Jump to content

User talk:Bmg916

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sharara (talk | contribs) at 20:40, 20 November 2007 (→Spam is serious issue: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to my Talk page
The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
My User Page
My User Page
Awards
Awards
Autographs
Autographs
Userboxes
Userboxes
My Contributions
My Contributions
The Wiki Signpost
View my User Page
Awards
Autographs
Userboxes
My Contributions

libeling people on user pages is a bad idea, and in fact, using user pages to attack people or campaign for or against anything or anyone is a bad idea

— Jimbo Wales, 29 September 2006, Wikipedia co-founder

I think that almost any argument, on any topic, which has premises beginning with "Jimbo said..." is a pretty weak argument. Surely the merits of the proposal should be primary, not what I happen to think. -- Jimbo Wales

If you leave me a message on this page, I will reply on your page as soon as I can.
If I left a message on your talk page, please reply here, thank you.
Don't forget to sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.


Cryme Tyme

Sorry For Adding that immature comment to the article Cryme Tyme. I was bored.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr.24SevenCrashHolly (talk • contribs)

My talk page

Do you mind watching my talk page? There is a user who keeps trolling in it. I'm not online that often to keep an eye on it myself so I would really appreciate it if you could help keep an eye on it for me. Thanks.-- bulletproof 3:16 05:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

Collaboration icon Hello! The Pro Wrestling Collaboration of the Week for November 4 - November 10 is Adam Copeland. Please help to improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia professional wrestling related article. The next article for collaboration will be chosen on Sunday, November 11.
Cast your vote to select the collaboration for next week! | Nominate an article that could be greatly improved!

You are receiving this notification because you are listed as a member of the Professional Wrestling WikiProject. If you no longer wish to receive this notice, then please add your name to this list.

Delivered on 11:46, 4 November 2007 (UTC) by MiszaBot

yankee roster

it has been said on the yankees web site larry bowa will not be back and ron guidry won't back also —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesbondfan (talk • contribs) 18:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Spoilers

I became aware of this edit and several others like it via an unblock request. I want to make sure you know that your edit was inappropriate, and it was doubly inappropriate to refer to the edit you were reverting as vandalism. See Wikipedia:Spoilers - Wikipedia does not avoid including information just because it is a spoiler; rather, we have spoiler warning templates for the occasion where we feel an unsuspecting reader should be warned, but the information, if otherwise appropriate, should definitely not be removed or hidden. Mangojuicetalk 05:03, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless, you were removing sourced, relevant information from an article, repeatedly. You violated WP:3RR and WP:OWN in doing so so many times in a row. Spoiler information is not inappropriate, but you were treating it as vandalism (note: there is a vandalism exception for WP:3RR but since this is certainly not "simple, obvious vandalism" it wouldn't apply here in any case). Also, neither you nor anyone else made a serious attempt to discuss the issue with the user (although I will note, neither did the user attempt discussion). Finally, you kept citing WP:PW as if it were policy: it is definitely not policy, it's a Wikiproject, and doesn't even have any subpages that are official guidelines. Even beyond that, you will have to point me to where on WP:PW spoilers are even discussed, because I can't find it. On the other hand Wikipedia:Spoilers is an official guideline. Mangojuicetalk 13:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, problem solved then. It's one thing to be draconian about not including speculative unsourced information (per WP:NOT#CRYSTAL); it's another to not include adequately sourced information that "spoils" a future broadcast. I can understand the general assumption that spoilers are likely to violate WP:NOT#CRYSTAL, I just don't think that was true in this case because of the sources. If the other user had been more communicative here, he might have said (before all those reverts) that SmackDown had aired in Australia, which he is now saying. I would think that changes things - would you agree? Mangojuicetalk 13:56, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Shad

Cool thank you very much. So what do I need to do to give you the correct info about me? I just don’t like the whey the guy put on the article "According to his SELF-WRITTEN MySpace biography" and "He further CLAIMS to have been" it just makes me sound like a lire. I mean who ells is going to tell people about my life except for me, I lived it, and I know I remember it. :) Some fans get over zelless, but it's ok. I want them to realize that I was just like them and hearse my story. Now if they can use it to get what they want out of there life more power to them. You being a fan I know you understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bkbeast13 (talk • contribs) 17:48, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check You E mailBkbeast13 —Preceding comment was added at 18:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did nothing cam up, but I'm doing showes with Booker T in houston tx. this is the real info about me. I did a shoot interviw that comes out this month with all this info on it and more. plus all the feued, tag team pardners and more if you do a search with my name. Thank you for the help and feel free to edit so that it is the truth. thank you

Thank youBkbeast13 —Preceding comment was added at 18:58, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hay thanks for fixing my page but her still are some false things on there. So this is what I’m going to do. I’m going to give you a shoot interview right now! I’m going to have my wife type up my biography for me and if you can post it an a web page Also send me any questions you want me to answer and I will right now. CoolBkbeast13 —Preceding comment was added at 18:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


My Myspace is my only page…Now you see I like what’s in the sand box, like Hard =Body never trained me for wrestling, Sgt did Hard Body was jus my fight promoter. And I do live in Atlanta, Louisville, Brooklyn, and Miami. I have condos in Atlanta, Louisville, Miami, and Atlanta, I own a brownstone apartment building in Brooklyn on Albany ave, and I have a house in Houston. That’s why I put my father and our company Mcfay Contracting Inc in the article it explains why I reside in so many places. Real-estate makes me more or the same as wrestling…. Now you have to understand when I started prize fighting in 97 ufc just got started and I was fighting in Bars, clubs, were ever Hard body took me. Back then there was no Shreddog or real internet coverage. Shit we didn’t have to even were gloves back then. I fought for two reasons, because I was good and I had bills to pay. From age 16-20 in a normal month I had about 8-10 fights, I was working as a bouncer in clubs on the weekends, and I was doing drug runs if the money was right. Life was a bitch but it made me hard I want people to know that if I can com out that shit and be a success then they can also… I understand shortening my stuff in wwe because there is a cryme tyme article, but I spent 4 years in OVW, 2 ½ without a contract. WWE recruited me but I didn’t get a contract till later and I tagged with a lot of guy. Not just Carlos an Osama. Plus I feuded with a lot of people before I got called up to RAW, so I do want that on the page as well…Bkbeast13 —Preceding comment was added at 18:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yo

Its been too long, Bmg. —mikedk9109 19:47, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DX

Unless a valid citation can be found stating it was a joke incarnation. It should be left as a (one night only) until one can be found. Otherwise it is just a personal POV stating it was a joke. Because Shawn or HHH never said it was a joke. Or else people can go back and say other members were just a joke(ie: Mike Tyson) and so on.Aladdin Zane 13:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the proof was on the show,with Shawn making and executive decision to allow them to join with HHH accepting. To state it was a JOKE would have to be found. But honorary member is fine by me.Aladdin Zane 17:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Bmg I would just like to note something about what you said on my page. Because it made me REwatch monday nights episode. You said "It's all a matter of POV in my opinion, based how one interpreted the show (especially based on what Shawn said after everyone but him and Triple H disappeared)" Well when I just rewatched it to see exactly what he said. He mentioned nothing of it being a joke, But infact what he did say actually confirms that it was a real incarnation. When he realized everyone was gone Shawn said "It was the greatest debacle" a debacle is a "very quick breakup, collapse, downfall, or failure" With that being said, the fact that he called it a debacle confirms it was an incarnation.Aladdin Zane 20:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gaspard article

I'm un-watching it, leaving it be, just to defuse the whole situation but the article as it stands (written by you with his input) needs some serious cleanup. I won't touch it because he's pretty much specifically asked me not to.«»bd(talk stalk) 20:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Years Revolution edit??

Uh...yeah, can you tell me how exactly that I "vandalised" the New Years Revolution page? The only thing I could think of is adding that it was actually scheduled, then pulled again. That isn't vandalism. I've been usin this thing on and off for more than two years, and every single edit (including the legit ones, not just the ones I do because I'm bored - admit it, everyone else does it too :p) has been reverted...There was one on the Punjabi Prison match, after the No Mercy 2007 match had been announced, I added it to the Punjabi Prison section - as the Undertaker/Big Show one had been done the year before. Now, if the first one was never removed, why should mine have been??Taker04 12:38, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Writing things such as "Haza fucks frogs!!" and "Haza loves donkey cawk!!" are blatant vandalism, please refrain from doing so in the future. Thank you. Bmg916Speak 13:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John and Jim

I don't know how to phrase it into the article but the John Hennigan article managed to completely omit the gimmicks relationship with Jim Morrison with blatant self-referential The Doors references included in Morrison promos and on the WWE website not to mention the personality. Right now the article pretty much states that the gimmick simply received a larger ego. I am thinking something along the lines of CM Punk#Gimmick to be added, or at least the Jim Morrison connection to be made clear. –– Lid(Talk) 14:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was an RS for it, until it got taken down for the drug question: Morrison's interview with The Sun. –– Lid(Talk) 14:44, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Or not now that I found a transcript for it again, misremembered the interview. The entire thing got derailed after the drug question. –– Lid(Talk) 14:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL

Haha, I can't think of another hint to give you. I'll repeat, I wanna raok! I don't know of what else to say. Peace, The Hybrid T/C 22:12, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship?

Would you like me to nominate you to be an administrator? I think you are a good user who is unlikely to abuse the tools. NHRHS2010 talk 23:02, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd support you. The Hybrid T/C 23:05, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha, I was just checking out your edit count and lifespan on Wikipedia to see if I could suggest you running for adminship. See WP:RfA for more information; it's worth reading before accepting a nomination. Looks like you'd have no problems finding someone to nominate you but let me know if you'd like me to. I think having "the mop" would make your life a bit easier. Finally, if you do get nominated, please let me know. Admin candidates are not permitted to canvas for support but I explicitly state here that you informing me would not be considered a violation or failing that, any violation would be on my part, not on your part. --Yamla 17:01, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re White Tyson and Hippiodude report at AIV

You may wish to consider my comments made at WP:AIV. Cheers. LessHeard vanU 00:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hi Im Truco9311, or in reality Kevin, and I proposed to split the WWE Brand Extension article into the WWE Brand Extension and WWE Draft, and I need at least 7-10 signatures so I can start splitting them. If you may, join the discussion here Thanks!--TrUcO9311 16:40, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

One thing that would greatly help in your RFA and help us at SSP, is if you'd review SSP cases and give you opinion, help dig out evidence, etc. It really helps and would show your sincerity at becoming a good admin. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:49, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

The WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter
Issue I - November 11, 2007
Project News
Current Events
Collaboration of the Week

The Pro Wrestling Collaboration of the Week for November 11 - November 17 is World Wrestling Entertainment. Please help to improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia professional wrestling related article. The next article for collaboration will be chosen on Sunday, November 18.
Cast your vote to select the collaboration for next week! — Nominate an article that could be greatly improved!

From the Editor

Welcome to the inaugural edition of the WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter! I hope this will be a good source of news to those people interested in what's happening around our pro wrestlimg community. I plan to release it every Sunday.

This newsletter will just be a way to get the community announcements to people who don't have the time to check the mesageboards, as well that to those just curious about the news. The newsleter will consist of a project news section (to do with what's happening on Wikipedia), and a current events section (relating to news in the "real world"). The newslette will also contain the Collaboration of the Week announcement.

That's all. If you have any feedback or suggestions, please post them at this talk page.

~ The Chronic

Contributors to this Issue: Gavyn Sykes — LAX — Nahallac Silverwinds — The Chronic — The Hybrid

Delivered: 18:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC) by MiszaBot

RE: WP:PW Newsletter

Thank you. Feel free to offer suggestions or contributions to next week's issue. The Chronic 18:47, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright

I was pretty sure it was nonsense anyway. Glad to have it cleared up.LifeStroke420 22:03, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a sock or a master

Please take a look at the discussion at Edmund the Martyr. EdChampion is a single purpose editor who has been blocked before for edit warring and not engaging in discussion. He knows a great deal about WP policy, yet edits nothing other then Edmund the Martyr. HE is certainly a sock puppet and while I have a pretty good idea who he belongs to - a banned user - I have never attempted to have him checked. He is an annoyance, but all consensus (5+ editors) is against him.

Whatsupwestcoast and I are both members of a Wikiproject, so there is some overlap in our edits, but he is Canadian and demonstrates it with knowledge that only a local could have. I am an American and have never been to Canada. My personal details are all on my user page, EdChampion googled me a few month back to get my cell number, and in my line of work all my info is on the internet. I figured I may as well be out with it all.

The article in question has gone RfC in an attempt to end this problem once and for all. Consensus is almost certainly going to go against EdChampion (even his name is POV) and he is getting desperate. If I am the master of "meat puppets" then Angus McLellan, David Underdown, The Rambling Man, Edmund Patrick and others are all puppets, too. Consensus is 100% against the position insisted on by EdChampion and it is not because of article ownership or sock puppetry, it is because he is advancing a fringe opinion that merits no further mention in the article. Please see for yourself. Best. -- SECisek 23:42, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

abuse on my talkpage

If it's OK I would rather have the death threat back please, I rather like futile grandiose death threats from post-pubescent Goths with lurid handles, it adds to my street cred? Anyway, as it's my talkpage, shouldn't it really be up to me what stays on it? Would anyone mind if I kept it do you think? Excalibur 03:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet

As you guessed, "Unless you meant Pyaremohan (talk · contribs) is the puppet and Dosrassam (talk · contribs) is the puppeteer" Pyaremohan <--> Dosarassam is the sockpuppet I meant... I made the changes to the report here... Can you please check ?

Moreover, User:Pyaremohan has only 1 edit so far (remaining 3 were issuing warnings)... How else can I ensure that he is a sockpuppet? Mugunth 15:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non Wiki-question

This has nothing to do with Wikipedia, but do you know why the Titantron always appears black in photos from WWE? TJ Spyke 20:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page Moving

All the wrestler's pages are like that.. see for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rey_Mysterio http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glen_Jacobs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Goldberg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Bautista why should Khali be any different?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sai2020 (talk • contribs)

I'm new over here.. thanks a lot —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sai2020 (talk • contribs) 17:31, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Spoilers

I really don't care all that much, but I just don't see either argument sticking. It's not WP:CRYSTAL as seems to be stressed in the archived WPT:PW discussion, and if "we're not a wrestling news site," then why do we list titles at all?

But as I said, it doesn't really matter to me. I probably won't be involved in the editing/reverting struggle at all. Tromboneguy0186 18:41, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

King of the Ring

He also messed with the main article if you want to take a look. I already reverted once. TJ Spyke 14:03, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem

I could search through the archives and my own edits and find times when I have enforced the "reverting spoilers" up until a few months ago, but at the time I realised something was wrong and haven't until recently had the time to properly bring up the topic (with real life issues, and the rather sudden adminship). –– Lid(Talk) 16:59, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I tried to nudge WP:PW in the right direction back in September but at the time didn't have enough time to explain my full thoughts on the matter. –– Lid(Talk) 17:11, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reading over responses to my comments it seems common practice for people against dirtsheets to refer to them as, well, "dirtsheets". It gives off a negative connotation and emphasises that these "dish out the dirt" on professional wrestling and is used as the statement they are unreliable but they still seem to ignore that the spoiler results are always right. In fact not one person has pointed to an incident where the spoilers have been wrong. It's extraordinarily hard to get people out of the frame of mind that dirtsheets can be reliable in certain aspects, as long as we are not using them to cite things like "X was seen smoking crack outside Y with Z". I mean "The Sun" is a fucking reliable source for wrestling articles, and that thing is a real dirtsheet. –– Lid(Talk) 00:18, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • The problem still isn't solved, and is going to arise everytime a title change happens on a taped show or a house show; the pages become edit wars over the inclusion or exclusion over a situation that everyone knows is true but gets written off as "being from dirthseets". It's really bizarre to me that everyone knows it's true but chooses to say it's unreliable, therefore wrong. –– Lid(Talk) 01:00, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • They already don't have a leg to stand on which is why I'm trying to keep the Australia debate separate from the internet situation. They're not the same topic, one is a debate and the other one has no basis in anything. –– Lid(Talk) 01:12, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply:Please

Will do, sorry about that. I've just got done reading over Lid's comments and I'm thinking of a suitable reply. I tend to think that if it airs (whether in the US or not) it should be noted. -- Gavyn Sykes (talk) 17:26, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow

He managed to take a statement of mine meant to show how absurd his position was and then actually followed what I said. This truly is absurd. –– Lid(Talk) 10:55, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One and a half years as a user I have no real incidents and am commended upon for my civility in the face of heated disputes as well as my strive towards neutrality. An admin for less than a week and I cause a template used in 2000 articles to be nominated for deletion and an ANI thread accusing me of POV pushing and incivility. Oh how the levees break. –– Lid(Talk) 01:37, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I know where you are coming from but the problem is that this happens everytime such a dispute comes up; it no longer becomes about who is correct it becomes who can keep spouting their view the longest. This isn't meant to be an endurance competition but a debate on merits and to my eyes we have been ahead every step of the way, to give up now would be to sacrifice simply because they are more willing to go for broke. This isn't how this should be occurring, but it is, and giving up the position because of exhaustion only leads people to believe that the longer they spout their view the more likely it will be that people will agree to it simply because they are no longer willing to step up and speak against it. –– Lid(Talk) 04:25, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Hybrid has already stated his intention to potentially stonewall the debate, which is how this tactic is meant to work in that it prevents a true conclusion from being reached through stubborness. You do not defeat stubbornness by giving in to it, you defeat it by showing you will not back down from such tactics. –– Lid(Talk) 04:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE:

Yeah, I'll let you know. This is annoying, but I consider it important enough to pursue it for as long as I can. Cheers, The Hybrid T/C 05:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lesnar

Done. –– Lid(Talk) 13:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

please talk to me

hello Bmg916 this is Rafff18 I have noticed that you seem particularly abatement about me being banned. I have read what you said on the administrates noticeboard that you would like to assume good faith. You can see were the additions that I made were agreed on here Talk:Montreal_Screwjob#Citing_Facts.2C_Hart.27s_Demands. Also if you do not trust the summery of the interview you can listen to it yourself after signing up here [[1]]. you are a big Bret Hart fan so you probably wont except this, and to be honest I started cheering against Bret in 94 because I was a big Owen Hart fan and my sister loved Bob Backlund. However even though I feel that the information is incorrect on the page, I know that whatever I put down no matter the source you would delete it, so if you would talk to someone about lifting the block on my account I promise you that I will not edit the page for the Montreal Screwjob. Could you please do this I want to be able to edit wikipedia from my apartment and here using my account. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.186.40.149 (talk) 15:36, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If a more verifiable source was used, whether I am a Bret Hart fan or not (I'm more of an Owen fan myself -- may he RIP), the information would stay, save for copy editing. Also, you are not banned, you are blocked. There is a difference. I don't really see any agreement at the provided link, more of a discussion that just kind of got stonewalled at some point. However, if you agree to not put the information on the Montreal Screwjob page since the screwjob is barely mentioned in passing in the interview (I am more open to perhaps putting this information, pending a more verifiable source be found in the Bret Hart article), I will speak with Secret (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) about possibly lifting or shortening your block. If you were banned, I wouldn't do this, but seeing as you are not banned, and you seem to be sincere I will assume good faith and speak with Secret. I cannot however, guarantee anything past that. Regards, Bmg916Speak 15:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spam is serious issue

Let Jimbo wales address it. Present policies has failed to control it. sharara 20:40, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bmg916&oldid=172769864"