User talk:MJN SEIFER

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, MJN SEIFER, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Trevor Kellog

Article removed. Please assert why this is an important topic if you repost.--File Éireann 22:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Sophie Braddock

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. The article was a non-notable biography according to the criteria set out in WP:BIO.  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  20:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Storylines of EastEnders

Your recent edit to Storylines of EastEnders could be considered vandalism. To experiment, please use the sandbox. Also, on a side not, the phrase is "commited suicide" not "suicided themself". Trampikey ^{(talk to me)(contribs)} 20:15, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I was referring to your statement that Leo Taylor "suicided himself which he shouldn't have done" Trampikey ^{(talk to me)(contribs)} 19:32, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, well you can leave it as it is if you want ("Suicide - Heroin"). I won't touch it again. What I meant by "Shouldn't have done" is that he had know reason to overdose. He thought another character was dead and that's why he did it. but She wasn't dead - so he shouldn't have done it.

1. 1. 1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MJN SEIFER (talk • contribs)

Please sign your posts

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trampikey (talk • contribs)

Keediz

You have recently re-created the article Keediz, which was deleted in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policies. Please do not re-create the article. If you disagree with the article's deletion, you may ask for a deletion review.

Please refrain from creating inappropriate pages such as Keediz. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. --ArmadilloFromHell 20:50, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

It's not suposed to be vandalism. I tried to make it as dimensional as I could. The fact of the matter is that I hate this awfull rumor, which is why I did an article of it. It's such an infamous myth I thought it derserved an article of it's own. And I stated I wasn't trying to ofend Americans or children as I am neither ageist nor racist.

Keediz has been around for years even though it doesn't exist it makes me sick every time I hear it mentioned but I wasn't trying to vandalize just educate are younger readers.

MJN SEIFER

Apparent nonsense or hoax, no Google hits, and nothing in the article to show otherwise. Article was created by you twice and deleted twice and looked at by at least three editors/users before deletion. If you can prove otherwise please post the citations/sources here. If you are unable to, and you recreate the article you will be blocked from editing. --ArmadilloFromHell 04:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Vorarephilia

Seifer, noone is claiming that vore doesn't exist. The question is whether there is sufficient verifiable information available to include vore within wikipedia. If we can't use Original Research (and there's good reasons why we can't), then we need to find information sources to verify this information. Otherwise, you could add anything to wikipedia, and all you'd need is a web-forum dedicated to the faux-subject.

Although, if you're willing to write said reliable information source... -- Kirby1024 23:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I might try to, It won't be up to Wiki's standards (Bad spelling/Grammar, may not be "Ensyclopeida like" either) But I may concider it, if people are willing to edited my badly spelled mess. MJN SEIFER

RHaworth

Don't apologize to him. He just called you a retard. I've had a dispute with this user in the past, and in that case I was pretty clearly in the wrong. But his attitude toward people is starting to approach violation of WP:CIVIL. --Tractorkingsfan 21:34, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I was a bit desperate for him to help me as a simply didn't know.

Thanks though. MJN SEIFER 21:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. There are plenty of people here who will help you without being like that about it (like me). If he keeps it up I'm reporting him. Have a good day. --Tractorkingsfan 22:04, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, There was this other article where someone corrected something I done wrong (Fair Enough - That's one of the things of Wiki, it can be edited) But he (Or she) wrote "This guy needs English lessons" at the bottom of the page which, I found irritating. I make mistakes and I'm not perfect, but that message was pointless, and I concidered leaving.

But If there are people like you here, I'll concider staying. MJN SEIFER 22:12, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Good, please do. We have policies here against being unnecessarily mean to people who are trying to make good contributions. Unfortunately, not enough people follow them. But some do. Feel free to ask me any questions you may have at any time. Cheers, --Tractorkingsfan 05:01, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

• Good heavens don't apologise to me! I must gently point out to Tractorkingsfan that I would never call anyone a retard - it was MJN who introduced the word. -- RHaworth 06:39, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Admitidly (sp?) that statement is true MJN SEIFER 12:11, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, he called himself a retard. But you were pretty eager to agree. Anyway, RHaworth, regarding what I speak about above (WP:Civil), don't you think you come off a little mean? Sometimes I think you might be joking or at least not that serious, but I'm just wondering if you ever look at something you say and say: "Dear God, I'm kind of a dick." I'm not calling you a dick, I'm just wondering if you call yourself a dick. --Tractorkingsfan 23:56, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

• How vulgar. I would never call anybody, least of all myself, a "dick" - whatever that means. The most I will admit is that whilst I never actually bite the newbies, I consider that admittedly, I may growl at them a little more than is strictly necessary.

"Joking" / "not serious" is getting closer to my attitude. How would I express it? "Wikipedia is not a matter of life and death. At the end of the day you can completely ignore me if you want." -- RHaworth 06:55, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Shall we end this now? "Retard" isn't even *that* bad a word! MJN SEIFER 16:29, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

• I shall stop certainly. -- RHaworth 18:07, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Excelent. thankyou. MJN SEIFER 18:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from

I think I have worked out about "retrieved from". This appears on every page but within a <div class="printfooter"> and is only meant to appear on a print version.

• If you are seeing "retrieved from" on screen, upgrade/change your browser to one with proper CSS support.
• Obviously you should not have copied "retrieved from" into the Bushido Blade (video game) but you should have made a note in the edit summary so that there is a link back to the other people who have contributed to the article. (OK, in this case there were no other people!)
• You copied "across levels", ie. you copied rendered text into an edit box and thereby threw away the links that you yourself had put in Story Mode. You should have opened Story Mode as if to edit it and copied from edit box to edit box. That preserves wiki markup.

-- RHaworth 18:07, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll be more careful next time MJN SEIFER 18:36, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:BladeT 026 1 0004.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BladeT 026 1 0004.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Fictitious

Please see http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/fictitious

You may want to practice checking a dictionary before declaring a word non-existent. You'll look less foolish that way. Captain Infinity 16:48, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Kannuki

Thanks for your message. I replied at the article talk page. Pan Dan 19:49, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I can honestly say that the article was purly in my own words from facts I knew. It's basically describing the character this has been done for other video games. Secondly I realize the characters don't have their own page yet but I will create thoes too. In fact I would like to thank you for motivating me to do so as I have been quite lazy recently. So far the only characters given pages are Kannuki and Mikado. But I will do the others. I will also try to make it more independent if need be. MJN SEIFER 19:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Well I will still do thoes pages, but I will save them incase they arn't apropriate (If there not I'll put them on another side - maybe even my own if make one) I wiki isn't hasty with removing things it "doesn't like".

Also the best way to see if what I've put is true is to play the game It's all very well with most games because they have website after website about them. But Bushido blade has hardly any. That is actually why I added to wiki in the first place because if people wanted information on the game or it's characters they'd have a place to go.

Also, although I will read what you've given me (Not tonight I'm tired) I am quite wary about wiki's "Orignal Research" policy, while it can be good if used correctly I think it can sometimes be missused. There is actually an article in wiki about myself and I have been told not to edited because everything I say is "Original Research". MJN SEIFER 20:15, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Accusing me of vandalism?

I noticed you said I was vandalizing the page List of characters from The Sopranos in the Soprano crime family. Excuse me, but did you even bother to look at the edits made by User:70.73.174.179, User:209.89.89.157 and User:80.99.18.40 (they are possibly the same person). They had their edits removed for vandalism on many pages and not just by me. If you even bothered to look at the edit history you would see that. They removed real characters and added characters and cast members who do not exist and added other odd, false information. So I and others spent a long time fixing their vandalism and cleaning it up. If you really think "they're not vandalizing (sp?)", then you clearly did not bother to look at what they did and are clearly don't know what the hell you're talking about. So I suggest you please be more careful in the future before you go accusing people of vandalism, especially people who spent a lot of time cleaning it up. Also, you spelled vandalizing correctly, but if you're going to accuse people of it, it's good to be sure how to spell it. Thank you. MrBlondNYC 21:24, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

OK Apology accepted. It's just that I spent so much time removing all that crazy vandalism on that page (and others), to be accused doing vandalism instead of removing it made me angry. So I apologize because I could have used a better tone in talking to you. I'm going to undo your revert to finally remove all the vandalism by the anonymous user.

Comatose

While I'm here I do have another issue to address with you. I have noticed that you stated that "comatose" is the "wrong word" in articles relating to Silvio Dante. I think your reasoning is that "comatose" means to be lethargic rather than being in a coma. That is incorrect. Comatose can be used to describe lethargy but according to dictionary.com the primary meanings of comatose relates to coma: [1] I think after reading those definitions you will agree. MrBlondNYC 20:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure that "I heard from professionals" is a good enough reason to make those edits. I can say "I heard the exact opposite from the head of the AMA". If you look carefully, the definitions on Dictionary.com for comatose are from Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary [2], Random House Unabridged Dictionary, American Heritage Dictionary, WordNet, and Cancerweb. You can also try online KMLE Medical Dictionary, Dorland's Medical Dictionary and Stedman's. If you're position is that ALL those dictionaries are wrong, then I must say that's an odd position to take. What Dictionary DO you use then? If you can provide good cites for your reasoning, then by all means. MrBlondNYC 20:57, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Real world information

Real world information is anything here. Note that it has to be a significant amount to be worthy of an article. I suggest Wikia if you want to write about characters. TTN (talk) 01:59, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou for explaining, I'll see what I can do. MJN SEIFER (talk) 14:24, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

November 2007

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Katy Fox. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 10:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Li Chen 001 0001.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Li Chen 001 0001.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Final Destination articles

I happen to agree with the edits that were made recently and I certainly do not "hate" the films. In fact, quite the opposite. I LOVE the films. He just went through and did what had to be done. Don't agree with it? Discuss it on the talk page. --13² 23:48, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I was the one you accused of "hating" the film. I also am a fan (well, of the first and third, the second is not as good). But what you need to understand is that this is an encyclopedia and not a fan page. That means we have to follow encyclopedic standards. Listing off how each character dies and giving a blow by blow recap of everything that happens in the film is not even close to how an encyclopedia covers films. And, for crying out loud, if you like the film so much why do you want to spoil it for anyone who hasn't seen it yet? DreamGuy (talk) 18:16, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

To Thirteen Squared: If you agree with the edits that's fine - I am still learning what qualifies as "notable" in Wiki standards if truth be told. Also I love the FD films too.

To DreamGuy: Firstly I apologize for accusing you of hating the films, looking back at you previous edits you gave no implication of doing so. So I am sorry for my harsh edits, and as mentioned above I am still learning how to "appropriately" use wikipedia. As for spoiling the film - well I was under the assumption (i.e. I am probably wrong) that Wiki film articles where only read by people who have already watched the film - if this not the case I apologize for this as well.MJN SEIFER (talk) 22:09, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I understand how tough it is to not put in every last detail or tidbit of information with articles you have a particular inkling for. I do have a suggestion for you. Since you do love the films so much and you seem to know so much about them, I will suggest you trying to improve the articles and I'm sure you wouldn't be too against researching the films even more. The biggest thing all of the Final Destination articles need is a good, detailed, well-sourced critical reception section. How did the movies perform in theaters? What are the critics' general opinions of them? How much money have the films grossed? A good critical reception section can really, really help improve an article. It's just a suggestion, of course, but I thought I'd throw it out there. --13² 19:18, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for understanding, I will give your sugestions a go (although they might not be as instant as my previous edits as I want to make sure it's done correctly) so thank you for suggesting it, I will see what I can do.

Incidently would anyone be against me putting the stuff about the video camera back in the FD3 article (although I am still looking for "sources")? It doesn't really spoil the film for those who haven't seen it and if it's not explained the film seems to get a worse reputaition than it deserves (people actually dismiss the whole film because of it, but they don't need to). I just thought I'd check if it was ok. MJN SEIFER (talk) 18:13, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

The Final Destination

I reverted your recent additions for three reasons. 1)It was extremely repetitive as most of that info is already in the plot. 2)Per WP:MOSFILM, the cast list either needs to be like it was before or prose with how the cast members were chosen. 3)There was actually a lot of OR in there, as well as unnecessary details or "exaggeration" words.

Please remember the article is about the film, not the plot of the film. Work needs to be done on casting, production, marketing, reception, and such, not information about the plot. Please also keep in mind that plot summaries should be 400-700 words, max, and that includes all plot information like your addition. The plot summary of the article is already way too long. Your edits tripled that and just could not stay. --13² 22:48, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Understood. I am a massive fan of TFD and figured I'd take a shot, but I will leave my edits out in future.

As a request; could you give me examples of what was "OR" and "Exageration Words" - so I don't make the same mistake in future edits (of other things)? Thanks for advice. MJN SEIFER (talk) 23:30, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Sure, no problem! Some examples of OR:

• "She also seems to be good friends with Janet." (The problem word is "seems" because it implies ambiguity.)
• "it is implied from his shirt he is a fan of "Bill Wall Leather Racing"" (While it may seem obvious, it might just be your interpretation.)
• "...although she was probably dead more or less as soon as the accident started..." (More or less implies an unknown.)

OR can be seen easiest in the types of words used. A lot of times, OR statements contain words or phrases called weasel words. If you're ever tempted to use a word listed there or a similar word, don't add it to the article.

Some examples of the exaggerated words:

• "promptly punches away" ("punches away" is sufficient)
• "quickly realizes" ("realizes" is sufficient)
• "epic race accident" ("accident" or "race accident" would both be fine)

Essentially, you should avoid words or adjectives that make the statement more dramatic or are used to increase the effect of something. The first two here are pretty mild, but it's probably best to avoid them unless absolutely necessary. These are sometimes called peacock words.

Hopefully this helped a little? --13² 00:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

It does. Thanks MJN SEIFER (talk) 18:19, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Give Yourself Goosebumps

Hello, MJN SEIFER. You have new messages at Talk:Give Yourself Goosebumps.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Blogs are essentially Original Research, since they only give opinions, not facts and OR is not allowed on Wiki (and I am pretty sure that links to such is not permitted) TyVulpine (talk) 20:21, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

That's okay Ty. I had a feeling it would because of the OR rule, I just needed to check, seeing as I actually asked on the Talk Page whether it was OR or not, and no one answered. Thanks for the advice, I won't add it again (I have the publicity I need anyway.) MJN SEIFER (talk) 22:13, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, MJN SEIFER. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)