Do not replace existing versions of images with even blurrier images. This compromises the integrity of the pages. Benten
Stop editing existing images. They're fine the way they are. Benten
If you continue to replace the existing image of Kenzan with the inferior profile pic, you will be considered for blocking. Benten
All-righty then. Back to square one are we? If you continue to vandalize the infobox image of Kenzan by editing the pic to the inferior version (which is blurrier, and this has been explained to you multiple times already), you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. You are compromising the integrity of these pgs. For the sake of these articles, please stop. --Benten16:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The original translation for Hikari no Kekkai was done by Horoko over at Janime. He has since replaced it with this, and although both are correct, The Bounds of Light is superior in the aesthetic sense of translation. Thus it remains. Do not edit it again. Benten
Leave the pages alone! They all follow Horoko's translations, so GET OVER IT! If you do not stop, you will be considered for blocking. Benten
Images
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages (List of Pokémon Advanced Generation episodes), you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.
I decide the images that will be used in Advanced, Advanced Challenge and Advanced Battle and Bobabobabo decides the ones that can be used in Advanced Battle. Stop changing images.
Look at this: "What>>>> I don't even know what you are talking about.. This Yugigx60 is lying.. He never asked my about changing your great images.. Sorry for the confusion (Bobabobabo 00:25, 23 September 2006 (UTC))". Don't lie. Stop changing images.
Sorry to bother you
Hi, there! I'm Pie, style editor of Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon wiki, and I'm just doing some sleuthing in a case of someone saying they were unrightfully banned as a sockpuppet. I would just like to know if you have registered at Bulbapedia, and if so, what your username is there. Thanks! --Jaydeis18:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bobabobabo
Her personal details and likes are irrelevant. Copyrighted images are not allowed on user pages. That is final. Your refusal to obey this rule is not helping Wikipedia or Bobabobabo herself. Interrobamf22:05, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well I personally think they improve the article, and I've followed certain Featured List Candidates involving fair use images, and opposers have always stated that images should be in relation to the text, much like any other image, and not there for decorative purposes. HighwayDaytrippers20:24, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe episode list pages should exist on wikipedia - whether images can be used, legally and by current policy, via fair use for that is a complex matter, but I would suggest you contribute to some other area of Wikipedia. --Improv13:56, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Images on episode lists
You asked: "Are fair-use images allowed on episode list pages??"(UTC))
No, not in my opinion, not unless they are being used to provide critical commentary on the specific episodes. They may not be used solely to illustrate an episode list. --Yamla14:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the images do make the articles look nicer. That doesn't mean that it fits the policy. I'd love to steal all sorts of different pictures and put them on every article but it ain't gonna happen. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:57, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
checkuser
If you alter Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Bobabobabo I will block you until you agree to stop or until the check is performed. Obviously your IP is not blocked or else you would not be able to edit as you are now. Therefore your argument that you could not have created those new accounts does not hold water. The checkuser will answer based on the technical evidence, which would be apparent (if true) even if you erase the page. So quit it. Thatcher13121:35, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A Man in Black allowed you to edit but blocked the IP forcing you to use your registered account. However, that does not give you license to act in a disruptive manner on checkuser pages or anywhere else. AMIB's block also has no bearing on whether or not the other accounts which have suddenly entered the image war are also controlled by you. They may or may not be; that will be determined by someone with access to the checkuser tool. I have given my opinion on images; I am content to let others sort it out and make a final determination. But I will not tolerate further disruption. Thank you. Thatcher13121:45, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked: I have blocked you for a period of time called indefinite. This is not meant to be permanent, but rather for a time to be determined later. I will unblock your account once the checkuser request is answered, or if you assure me that you will stop disrupting the page. However in no event will the block be less than 12 hours, because whatever else, you violated the 3 revert rule on Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Bobabobabo. Thatcher13121:49, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I changed your block to a straight 12 hours for first offense disruption and 3RR violation. Wikipedia has many ways of discussing your image concerns. Right now there appears to be a centralized discussion at Wikipedia:Fair use/Fair use images in lists. Whatever the Pokemon project decides, it may be overridden by a Wikipedia-wide solution, if one is ever achieved. In the meantime Pokemon editors should avoid drastic changes in either direction. If you have a dispute with an editor you can use severak forms of Dispute Resolution. Please try to avoid being deliberately provocative or disruptive while you and other editors work out this image business. Thatcher13122:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Image discussion
You have been asked to participate in a mediation relating to the use images in articles detailing episodes of the Pokémon anime. If you wish to input into discussion, you can do so here, all help is welcomed towards a positive resolution. Cheers, HighwayDaytrippers21:00, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
