega Genesis article talk page, not Ristar. I've said nothing out of line, stop taking things so personally. Sergecross73 msg me 21:12, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

You don't seem to understand that how other articles should address the naming issue is a separate issue from what the article itself is called though. As I've explained on the RfC. --85.211.134.202 (talk) 21:16, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I understand what you're saying, I just believe you're wrong, as I've explained at the RFC. I don't believe it to be a separate issue. Sergecross73 msg me 21:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

User: Peter Somerville

Want to WP:AGF, but this user is also editing using the IP address User:5.64.13.6 and is also User:Agendapedia. Edit patterns (over the top NPOV, and similar edits on Babylon Zoo and Eoghan Quigg articles) are exactly the same as his the use of "I've got this" on edit summaries. Just a heads up. I don't have time to fill out a WP:SPI, sorry. --Yankees76 ^Talk 14:27, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I am. My browser is set to erase all cookies when closed, so I occasionally edit via IP. I will endeavour to use this account at all times from now on. Peter Somerville (talk) 14:29, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

No, Agendapedia is a fellow student with similar interests. Nothing illegal whatsoever here. Peter Somerville (talk) 14:37, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Yankee76, thanks for the heads up. Peter Somerville, I hope both of you tone down these WP:NPOV violations. At best, majority of your edits are being undone because your word choices are in such bad taste and overtly not neutral. At worst, you'll be blocked for not stopping. Either way, you're not accomplishing anything when you act like this. Please stop. Sergecross73 msg me 14:40, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

The choice of language seemed relevant for such critically loathed acts. Peter Somerville (talk) 14:45, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that your word choices are way over the top. If reviewers are saying that, then feel free to quote them, but you can't be inserting your own 2 cents into articles like that. Sergecross73 msg me 14:50, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

I would also suggest you at least fact check your edits before posting. Incorrect edits like these [2], [3], [4] border on vandalism and do nothing but waste other editors' time reverting them. Yankees76 ^Talk 14:51, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, those are all terrible edit choices. If Peter returns to those sort of edits today, after my warnings today, he will be blocked. Sergecross73 msg me 14:55, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree that some of the edits were journalistic, i.e. 'vilifying reception', personally i don't see a problem with 'very unfavourable' in the reviews box, i have seen this before whilst browsing albums in the past. We generally have a shared interest in critical failures, one hit wonders etc. I personally don't think articles such as List of films considered the worst, List of films considered the best etc should be allowed on wiki, but the community has accepted them, regardless of the unverifiable original research that they project. It's unavoidable that we should stray away from a neutral standpoint with such articles on offer. Agendapedia (talk) 15:01, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

It's not different than how we don't use "Amazing" or "Hated" in the charts. Its a standardization thing. Just a quick reference. As far as those articles, they have been accepted because the media themselves have been referred to as such by reliable sources. That's okay. Its not okay when you're using your own personal judgments, which is what much of your two edits boil down to. You need to rely more on what the sources are saying, and less on blazing through the thesaurus to find another outlandish way to call something bad. Sergecross73 msg me 15:05, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

I see major issues with edits like this [[5]], which, like the edits to the Stone Roses, Radiohead and Japan pages are not only unencyclopedic (the failure of a single to chart is never a "cataclysmic disaster"), but are also incorrect as according to Discogs [6], the single appears to only have been released in the US and Australia - making it's failure to chart in the UK and Canada an irrelevant point and hardly a disaster (especially considering it came out almost a year after Steal My Sunshine). To me this just shows zero grasp on the subject matter. Yankees76 ^Talk 17:01, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, the more I dig up, the worse the editings appears to be. Commentary like this is unacceptable on a number of levels as well. I'm issuing a final warning. Any more of this will result in a block. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 17:08, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Peter Somerville has again added trashed another musician. I found this with STiki and the notification is on his talk page. Thanks, Surfer43 (talk) 17:21, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

While its debatable that he needed to add that to the person's opening paragraph, its not nearly as in bad taste as his other edits. It does seem like that album was not well received, so I don't think he's out of line when he words it like that. Sergecross73 msg me 18:27, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

The disruptive edits continue: [7].Yankees76 ^Talk 13:44, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Also just a heads up, but it's very likely that he's evading his block and editing as User:5.64.47.4 (pretty much same IP as above). Yankees76 ^Talk 13:16, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Where at? If its consistently one page, then I can at least protect it. Also, his block runs out tomorrow, so he may be back to his name after that... Sergecross73 msg me 13:22, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

They're all on the same Babylon Zoo related articles that Peter Somerville regularly edits in the pattern above. Notably The Boy with the X-Ray Eyes. I would have let you know yesterday but I didn't notice you extended his block to a full week and figured he just forgot to log in again. Probably no need to protect the page - but he should be made aware that being blocked means being unable to edit from any account - IP included. 17:44, 18 June 2013 (UTC) ‎

These guys just don't quit, and I've uncovered another account User:Bluidsports - wether sock or meatpuppet, I don't know (and based on the edits, there is no difference). See the edit history for Deep Blue Something, in particular these edits: [8] and [9]. Frankly, I'm getting tired of going around removing these WP:NPOV violations (2 reverts today). Yankees76 ^Talk 14:30, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I thought one of them alluded to being in dorms in a college or something. Perhaps all their buddies are into trashing random musicians or something. At any rate, while debatable, seems to be in better faith, as they did search out a source, and PS is no longer block evading, so I think I'd file this one more under "annoying" than "actionable". But by all means, keep letting me know when stuff like this happens. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 14:52, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

And it continues: [10]. Calling an ablum that charted at #6 an album that was met with little interest and a "flop". My main issue is both accounts continue to use tabloids or non music press as mains sources to make strong claims on material that ultimately is given undue weight in the articles they're editing. Yankees76 ^Talk 12:52, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree that it's not a great word choice, but they have found sources for what they're saying, so I don't feel like its totally unjustified. They both need to learn how to present their information a little better, I'm torn, they're finding sources, but its still thinly-veiled POV pushing too... Sergecross73 msg me 13:14, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree they're finding sources (wether they're reliable or not is another matter) - but as I noted, they're using WP:PUS tabloids like the Daily Mirror and 1-paragraph reviews in small town weekly newspapers to push their viewpoints or support their original research (often ending up in the lead). And edits like this [11] - are just adding WP:OR in the same vein as the Britney Spears edits above. I'm not sure what I'm asking you to do about it, but I feel like this is a least a good spot to track this. Yankees76 ^Talk 13:25, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree, keep tracking it, and letting me know about the worse ones. Challenge them on talk pages if you doubt the source's validity; I work with video game and music articles, and while I'm familiar with almost all video game sources and their reliability, there are far more music sources that I'm unfamiliar with. I'll drop AP a talk page message too. Sergecross73 msg me 13:40, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good. I think it's going to be an issue as they begin to edit more heavily-watched articles, and begin to more widely meatpuppet each others work (especially on AFDs - which they've already started doing [12]). Yankees76 ^Talk 13:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh and a 4th account from the same "dorm" - User:PC7705. Edits the same articles (Eoghan Quigg, New Radicals), All I Ever Wanted (The Human League song), Afroman same AFD, and worse the same edits ("known principally" [13]. Yankees76 ^Talk 13:56, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

I feel like it's time I had some input in this discussion. Some of Yankees points are justified, but a lot of them are weak. Sometimes I feel as if he just does not like what is being said about an artist he has a close affiliation to. I agree that adding a Sunday Mercury sentence to deride The Boy with the X-Ray Eyes is somewhat clutching at straws. What is evident is that I am working hard at locating sources such as in these examples: [14], [15], [16]. Not all sources can be considered top quality. I agree that some tabloids present viewpoints that tend towards impartial journalism, however you will notice that most edits supported by citations from The Free Library are usually employed for specifying information as in these edits: [17], [18]. Indeed Yankees reverted the latter edit seemingly because it didn't have an author. Although not a reliable source, it does say at babylonzoo.net that "Spaceman" was the fastest selling single since the Beatles' "Can't Buy Me Love". I felt the Daily Mirror was a reasonable source to corroborate this fact. Agendapedia (talk) 14:26, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Daily Mirror is not a WP:RS, and is specifically called out in WP:PUS. Also, read the articles you edit you'll notice that the Babylon Zoo already has the fastest selling claim that is sourced from Allmusic (and it further verifies why the Daily Mirror is not a reliable source, since they have both the wrong claim and the wrong sales figure). In your haste to post sensationalistic, derisive, and non neutral point of view material, you overlook the rest of the material that has already been added by other editors - which disrupts the project and doesn't improve upon the articles you're contributing to. Yankees76 ^Talk 14:53, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, you guys have gotten better, and are using sources now, its just that your set up still needs a little tweaking.

• For instance, in this edit, you make the claim which was clearly a mechanism to boost sales. Even if a source is supporting this, to make such a bold claim, you need to have the right context. Something more along the lines of which was something Nicola Sloan of More Than the Music felt was a mechanism to boost sales. Unless you've got official word from the artist, you can't make the general claim like that.
• Additionally, as I've said before, as long as your user name is "Agendapedia" and almost all of your edits are centered around adding negative commentary to articles, people are going to accuse you guys of "POV pushing". You're little group is still being rather blatant if people bother to pay attention... Sergecross73 msg me 14:38, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

List of Virtual Console games for Nintendo 3DS (North America)

Hey, likewise, McDoobs has no business instructing me to find any sources for him. And you have no business scolding me. Norrk (talk) 13:57, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

There is absolutely nothing wrong with telling people to provide sources on Wikipedia. ~~|~

He's back

Please review this edit. --McDoobAU93 19:21, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. If you find him again, feel free to keep letting me know. Sergecross73 msg me 19:25, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

By the by, I do kinda agree with APL on the Genesis talk page that maybe an unINVOLVED editor should have made the block. But it does look like you have clear evidence of bad behavior, and INVOLVED editors can act in that regard, especially now with block evasion. --McDoobAU93 19:27, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I was contemplating not doing it. I almost blocked him when he repeatedly altered my edits. But once it went to blatant canvassing, I felt it went into the any reasonable admin clause of it. Sergecross73 msg me 19:30, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

That's true. He's definitely being disruptive, and I think his behavior is pretty clear-cut. --McDoobAU93 19:32, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again for your help. I appreciate it. Sergecross73 msg me 19:40, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. I already reverted his edit on the WPVG talk page as block evasion. --McDoobAU93 19:42, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank You!

For fixing one of my silly mistakes, I give you this!

	Here's a plate full of cookies to share!
	Hi Sergecross73, here are some delicious cookies to help brighten your day! However, there are too many cookies here for one person to eat all at once, so please share these cookies with at least two other editors by copying {{subst:Sharethecookies}} to their talk pages. Enjoy! buffbills (talk) 01:33, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for understanding. (It's nice to hear, it seems like far too many edits are with people who want to argue endlessly recently...) Sergecross73 msg me 20:01, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Gamespot and Gamedaily

Hi Sergecross 73. I've found these two cites Gamespot and Gamedaily and i've found two lists there. top 25 capcom characters of all time in gamedaily and top 10 videogame villains in gamespot and akuma is in both lists. Are those two cites reliable about that stuff . I mean would you mind if i add that information in akuma's reception? Thanks, DisturbedAsylum — Preceding unsigned comment added by Disturbedasylum (talk • contribs) 15:18, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello again. Yes, both of those sources are typically considered reliable sources, so I would think that they would work just fine. You can ask me as much as you want, I don't mind, but there's also a reference guide on which sources are considered to be reliable or unreliable for video game related content at WP:VG/S. It doesn't cover everything, but certainly a lot of them. (You can see that both GameSpot and GameDaily are on there in the "reliable" subsection. Sergecross73 msg me 15:34, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

blocking the IP at Mega Drive

I finally checked the talk page of the disruptive IP, User talk:85.211.203.66, and was surprised to see your user id there. As an involved party in the dispute isn't it best to find an uninvolved admin to review the situation and decide whether to block? I'm personally pleased with this block but I'm not sure it was proper. But, more importantly, I think it's critical that uninvolved admins to make these calls. --B2C 16:58, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

As I said to the others at the discussion itself, I held back in blocking the IP when it was more subjective "being disruptive", but as soon as it crossed over into "blatant canvassing", I felt it fell into the any reasonable admin clause of INVOLVED (third paragraph). Consider the same person came back as another IP, and continued their canvassing, instead of making any effort to defend their actions as "not canvassing", makes me think that this person wasn't here to be constructive, and that it was a good block.

Let me know if you need specific difs, or want to talk this over any further. It wasn't meant to be an abuse of admin power, but rather cutting to the chase of the IP wasting everyone's time. Sergecross73 msg me 17:05, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

That canvassing was so blatant it suggested ignorance about WP's rule about using neutral language in such posts and warranted a warning. Even if he had been warned about that in the past (which I don't see on the talk page), I feel very strongly that any non-emergency block decision must be made by an uninvolved admin. --B2C 17:34, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

From that 3rd paragraph:

Although there are exceptions to the prohibition on involved editors taking administrative action, it is still best practice in cases where an administrator may be seen to be involved to pass the matter to another administrator via the relevant noticeboards.

--B2C 17:36, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

• It wasn't just the language, it was the targets. I looked through the contributions of the three people he contacted, and they all expressed sentiments that favored his argument. As such, I was trying to prevent the RFC from turning into a circus, as it certainly has in the past over the subject, something that would have likely influenced things away from the Speedy Close that everyone, yourself included, was requesting.
• Both that IP, and another (who may very well have been a sock/meat puppet) both had expressed that they "had been here a long time" and "knew about policy" when discussing various points with them. That, again, the fact that, when he came back as another IP, and instead of saying "Hey wait, what's canvassing?", continued to do the same thing, makes me think the IP knew better. He didn't comment on his talk page, he chose to block evade. Sergecross73 msg me 17:45, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
  • I understand your reasoning. I just think an uninvolved admin may have reasonably chosen to warn for canvassing before blocking for canvassing, and that, as an involved editor, it was not your place to make that call. For future reference... Thanks. --B2C 23:01, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

• I'll be sure that my future blocks are so cut and dry, black and white correct that we won't need to waste our time with these discussions. Thank you for your concern. Sergecross73 msg me 23:43, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

FYI, he's back at his canvassing and causing chaos at that RFC. You've had much to say on how to handle it last time around, so I'll let you handle this as you please. Best of luck. Sergecross73 msg me 12:27, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Nano Assault Neo

Sorry to bother you, but I was wondering if you could help me out on my very first article, Nano Assault Neo. (Please contribute if you can; it supports Off-TV Play!) I haven't had any problems with it passing the notability guidelines or anything, but I need some assistance adding a link to the Japanese Wikipedia article on it: JA:NANO ASSAULT. I haven't been able to use the new(ish) 'central data repository' so if you'd be able to help adding the link it would be appreciated. Thanks! DarkToonLink (talk) 00:54, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Haha, I suppose people see right through me; I do love my gaming to be handheld, Off TV Play, or Remote Play, so that is a good way to get my attention! I'll gladly give you general help with the article (it looks pretty good for it being your first article!) However, I've never really worked with any of the inter-wiki stuff, so I can't really help you there... (Last I heard, I thought I understood it as they didn't need to be manually added anymore, but rather it would be added automatically. But since I never really messed around with that stuff to begin with, I could have understood it wrong.) Sergecross73 msg me 01:40, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Done Saw that you had to be logged on across all Wikimedia projects to make such an addition. My username is unified, so I went in and made the addition. It's appearing in the page now! --McDoobAU93 01:56, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Fantastic, I was hoping that, if something could be done, perhaps a "talk page stalker" of mine could help. Thank you, McDoob! Sergecross73 msg me 02:05, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

It does work pretty well ... you tell it what Wiki you want to link to, then give the page's name at that Wiki (in this case, NANO ASSAULT). As you type, it works like the search bar, displaying best matches to what you enter. The system says it takes a few minutes to link, but the Nihongo inter-wiki link appeared instantly on the English article. And I agree, this article is off to a good start, and it's got me interested in the game, too, as I love twin-stick games like Robotron 2084 and Geometry Wars! --McDoobAU93 02:10, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help! DarkToonLink (talk) 02:31, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Tales

Thanks a bunch for the compliment. Keep up the good work yourself on the Tales pages or whatever else you're working on. Nall (talk) 03:23, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Warning you issued

Hi Sergecross. I saw your very applicable comment on Peter Somerville's talk page after I warned him for his disruptive editing. I just discovered that you had previously given him this final warning on May 31, in which told him you'd block him if he did it one more time. Well, he's done it several more times since then, including multiple times just yesterday. Apparently, he doesn't care because he's ignored not only an admin's warning (yours), but also the three or four other warnings from various editors. And he's obviously read all the prior warnings because he removed all of them from his talk page very quickly after receiving them. Thanks. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 22:01, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I know, but he was getting better for a bit. I was curious to see what he had to say for himself first. Sergecross73 msg me 23:15, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks. But the problem is that he was promised a block on the next occurrence. Also, not only has he never communicated with anyone who's warned him, his edit summaries when removing those warnings included "Rm trolling", "Rm garbage", and "Yeah yeah". This clearly indicates that he thinks the warnings are a joke and that nothing will happen to him if he disruptively edits. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 00:16, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I know, he's certainly on the thinnest of ice. But he's not very active either, so he's not doing that much damage. Let me know if he makes another unconstructive edit after its clear he ignore my request for an explanation. I think that'll be the tipping point... Sergecross73 msg me 01:22, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

OK, Serge. I have to give you credit; you appear to be a very calm and patient admin. That's a very good quality. Thank you. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 01:47, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Serge, Peter Somerville has responded to you and I. Based on his explanation, I really think following through with your promised block is now warranted. IMO, he is clearly playing games or has no basic editing common sense. Either way, he's a disruptive editor who's ignored all warnings. Thanks. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 23:17, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

It has been addressed. Sergecross73 msg me 00:43, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 01:43, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Serge, I saw your very helpful comments to Peter Somerville today. However, the fact that he told me to "fuck off" in response to the mild (not templated) warning I gave him, not to mention that he defiantly still insists that his edit was proper, are behaviors that clearly warrant an extension of the block. We cannot allow editors to go around telling other editors to fuck off, especially when there's absolutely no provocation for it. Based on all of the above, I would ask that you please extend the block unless the editor acknowledges two things: (1) that he cannot talk that way to another editor, and (2) that he understands why the fan site is not a reliable source and promises to follow the WP:RELIABLE guidelines. Otherwise, the message you'll be sending to him is that he can get away with that type of inappropriate behavior. Does this sound reasonable? Thanks. :) --76.189.109.155 (talk) 20:41, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, that was a pretty terrible response, I agree. However, his other warnings were for NPOV and disruptive editing. Technically he hasn't been warned for WP:NPA yet. He's now at final warning for both, and I do agree with you that his response to things from here out may affect things as well. Sergecross73 msg me 20:59, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, he has removed the block template and your block-related comments (and everything else). Is that enough to extend it? And remove his talk page access? --76.189.109.155 (talk) 23:08, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Done. Sergecross73 msg me 02:29, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Hopefully, he'll edit productively if he decides to return. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 02:47, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Iron Man 3: The Official Game Armors

You do realize that according to the rules of Wikipedia, an article is meant to help a reader, and this therefore helps a reader in the game. Adding the armors section is like adding a maps section to any other article of a video game on Wikipedia, therefore it is allowed to be added. Especially since the armors a very major part of the game, assuming that you have played it and know this.Brian82027 (talk) 00:24, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

• I'm rather irritated that, after I went through extensive work saving the article you created from being deleted, (no thanks to you, who failed to even leave a valid reason to keep it), that now you're going to lecture me about what the point of Wikipedia is. Had I not stepped in, at the rate things were going, the article would have been eliminated in a "merge", and we wouldn't have anything to work with. This is largely because you did such a poor job of writing the article in the first place. So don't lecture me on how to write an article.
• We don't just add whatever "helps" the reader, which is both subjective and vague. We follow guidelines. We're an encyclopedia; we write descriptions of games. But We don't write game guides on how to play games. And in video game articles we don't add lists of gameplay items, weapons, or concepts. Iron man's armor obviously falls into this category. You'll notice that no video game articles have lists of weapons or armors or various items. It doesn't matter "how much it helps readers" or "how necessary it is to the game" you'll notice there's no list of weapons usuable in Final Fantasy 8 or armors collectible in Mass Effect 2. (You'll note these examples are Features Articles -- the highest quality of Wikipedia article. Not a single chart like you're proposing.
• I'm asking you now, to stop re-adding that into the article. If you don't, then I'll open up discussion at WP:VG on it, and I'm pretty certain we'll find a consensus there that it needs to be removed, and if you go against that decision, you'll be blocked for disruptive editing. Its up to you if you want to wrap this up quickly, or waste time arguing about it. Sergecross73 msg me 01:17, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Okay look, I know that you have nothing better to but stare at your computer, but one of the only reasons I created the article was to show the armors, so why don't YOU stop lecturing me about the Wikipedia. Just because you're an admin, and you think you're so awesome living in your basement doesn't mean you get to make the big decisions on articles that you didn't start and how no one asked for your help.Brian82027 (talk) 01:49, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

• I'd like to point out that the "lecturing on Wikipedia" started with you, when you started saying "according to the rules of wikipedia, an article is meant to help a reader, which is ironic, because it appears you have very little understanding of the rules of Wikipedia. As it is, because it appears the very reason you created the article go against Wikipedia Guidelines.
• You comments about living in a basement are so far off base they aren't offensive.
• Have it your way. We'll start a discussion up about it. Sergecross73 msg me 01:56, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

This is the source

http://www.ubergizmo.com/2013/05/nintendo-and-sega-agree-on-exclusive-partnership/

My bad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SeeminglySubdued (talk • contribs) 15:19, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

User:TornadoCreator

Could use your assistance at History of video game consoles (eighth generation) with a user insisting that VGchartz is a reliable source (to the point of 3RR). Completely unwillingness to discuss changes or even begin to consider the source unreliable. Trut-h-urts man (T • C) 21:33, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Scratch that - this actually appears to be under control for the time being. Trut-h-urts man (T • C) 21:46, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I would have helped you. Let me know if issues regarding this come up again. Sergecross73 msg me 00:44, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Are you talking about Soap?

He actually didcussed it with me on the Irc wikipedia page, and he at least acted like he was quite interested. I thought it would be okay to contact him about it? Did he have some kind of issue?

TheUnknownNinjaNN2(Talk,Always willing to discuss this subject) 04:53, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

• As I said, its not appropriate to be discussing on Wikipedia, whether it be WikiProjects or any talk pages, because its not Wikipedia related. If other users are contacting you about it here, you need another means of contacting each other. Exchange emails or something. It does not belong here. Sergecross73 msg me 11:50, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I said I played the game and it looked well-made but it wasnt really my type of game. I understand you want help but asking me for advice or help is like me asking you what I should wear tomorrow. —Soap— 22:33, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for starting the Super Mario 3D World article! Satellizer el Bridget ^ツ 08:55, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I was surprised I was the first one to do so, but I think I was the only one who started writing it while the Nintendo Direct was still on-going... Sergecross73 msg me 13:11, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

?

You shouldn't judge or talk bad about the person behind "Hydao" because he "helped" you with this article BreakThru! (video game). Now imagine someone like gvnayr, who created and edited hundreds of articles like that, with incorrect/innacurate/silly info, don't you think it's frustrating? Well, whatever, who fucking cares right? Bye! :) --88.214.164.189 (talk) 18:45, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Was it bad? I just found it confusing, the contradiction and all. Hydao could contribute when he wanted to, but he sure got obsessed about others habits, so much so that he was completely oblivious to his own... Sergecross73 msg me 18:48, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Lol, it was me (ex-user:Hydao) who left the message. What contradiction? Maybe I'm obsessed yes, obsessed in NOT wanting to read false information, do you understand? I (and other readers too) was fooled by his additions many times. many... countless. erm, for example, the article you edited was innacurate and had some terribly false information, but it was totally OK, I remember I sent you a friendly message saying about what was wrong, you know, just "working" and helping. I do like sharing CORRECT information. but gvnayr, NO, he's an ass, he's doing these things systematically, however he is still allowed to fool the readers with his stupid additions. I was fooled many times. he's lame, what to do? I don't know why you Wiki-users are "protecting" him, I think it is extremely weird... I don't give a damn crap about the Hydao account or whatever, I just don't want to be fooled by losers like him. is that so bad? am i asking too much? Cheers. --188.140.33.162 (talk) 19:14, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I know who you are. The contradiction is that you complain this person isn't productive with their life, meanwhile, here you are, spending your time talking about him and harassing other Admin, on a website you're currently banned from. This sort of acting out just makes yourself look bad, and you're not making any progress on what you mean to do. (You're blocked, while the person you take issue with, is still freely editing, right?) There's so many better ways to get results; forming a consensus against the edits, RFC, ANI, etc etc. Yet you chose to go on a bunch of tirades and harass the user. Your route is the worst, you exert a ton of energy, get an atrocious reputation so that no one takes him seriously, and gets no results. There's just no reasonable justification for it. That's the contradiction. Sergecross73 msg me 19:26, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree with everthing you just said, I certainly made a silly mistake, and I admit it. I have already discussed this many times before, and it seems that you guys (some of you) don't want to listen and only give importance to the fact that I said simply... the sad truth about that creature. I did not invent anything, it's all true, and things are to be said as they are. Indeed this is all a waste of time, because nothing will change. Nothing. "The Greatest Wikipedian" will vandalize Wikipedia until mid-2030 lol, or whatever. And honestly, I don't want to "interact" more here, if I want to make an useful edit, I will still make it. I will make it for the Humanity. Do I need an freaking account to make edits? No. It's better being 100% anonymous. Take care. --46.50.42.211 (talk) 19:58, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

If you agree, then I hope you'll let this go then. Please. Nothing will change the way you're going about things anyways, you're just making more work for people largely unrelated to him. (Like me.) Sergecross73 msg me 20:02, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

I will "let it go" when this gvnayr case/problem is solved for once and all. Blocking Hydao and IP's are not the solution, and pretty useless and waste of time. At least user Jtalledo (which I respect) has some decency and opened that case, now I want to see how it ends. --88.214.165.236 (talk) 20:18, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Just know that all the name calling and mudslinging that you're doing is only hurting the process, it distracts people from getting to the heart of the real issue at hand, and it makes people take your case less seriously. For the record, I'm not blocking you out of defense of this person, but rather, No Personal Attacks and Block Evasion are non-negotiable things that need to be followed here. Sergecross73 msg me 20:28, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Salvidrim! (talk · contribs) called me a "predator" and I can feel offended too (or not?), actually I took that as an offense and personal attack. Well, ok, I'm the Predator then, and he is Billy, how about that? Billy is athletic though... Salvidrim is the one who started sending me YouTube messages/comments more than a year ago, but now he says: "I don't read YT messages. Nice one... I'm off now, and sorry for the trouble, Sergecross73. --188.140.45.255 (talk) 22:12, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Ouya

And there is consensus that the Gamestick is Ouya's "Main" competitor? Even though neither one is even out yet? You revert my edit which is more factually correct back to something which is even worse. Instead of reverting it back to the worse thing you should have just removed that as well. There was no citation for it. --Teabeard (talk) 14:24, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to remove the content about GameStick if you disagree with it. I'm indifferent to it. All I know is that there wasn't consensus for your change. If you don't like it, you remove it. That's on you. Sergecross73 msg me 14:30, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Question

Is The Video Game Critic a RS for reviews? I've seen it used in a number of articles, but I'm not sure it meets Wikipedia standards.76.222.59.241 (talk) 01:53, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

I dont believe it is considered reliable. You could check through the history/archives of WP:VG/S to see if its been discussed much before. Any context for the situation? I couldn't check your edit history to see where this was an issue... Sergecross73 msg me 02:05, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

It hasn't been an issue for me personally. I've just seen it cited in articles, such as Metroid and Sonic Triple Trouble, and was concerned because the website appears to be self-published. I've been unable to find any discussion about this matter, but aren't self-published sources inherently unreliable?76.222.59.241 (talk) 02:20, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, he's just a random guy, right? Technically, no, he probably shouldn't be used. I think what happens is, he tends to cover older games sometimes, that don't have a ton of sources online (because majority of the sources are back in printed magazines from the 90s, which few editors have access to) since there aren't many sources out there, and the articles don't get many viewers, I think no one really bothers to remove them. Since there aren't many sources on such games, I don't actively remove them unless they say something questionable. But, if anyone else contests them, like you, I wouldn't argue...

Okay, thanks.76.222.59.241 (talk) 02:41, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

I misread that source :)

On the Ouya: When I saw the change, I thought he both mentioned kickstarter and linked to kickstarter, haha. My brain kind of skipped over the IGN part. -Kai445 (talk) 16:07, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

That's fine. I kind of figured as much, which was why I didn't bother opening up a discussion on the talk page or anything. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 16:14, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Operation Red Hat

Can you review the justification for Deletion of Operation Red Hat, the Discussion for banning me and the the claims of providing mis-information. The accusations stated are not valid. Thanks Johnvr4 (talk) 17:21, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I really don't follow the whole scenario, I was merely pointing out that, you said the article's deletion was unjustified, but the consensus on the deletion discussion was clearly for delete. Sergecross73 msg me 20:19, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

PCMag source

Where do you see 5GB mentioned in a chart at PCMag? I only see it mentioned in prose, and in such a way that PCMag is just reiterating what Game Informer reported – not providing additional verification or analysis. --GoneIn60 (talk) 17:45, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Oops, it doesn't. I think I didn't look closely enough. I think I combined the 8GB Memory with the 500GB from the hard drive size below, and thought I saw 5BG. I'll revise my statement. Sergecross73 msg me 17:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

No problem, thanks. The biggest red flag to me is the fact that there are hundreds of reviews out there (some in the last couple days) that don't mention the 5GB limit. I find that strange, especially when the articles are focusing on comparing the PS4 to the Xbox One. You would think this would be too big of a factor to neglect. --GoneIn60 (talk) 18:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Sonic 3D

Dear Sergecross73, could you please enlighten me by telling me what that first bold date is supposed to be? Is it for the first world wide release, the first English speaking relase, the first North American relase or the first US-American release?
If it is the first North American or US-American release, then you are right, but then the English wikipedia is biased and US-centric again.
If it is the first world wide or English speaking release, then it's just November again till more information is found, maybe cf. User talk:Yodonothav#June 2013. -Yodonothav (talk) 19:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

The link was to IGN, not IGN UK, so I'm guessing its the US release. I'm not sure why you're trying to bring "bias" into this, you removed a release date, and I re-added with a reliable source. If you have some concerns, try doing some basic Google searches for this kind of stuff, its usually not hard to find, rather than resorting to whatever a Wikia says, which isn't usable. Sergecross73 msg me 19:38, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

It is the US release date, at least for Zelda: Ocarina of Time, and the price is US-American, too (USD).
Well, could you please tell me what the first bold date is supposed to be? Is it the date when the game was first released anywhere in the world whatever the language is (possibly in some non-English language like Japanese in some non-English speaking country like Japan), or the date when the first English version was released (which could have been in a usually non-English speaking country like Japan or Russia), or the date when it was first released in any English speaking region (North America, Australia, UK/GB), or the date when the game was released in North America or the USA?

To illustrate the question: picture. In this example the first mentioned date in bold is the date when the game was first released world wide and when it was first released in North America as the dates are the same. In The Legend of Zelda (video game) the first date (which isn't bold there though) is the date when the game was first released anywhere in the world (in this case, it was in a Japanese/English mix in Japan). So the first mentioned date is the date when the game was first released anywhere in the world, isn't it? -Yodonothav (talk) 20:01, 20 June 2013 (UTC), added: 20:34, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure, it's not something I usually even use in articles I've created/rewritten. (I usually just list out the release dates and leave it at that.) You can ask at WP:VG or check through things like WP:VG/GL and see if its stated. Sergecross73 msg me 20:40, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Then can't I simply claim that the first mentioned date is the date when a game was first released anywhere in the world? [Just a rhetoric question, of course.] At least for Zelda that is, how it is in the article. As one could claim that Zelda 1 is mix of English and Japanese in the Japanese version, then here is Z:ALttP where the Japanese version was and is in Japanese. So this existing article proofs or implies that the first mentioned date is the date, when the game was first released anywhere in the world.

Now to repeat myself: By accepting that the European version of Sonic 3D was released in November and by stating that the first release of Sonic 3D anywhere in the world was the 30 November of the same year, one claims that the European version was released on 30 November too (as there is no 31 November). As no source was given, it's WP:OR. I instead simply accept that the game was (with some skepticism: most likely) released in November (ie. 30 in North America and at this time unknown/unsourced in Europe, so it could be the any date between 1 and 30). As the concret European day is at this time unknown/unsourced, it's all we have. Conclusion, at this time: The first release of Sonic 3D anywhere in the world was in November [1996].

Also again: For this argumentation it's completely irrelevant what some wikia states as it isn't used here and as I know that it (like many other sources) is no reliable source.

-Yodonothav (talk) 21:23, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Since we have a source that gives the full release date for the Saturn version, it would appear this is the earliest definitive date for any release of the game on any version and in any market (the citation specifically mentions the Sega Saturn version in North America). If a source appears stating that the European market release for any version falls earlier than that, and not just a broad "November 1996", then I certainly would advocate for changing the date to that release. In the general hierarchy of dates, Day/Month/Year trumps Month/Year, which trumps Year. I don't detect any nation-centrism here at all. --McDoobAU93 00:36, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Might be missing something here, but Template:Infobox VG is the guideline we should be using; it states that the "bold" release date is the first date the game was released. Яehevkor ✉ 09:17, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree with McDoob that we should go with the earliest definitive release date. ("November" isn't a release date. It's a release timeframe.) Find a reliable source that says a European date earlier than that, and we'll use that instead. (Thanks for the confirmation, Rehevkor.) This approach strikes me as a good compromise, and the fact that I'm willing to do that should calm any of those unfounded bad faith claims of favoring a certain region. If you disagree, start up a discussion on the article's talk page. Sergecross73 msg me 16:26, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

FYI

173.68.110.16 replied with an inferred uncivil attack at you. ViperSnake151  Talk  03:30, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I actually caught it right away, and blocked him for it. (It was even more overt than the original violation.) I had just forgotten to put the block template on his talk page. I appreciate the heads up though, as I could have very easily never noticed his response. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 12:26, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Wii_U#Inappropriate_commentary_in_lead_moved_to_reception

Hello, I've noticed you are an admin who frequently edits Wii U. I thought it was inappropriate to immediately start criticizing the system in the first paragraph as was previously done. A week or so ago I moved some of the criticism down into the reception section and immediately started a discussion about it on the talk page. So far only one other user has joined the discussion (and appears to agree with me). I was wondering if you could leave some input there. (I am asking because User:Mazty,[19] an account that edits almost nothing other than Wii U recently reverted my move. I in turn reverted them and referred them to the discussion)

Thegreyanomaly (talk) 21:55, 25 June 2013 (UTC)