Jump to content

User talk:TJ Spyke

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Heracles31 (talk | contribs) at 00:33, 24 January 2010. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to User talk:TJ Spyke/Archive 29. Archives prior to February 10, 2008 (Archive 16) were compiled by Werdnabot/Shadowbot3 and can be found at the right hand side of this page. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

WWE The Music - A New Day

Basically it's all coming through WWE's two Twitter accounts WWE and WWEUniverse. I would have cited them but it looks like I can't use them as sources per WP:TWITTER so I'm hopefully waiting for a WWE.com source later today. --  Θakster   18:52, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well if it helps, WWE.com writer Corey Clayton has confirmed the Twitter accounts as legit in his WWE Universe blog post. --  Θakster   19:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WWE Hall Of Fame 2010

i need a second opinion. i read a story on lordsofpain.net that maay have confirmed 1 member of the wwe hall of fame class of 2010: stu hart. here is the link: http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe/5939.html Can we put that into the article, or wait and see how it plays out?--JereMerr 14:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC)--JereMerr 14:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC)--JereMerr 14:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeremerr (talk • contribs)

WrestleMania 23

Do you fancy starting an RFC for this? GaryColemanFan is clearly not going to drop the stick and he shows no sign of budging, I am also disinclined to budge since as far as I can tell this made-up attendance figure has never been covered by any reliable source so cannot be allowed any kind of parity with the official figures, and there seems to be some kind of forum meme pushing Metzler's wild guess as evidence of WWF falsifying the attendance figures. Guy (Help!) 20:50, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/IWGP Junior Heavyweight Tag Team Championship/archive1

Hi, can you revisit this FLC when you get the chance? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 16:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note that if you don't reply to Will's responses, I may have to discount your oppose as not actionable. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:27, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The sorting issue has been addressed; please check back ASAP. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 01:29, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

Delivered: 19:28, 18 January 2010 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

The Straight Edge Society

You should probably just jump the gun and nominate the page for afd now. You'll most likely have to do it eventually, and at least that way any future recreations can easily be speedily deleted. -- Scorpion0422 21:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 18 January 2010

Hey

Hey TJ, how have you been? Save Us.Y2J 12:00, January 20 2010 (UTC)

I've been pretty good. I'm just playing Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 at the moment. Save Us.Y2J 12:24, January 20 2010 (UTC)
It is a great game. The game has got alot of controversy but it's still a good game. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare is a good game aswell. I finished that on regular and I finished Modern Warfare 2 on hardened. Special Ops on Modern Warfare 2 is amazing. Save Us.Y2J 12:46, January 20 2010 (UTC)

Another tricky title

Thank you for making your points at Talk:Brüno. I was wondering, do you feel the same way about WΔZ? Or should it be at "wΔz"? I came across it not long ago and was trying to decide what could be done with it. Seems like a strange and unreachable name. Erik (talk) 19:37, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ahem

See, I didn't ask you to use your sole opinion as consensus. I asked you to explain where the consensus exists that the ESRB ratings should be counted in light of the several discussions that resulted in a consensus otherwise. Give me one good reason why we're allowed to speculate as to what a rating means from the ESRB. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 04:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And might I remind you that editing an article to reflect the consensus achieved on three talk pages [one of those talk pages requiring TWO discussions to get it removed, in spite of the first discussion being successful], is as far from vandalism as you can get. Maybe you should step back and stop trying to weasel your POV into articles; you already knew that the ESRB was not accepted as a reliable source by the project but went on your own and ignored all of the opposition. FYI, I'll be taking further action to remove future release lists based on ratings for all other VC lists. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 09:07, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Yeah, except that you participated in that silly little project discussion on the reliable sources talk page.
  2. How has it not been established? It was not included as a reliable source on the matter of release dates specifically because the ESRB web site says exactly zero times that these ratings are indicative of a future release. You saying that the company intends to release a game solely because it's been rated by the ESRB is far from important; does it say this on the web site? Can you show that 100% of all VC games that have been rated by the ESRB have not been removed?
  3. To repeat what's been said, we are not a news site. We provide facts about notable things, not up-to-the-second information.
  4. Most of IGN's links are general "no information" links, several of them being merely summaries of their original games that likely indicate that they just saw the ESRB ratings and went from there. There are no news stories or references to establish where the information came from, and even if it was from Nintendo directly, they would mention that. Even the most reliable source mentions where it receives its information. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:56, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cite: publisher parameter

Hi, thanks for your note about the "publisher" and "work" Cite parameters. I have a long list of articles linking to The Sun which I'm processing, and many of them use various Cite templates. While the documentation for {{Cite news}} makes it clear that The Sun should not be listed as the "publisher", for other Cite templates it's not so obvious. It appears to me that The Sun should, indeed, be the "publisher" for items such as {{Cite web}} and {{Cite video}}. Do you agree, or do you have another interpretation? Thanks, MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 09:06, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: January 2010

Hello, TJ Spyke. You have new messages at Heracles31's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TJ_Spyke&oldid=339633837"