User talk:Sergecross73

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


Vandalism pt2[edit]

Vandalism pt3[edit]

Vandalism pt4[edit]

Vandalism pt5[edit]

Vandalism pt6[edit]

Atlanta Falcons[edit]

Why did you lock the Falcons roster box and not any others ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Falconfanatic (talkcontribs) 17:07, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

See the discussion directly above. It was the only one I was alerted to. There was a dispute and the IP was not discussing on the talk page or adhering to precedent. (From what I've been told anyways, I don't usually work on sports pages.) Sergecross73 msg me 17:12, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

@Falconfanatic: Have you read the talk page? I made a comment there 8 months ago, but it was ignored by the anonymous user who doesn't follow template standards and reverted anything I did to combat that. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:58, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Seems like Falconfanatic may be the same user, as he just added back the nonstandard grouping. For comparison, this is what the template is like for the rest of the league (31 other templates), and this is what the Falcons one was like during the season. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 01:16, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
I've now fully protected it, and started a new discussion on the talk page. Hopefully there will be discussion now. Full protection means now you can't edit it either, though I'll remove it shortly, especially if you are intending on making non-controversial other changes to it. If you don't mind, on the meantime, please explain your stance on the template talk page. Not for me - I understand your stance - but just for documentation's sake. Sergecross73 msg me 01:31, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the help, I've asked on the NFL Wikiproject twice now, but was ignored for some reason. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 02:35, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Are they very active? I know the video games and music ones are, but I know a lot of others aren't. Then again, Footballs pretty popular, so it seems like there'd be a presence there... Sergecross73 msg me 02:50, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
They are, recently the NFL player infobox was updated with a lot of discussion about it, so I don't know why some requests are just ignored (similar to how my videogame infobox composer suggestions...) Dissident93 (talk) 04:00, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

This is not right for this roster box to be locked and 31 others are unlocked I have been doing the falcons roster for about 2 years now I am a die hard fan and I would like it to be decent that's why I fix it up.

  1. RiseUp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Falconfanatic (talkcontribs) 05:19, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Why would I lock every template if there's only a dispute with one? There's a dispute on how to organize, and no one is discussing on the talk page about it like they're supposed to when this happens. Locking it forces the discussion that was already supposed to be happening. I'll unlock it one there's a WP:CONSENSUS on how to handle it. Sergecross73 msg me 15:22, 3 May 2015 (UTC)


So about 6 hours after you issued a final warning on AN/I that Subtropical-man would be blocked for any further personal attacks, he posted this snide remark "- in the USA they do not teach in schools about the European Union?" which I ignored. Then you repeated the block warning you posted at AN/I on Subtropical-man's talk page. The very next day, he posted this, "By the way, I know, the EU is a competitor of your country - USA but if you came here to fight with the European Union (I suspected this before), I report it to administrators according to the WP:BATTLEGROUND and few other rules. The rules say that Wikipedia is not a place to hold grudges, conflicts, carry on ideological battles, nurture prejudice, hatred, or political views. PS. (Yet) I not officially accuse you, just inform."

As if he deserved yet more warnings, BeenAroundAWhile tried again to warn him to cease personal attacks. And so he backhandedly strikes out some of the offensive comments, and justifies it because I described a map which literally includes two versions of the same view as "silly".

Note that just prior to this, at User talk:Subtropical-man#Friendly advice a sympathetic editor agreed that Subtropical-man is being on uncivil and should stop, and he responded as if he had no clue. If it 's not WP:COMPETENCE, it must be WP:IDHT, but either way, this guy is not going to stop his disruptive editing. A block is necessary, and I don't think he should be unblocked until he gives some evidence that he gets it. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Dennis_Bratland I'm the editor you're referring to (the one that left the note "Friendly Advice"). I don't think it's a competence problem, I really think it's IDT, sounds like he doesn't want to hear it. It would be sad to see him get blocked or worse, but if he won't listen, he'll have to learn some other way. KoshVorlon Rassekali ternii i mlechnye puti 21:15, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
I agree with everything you both say, but I'm giving him one last chance because it's technically a little different than what I final warned him about. He's on the thinnest of ice though. Please keep me posted. Sergecross73 msg me 21:42, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
This has reached the point of disruptive editing. This guy has taken ownership of the Malta article and reverts even the tiniest improvement in the map. You can't talk to him. Can you make this stop? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 14:46, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Again calling everything a "personal attack", because he doesn't understand what is an isn't a personal attack. Does this have to go back to AN/I for another round of bickering to deal with violations of WP:OWN? To me this is a simple case of disruptive editing in many forms: 3RR, personal attacks, AGF, and now OWN. Every time he gets told to stop violating one behavior norm, he switches to another. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:37, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
  • You insulted me in his post, this is personal attack or/and slander. I explained in a courteous way [2].
  • You wrote: "tiniest improvement in the map" - you entered a completely new map to infobox without discussion and consensus (ostensibly change of ring) [3]. This is completely new map (with Mercator projections; other colours, file extension, proportions etc). Please stop make changes to the maps without consensus.
  • I corrected my behavior [4], no personal attacks. Please stop still trying to convince that I break the rules. I do not break any rule of Wikipedia.
  • You breaking rules, you entered a completely new map to infobox without discussion and consensus! If I reverted this edition according to the rules, you accused me (own etc). Please stop. If you want change of map, discuss and consensus. Sergecross73, please help. Please mediation and block of article - in order that Dennis not can change map without consensus. Subtropical-man talk
    17:56, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
See what I mean? I've tried to reason with this person. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:19, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
It would not be a problem if you were not breaking the rules. You still trying to enter a new map to the article by your changes/your opinion. There must be consensus, it's not my invention. If there is consensus, your map will be introduced to the article. But you still trying, trying, trying enter a new map without consensus. Subtropical-man talk
18:27, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Maybe you guys should try WP:3O or mediation or something? Or work with a Maps/Geography Wikipeoject or something. I don't know enough about Wikipedias stance on these areas to make a good call content-wise. As far as conduct goes, Subtropical Man's actions do seem irritating, but I really can't block on those grounds. The frustrating part of Wikipedia policy is that if you keep things below a personal attack and don't violate WP:CIV, it's hard to block, and I think this is one of those times. STM may be at the end of the line when it comes to warnings about personal attacks, canvassing, and innappropriate tangents in discussions, but nothing's he's done violates any of that. Sergecross73 msg me 22:45, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Costumes table again[edit]

Remember the issue I brought up to WPVG some time ago regarding the Hatsune Miku: Project Diva game series, where IP editors are often inserting crufty tables of in-game player costumes? Well, it's happening again. --benlisquareTCE 07:05, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I've blocked the IP, as I imagine its the same person. If another IP pops up to re-add the information, let me know, and I'll protect the respective pages. Sergecross73 msg me 12:13, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

My relevant info about WTCC[edit]

Hello Serge. I did no war. I added some some true, relevant info. Here a user added a vandalism tag but it was an abuse removed by the WP robots !

  • obviously I did no vandalism : you already perfectly know that all my actions are accurate and right. I added some true and relevant info. like a visual sum up of the circuits of the season, a sum up of the victories, podium and pole position, the fact that a driver left the WTCC during the season. I also added some info. about the compensation weight that were missing to have a clear view of the final results. Nobody thought to that before, so you could honestly congratulate me to have done all these actions : only some true, relevant info. and connected to the subject !
  • this user had no right to add this tag, because first my actions are certainly not vandalism -all this info are true and relevant- and the robot removed this tag automatically, because it is not a protected page

This user "used" a rule to remove my stats. But this rule is not relevant here , because only three sums are NOT "an excessive amount of statistics" ! So it was just an false excuse. Yet he continued again and again to remove these THREE stats.. You could blame him for that -removing some true info, using a rule that cannot be applied here, because 3 is not an excessive amount *LOL*-, not me. Your position towards these facts describes your "spirit" !

I also added some info. about the fact that a driver left the WTCC, it is relevant, but this user erased this true and relevant info. This is considered as a vandalism, not my actions =)

All my actions are good for readers and Wikipedia, but if you want to support some lies saying that I would do vandalism or dispute, please do : I don't mind if WP is poorer and if you want to support the people who don't want to cooperate and create a dispute whereas I have all the proofs that my actions are good.

On the contrary, I explained that I create no dispute and I pointed out that a little wisdom would be necessary here

You want to blame my positive actions ? You want to block this IP ? You want WP to be poorer ? You let a user and its friends to remove my true and relevant content ? Yet, some other users accepted it ! I don't mind that you support the users that make WP poorer and remove the true info, what is considered as a vandalism. I was cooperating to make WP more relevant and richer. So, people will read some articles on some others sources to get the right info. ! =) Removing some true and relevant info. is certainly not a mean to support WP !

On the contrary, you could ask some users to stop childish dispute and to remove some relevant info., what is considered as vandalism, not adding some like I did. You do what you want, and what you do describes your "spirit". Some people just want to prove that they are important, and remove the relevant info. Some people have a biased view and don't want some info. to appear. If you want to support that, it is your responsibility =) You want to take a false opportunity to blame me ? Please do !

One more proof for my publications =)

Thank you =) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:03, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Please actually read WP:EW and WP:3RR. It doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, the problem is that you keep on reverting other editors over and over again. Its undeniable that you did this 5 times here. That's technically enough to block you right there, but I went with a warning since I assumed you didn't know policy. Now you know, so next time its a block.
I'd also like to remind you that you're also at your final warning for bad faith assumptions of other users, and you're getting dangerously close to violating that. Use talk page. Discuss content, not editors. Final warning. Sergecross73 msg me 14:34, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

The user accused me of being bad faith, by adding a "vandalism" tag, whereas I did no vandalism ! But you don't "warn" him for that. Why ?' I would like to understand your point of view. On the contrary, why warning me again and again whereas no bad faith and no false info. from me were proved, OBVIOUSLY ? I would like to understand your point of view. Some user create a dispute by removing again and again some relevant info. As to me, I almost never remove some info., easy to prove this. I save each of my modifications. Some other users reverted more than 5 times (Cybervoron -the name that he used to describe himself !- reverted NINE times, much more than 5 times ! But you don't warn him for having reverted NINE times either. Why ? I'd like to understand your point of view. Finally he ACCEPTED my relevant info. about Borkovic, a PROOF that I was right to insist =) You are welcome ! =) Even this sudden opponent had to accept my adding, because it was "impossible" to continue to remove it a 10th time =)Thank you to explain your choices to blame me for 5 "reverts", but not another user that did NINE reverts =) As I wrote previously, I absolutely don't mind if you prefer to support the people who remove some relevant info. and make WP poorer. People will read some other sources, instead of WP, that's all ! Not good for WP and readers, yet... To bad, but no drama ! In addition, you do not count all the users that accepted my adding, you count only the 3 ones who suddenly appear there and revert, one after the other. Would you like to remind the policy to the user who reverted NINE TIMES ? You did not yet, did you ? Have a nice day =) (talk) 16:31, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I've now warned him as well, though I don't understand where exactly you're getting 9 from, I only see 3, maybe 4 times, at the article I'm talking about. But that doesn't excuse your actions, it just means you're both in the wrong, when it comes to following policy. I did not warn them before because I didn't see he had reverted you as many as 3-4 times, I thought it was less, as there were multiple other editors there who were having problems with your edits.
Regardless, with that out of the way, discuss on the talk page, and only move forward if there is a consensus to do so, as I've instructed you many times in the past. Sergecross73 msg me 17:04, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Serge. It is a pity that you refused to explain your choices. The 2 pseudonyms did not open a discussion, just suddenly removed some true info. even assuming that THREE sums are an "excessive amount of statistics". LOL =) Anyway, once again, I will not insist. Some people remove some useful info. on WP what makes it poorer ? Too bad for WP and readers, they will read some other websites, that is all ! You could intervene in a good way, but if you don't want to, no problem. WP is penalized ! I did my best. You know the situation. You let do this. As to me, I already know these info. that I share. I don't mind if some people want to erase them in WP and do as if they did not exist. It is a pity obviously, but people will read the websites where they find some more complete info. !

Stats. are useful, so look : When one "stops" temporarily to revert, the other one continues. You noticed that too ;-)

IvanEurope :

  5. adds "vandalism" tag ! Strong accusation... maybe you could warn him for that ? What is your opinion ?

Cybervoron :


NINE reverts, by this couple of "pseudonyms"...

A user validated the relevance of my new "compensation weight" §. He transformed my text into a table. I did not think that this change of mu initial text was bad against me. I am not childish. A table can be good to see the info. in a more little space =) So I did not remove his modification. As to me I cooperate ! And it is extremely rare that I remove some info., yet some are FALSE, some other not really relevant. But I think that WP is there to represent different opinions, so maybe among readers, some people will be happy to read some less important info. Therefore, I don't remove the info., even if they seem poor.

Have a nice day =)

Stop arguing with me, and start discussing with them. You undeniably and objectively have been edit warring according to its very definition. So has Cybervoron, and he was warned as well. I have no interest in any of this other than eliminating the edit warring. If you keep doing it, you're blocked. There is literally nothing you need to be saying to me other than "Okay Serge, I'll stop edit warring and discuss on the talk page." I can't comment on the your comment about them tagging your edit as vandalism because I can't find the word vandalism present in the link's you've presented. But it doesn't matter, even if he put that somewhere, it doesn't excuse all the reverting of edits without talk page discussion. Sergecross73 msg me 18:40, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, yes, I've been implicitly accused of vandalism : here is the right link => {pp-vandalism|expiry=10 May 2016|small=yes}} word "VANDALISM" ! I added some true and relevant info. directly connected to this page : NO vandalism obviously. All my actions are relevant and honest. And you should support me, if you thought to WP interests, by the way. They began a "war". Suddenly they remove some true and relevant info., invent that THREE sums are "an excessive amount of statistics" and theyr created no discussion, before ERASING FIRST my true info. A poor content on WP is good for the other websites ! Too bad... Bye. (talk) 10:49, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Alright, I see the word vandalism now. His edit summaries said "trivia", but he did use the word vandalism once, which isn't right. That being said, as I just said, it doesn't give you the right to edit war. Additionally, he has even attempted to discuss on the talk page. You still have not responded it discussed anything, instead choosing to bicker over little details with me. I can't stress enough how you're arguing with the wrong person here. Discuss your content issues with the people you were edit warring with, not me. Sergecross73 msg me 12:34, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Non-english articles and lists in reception section[edit]

Hey there, admin. Just one quick question. When I was searching for more reception lists for Ogre from Tekken, I have found some non-English (Spanish) articles in which he appears: Maybe I'll find later some more, but never mind. Is it allowable if I add those other-language lists in his (or in some other character) reception lists? And also, some guy posted on my page this:

(Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Disturbedasylum. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

   The five pillars of Wikipedia
   Contributing to Wikipedia
   How to edit a page
   Help pages
   How to write a great article
   Editor's index to Wikipedia

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (Disturbedasylum (talk) 01:54, 10 May 2015 (UTC)); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.)

Was that what I think it means (nothing special :D) or was he trying to tell something more with that? He also posted some picture. You can see it on my talk page. Thanks. Disturbedasylum

(talk page stalker) @Disturbedasylum: Non-English sources are acceptable if they're otherwise okay, but that Spanish page looks like a blog to me that isn't subject to editorial oversight and wouldn't be considered reliable. The message that was left on your talk page is a standard greeting with some links to pages you may find helpful and some general advice. For example, signing talk page messages with four tildes (~~~~), as that message suggests, is a good idea because it will make it much easier to tell who said what, and when, than manually adding your username to the bottom - the default signature cotains not just your username, but a link to your talk page and a timestamp too. Huon (talk) 02:42, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Disturbedasylum - Hey there. Huon's response above is correct. Spanish-language sources are usable in theory, but those one's you've presented are not. A tip - anything with "Wordpress" in the link is generally not a usable/reliable source, just because any old person can start up a wordpress blog, and write whatever they want about a subject. I could go make a NFL Football Wordpress blog right now if I wanted to...and boy, I am not an authority on football. Huon, thanks for the assistance, I always appreciate it when a TPS helps people on my talk page, and I did not know you stalked my talk page. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 13:21, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

CSD Deleted Number Userbox[edit]

Did you use a tool to generate the user box on your page with the number of CSD deleted articles? I am interested in having that as a user box on my page as well. Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 13:59, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Chrislk02 - I wish I had, or knew of one, but no, the way I figured it out was much more manual - I went to the deletion log and filtered it to only deletions done by my name, and then roughly gauged how many it looked like there were. I know that I rarely if ever close AFDs, so they're mostly CSD's by default. I just started working at CSD consistently, a month or two ago, so this works right now, though I recorgnize it may not really be a sustainable approach I suppose. So definitely tell me if you happen to find a better method. :) Sergecross73 msg me 14:08, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! I used to patrol CSD heavily several years ago, then I took a break for a while and am just not getting back into it. It seemed like a cool user box to indicate that one worked in the CSD area. I will just do what you did, and maybe do a search for deletions with AFD in it to narrow down the ones from CSD. Thanks! Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 14:16, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
No problem. Glad I was able to help a fellow editor who likes statistics! Sergecross73 msg me 14:32, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
I created a rough templated version as User:Chrislk02/userbox/csdcount (I prefer to avoid raw template like content on my user page) Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 14:26, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Oh yeah, your version does look better. I'll use that too - thank you. Yeah, the rough version I had before was just taken from the AFD ones on my talk page that I created years ago back when I couldn't find any existing ones that covered what I was trying to express. I don't even know how I came across the raw version, I must have copied it from somewhere, as it was before I really knew much of the Wiki-markup like I do now. Regardless, yours looks better. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 14:32, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Reverting to type[edit]

As soon as I geolocated that IP at Talk:Sega Genesis, knew who it was. He's back to personal attacks. --McDoobAU93 20:12, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Its that Technotopia guy, right? Did we indef block him? Sergecross73 msg me 20:14, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
His second personal attack is enough alone to block him even if he was new, though, like you, I don't believe he is. Sergecross73 msg me 20:21, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
May be in need of revocation of talk page access now ... --McDoobAU93 20:24, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Yup. Just did it. (And he's back to his trademark insult "Yanks" so I'm sure it was him...) Sergecross73 msg me 20:27, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
As I recall, IP pages do not "belong" to the people who post on them; that privilege is reserved for users who create an account, right? --McDoobAU93 20:30, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I believe that's right. I personally don't really care when IP's remove posts (as long as they're not doing it to misguide what happened in an unblock request), but every time he was reverting it to a version with personal attacks present, which is obviously a problem. Sergecross73 msg me 02:35, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

/* Proposed merge with Alice Hathaway Lee Roosevelt */ Oppose[edit]

How are the administrators who arbitrate these proposals chosen? Does participating in the discussion disqualify you from being the arbiter? I agree with you that it should be WP:SNOW, as evidenced by my Speedy keep, but I have enough experience to know not to look away when minority viewpoints are expressed as virulently as WV and Snuggums have done. You may think article's are protected, so you pay attention to other things, and wham, the article is gone because we were caught napping. So any way I can help, please ask. Thanks.MMetro (talk) 07:39, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi there MMetro. Generally, it's any Admin who is WP:UNINVOLVED in the debates. Since I've been commenting in the AFD for it, yeah, I wouldn't be able to close it. Keeping an eye on things is a good idea, but I wouldn't worry too muchabout this. They've drawn a lot of attention to this debate, between the merge discussion and the AFD discussions. I think they realize that they'd be in all sorts of trouble if they acted against a consensus that had so much visibility on it. They may not be above badgering every person who disagrees with them, but I don't think they'd outright edit against consensus like that. Sergecross73 msg me 21:22, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
WTF? We're not idiots, we're not inexperienced editors -- acting against consensus is something neither I nor Snuggums would do even if there wasn't "visibility". Further, there is nothing wrong with trying to explain your case or state your side of the discussion in such a situation as this. No one is badgering anyone. Both of us are "above" doing so -- if you think otherwise, then you clearly haven't paid attention to how either of us defend what we believe in. You non-AGFA comments here are out of line and over the top. Especially for an administrator, Serge. Further, MMetro, I'm fairly certain claming both speedy keep and snow at the AfD is inappropriate, as there are two delete !votes at the proposal page. -- WV 21:51, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
When people respond to every single !vote, saying pretty much the same thing over and over again, I feel it elevates from "arguing" to "badgering", but that's just my 2 cents. Sergecross73 msg me 22:03, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
It was speedy enough of a keep for me. Thanks. MMetro (talk) 09:03, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Black Ops III protection?[edit]

Hey, do you think activity Call of Duty: Black Ops III warrants semi-protection? No substantial changes in the last 10 days with over 100 edits. Some background vandalism coupled with unsourced additions regarding platforms and zombies. Unsure if it would pass RPP muster though, since the clear vandalism isn't too high. -- ferret (talk) 19:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Guess so. :P -- ferret (talk) 19:25, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Ha, sorry, I acted first, and got pulled away before I could actually respond. I probably fall more on the lax side of page protection requirements, so I agree here that it's necessary here. I've protected it for a month, so that it runs through E3, and then we can take it from there. Sergecross73 msg me 19:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

"Tales of" series[edit]

Yes, Narikiri Dungeon was released for the Game Boy Color, but the game was backwards compatible with the original Game Boy. I believe that Game Boy should be displayed as a platform where people can play a game from this series on. The same could be said about Star Ocean Blue Sphere and Grand Theft Auto for their respective series. ThiagoSimoes (talk) 20:10, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Its not wrong, but it just kind of strikes me as redundant, just the same that we don't list DSi or PSP Go even though Tales of Innocence and Tales of Vs. are playable on them... Sergecross73 msg me 20:15, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
GBA games were playable on DS, but we don't describe GBA games as released for both consoles. Cross-compatibility doesn't change what the intended/principal platform of release was: it's what's written on the box! ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  20:24, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Agreed. Even the respective Star Ocean article given as an example doesn't use the suggested approach its supposed to exemplify... Sergecross73 msg me 20:27, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
But it IS clearly stated on the box that the game is playable on the original Game Boy. GBA games were playable on SOME models of the Nintendo DS, while Narikiri Dungeon is playable on ALL models of the original Game Boy. There is a huge difference. There are two types of GBC releases: games that were compatible with the Game Boy Color only and games that were compatible with the Game Boy Color and the original Game Boy. The Grand Theft Auto (series) follows this approach and it has not been contested by anybody so far. ThiagoSimoes (talk) 14:21, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
We don't usually list "backwards compatible" systems in infoboxes though. GB/GBC are more closely related to the DS/DSi example, which we don't denote when its compatible with both. Nor do we in the actual GBC game articles, like Grand Theft Auto (video game) or Star Ocean: Blue Sphere. Sergecross73 msg me 14:34, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
I respect this, but I insist that it is not valid to compare the GB/GBC issue with the way DS/DSi games are listed. DSi games have never been made with backwards compatibility in mind. If one happens to own an original Nintendo DS or a Nintendo DS Lite, there is no way a DSi game could work in one of these systems. Now, if one happens to buy Grand Theft Auto or Star Ocean: Blue Sphere, the games could be perfectly played on any previous version of the monochrome Game Boy. There are no limitations whatsoever. I find it interesting when you label this kind of information as redundant, since backwards compatibility is not true for most of the Game Boy Color releases. The GBC version of Tomb Raider does not work with the monochrome GB, for example. This is why I believe backwards compatibility should not be taken for granted. Also, should not we provide the information that ToP:ND also works on all the orginal GB models only because people should assume this could be a possibility? This information could hardly lead to some confusion, so I can see no reason for it to be removed other than "we don't do that", which so far has been applied to completely different systems under wildly different circumstances, anyway. Narikiri Dungeon was developed aiming for full compatibility for both Color and monochrome versions of the Game Boy system, and while I understand the reasons for people to debate over this issue, I still can not see any harm to add this information on the Wikipedia article. ThiagoSimoes (talk) 02:11, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

need protection[edit]

Hi, Rock Out with Your Socks Out Tour is being seriously vandalised by various users. Please protect it.— Supdiop talk 18:12, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Looks like another Admin beat me to it. I would have done the same though. Sergecross73 msg me 18:14, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Green Queen[edit]

I just spent an hour making Green Queen acceptable and now because I chose to review the page, all the content has been deleted. If you can recover it, that would be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msmarytalt (talkcontribs) 19:13, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I've restored it at Draft: Green Queen to the draft area, though it is far from ready to be in Wikipedia proper. You need to write it according to what third party sources say about it. See WP:REFB for some beginners help, and check those links on your talk page about how Wikipedia works and whatnot. You'll need the approval of an Admin in order to take it out of the rough draft area. WP:AFC is a way to do this. Sergecross73 msg me 23:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

IP issue[edit]

Hi. Can you please take a look at the following: [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]. According to the histories I provided, the IPs appear to be a dynamic hopper which geolocates to the University of South Florida. I believe that it appears to have issues with WP:NPOV, WP:INUNIVERSE, WP:N and WP:OR. I think we should file an WP:SPI if its necessary, but do you have any thoughts about this matter? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:28, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sjones! I've looked it over. I definitely agree with your actions thus far. I don't know if SPI would help much, since a number of them haven't been very active recently. I can protect any pages being targeted though. I protected Xion, and it looks like someone already protected Eureka. Were there any others? Sergecross73 msg me 20:16, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Not at the moment, but can you take a look at the contributions of Liftboard Rider (talk · contribs)? It appears that the user, whom I believe is an obvious fan of Eureka Seven and the Kingdom Hearts series, intends to recreate articles that were merged using those IPs months earlier in different name spaces. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 10:23, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, I believe he's allowed to have copies in the draft/sandbox space, if he think he's able to work on it and make it meet the GNG. I, like you, don't really expect it to go that way, but he can technically do it though. If he starts moving it into the article space without a consensus in his favor, then I could always up the protection of any possible names, but I'd have to wait until he does that first though. I can also speedy delete the drafts once they've been sitting there without improvement for a while... Sergecross73 msg me 14:01, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
You deserve this. Thanks for giving me this advice Bsliangel (talk) 16:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Let me know if you have any questions or need help. (Also, a reminder, your rough draft was moved to Draft:Fantasy Forest: Land Before Dragons.) Sergecross73 msg me 16:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


Thanks for the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kimono111 (talkcontribs) 16:30, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Peace Barnstar Hires.png The Barnstar of Diplomacy
Thanks for the message. This is my gift for you Bsliangel (talk) 16:52, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Fantasy Forest[edit]

Thank you for helping on the article fantasy forest. If you could, please help on improving it. And I was also wondering how to submit the draft.

Bsliangel (talk) 20:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)BsliangelBsliangel (talk) 20:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)


How do I submit my article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsliangel (talkcontribs) 17:33, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

I've added the articles for creation tag back on to your draft. If you click on the spot that says "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!", it should be submitted for review. FYI, I would not submit yet if I were you, as I don't think it would pass a review. I'm saying this to help you out - not to criticize - but there are a number of issues with it currently.
  1. There's many formatting issues - for example, your headings/section titles "Habitats" are in boxes because you put a ton of spaces in front of them in efforts to "center" them. That's not how Wikipedia formatting works.
  2. You need to use reliable sources, and directly cite the information (see WP:REFB). Websites like Wikias and Gamefaqs are not usable sources because the info there can be submitted/written by anyone. You need to use sources that are written by actual writers/journalists. Like that example I gave you a while back -
  3. You need to show how the article meets Wikipedia's standards for having its own article. It shouldn't just be all a guide informing people how to play.
For an example of how an iPhone game article should look more like, see an article I made - Sonic Jump. It's not the best article in the world, but it meets the bare minimums. Sergecross73 msg me 17:41, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Draft: Fantasy Forest: Land Before Dragons[edit]

Do you think you could keep helping me on this? Link — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kimono111 (talkcontribs) 15:11, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I can try to help some more...but as I was saying above, its kinda going to need a lot of work to get it to pass. See my points 1, 2 and 3 in the section above this one, here on my talk page, for starters... Sergecross73 msg me 15:29, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I drove by the article and did a tiny bit of cleanup. I also added two sources to the talk page, you should attempt to integrate the information they present and reference them. Remember to not copy them verbatim! That would be a copyright violation. Unfortunately didn't find any usable reliable sources when I looked... -- ferret (talk) 15:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
ferret - The 148 apps review is usable. The Touch Arcade one is too, though its rather brief and a database entry, so it wouldn't count towards notability. It could help with some details of a gameplay overview type sentence maybe... Sergecross73 msg me 15:48, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Serge, note that there's apparently two games, "Fantasy Forest Story" and "Fantasy Forest: Land Before Dragons". The 148apps review appears to be for the former, I could find no review for "Land Before Dragons". Touch Arcade specifically notes "No Review" for "Land Before Dragons". -- ferret (talk) 15:50, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Or do they use it interchangably? There seems to be separate app listings for both... -- ferret (talk) 15:52, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I had thought that one was just a shortened name for another. When I'm in the app store, I search for both, and I only come up with one hit with both terms, and its the same one. I don't get a second listing either either search term. That's all I had been basing it off of though, I've never played the game before, nor is it really my type of game, so I'm not entirely sure...but these new editors were asking for help at WP:VG so I was trying to give a bit of guidance... Sergecross73 msg me 15:57, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeah guess so. I just feel like I saw someone recently refer to them as distinct titles. Not a lot of sources here but found one more that might help with gameplay. -- ferret (talk) 16:05, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, its going to be really close as to if it's going to meet the WP:GNG or not here. Not entirely sure how strict or lax AFC is either. I've personally never used it as a creator or a reviewer. (I didn't start creating articles until I had been here a few years, and knew pretty well what an article should look like... Sergecross73 msg me 16:08, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Brogue (video game) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brogue (video game) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brogue (video game) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --Anarchyte 00:06, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

My biggest contribution was just declining its speedy deletion tag months back, but thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 00:34, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Meghan Trainor[edit]

Hi Sergecross, if you get a chance, could you take a look at edits I recently made to the Meghan Trainor "early life” section? These were edits originally added by Lips Are Movin, which I trimmed and copy edited. I took the time to do so because her recent efforts were mass reverted [11],[12],[13] and I’m concerned multiple editors are being run off the Meghan Trainor suite of articles due to the ongoing battleground and being accused of “fancruft” (But who else but a fan is going to bother reading all the sources involved in writing a good comprehensive early life section?) I seem to recall you had a moderate position on that article in regards to the past concerns regarding length and bloat, acknowledging bloat, but also thinking there was music snobbery at play. If you get a chance, would you mind taking a look and seeing if you think this needs further trimmed? [14]--BoboMeowCat (talk) 23:06, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I am not a fan or anything, I just stumbled upon one if the discussions at random, so I could help make a call on fancruff type info. I'm a bit busy at the moment, but I'll look into it in a bit. Sergecross73 msg me 01:24, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


That indefintetly-blocked user Dragonron is back again, this time as Looks nice guy! I'm back (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) and Hoo! rock me back! (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log). Just wanted to inform you about this in advance. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 07:19, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Blocked them, and a few others, and protected the page. Even if its not DR, it's still obviously someone making new accounts to continue an edit war. Let me know if it this recurs, and I can look into it again. Sergecross73 msg me 11:48, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for dealing with this matter. I repoted Dragonron at META[15]. @Sjones23:Could you start the sockpuppet investigation on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dragonron? --Infinite0694 (Talk) 14:40, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
No problem. Do you suspect for there to be more socksout there? If not, we don't really need to do an SPI if I already indef blocked every one that edited at that article they were vandalizing. You guys can do whatever you want though, just my 2 cents. Sergecross73 msg me 14:47, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


Hi there. I noticed you replaced a header with a semicolon in this edit. This generates broken HTML and causes some browsers, such as screen readers for the blind, to have trouble. Semicolons should only be use for definition lists, not for pseudo-headers. It's not a huge deal, but I've been trying to get rid of all the errant semicolons on Wikipedia lately, and it's a pretty huge task. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:12, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

NinjaRobotPirate Oh, this comes as a surprise to me, as the semi-colon approach is pretty widely used as a method of sectioning off credits in band or album articles. (See WP:GA's like Green Day or Neighborhoods (Blink-182 album).) You may want to consult with some of these Wikiprojects, like music related ones, and their MOS, before spending too much time on this. Otherwise, its going to increase faster than you can try to fix it... Also, do you maybe have any alternative suggestions? Similar to your efforts, I commonly go about trimming out unnecessary sub sections that have little to no content to warrant sectioning off, which also clutter up the TOC at the tops of articles too. Sergecross73 msg me 16:28, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I didn't care at first, but then I saw it increasingly used all over the place. I just fix them when I see them; otherwise, it would be a pointlessly huge task. I don't want to go on a Giraffedata-style crusade. At first, I replaced semicolons with bolded text, thinking it was the lesser of two evils. I ran into trouble when MOS enthusiasts pointed out that it was against MOS:ACCESS. Being something of a fellow MOS enthusiast, I gave up on that. Since then, I haven't really had a good solution, but the TOC can always be limited if it gets unwieldy. Sometimes it's possible to strip out the headers completely, and other times it's easier to reword the subsection so that it doesn't need a header. Sometimes you can simply remove the errant semicolon, and it works as an introductory sentence for the following text. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:45, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

List of PlayStation Vita games[edit]

On this page, we're nearing the template transclusion limits apparently, and this will definitely be a problem once it happens. We've already had to remove navigational templates which are normally placed at the bottom of such articles, for instance {{Video game lists by platform}} and {{PlayStation}}.

Would it be a good idea to replace all instances of {{dts|date}} with plaintext dates (i.e. replacing {{dts|2015|02|25}} with "February 25, 2015") to alleviate this issue? The majority of transclusions on this page are automatic date format conversions, and although such a change would make future editing/updates to the page slightly more tedious (and the raw wikicode more messy), we can have the page functioning normally. This can be easily done with an automated script, by the way. --benlisquareTCE 04:21, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Benlisquare - I see no problem with that. I know another approach I've seen would be to split the list into 2 articles as well - something like "List of PlayStation Vita games (A-M) and List of PlayStation Vita games (N-Z) (or wherever a split would make the most sense.) Either way, its up to you. Usually, it seems like these sorts of lists are usually just maintained by an editor or two, and aren't the type to be brought to "Good" or "Featured" status, so, with little opposition out there, you're probably free to take some liberties on the approach. Sergecross73 msg me 13:24, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

SCE Japan Studio page protection[edit]

An anonymous user keeps re-adding his (badly written and formatted) version on the SCE Japan Studio article. It doesn't seem neutral and it has TM symbols for every game, so since I've reverted him around 3 times, I'm proposing that the article be protected for a bit, if possible, thanks. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:29, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Done. Do what you can to discuss though. Sergecross73 msg me 23:58, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
I'll try next time, but I don't think the user will respond. The edits he keeps reverting too look like a copypasted pamphlet about the company or something. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:36, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
I completely understand, I just mean, if there's proof somewhere that you at least tried to start a discussion, then that usually alleviates you if any blame or trouble in edit warring/content disputes. Sergecross73 msg me 22:32, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Possible conflict of interest[edit]

I was checking the new pages for video games and I noticed that two articles, Tom Kudirka and 2015, Inc., were made by User:Tomkudirka, which has me thinking there's a COI on these articles. Thoughts? GamerPro64 21:26, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Going by File:Tom_wiki.png, he claims to be the photo's copyright holder and then states the photo's "author" as Tom Kudirka. Questionable.. Яehevkor 21:49, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
Seems like a COI, definitely. The article definitely has some "puffery" going on too. ("some of the most talented developers") Also, a lot of parts are unsourced. Sergecross73 msg me 22:06, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
So should I take this to AfD or nominate it for Speedy deletion as advertisement? GamerPro64 22:35, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
You can always try a speedy, and if it fails, send it to AFD. Sergecross73 msg me 22:56, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
GamerPro64 - So, it looks like both speedies failed. Looking through the sources a little closer, there does seem to at least be an attempt to claim he's notable, so I suppose that makes sense. Its up to you if you want to nominate them for AFD. I don't think they'd survive, honestly, but I'm also content personally with just hacking up the article to remove all the promotional content too. Your call. Sergecross73 msg me 14:19, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
On closer inspection, 2015, inc. wasn't made by the user. That was an error in my part so I undid my speedy tag. I think User:Hakken, the creator of the article, could improve on it for the better. like taking out the MobyGames citations and replace them with reliable source. I might pursue an AfD on the individual, though. GamerPro64 15:00, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I'd advocate a redirect of the individual to the company too, if you think the company is notable enough to maintain having its own article. The only reason I didn't do it sooner was that I kind of thought they'd both be deleted. I admit I haven't looked into "2015 Inc." much though. Sergecross73 msg me 15:05, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Problematic editor on Sega related articles continues to ignore issues on the talk page[edit]

I'm sure you remember Tripple-ddd, the editor that has had multiple people reverting his mass changes on Sega related articles. Well, recently he states that since he "Hasn't got a response on the talk page...", that somehow gives him the right to continue to ignore what he's been told to stop doing. If you just take a gander at the Sega article talk page, you will see the massive walls of texts dating back months in which we try to help he see what he continues to do wrong, so he's wrong when he says this and is just edit warring at this point. We're all getting tired of babysitting him and reverting his edits that clearly go against consensus set on that talk page, so I'm wondering if something else can be done? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:15, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I'm very tired of dealing with him as well. You're like the third person to complain, and all of them have been warranted. Blocked for a week. Sergecross73 msg me 00:34, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

A brownie for you![edit]

Brownie transparent.png I've just baked a batch of brownies (OK, Sainsbury's did; I just bought them! =D) and thought of you; hope you enjoy them, they're nut free. Kandiwell 22:25, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Haha, thank you Kandiwell. Sergecross73 msg me 14:16, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


Question, I'm an old WP user, as you can tell by my account, but you were proposing deleting the section showing that the xbox one game console was using deceptive tactics to market their game device, why? I mean I feel that is a major important milestone, if nothing else it would be like mentioning Microsoft without mentioning the misteps of Windows ME.Cleave and Smite, Delete and Tear! (talk) 03:02, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Because no reliable sources cover it in any of the ways people are trying to use it in the article, and no one has given a counter-proposal that didnt sound like they had an axe to grind against Microsoft. Sergecross73 msg me 03:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Strictly for the record, why is Gawker media considered reliable, when they are being sued in the the United States for behavior that was slanderous, Cleave and Smite, Delete and Tear! (talk) 04:24, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Please see WP:VG/S for the complete list of sources that are currently deemed usable or non-usable. Gawker Media isn't listed there as always being reliable - that's not the current stance. Kotaku specifically is usable, but even then, there's the "you need to be cautious when using it" type clauses with it. Sergecross73 msg me 12:23, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


Are you the paige owner of rise — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wonderdisk 93 (talkcontribs) 23:18, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Are you talking about Rise Against? Wikipedia doesn't have page "page owners", but I do mediate conflicts there, yes. Sergecross73 msg me 23:36, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Untitled thread[edit]

Do not delete my page if you find an error, correct it. If you want to know more about me Google my name.

Tom Kudirka — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomkudirka (talkcontribs) 03:58, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Salvidrim! - Yeah, GamerPro64 brought him to my attention after he noticed he appeared to be writing an article about himself. We've been discussing how to handle it a few sections up, here. The speedy deletes were declined, so I've been working on trimming all the unsourced or promotional content away. And yeah, I redirected the Wages of SiN because it had been tagged as unsourced for 8 years. Sergecross73 msg me 12:49, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Sin: Wages of Sin[edit]

Why did you delete the page Sin: Wages of Sin? You have it redirected to the SiN page. Wages of Sin is the mission pack for the game SiN. They are not the same game. What gives you the right to delete a cult classic? You can still buy this game on EBay. Did you research the game at all? The guys who made Sin: Wages of Sin worked for 2015, Inc. their next game was Medal of Honor: Allied Assault. The team left and became Infinity Ward. Have you heard of them? Their next game was Call of Duty. Put back up the page Sin: Wages of Sin. Clearly you never heard of that game. But anyone who truly knows video games understands its significance to FPS games. Underdoger (talk) 17:02, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Have you done any research on how encyclopedia articles are supposed to be written? That article was without a single reference in 8 years. I am well within my right to redirect an article that has zero reliable sources in it. That was a terribly written article. Articles need to be written by what reliable sources say. If you're so deadset on it having an article, then go dig up some sources on it and rewrite it. If its as influential as you say, then that should be easy enough to do. It's past form was unacceptable. Sergecross73 msg me 17:10, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Did I do any research on how encyclopedia articles are supposed to be written? I didn't create the article. We just noticed the article as gone. If the page has not been referenced in 8 years then put it back up and I will add updated references. Underdoger (talk) 17:21, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I know you didn't create the article, I can see that you've only made 2 edits ever, starting today. (I also imagine you're Tom Kudirka, as no one except him has shown any interest in this expansion pack in 8 years, and now all of a sudden 2 people are fired up about this?) Anyways, what I meant was, if you knew how an article was to be written, and how the website works, you'd know why I redirected it (and know that questions like "What give you the right?" doesn't make any sense in this case.) Feel free to undo the redirect and make it into an article, but keep in mind 1) If you are Tom, you're going to be faced with a lot of opposition and scrutiny because you have an obvious conflict of interest, which is frowned upon here and 2) it'll get redirected again if you fail to add proper sources and content. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 17:29, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't appreciate your attitude. Very appropriate for a Wikipedia administrator. Who do you think your talking to? I'm 52 years old professional businessman whose been in the video games industry for over 15 years creating hit games like Medal of Honor: Allied Assault and assembling the team that became Infinity Ward. There's not going to be opposition and scrutiny because I will adhere to the guidelines under Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. So there will be no conflict of interest either. And there are plenty of video game developers with biographies out there. I don't have to explain myself to you at all. Wikipedia Administrators should not speak to anyone this way. Underdoger (talk) 18:12, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

How was my attitude different from yours? I answered you in the same manner you addressed me when you came on my talk page and started demanding all this "What give you the right?" and "Obviously anyone who knows video games" type lectures. Had you come on to my talk page a little more calmly, then that's the kind of response you would have gotten. That being said, all I was, was direct and to the point. I did not insult you or call you any names. Sergecross73 msg me 18:43, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @Underdoger:

Please calm down and assume good faith. To ensure quality, the article needs to be neutral and have reliable sources. Before the article is restored, we need the reliable sources first. Right now, you have not guaranteed that after the article is restored you'll go and improve it. Per the Wikipedia policy WP:BURDEN, you yourself need to ensure the content is verifiable before it's visible to readers. On the flipside, we need to ensure that the article is neutral. This means that any material added should not be cherry-picked to advance a position. Hypothetically, if the game has both positive and negative reviews and you choose to provide only positive reviews, that's not maintaining neutrality. So what Serge is saying is that because you're closely involved with the subject matter this bias could be present (not saying it will be) and thus will face more opposition from other editors. Please don't take Serge's comments the wrong way. He is simply acting in the best interests of Wikipedia. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 18:56, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I understand and agree with you ThomasO1989. The SiN: Wages of Sin article must have reliable sources and must be neutral. I just don't agree if an article is old to simply delete it. If an article in an encyclopedia is old should it be deleted? I did not write the Wages of Sin article and I don't remember everything in the article. I guarantee that after the article is restored I will improve it. Thank you for your cooperation. Tomkudirka (talk) 14:13, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

The article was not deleted because it was "old". It was redirected because it had zero sources in it. The "8 years of being unsourced" argument I make is only noted because it shows that zero improvement has been in an extremely long time. Sometimes, people argue "Its been showing improvement" as an argument to hold off on redirecting an article. I'm just showing that no improvement has been made in a very long time. (I mean, usually, if an article didn't show improvement in a month, its not a good sign. So you can see how zero sources in 8 years sounds.) Sergecross73 msg me 14:21, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker)@Tomkudirka: You are free to go to the history of the article in question and retrieve the revision from before the redirect. You can then copy it to your sandbox, or to the Draft space, in order to work on it. The article was just redirected, not deleted, and the old content is available to you in the article history. -- ferret (talk) 14:46, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you ferret, you're a good man. Tomkudirka (talk) 14:54, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Re: Tripple-ddd's behavior/block[edit]

I didn't have any idea about the (long!) discussion at WP:VG, or that Tripple had even been blocked until today when I found it on a fluke; just had a comment regarding the latter, and I would've thrown in my 2¢ on the former discussion if I'd known. Anyway.

I think there was a misunderstanding re: the edit I think you used as your rationale for blocking him. Dissident misread the diff history and thought that Tripple was reverting me adding something back on Sega, but once I explained what was going on on the TP, Dissident said he was fine with the change Tripple made.

Honestly I know the nittygritty really doesn't matter; if it wasn't this he would've likely gotten blocked over something else, and the main issue is definitely in that he doesn't communicate properly with others half the time or listen when people say he needs to approach things differently. I've gotten along ok with him so far because it's rare for someone to truly wear on my patience; while I'm not fond of the prickliness Luke or Dissident tended to meet him with, I can understand where their frustration comes from. Not everyone wants to spend all their time trying to get through to him, so he's got to learn. BlusterBlaster beepboop 17:08, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the input. I'm torn on what to do with him. On one hand, its not quite as bad as I first thought. On the other hand, its still very concerning how confrontational and unnecessarily difficult he is. He didn't argue with me at all about his block, but has argued with me at length about the notability requirements (and shortcomings) of some of the articles he's recently created. He won't listen to anything, and fights every step of the way. The "straw that broke the camels back" isn't quite what I thought it was, but at the same time, it doesn't feel right to unblock someone who has been so combative since the start of the block as well (in regards to things that were unrelated to the block as well, its not like he was combative because he feels he was wrongfullyblocked.) Sergecross73 msg me 20:44, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
He needed a break from editing the articles anyway, I mean it's not like this one is permanent. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:26, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
He's returned, but already blanked another article into his version without consensus backing it, so I'll continue to keep an eye on him. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 02:04, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Keep me posted. I'll try to keep an eye on it too. Sergecross73 msg me 02:14, 29 June 2015 (UTC)