User talk:Strikerforce

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Strikerforce.

Welcome to my talk page! Here are a few things that you might want to be aware of, prior to beginning a new thread:

I am not an Administrator, so I did not delete your page, nor do I have the power to do so. If I have tagged your page as a CSD or PROD and you would like to know why, I can provide you with an answer. However, I do not have the power to retrieve your page, if it has been deleted.
I prefer to keep all communication in one place. If I posted on your talk page, please feel free to leave a {{tb}} that directs me to your page, but please respond as you see fit on your page, rather than mine. The odds are pretty good, though, that if I have posted on your talk page, I have placed it on my watchlist, so if you have responded, I'll likely be around shortly.
Please remember to sign any comments left on this page by placing ~~~~ at the end of your comment.
While Wikipedia itself is not censored, I do not appreciate profane language of any kind on my talk page. I reserve the right to remove any comment containing profanity once I have reviewed the comment and acted upon it as needed.
As noted below, my talk page is watched by a few nice folks. In regard to issues of policy here on Wikipedia, any response by a talk page stalker may be considered as good as coming from me personally. Outside of policy questions, I appreciate their opinions, but please wait for a response from me.
While my edit count (currently in the neighborhood of 7000) may not be indicative of it, I have been around Wikipedia for over ten years now. As such, I would prefer not to be templated. If I have made an error that normally bring out a template, I would ask that you take the time to write a personal comment, rather than the alternative. In asking, I explicitly agree to extend the same courtesy to others.
My talk page is bot archived on a regular basis. Previous discussions may be found in the archive here.

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

float

Friendly messages are much appreciated! Please add new conversations below. Thanks! —Strikerforce

Edit War on Matt Painter

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.--174.253.20.207 (talk) 17:03, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm... no? It's a page with Pending Changes protection. Unless I am mistaken, this is not a situation where 3RR would apply. Strikerforce (talk) 17:12, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

3 reverts is 3 reverts. You don't get to pick and choose. I have reported you. --174.253.20.207 (talk) 17:16, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that would be your right as an editor, I suppose. I'd be very surprised to see anything come of the report, but we'll see. Strikerforce (talk) 17:18, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are vandalizing Wikipedia. You will be blocked!--174.253.20.207 (talk) 17:22, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above, we'll see what action - if any - that an administrator decides to take. I'm curious, though, about one thing... you haven't made any other edits to the encyclopedia other than a report to AN/3 about me. What is your deal? Why are you so interested in interacting with me about a claim regarding a violation of policy that might not even be, in fact, a violation? Strikerforce (talk) 17:25, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Supreme Overlord of Knowledge

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Supreme Overlord of Knowledge, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Minima c (talk) 06:29, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently you didn't read the edit summary that I used when I created the page, Minimac :-) 'Tis all good, though. Delete away! Strikerforce (talk) 06:36, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CSD Removed per ApFaDa «l| Promethean ™|l» (talk) 06:35, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Userspace edit

Don't worry about the category that I removed for being red. I created it. The Wikipedians who use Chrome currently are you and me. Other than that, it's clear.--The Master of Mayhem 19:14, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments on my page re Barry Bonds

You stated "Your edit summary on Barry BondsI do not appreciate the tone of your most recent edit summary on the Barry Bonds article. Per BLP, I was correct to undo your edit and request a citation. I was well aware, at the time of my edit, that the verdict had come in. All you had to do was provide that citation, which you could have done without adding the comment that you did. --StrikerforceTalk Review me! 21:58, 13 April 2011 (UTC)"

Your comments are out-of-line. You could have just as easily put a cite in, as you were apparently aware of the verdict. Failure to do so is conterproductive. Jvsett (talk) 23:33, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with you. My edit was backed 100% by policy (one of the most strict policies that Wikipedia has). I made a simple request for a citation ("Citation, please", for anyone that may be reviewing this interaction at any future point). Your response of "See the news, please" comes across as snippy, disrespectful, and patronizing. For that reason, I left a comment on your talk page, simply pointing out that you may have been a bit uncivil (which, looking at a couple of other items on your talk page, appears to be a problem that you have had previously). In regard to the citation, I was aware of it, yes, thanks to my Twitter feed blowing up with "breaking news" comments about it, but I had yet to read an article about the verdict, myself. Thus, I did not have a citation readily available. In the interest of maintaining BLP compliance, I acted correctly. Strikerforce^{Talk Review me!} 23:58, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And I disagree with you. Regarding my comment "read the news," since you acknowledge you had full awareness of the fact Barry Bonds had been convicted, the proper edit would have been to add cite, not to remove an undisputed fact which simply was “He was convicted on April 13, 2011 on the obstruction of justice charge”. This is nothing controversial nor editorializing about this statement. Your reverting did not increase the utility of Wikipedia, nor comply with policy you cite. I note that another use added additional citation approximately one hour after my citation, which should have been done in your edit. Your inappropriate umbrage and continued posting on this matter is bewildering. You accuse me of being uncivil and personally attacked me on two different pages. I was neither uncivil nor attacked you. I did not make any disparaging remarks about you, which you continue to do. This is inappropriate. You continue inflame this situation for no apparent reason. Jvsett (talk) 01:56, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]