User talk:Project Umbrella

There's no "Genki PlayStation"

--Niemti (talk) 20:13, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You probably shouldn't rely on a typo as the basis for an argument. Project Umbrella (talk) 20:24, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that the username you have chosen, "Project Umbrella", seems to imply that you are editing on behalf of something other than yourself. Please note that you may not edit on behalf of a company, group, institution, product, or website, and Wikipedia does not allow usernames that are promotional or accounts that are shared. If you are willing to use a personal account, please take a moment to create a new account or request a username change that represents only yourself as an individual. You should also read our Conflict of interest guideline and Plain and simple conflict of interest guide, and remember that promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. Thank you. Alexf^(talk) 14:27, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I only chose this username because I have a lack of originality once the username I normally use is taken. Simple as that. Project Umbrella (talk) 15:08, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Still it matches the name of your organization (per your user page), therefore it violates WP:GROUPNAME. -- Alexf^(talk) 15:19, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. If anyone is willing to change it for me, just make it "News-Bot". Project Umbrella (talk) 15:30, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Resident Evil 4 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

added he was very sorry and "even ashamed" that Mikami had to step in and scrap this version.<ref>[http://projectumbrella.net/articles/Yasuhisa-Kawamura-Interview-Project-Umbrella, Yasuhisa Kawamura

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:57, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OR, WP:RS

Also WP:SPS. And welcome to Wikipedia. --Niemti (talk) 13:01, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for proving you have absolutely no clue about what you're even attemtping to edit, I guess. Project Umbrella (talk) 18:26, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And you really don't know how Wikipedia works, and still didn't bother to learn. Oh well. --Niemti (talk) 09:32, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know how it works, and you using the rules to spread misinformation and outright false sources despite being given precise information is quite annoying. Sort yourself out. You have no clue what you're talking about half the time. You're prepared to take the word of a random chump on the Internet or a magazine despite them being proven wrong, but when a developer says something it's suddenly unacceptable. That is ridiculous, especially when you do no research of your own to verify anything. You do nothing but a disservice to people who actually want information. [[--Niemti (talk) 11:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC)User:Project Umbrella|Project Umbrella]] (talk) 09:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your "precise information" is a self-published source (and your own, no less) that was previously unpublished and of unverified reliability (the interview might be just a hoax, there's no proof it isn't, or at least this proof was never presented). Got it? Oh, and you're "a random chump on the Internet". --Niemti (talk) 10:56, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No proof except for the developer himself posting about it. Again, do your research before you pretend you know what you're talking about. The link to Mr. Kawamura's twitter is provided in both interviews. You could have just asked him. A random chump would be someone who hasn't already proven themselves to be a reliable source for more than five years. Someone who backs up every statement. Very few of the sources you provide actually explain themselves. And guess what? Your sources use me and my site as their source.^{[citation needed]} Project Umbrella (talk) 11:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. Either revert your own edit yourself, or I'll report you for being so bent on breaking multiple policies and rules of Wikipedia despite being informed on them repeatedly, and you might just blocked for any further disruptive editing. --Niemti (talk) 11:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Citation provided. No need to revert something factually correct just because you lack the capacity to do anything yourself. I'm not here to compensate for your incompetence. Project Umbrella (talk) 11:42, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you're here to promote your fansite. But yeah, [1] works for me. I'll edit it later, properly. --Niemti (talk) 11:52, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, I'm here to edit because I like the series and want other people to have the most accurate information available, not hashed together, unverified nonsense. I know my own motivations much better than you do, I assure you. You shouldn't accuse people just because they make you look foolish. That's twice you've done it, and twice you've been proven wrong. Can't wait to see your next accusation. Project Umbrella (talk) 12:03, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]