User talk:Sergecross73

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Vandalism pt 16[edit]

Posting for Serge ;) Here's the 16th iteration of Serge's personal WP:AIV. Let mehim know if you like mehim to look into any instances that you feel may require warnings, blocks, page protections, or just general intervention. Thanks! -- ferret (talk) 22:29, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

  • 184.88.74.163 (talk · contribs) is back, you blocked him in October. Only 2 edits so far, but they are to the same articles and repeating incorrect edits. Not sure if outright vandalism or just unsourced/wrong. -- ferret (talk) 22:29, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for starting this new iteration - I think this was the first time it's ever been inactive enough to auto-archive after 15 iterations. Anyways...I don't know what to do with that guy. What put me over the edge last time was a few edits that were clearly fake, but many of them, then and now, seem more like they could be good faith mistakes. I think I'll probably monitor him for now, until he makes an edit that's clearly bad faith. Because you're probably right, and I'm probably giving them too much credit. Sergecross73 msg me 04:21, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Can you protect Angry Birds POP!? IP hopper keeps restoring level tables even after the consensus to have them removed and claims on the talk page that they will keep doing it. --The1337gamer (talk) 23:33, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I looked into this right away, but forgot to respond. Was having a hard time confirming that it is or isn't him, I could go either way. At least he's pretty much stopped since you mentioned him here (which is probably actually a point towards it being Tripple, since he seems to abandon user names once you bring them to my attention, whether I block them or not... Sergecross73 msg me 21:29, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
Here's another edit he just made to Sonic Team: [1]. If you look at the information he's re-adding, the last part is exactly stuff he previously added under Tripple-ddd [2]. --The1337gamer (talk) 12:44, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Good catch. Blocked this time. Sergecross73 msg me 13:59, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Trolli20 (talk · contribs) Don't know what to do with this guy. He makes a lot of unsourced edits, doesn't read edit notes or warnings (apparently), and often makes minor (Space added/deleted) edits in order to leave news-like edit notes. Disruptive/incompetent. -- ferret (talk) 21:22, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Heads up to ferret, Dissident93, The1337gamer and any other (talk page stalker) - after looking into an ANI case I was pinged to, it looks like ol' ZacharyAtlus is back, and probably has been for a few months by looking over things. Not sure if we havent seen him because he doesn't seem to be active in video game articles as much anymore (hes been more into TV/film stuff, which was his secondary area), or if you guys got tired of dealing with him, (I wouldn't blame you) but if you see him, let me know, and I'll look into it. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 14:39, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Team Fortress 2 may need a short prot. Take a look at history. Hoping the editor will move to talk page. -- ferret (talk) 16:38, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Protected, left a note on the editor's talk page about not using wikias. I'll remove it if participants agree to stop. Sergecross73 msg me 16:49, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
  • FYI, not sure if you followed this further or not, but the editor was indef blocked by another admin, and rightfully so. Sergecross73 msg me 13:47, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Esports is due another prot. Multiple drive by editors in the last month pulling the eSports -> Esports edit against consensus. -- ferret (talk) 22:24, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Citing[edit]

Please don't leave bare references. be sure to cite them. I'm referring to Kocytean -- which I have since fixed.

this tool is also handy. Reflinks - just put the link in and it does it for you. --Jennica talk / contribs 14:50, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Jennica: What you've done isn't really building a complete citation, though. It's still just a URL with a title. Reflinks isn't nearly as functional as it used to be years ago. Use Refill to build more complete CS1 citations. -- ferret (talk) 15:11, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
@Ferret: - thanks very much, I didn't know about this tool. --Jennica talk / contribs 15:13, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
@Jennica: Reflinks used to build a full cite web, but a few years ago there was a big to-do about how tool servers were funded, and Reflinks went away for a while. Refill was developed during this time. The new Reflinks you linked above appears to only add a title to the URL, while Refill attempts to build a full citation. Just keep an eye on it, it can make mistakes or miss details (Like first and last name of author). But it's very helpful in getting citations built. -- ferret (talk) 15:17, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
@Sergecross73: - What is your aversion to properly citing sources? An admin should know better to be honest. --Jennica / talk 22:36, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
@Jennica: Please note that WP:BAREURLS is an essay, not a policy or guideline. Full citations are certainly preferred, but a bare URL is definitely better than unsourced content. I'd also like to point out that you don't seem to have fully read my advice above about reFill. You have not been taking the time to complete any details missed by reFill. For example, during this reFill edit, reFill missed the author on the second. It's up to the editor using reFill to catch these omissions and fill in the details. Otherwise it's still not a complete citation. -- ferret (talk) 22:43, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
Apologies for not responding on your first comment on this, Jennica, but I couldn't really come up with a nice way of saying something to the capacity of "Thanks, but no thanks." I prefer to keep things moving and work on other things instead. As Ferret says above, it is not a requirement to do them a certain way as long as you do them, and there's many people in the areas I work in that offer to do it for me much of the time, so it's fine. I think you're the only person in my past 8 years to give me a hard time about this (that I recall), so that's probably another testament to it not being a big deal... Sergecross73 msg me 23:59, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
It's just a little ironic to me that you are an admin and are supposed to uphold the rules of Wikipedia/do things correctly, etc. To me, doing a complete reference is the correct way - since there's a whole wikiproject for cleaning Wikipedia up and fixing citations... and it's ridiculously easy. It screams laziness. I would expect this from a new user. I mean, all you have to do is click on the cite web button, plop the link in and push the magnifying button to generate a title. What's so hard about it? It does cause problems.. WP:BAREURLS: "Bare URLs are subject to link rot.", "Most importantly, do not add bare URLs to articles—always create full citations with title, author, date, publisher, etc.". --Jennica / talk 00:08, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
I do uphold the rules, it's just that there aren't any actual rules in regards to bare refs. I'm sorry my years of volunteering my free time do not meet your personal expectations. I apologize for not doing FAs and DYKs in advance, it's probably disheartening I dont do those either. Sergecross73 msg me 00:27, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Again, WP:BAREURLS is an essay, not a guideline or policy. Jennica, if you are going to quote BAREURLS to Sergecross, I hope you'll take to heart my comments to you about filling in the missing data. Reflinks only added title, leaving out date, author, publisher, etc. Refill does a better, but incomplete job. Those who use it are expected to review the edit and fix any mistakes or omissions the tool makes. You are lecturing Sergecross about something you yourself are not fully following. -- ferret (talk) 01:52, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @Ferret: ??? this isn't even about that. it's about him not even using the cite web function to create a full reference. I make an effort to not leave bare references and cleaning them up. the opposite of what he's doing. it's not all that important anyways, according the rules. --Jennica / talk 16:55, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Your citations are much less detailed than anyone else who fleshed out my bare urls. They don't even overtly mention the website's name in them. They're almost a step backwards in that regard - I prefer the websites names to be in plain sight, especially considering how much I work on articles that meet the GNG but often fly under the mainstream radar. Sergecross73 msg me 17:00, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

AtlusZachary socks[edit]

Thanks for offering to block these AtlusZachary socks as they pop up. I found another one active today: 2A02:C7D:561D:1D00:A1F0:8939:AFB1:D0F8 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · edit filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:48, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

No problem. Thank you for reporting him. Please keep at it whenever you find him. Sergecross73 msg me 01:24, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
And another one: 2A02:C7D:561D:1D00:393F:7F20:A157:405D (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · edit filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:14, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Blocked. Sergecross73 msg me 03:02, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Speaking of "blocked": Q543frodomar was also your Playstation friend. Drmies (talk) 19:39, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Really? I'm a bit surprised - Q5 says he is Bambifan, who seemed prolific in their disruption. My guy just seems to come back once a year to say something stupid and get blocked. I suppose Q5 could be lying about being Bambifan though. Either that, or he's prolific in disruption but only blesses me with his presence on my talk page every once in a while. Or maybe I'm missing something else? Sergecross73 msg me 19:51, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Got another two: 2A02:C7D:561D:1D00:4573:4A4F:C8A8:947F (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 2A02:C7D:8A2C:7300:B5E9:9889:610F:CC3E (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Second one I'm about 95% sure of, but I'm not going to bet my house on it. Does AtlusZachary usually engage in petty "your mama" vandalism? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:26, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

No, AtlusZachary is disruptive/incompetent, not outright vandalism. -- ferret (talk) 23:39, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Alright, then maybe ignore the second one. It was probably just a random one-off from someone on the same ISP. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:31, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, while he has occasional outbursts on talk pages, his edits aren't usually vandalism as much as they're just factually incorrect or misinformed. Blocked the first, will keep an eye on the second - doesn't look like him, but they're not good edits coming from it all the same. Sergecross73 msg me 02:55, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Sonic Gems Collection[edit]

I've been making a page for Sonic Gems Collection. Can you help? I need infoboxes and an expanded reception section. I can do most of it, but I wanted to know if you could help me with the infoboxes. I want a picture of the boxart, too, but it's copyrighted, so I can't use it because I don't have a license. (TheJoebro64 (talk) 02:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC))

Wow, I'm surprised that didn't have its own article. Yeah, I can help with the article some, though I don't really do much in the way of images. Once it's an actual article, we can tag it as needing the cover art or a screenshot, and someone will eventually come by and help. Sergecross73 msg me 02:49, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Here's my user page for it: User:TheJoebro64/Sonic Gems Collection (TheJoebro64 (talk) 12:16, 8 December 2016 (UTC))

Regarding news.[edit]

Regarding my edit on Super Mario Run, I'm trying to keep information up to date as news comes in. For example: If there are video games released on platforms such as PlayStation 4, Wii U, or Xbox One, I try to include an appropriate reference towards that particular release. It seems that I'm the only one editing information on those game pages. Besides that, what are we going to do with my previous edit regarding Reggie Fils-Aimé's comment on the Super Mario Run and Nintendo Swich's news? Zacharyalejandro (talk) 00:54, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Regarding your edit, the problem this that it's not reception - reception info present some sort of judgement call on the subject - like a review or a hands on preview - saying it's good, bad, etc. You could add it to the development section, but even then, it may be removed as unnecessary - as it was never really announced or expected to be put on any other platforms. Sergecross73 msg me 01:26, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#Sonic and Pokémon credits[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#Sonic and Pokémon credits. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:01, 9 December 2016 (UTC)