Jump to content

User talk:Tide rolls/Archive 47

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 40←Archive 45Archive 46Archive 47Archive 48Archive 49Archive 50

TideRolls

Bold text You should really quit, you are obsessed with ruining peoples lives. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.229.22.180 (talk) 00:18, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Golden timing barnstar!

Golden timing barnstar!
You get this barnstar for this golden timing revert (reverting in the same minute in which it was made).

A kitten for you!

I realize this is belated since it's about something you did in February, but thanks for fixing vandalism in the article on The Elizabethtown Advocate.

Pha telegrapher (talk) 01:28, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Sky King

The user (Olgarey) and another user (Speedofheat) continue to insert the information but did not provide any sources to back up that information. Snoozlepet (talk) 00:36, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Snoozlepet. I see where you're coming from, but from my (uninitiated) view it's murky. I do appreciate your report and will keep watch over the situation. See ya 'round Tiderolls 00:39, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! The source needs to be visible for everyone else to see. Snoozlepet (talk) 02:33, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
An editor has supplied a reliable source and, IMO, added a neutral version of the content to the article. Unfortunately, Olgarey has been blocked for insisting on their version without offering any discussion despite several warnings. I'd like to offer you some advice; be very careful how you pursue such reverts in the future. I completely understand your intent and am not offering any condemnation. However, absent the specific exemptions of vandalism, BLP problems and copyvios, multiple reversions can backfire on a user possessing the purest of intentions. Please ask for clarification if you feel the need. Thanks for all your help, Snoozlepet. Tiderolls 02:44, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Sky King Inc.Page

HkCaGu;

Be advised you are the one who is trying to prevent the facts from being published on the Sky King page.

It is my opinion you have something to gain by trying to keep the recent Bankruptcy filling of Sky King Inc. from being included as part of the facts which pertain to this company.

Please refrain from removing the facts concerning Sky King Inc.or I shall seek a remedy for your actions.

Regards, olgarey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olgarey (talk • contribs) 01:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Olgarey. So many things to cover; first, see the banner at the top of this page? Spreading discussions over several pages makes for a very confusing, disjointed situation. As you're here, though, don't threaten; it's impotent and offers no real solution. Please read WP:Edit warring, WP:Identifying reliable sources, WP:Notability, WP:NOTBATTLE and WP:TRUTH. When you've made yourself familiar with the concepts conveyed in those pages, get back to me. Regards Tiderolls 01:17, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Fahrenheit (2005 video game)

IP address user 76.98.45.126[1] may need to be told by an Administrator what on what Trivial information is on wikiedia[2][3], info such as this useless and adds nothing to the page or character.108.208.137.142 (talk) 20:38, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, 108.208. You could've taken the action your requesting. I've left the user a message. You can check it out and be able to recreate it when you need. See ya 'round Tiderolls 20:48, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Please unblock Avanu

It's not a good block. He wasn't actually disrupting anything... all he needed was some time to wind down, not to be forced into a metaphorical corner. Had he done yet another refactor after your warning, I'd see the point, but failure to grovel adequately promise future compliance (when he's obviously not having a good Wiki-day), should not be a reason to block. Nobody Ent 21:06, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I've always respected your opinion even when I disagreed with it, Ent. TPGs are not metaphorical...to me, anyway. I do not require groveling; Avanu explicitly broached the guideline and then appeared to gloat on their talkpage. I was sincere; I was, and am, convinced they would not stop. I understand the "bad day" syndrome as I've been there. I will unblock them myself with a simple statement acknowledging their misstep and a commitment to move forward withing the guidelines. Tiderolls 21:14, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
I agree with Nobody Ent here, and second their request. I've known Avanu for a long time, and he wasn't going to be refactoring any more talk pages in the near future. ~Adjwilley (talk) 21:20, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
I have the same request but my perspective for asking is slightly different. I don't think it was a bad block or that you were seeking an ego massage from a groveling editor. Frankly that's a bit charged for my taste. I do however, sincerely believe it would serve a greater good for you to give deference to compassion in this case. Not that you must, or even should, but that you can and showed that you would. 76Strat String da Broke da (talk) 21:36, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Not intended that way, refactored. Nobody Ent 21:44, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
  • I doubt it comes as any surprise that I fully support the block. Avanu apparently thinks that just because they made a proposal they can control conversations about it. They were told repeatedly that they in fact cannot do that and chose to ignore that fact and keep doing it. Their behavior today could fairly be described as edit warring when you add up the initial removal of my remark from the thread, the reversion of the edit that added it back in, the attempt to re-open the discussion I removed from my talk page, and the late adding of remarks to the closed discussion. I'm sure Avanu believes they are just contributing in good faith, but they are making up their own rules and clearly need to take a break and calm down. They accused me and others of "throwing a fit" when it is in fact they who have been doing so. It saddens me that so many Wikpedians of late cannot recognize the contextual distinction between saying an idea is stupid and making a personal attack. We all have a stupid idea now and then, I've certainly had a few that were shot down just as hard by the community, but I didn't react by freaking out and trying to dictate who was allowed to comment and what types of remarks they were allowed to make. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:48, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Beelbebrox, I don't think anybody is arguing that Avanu's behavior was not inappropriate. I'm arguing that it's not block-worthy. Is there any evidence that the block is preventing "imminent or continuing damage and disruption to Wikipedia", or is this just a "cool down" block?

Also, I have to disagree about Avanu thinking he can control conversations about proposals he made. He obviously misinterpreted your comment, and reacted poorly. Grounds for a scolding, but not a block. ~Adjwilley (talk) 22:21, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Avanu's refactoring comments after my warning and then drawing my attention to the situation demonstrated to me that they would continue their disruption. Their further refusing to take ownership of the disruptive nature of their actions indicated to me that action was warranted. I thought I had made this clear. Apologies or any unintentional obliqueness. Tiderolls 22:25, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
You'll have to forgive me: I don't know the chronology as well as you, since I only started paying attention when the block log popped up in my watchlist. As far as I can tell, Avanu only made 3 edits between your final warning (20:32 UTC) and your block (21:02 UTC) and none of them were refactoring comments. The first was a reply to another user on his talk page, the second was a comment on another user's talk page, the last was a post at Village Pump. (The contents of his last two edits are sadly ironic, given the current circumstances.) Anyway, I don't want to badger you, and I promise I'll butt out after this, but I would appreciate it very much if you would reconsider your block. ~Adjwilley (talk) 22:51, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
And please forgive me if my exasperation is showing through. Of course you are welcome to comment here on any subject any time. Any change in Avanu's block is up to Avanu. Tiderolls 22:58, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Statement

Thanks for all the input, seriously. My "civility" standards are, by definition, different from every other human. I agree that the civility policy is enforced in a capricious manner. My own standard is quite high; "dumb", "ridiculous" and "silly" don't get my vote. I can see where those words would offend and I can appreciate advocating for an environment where unambiguous civility be maintained. Any, almost any, commentary directed at the individuals making the comments that were refactored would not have garnered my attention. However, changing a disucssion without clear aim toward removing hate speech, BLP vios or gross thread hijacking does more harm than any collection of harsh comments or expletives. Tiderolls 22:13, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I certainly don't disagree -- if you look at the logs you'll see I reverted Avanu's removal of Beeblebrox's comment and my refactoring Avanu's AN inaccurate close edit conflicted with Bbb23's revert. I was just think the block wasn't the best way of preceding. What I'll ask going forward is you don't, at this point, extend the block to indef as you mentioned on his talk page. If Avanu's choses not to get himself unblocked by making a reasonable commitment to lay off the refactoring, just let the block time out and let him resume editing. There will be plenty of time to block him later if he resumes the inappropriate refactoring. Nobody Ent 22:23, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Ent, Avanu is in the driver's seat here...as they've been from this situation's inception. I will certainly take into account to any discussion that mitigates Avanu's attitude toward the TPG. As Avanu continues to dig their heels in and deflect discussion from their behavior, my hope fades. Tiderolls 22:34, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
You should have left me blocked. -- Avanu (talk) 23:11, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
I'm a person of my word, Avanu. I'm hoping that you are as well. Tiderolls 23:18, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

WP:MMA

Thanks for helping to make MMA articles on wikipedia better! In September 168 people made a total of 956 edits to MMA articles. I noticed you haven't listed yourself on the WikiProject Mixed martial arts Participants page. Take a look, sign up, and don't forget to say hi on the talk page.

Kevlar (talk) 05:20, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Tide rolls. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 01:38, 2 October 2012 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 01:38, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Justification?

You absolutely can't justify that block when the discussion about which you are blocking is _about a content dispute_. You may not like that your comments were unwelcome on my talk page, but that doesn't make explaining my position on a content dispute "disuptive". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.255.100.13 (talk) 02:03, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

  • Yeah, that's going to work well. I think we can all see that you're the one who's unproductive and unwilling to engage. Enjoy the wet embrace of Dave's mouth and see you when I see you -- I"m sure you'll be reverting a lot of new vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.253.21.104 (talk) 02:12, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Tide rolls. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 15:11, 3 October 2012 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 15:11, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

User talk:BitcoinNodeDev

Re: your comment to User:BitcoinNodeDev: The 'authority' claimed on the User page here is basically that he runs a piece of Bitcoin software, just as anyone can. As far as I can tell this person is just trying to pump up the appearance of authority for who knows what reason. I'd actually take a bet that this person is, in fact, the same person as "HowardStrong" who has been edit warring on the Bitcoin article. ("HowardStrong" is know in the bitcoin community as "atlas", a strange person who has the somewhat dubious and unique honor of having been unblocked on the Bitcoin forums because the moderators got tired of dealing with hundreds of socks and thought just one troll identity would be easier for people to ignore…). You may want to keep your eye on him. --Gmaxwell (talk) 01:02, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the input, Gmaxwell. From my brief observation, this is quite the quagmire. I'm just glad I'm on the outside looking in. See ya 'round Tiderolls 01:27, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Luke / cool hand Luke

I think u have made a mistake because that is his nickname I can prove this by googling it you will see that it is his nickname and also Colin Montgomery called him it live on sky sports he was also called it on the review of the Ryder cup on lots of different sports news wepsites. So I would like you to let me put it back on because I think it is correct. Thanks dean — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deanpp (talk • contribs) 11:07, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Do not undo my correction. That is not constructive and detrimental. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.162.123.130 (talk) 18:31, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

I was about to file an ANI report; being followed is mildly uncomfortable. Ha, I'm watching Oregon--they showed a graph comparing Oregon and Alabama in terms of plays per game; they're like first or so and we're practically last. Apparently Saban wants to outlaw the no-huddle. Drmies (talk) 05:11, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Cmonzonc

Hi, Tide rolls please I suggest you give a check this report to cmonzonc see here so that you have knowing about his editions in article Trujillo, Peru and you can have a better idea about it. --Antodeabout (talk) 02:41, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Antodeabout. Your report was my introduction to this situation. I see no reason at the moment to take any further action. I will wait to see what explanation Cmonzonc may offer. I've watchlisted the article so I'll know if there are any untoward incidents. Please take care yourself to refrain from edit warring on the article. I understand that Wikipedia's processes can seem slow at times and the frustration that can result. Thanks for your message. Tiderolls 02:49, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
It's ok. I will be collaborating in what I can and I'll be patient (I'm almost sure probably he'll say he wants to improve and restructure the article to make it a good or featured article and that he copied the spanish discussion (of him and his friends Wikisilki, Ganimedes, Lourdes and Edmenb) so that it serves as a guide to make this article as in spanish; but deep down he wants to hide or delete information referenced that speak well of Trujillo, at least that's what he has done in article in the Spanish Wikipedia; He will also say that the article is full of plagiarism and the strategy used by him and his friends is this: if a text or phrase is something similar to the reference they argue that is plagiarism and if it is something different they argue that the reference do not support the text, the target they want is to eliminate the text which speaks well for the city; to delete information they also say there's too much text and too many images see here is one district of Trujillo he hates all about Trujillo and he has made the same in article Trujillo and other articles related; in summary he put :"‎Demasiadas imagenes:too many images" and simply delete them). Cmonzonc seems to have something bad in an obsessive way with Trujillo city see here, in wikimedia commons he also deleted information about the city. I don't know if in other web sites he also does the same I'll try to check if I have some time. I checked the spanish discussion that cmonzonc copied and paged and there is another report made for another user of spanish wikipedia see here in that report made by a user called Toño and he said:"el problema con este wikipedista es que mantiene en otros foros de internet una guerra personal contra la ciudad de Trujillo y la gente de esa ciudad, buscando hacerla quedar como una ciudad poco importante en el Perú y especialmente trata de hacerla aparecer como menos importante que la ciudad de Arequipa a la que representa; :The problem with this Wikipedian is that he keeps in other internet forums a personal war against the city of Trujillo and the people of that city, he tries to make it appear like a minor city in Peru and especially tries to make it appear less important than Arequipa he represents;" and he redirects some link to a forum see here where in a text Cmonzonc speaks "Al final siguiendo la logica de Alexis uno podria decir que la provincia de Arequipa tiene mas gente con mejor IDH porque tiene mas gente, habria que ser bien bestia como para fundamentar algo asi:In the end following the logic of Alexis One could say that the province of Arequipa has more people with better HDI because it has more people, there would have to be a beast as well as to support something like that", he seems to insult (with the word beast and some other) to people of Trujillo and in all that text in the forum he seems to make comparisons between Arequipa and Trujillo.Thanks for your attention. --Antodeabout (talk) 02:55, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Jimwalter

As for your question, I know the poet, I was searching her name in google to read her new poems and I found out wiki's warning as speedy deletion, so as I know she is notable and known I removed it and edited it gramaticaly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimwalter (talk • contribs) 13:07, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Nondescript posts

I have high knowledge on Paul Taylor and was in his company. I, as a student, learned about Paul Taylor. The savings should be put. I retired from his company a long time ago, 4 years maybe, and now i'm teaching my 6th grade class about Paul Taylor, I hope there's no issue about adding some stuff my 6th graders can use for their projects I told them to do on Paul Taylor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.59.207 (talk) 01:09, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

he edit put on October 17 should be put about Paul Taylor, as for JimWalter, Paul Taylor is not a poet and he is a man. I was a student of his in the Paul Taylor Dance Company. I'm now retired and teaching my 6th graders about Paul Taylor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.59.207 (talk) 01:18, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

he edit put on October 17 should be put about Paul Taylor, as for JimWalter, Paul Taylor is not a poet and he is a man. I was a student of his in the Paul Taylor Dance Company. I'm now retired and teaching my 6th graders about Paul Taylor. I put this up to help my 6th graders with the project I told all of them to do about Paul Taylor.

I really don't care what you think. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.119.204.79 (talk) 01:28, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you -- I apologise...

...for the errors that you pointed out, and I shall try to avoid them.

Koermendi (talk) 17:33, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

"Ghost turds"

Oh dear. I didn't mean to give offence.

http://www.waywordradio.org/dust-bunnies-and-ghost-turds/

is a reference that can be apposed to support the change in text that I suggested.

I'm sorry not to have supplied it before. Please excuse inexperience -- I acknowledge that I didn't do things as those at home in Wikipedia editing would have done them, but truly, I am contrite.

Koermendi (talk) 19:19, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

First, for the sake of clarity, please attempt to maintain the thread of a discussion in a single location. Since you appear to favor my user talk, I will respond here. Your offer of contrition is a nice gesture but a preferable course would be that you read the links I left in my message on your user talk. If you had done so you would find that blogs are only considered reliable sources in very limited instances. As your source is actually quoting a podcast broadcast by individuals whose qualifications are unknown, your source even more problematical. Please self revert to avoid being reported and begin a discussion on the article talk page; if you are unclear how to find the talk page, click here. Tiderolls 19:40, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

50...

Thanks, Tide. The IP editor was doing so well for a while, but has fallen back into old patterns recently. Worse, a recent edit summary makes clear this is not someone with limited command of English, as I had thought he/she might be at one time. I wish I knew how to get through to him/her. None of what they do is all that bad if you take it one edit at time, but then you look at the accumulated edits and the pattern is really troublesome. I can never decide if we're in competence territory or not. --Drmargi (talk) 01:54, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Drmargi. I don't think it's competence; I believe they simply have a direction they want to go and they will not be dissuaded. Thanks for your arttention to this matter. Tiderolls 02:06, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
No problem. Grab a trout if I ever go overboard. --Drmargi (talk) 09:05, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

An idea to improve the ArbCom body

A very good start would involve your candidacy for the upcoming election. I can understand why you might not wish to run, but I can also hope that you will. 76Strat String da Broke da (talk) 06:28, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, My76Strat. That you think I would be an asset at ArbCom means a lot to me, but I would not be able to give the level of attention required to adeqately serve. Time is not the main reason I would decline candidacy, but my discretionary time is unpredictable in period and frequency. Thanks for your confidence, Tiderolls 06:44, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Denying Sabra and Shatila as a genocide from User ColaXtra ?

You gave me a warning about my edit war with User ColaXtra on the issue of genocide in Iran between 1980-1988.

I think you didn't read what ColaXtra wrote. ColaXtra is simply denying that Sabra and Shatila was a genocide. And how come, a person like ColaXtra who is denying a historical fact is able to judge that the event in Iran between 1980-1988 wasn't a genocide ?

I think you better give a warn to ColaXtra for deleting 3 or 4 times my post !

Regards Sayyed Bastami — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sayyed Bastami (talk • contribs) 12:49, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Continued disruption of Asian media articles

Last month, you protected Astro (Malaysian satellite television). Here are some other Asian media articles that may also need protection due to the sock/IP address: Sensasi, RTB1, RTB3, List of programmes broadcast by ntv7, A Tale of 2 Cities (TV series) and Template:Infobox television soap opera. Thank you for your help, Aspects (talk) 18:22, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Aspects. I've checked the articles you list and found that the disruption was recent and ongoing so I've semi-protected them and added them to my watchlist. I'd rather not protect the template without more input on the effects of that action. I have added the template to my watchlist and will keep an eye on it. Thanks for bringing this to my attention and for all your help on these articles. See ya 'round Tiderolls 22:05, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Continued vandalism of A Nightmare on Facetime by 86.161.164.200

Yes, he is a user that both you and I have warned. What can we do with him. He seems to be quite persistent. Thank you.

KazLabz (talk) Respond on my TALKPAGE! 01:06, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

you are making a huge mistake

the information regarding the wikipedia page of the Interposer is vital to the knowledge of those who wish only to learn.I suggest that you change the information back to the way I left it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobobkkkkd (talk • contribs) 01:13, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry

there is my friend that shares computer with me and he just mess up the wiki, i tried to stop him but he wont change, i hope you understand, thank you 117.102.107.84 (talk) 01:27, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

George II of Great Britain

I'm responding on my talkpage. 128.62.182.182 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:38, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Alleged edit to "Elysium" article

Hello. I just got a message from you regarding an inappropriate edit to the article "Elysium". The message link is below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:76.15.63.183&redirect=no

As I have NEVER made such an edit, I am insisting on an apology. I do not wish to be blocked for something I did not do.

Lee Adam 76.15.63.183 (talk) 05:14, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Lee...c'mon. That message was left over 18 month ago. It starts "Welcome to Wikipedia"....you want my apology for that? Registering an account would help prevent receiving messages that were meant for someone else. Tiderolls 09:35, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Unprotect

I don't know what is happening, but I see you constantly protecting many articles about TV in Malaysia for a long time each time. Please unprotect or at least reduce protection because I'm moving into KL next year. (now I'm living in the countryside)--110.49.250.8 (talk) 19:20, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Unprotecting those articles would be problematic. The articles have been the target of an individual, or indiviuals, that are intent on disrupting them. I have the articles watchlisted so any edit requests left on the article talk pages will be addressed promptly. You can find the edit request template at Template:Edit protected. Thanks Tiderolls 20:10, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Re: Vampirism

Generally, I’d agree, but this is a case of an article consisting of one sourced sentence, and giving that sole meaning for the term seems misleading at best. —173.199.215.5 (talk) 01:55, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Civility Barnstar
Thanks for civilly calling me out, even though I was admittedly a little confrontational. Frungi (talk) 02:37, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
No worries, Frungi. I think we both want the same thing. I didn't find you too confrontational. I have no problems with folks standing up for what they believe. Thanks for keeping me honest. See ya 'round Tiderolls 02:42, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Rights.

Hey, been awhile. Don't plan to do any vandalism fighting but just wondering if I can get my rights back since it is easier then using TW on the pages I watch now. If not, that's cool. Thanks.--iGeMiNix 05:43, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again and I don't remember using reviewer much during the time I had it so it is fine and I'll probably do some vandal fighting time to time, definitely not going to be as much as the past.--iGeMiNix 19:06, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey, need help with a user. [4] He doesn't vandalize but some of his edits aren't necessary and we end up having to clean up after him and he doesn't really listen when we put notes on his talk page so it is rather a hassle for the NYCTA editors to have to watch his every edit generally. Some advice would be nice. Thanks.--iGeMiNix 02:20, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Malaysia

The Malaysian tv articles I'm not adding informations. I'm going to rewrite it this Monday.--110.49.227.236 (talk) 09:06, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

By the way I see the reason now why you protected. And I'm going to rewrite the whole article because it's now too messy.--110.49.227.236 (talk) 09:10, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

List of Virtua Fighter characters

I feel as if I need to inform an administrator about this and see what they think. User Wintran[5] is unnecessary describing such things like a character’s Martial Arts when the links to them already provide that information.[6] I mean isn’t that what links are for? It just seems unnecessary. 99.168.78.169 (talk) 18:21, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

The same message was posted to my talk page. JamesBWatson (talk) 18:29, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
I'm not a fan of lists, so the prospect of my opinion being helpful is limited. I would direct 99.168.* to invite Wintran to the talk page for the list. Perhaps posting a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lists or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fictional characters to enlist knowledgeable opinion. Sorry I couldn't be more useful in this instance. Tiderolls 18:34, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes, please discuss with me on Talk:List_of_Virtua_Fighter_characters#Character_descriptions_need_sorting_out. I'm open for discussion, but I don't like your way of reverting all of my changes without comments, even the other improvements I did on other parts of the text. That's not very constructive. Instead, change the parts you don't like, and please take the discussion with me rather than an administrator. That's how we do it here. I'm sure we both love the game and want the best article possible. - Wintran (talk) 02:38, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tide_rolls/Archive_47&oldid=1151036595"