User talk:SNAAAAKE!!
Mileena
I would appreciate it if you didn't try and use low-quality sources in what are supposed to be good articles. Thank you. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 10:43, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
I just removed some random YT vids (but the Legacy episodes were released on YT) and "Game-Flush" whatever thing. --Niemti (talk) 10:46, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- And what about the numerous other sources that I removed which often don't even show up on WP:VG/RS? - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 10:48, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- It's all opinions, which aren't reliable by default (becasue they're subjective). These guys seem to be paid for their articles by the companies they work for, and it's approved by editors. (With the random SA user blogs, we've been removing them recently.) As for "WP:VG/RS" - do you really think Amiga Power was the only "reliable" Amiga magazine ever? Because all the other "don't even show up" there. And so there's not a trace of Amiga Format, and there's no CU Amiga neither, are you going to try to remove their references too? And so on. "WP:VG/RS" is totally worthless. But anyway: [1] --Niemti (talk) 10:55, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- I know how much you rue the idea of working with the community, but pretend that we have a process of verifying source reliability for a reason. I like Gabriel Yuji as an editor because his response to the situation was a well-reasoned justification for the strength of articles included in the list, rather than an unjustified freak-out. GameFront is not an RS, and PSU is not an RS. If you think they should be, bring them up at WP:VG/RS. I'd be more than happy to have more usable sources. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 17:04, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- And you're doing it wrong. Was there really only one reliable Amiga mag ever? Was nothing from Poland ever reliable? What you should do instad is to shit list stuff, and use commons sense in any other case. --Niemti (talk) 17:07, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- Niemti, let me repeat: you are not above everyone else. The only way that you get a free pass to use whatever sources you want is if you are considered the only editor that doesn't have to do proper citations. Further, no one is "shit listing" anything. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 17:10, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- Are you going to start removing all the other other Amiga magazines only because NOTHING but Amiga Power "even show up on WP:VG/RS"? Y/N. And I'm cosidered what? What? --Niemti (talk) 17:14, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- The only way that it is acceptable for you to be disregarding WP:VG/RS and using sources that have gone largely un-vetted is if you're, I dunno, a Wikipedia Gold member? Anyway, I'm not going to answer the question that you keep answering because you seem to basically be arguing that WP:VG/RS doesn't need to exist. Bring sources to that page and argue their merits, then use them. Like the WP:VG peasants do. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 17:20, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- I don't know what you talk about, people love shitting at me constantly (you too). You dodn't answer my question about (for example) all the other Amiga magazines and how does it matter they "don't even show up" there. Because I say: it doesn't matter at all, you might have another opinion so don't be shy and say it. --Niemti (talk) 17:27, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- People shit at you constantly because you have a terrible attitude. You were the absolute first person to enter that discussion re: the list and make the situation ugly. Tezero has just as much to "lose" if the character improvement drive were to go sour, and yet he's pretty humble and cooperative about it. Your problem is that you took it as a personal attack.
- I didn't answer your question because the implication is that WP:VG/RS, the guideline people in the project use to figure out which sources are good and which are not, is in fact unreliable. Feel free to help strengthen the sources guide. Do not feel free to ignore it. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 17:39, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- But please answer my question. --Niemti (talk) 17:42, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- It's your responsibility to ensure that Amiga sources are listed on WP:VG/RS. Same as the sources that aren't listed there that you use. You can't just used assumed notability. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 17:49, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- And so when are you gouing to start removing all the Amiga magazine sources that are not from Amiga Power? --Niemti (talk) 17:59, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Sorry. I don't plan on doing that because our goals are different: I'm removing sources of sketchy reliability, you're trying to disrupt Wikipedia by saying "Well what about this! And this! And this!" If I remove the Amiga sources, then that entails that I remove any source you ask me to. You can feel free to do it yourself. Or bring them to WP:VG/RS. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 18:10, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- SOMEESSAYEXISTS. You think I actually wanted you to do it? Removing the Amiga mags sources would be an incredibly stupid thing to do, all I wanted was to demonstrate you the absurdity of your "don't even show up on WP:VG/RS" argument. --Niemti (talk) 19:13, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Sorry. I don't plan on doing that because our goals are different: I'm removing sources of sketchy reliability, you're trying to disrupt Wikipedia by saying "Well what about this! And this! And this!" If I remove the Amiga sources, then that entails that I remove any source you ask me to. You can feel free to do it yourself. Or bring them to WP:VG/RS. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 18:10, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- And so when are you gouing to start removing all the Amiga magazine sources that are not from Amiga Power? --Niemti (talk) 17:59, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- It's your responsibility to ensure that Amiga sources are listed on WP:VG/RS. Same as the sources that aren't listed there that you use. You can't just used assumed notability. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 17:49, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- But please answer my question. --Niemti (talk) 17:42, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- I don't know what you talk about, people love shitting at me constantly (you too). You dodn't answer my question about (for example) all the other Amiga magazines and how does it matter they "don't even show up" there. Because I say: it doesn't matter at all, you might have another opinion so don't be shy and say it. --Niemti (talk) 17:27, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- The only way that it is acceptable for you to be disregarding WP:VG/RS and using sources that have gone largely un-vetted is if you're, I dunno, a Wikipedia Gold member? Anyway, I'm not going to answer the question that you keep answering because you seem to basically be arguing that WP:VG/RS doesn't need to exist. Bring sources to that page and argue their merits, then use them. Like the WP:VG peasants do. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 17:20, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- Are you going to start removing all the other other Amiga magazines only because NOTHING but Amiga Power "even show up on WP:VG/RS"? Y/N. And I'm cosidered what? What? --Niemti (talk) 17:14, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- Niemti, let me repeat: you are not above everyone else. The only way that you get a free pass to use whatever sources you want is if you are considered the only editor that doesn't have to do proper citations. Further, no one is "shit listing" anything. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 17:10, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- And you're doing it wrong. Was there really only one reliable Amiga mag ever? Was nothing from Poland ever reliable? What you should do instad is to shit list stuff, and use commons sense in any other case. --Niemti (talk) 17:07, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- I know how much you rue the idea of working with the community, but pretend that we have a process of verifying source reliability for a reason. I like Gabriel Yuji as an editor because his response to the situation was a well-reasoned justification for the strength of articles included in the list, rather than an unjustified freak-out. GameFront is not an RS, and PSU is not an RS. If you think they should be, bring them up at WP:VG/RS. I'd be more than happy to have more usable sources. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 17:04, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- It's all opinions, which aren't reliable by default (becasue they're subjective). These guys seem to be paid for their articles by the companies they work for, and it's approved by editors. (With the random SA user blogs, we've been removing them recently.) As for "WP:VG/RS" - do you really think Amiga Power was the only "reliable" Amiga magazine ever? Because all the other "don't even show up" there. And so there's not a trace of Amiga Format, and there's no CU Amiga neither, are you going to try to remove their references too? And so on. "WP:VG/RS" is totally worthless. But anyway: [1] --Niemti (talk) 10:55, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Btw, did you seriosuly list Ada Wong on your GA list? For your total of 5 edits (including 3 today)? Nice stolen valour. Keep on being classy. --Niemti (talk) 19:25, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- I created the article. Sorry that all I did was bring the article into existence. You'd have had a point if my five edits were to make a shell of an article, but I created it and sourced it (with sources that aren't just YouTube, RE fansites, and Gameranx) to the point that it passed WP:NOTE. Something that you struggle to do yourself, considering how many articles use unverified sources as a crutch. I think making the article is a little bit of more value than when you made the article poorly. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:34, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- A-ha, and it was a GA class article: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Ada_Wong&oldid=336698534 And yeah, it's me who uses "very, very bad sources" because yours awesome sources and excellent content, like Travis Moore, editor for the Daily Campus, stated that characters like Ada are cited as an example of characters who are in control of their sexuality, but added that this was only due to their "coy desirability" (what). Btw, I think Inquirer.net is even totally black-listed from linking today. Go and read this whole article. --Niemti (talk) 19:40, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- To confirm: Your quality is my quality four years ago. Well, that's pretty evident. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:43, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- Sure! (When asked by IGN editors if Ada would appear in the game, Resident Evil 4 producer Hiroyuki Kobayashi stated that a mystery woman appears in the game.) A serious question: whatever was "aquamarine.nu"? And "fyfre.com"? Oh! A reliable source! You have no shame. --Niemti (talk) 19:45, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- I'm not one for settling for mediocrity like you seem to be, but oh well. By the way, is it accidental that all of the sources to which you defend have not had a single word spoken by you to demonstrate their reliability? I mean, wouldn't it be fair to say that this probably means that you know that they aren't, but are disrupting Wikipedia to avoid their removal? Honestly, it seems like clockwork: any situation you're in, an RfC has to be opened up because your idea of editing Wikipedia doesn't involve civility or even the semblance of cooperation with anyone. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:53, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- You're the one "settling for mediocrity", and shamelessly lying for no reason (I created it and sourced it (with sources that aren't just YouTube, RE fansites, and Gameranx) to the point that it passed WP:NOTE. Something that you struggle to do yourself, considering how many articles use unverified sources as a crutch.). Btw, there's nothing wrong with YouTube (nothing at all). And it seems "fyfre.com" was this (where they even say they were a "fansite"). OK, I'm done with you. See ya. --Niemti (talk) 20:01, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- No problem, of course, beyond the fact that WP:EL states that most YouTube videos are to be avoided - AKA, all of the YouTube links I removed. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 20:19, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- WP:YOUTUBE and welcome to Wikipedia. --Niemti (talk) 20:20, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- No problem, of course, beyond the fact that WP:EL states that most YouTube videos are to be avoided - AKA, all of the YouTube links I removed. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 20:19, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- You're the one "settling for mediocrity", and shamelessly lying for no reason (I created it and sourced it (with sources that aren't just YouTube, RE fansites, and Gameranx) to the point that it passed WP:NOTE. Something that you struggle to do yourself, considering how many articles use unverified sources as a crutch.). Btw, there's nothing wrong with YouTube (nothing at all). And it seems "fyfre.com" was this (where they even say they were a "fansite"). OK, I'm done with you. See ya. --Niemti (talk) 20:01, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- I'm not one for settling for mediocrity like you seem to be, but oh well. By the way, is it accidental that all of the sources to which you defend have not had a single word spoken by you to demonstrate their reliability? I mean, wouldn't it be fair to say that this probably means that you know that they aren't, but are disrupting Wikipedia to avoid their removal? Honestly, it seems like clockwork: any situation you're in, an RfC has to be opened up because your idea of editing Wikipedia doesn't involve civility or even the semblance of cooperation with anyone. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:53, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- Sure! (When asked by IGN editors if Ada would appear in the game, Resident Evil 4 producer Hiroyuki Kobayashi stated that a mystery woman appears in the game.) A serious question: whatever was "aquamarine.nu"? And "fyfre.com"? Oh! A reliable source! You have no shame. --Niemti (talk) 19:45, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- To confirm: Your quality is my quality four years ago. Well, that's pretty evident. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:43, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- A-ha, and it was a GA class article: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Ada_Wong&oldid=336698534 And yeah, it's me who uses "very, very bad sources" because yours awesome sources and excellent content, like Travis Moore, editor for the Daily Campus, stated that characters like Ada are cited as an example of characters who are in control of their sexuality, but added that this was only due to their "coy desirability" (what). Btw, I think Inquirer.net is even totally black-listed from linking today. Go and read this whole article. --Niemti (talk) 19:40, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
" Many videos hosted on YouTube or similar sites do not meet the standards for inclusion" Protip: Don't link to something that makes my argument. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 20:27, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- Why are you even trying? Seriously, why do you even do it? Protip: ...and copyright is of particular concern. Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations and should not be linked. Links should be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis. don't take things out of context. It's really stupid. Especially since you KNOW that I read it. No, its just so really stupid. --Niemti (talk) 20:33, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Death Battle
Take it here Zero Serenity (talk) 16:39, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Re: Hey, it's really...
I agree that there are flagrant double standards; I'm just less confident than you that they can be stopped. I mean, the first two RfCs haven't gotten anything from outside WP:VG. I'm not sure anyone even cares; video game articles aren't exactly taken the most seriously out of what Wikipedia hosts. You pose an interesting idea about actively seeking other editors, though; do you know who exactly these founders you speak of are? Oh, and thanks for the work on Joe; it'd probably have been merged by now if it wasn't for you. Tezero (talk) 17:17, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
May 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ed Boon may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- *''[[Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3]]'' (1995 - executive producer, designer, programmer
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:08, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
AnddoX
Is now editing as TheSplïtter