User talk:Lizard King/ - archive3 2004
Feel free to leave a message for me here. I will periodically delete the talk on the page as dialogue builds up. If you are looking for previous debates that took place here look under page history by the entries that are marked: "just cleaning the chalk board".
For anyone who just happens to be reading this page, please note there is an awful lot of libel against my person in the discussion pages in 2004. What it all revolves around is my attempt to upload hand drawn images to less than a handful of entries. You can still see the images on my user page and most opinions were that they were very well done. However, some people, lacking any artistic ability or talent of their own are envious and become hostile when anyone tries to upload something of that nature to the site. I am then accused of lying, having multiple IP addresses, using sock puppets, etc. Mediation was involved and I was investigated and I was vindicated. Lizard King
The only innapropriate thing I did do that was (as a joke) change Tuf-Kat's dialogue in one of his posts to say that he had amorous feelings for bigfoot. It was a harmless practical joke and I removed it and apologized for it. That one action is what the people here keep referring to as my consistantly dishonest and vulgar behavior. The reality is the people attacking me were far more dishonest and rude than I ever was. Lizard King
I just didn't like the picture. I don't feel any of those pictures are appropriate for Yeti. It doesn't matter who drew them. PMC 04:16, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Well, actually you did clearly state that because I pulled a prank on TUF-KAT you were not going to support anything I did from that point on. I sort of doubt that you forgot about that or changed your mind. Maybe you just didn't realize I was aware you made the statement to begin with. In any case, TUF-KAT and I had words and exchanged apologies. It does bother me a little when people suggest that a person who insults a person who has insulted them, has broken a moral taboo, but excludes the first person from any fault based on personal bias. - Lizard King 18:55, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Mm, I said it was because you were rude. Then you apologized, other stuff happened, and I figured I'd take a less biased view - I wouldn't consider who created/drew/uploaded/whatever the picture, so long as it was good. I checked out Talk:Yeti and the pictures within and decided that the article was more appropriate without any pictures at all. (And, as it were, I have no personal bias towards anyone, because I don't know TUF-KAT and I don't know you!) PMC 23:44, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Hi Lizard King. I have a couple of matters to raise with you, both things to do with the well-established "ground rules" of the Wikipedia. First, there is the matter of marking substantive edits as "minor". This can be done accidently, and provided there was no intent to mislead, an apology is all that is required. However, note that if done persistently, it is a bannable offence. Please take care not to mark substantive edits as "minor" in future. (Hint: there s a setting in your user preferances to mark all edits as "minor" - it is a good idea to check that yours is not ticked.) The definition of a "substantive edit" is a little murky in detail, but it means any edit that changes the meaning of an article. For example, correcting a typo is minor.
Second, another basic rule here is that we do not change things that other people have written in talk pages. If you disagree with something that someone has written on a talk page, you are free to post about that. You are not free to alter what they wrote. This too is an offence that can lead to banning. You can probably get away with it a few times, but my advice to you is don't let it become a habit. At this stage I don't intend to lodge a complaint about your ill-advised action in Talk:Yeti, simply correct it without further comment, but please be aware that this sort of thing is not on.
Anyway, I've corrected the problems and we need say no more about it. Feel free to delete these lines as soon as you have read them. Best -- Tannin 14:00, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)
If you are going to ban me do it. I am not going to apologize to you. You don't have the right to discount people's votes. Your complaint about minor and major editing is highly laughable. By that standard you can decide I have done the wrong sort of editing no matter what I write. It is you who should be apologizing to me. - Lizard King 03:21, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)
The only REAL editing I did was the prank I played on TUF-KAT. The editing of your showing that the votes of Registered Wikipedia Users did not count, but that yours did was justified. I just undid a wrong done to several other users. Lizard King 04:04, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Your mediation with UtherSRG
[edit]There is a request for mediation between you and UtherSRG. If you still assent to that process, could you indicate which mediators (the full list is on Wikipedia:Mediation committee) would you would prefer to mediate between you two. You may indicate a strict order of preference, or list those mediators acceptable to you, or those which are unacceptable to you; or any combination of the above. (Tuf-Kat has indicated that he will not be available for mediating between you two.)
Do note the fact that if there is no mediator that is at the very least acceptable to both, mediation is untenable. This would be very unfortunate, and may (although not automatically) in the most serious cases possibly cause the dispute to move directly into binding arbitration without a mediation phase.
(for the mediation committee)
- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen 05:17, Jan 23, 2004 (UTC)
Uh oh. Put the cuffs on me. I don't even know how to respond to this. So I will just ignore it.Lizard King 06:58, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Okay. That is actually quite a valid point. Let me spell it out a bit more simply. Consider the above a scrapped version of a mediation committee approach.
Now, what all that text was trying to accomplish was for you to say straight up, whether going on with mediation (mediation here means just chatting and trying to get two users who have some aggro between them, sort things out) is something that would be ok with you.
If you don't like the idea, that gives the other guy all the trumps, if it turns out he wants to push it further, like into "arbitration" say. (In arbitration they can decide after some jaw-jaw all sorts of things, up to such a nasty view that you or the guy who has a beef with you can not play nice, and should not be around our little sandbox. Clear so far?)
Ok. If you do think it won't muss up your hair too badly to play along with this mediation stuff, you need to mosey round to Wikipedia:Mediation committee, and check if there are any names you like on the committee, that you would like more than some other names.
Or maybe there are some folks on the committee that you have some beef with (besides Tuf-Kat, who is sitting this one out anyhow), that you don't want mediating you at all. You then make it clear which of them you like, how much or how little, any which way you like.
You can do this either at my talk page, your talkpage, at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation or at any place you think it will safely come to the attention of one of us. Then we take it from there... I hope that is clear enough. If not, please don't hesitate to ask any of the folks on the mediation committee, and that includes me. -- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen 07:29, Jan 23, 2004 (UTC)
you rang?
[edit]check this out User talk:JackLynch Jack 07:32, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Mediation
[edit]Hi Lizard King, Geoff (a.k.a. Llywrch) here. I've taken on mediating the conflict between you & UtherSRG. Can you email me so we can begin the process of resolving this problem? -- llywrch 21:57, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- Forget that. I just saw your contact info on your main page. -- llywrch 22:04, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Hey buddy, any chance you could draw a pic of Paranthropus? That would rock, and since theres nothing there at all they (the Deletionists) would have little reason to persecute you. Besides, they prob would never go there anyways. Only if you feel your up to it, of course! cheers, Jack 08:56, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Not only will they delete it but they will get me banned from wiki. Uther already got the process started. I added an image of a quadrupedal Gigantopithecus to the Gigantopithecus entry and it was deleted within about 3 hours.Lizard King 09:15, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Keep in touch, especially if there are any votes or whatnot. I've heard mumblings of complaints about you other than your placement of sketch's, and I can't say what I think on that (not knowing anything) but I do know that the wiki policy is that an image is better than no image, assuming it relates to the subject. I have never seen or heard of you placing any image that was offensive, unrelated to the subject, or of such poor quality to be considered vandalism. Quite the opposite, I sincerely liked the bigfoot drawing, and found it clearly benificial. As I said, keep in touch, and I am of course interested in any images you post on your user page. Maybe someday things will change on the wiki, and contributers will recieve more respect. Jack 10:20, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Essentially, the other complaints were an attempt by certain parties to smear me for the purpose of preventing me from uploading images. These people will take very small actions and blow them way out of proportion. For instance, I once edited some of Tuf-Kat's dialogue so that it looked like he said he was sexually attracted to bigfoot as a joke, later I apologized. Eversince then UtherSrg, Mhr, and others say that I have a habit of editing the dialogue of others, when I only did it once. I also cussed out TUF-KAT pretty bad at one time, but we reconciled our differences and moved on. There are some real ______ frequenting this site.Lizard King 10:56, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I am very impressed by your use of _______ to describe those you are angry with. That shows alot of class. Its important not to sink to a lower level because someone else is unfair. I really wouldn't worry so much, I think you'll have a successful mediation, given your charm and polite demeanor. Jack 11:05, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)
oh yeah, and come vote Here if you will (but only if you actually care! ;) Jack 11:09, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC) [link changed to reflect page move -- Oliver P. 04:05, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)]
- Righteous pic dude! Check out Paranthropus. Jack 07:38, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Thanks. Lizard King 07:40, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)
No, your a nice Lizard
[edit]I have been given alot of grief lately (like here [1] and here Wikipedia talk:Possible misuses of admin privileges and here [2]). You are in no way part of my problem. Unfortunately, I have had alot less time to help you than I might have otherwise, and indeed I may be leaving the wikipedia. I am beginning to notice something I hope isn't true. Have you ever wondered... what if most of the people here (particularly the admins) were trolls? Sam Spade 21:47, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I haven't wondered that. I know that. However, the system is adequate to the extent that they have to behave most of the time as though they are not trolls in order to endure within it. That is why I have not been banned yet and though my illustations have been deleted my entries mostly have not. At least not yet. Lizard King 22:25, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Request for Comment
[edit]Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Homegrown images - UtherSRG 16:27, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)
You can find my contact info here. Feel free to contact me off the wiki if you like. Sam Spade
Lizard King has uploaded three images, apparently home-made sketches -- one for Bigfoot, African Grey Parrot and Cronus. I have no opinion on the first two, though the parrot has a photo already and the Bigfoot drawing is rather clunky for my taste. The drawing of Cronus, however, looks like a comic book undead supervillain instead of more typical representations. PMC has indicated support for the Cronus sketch on Lizard King's talk page, and both RickK and UtherSRG agree with me (see Talk:Cronus) on its removal. I am listing it here because this is not a clear consensus and some other opinions should be heard. Tuf-Kat 20:59, Jan 9, 2004 (UTC)
- UtherSRG has listed this on Wikipedia:Current disputes over articles. Now that I think about it, this is probably a better place for it so go there (or Talk:Cronus, Talk:African Grey Parrot, Talk:Bigfoot) and remove this notice in a day or two. Tuf-Kat 20:59, Jan 9, 2004 (UTC)
- After noting the other (rather nasty) edits he has made to peoples' comments, I'm going to withdraw my support for anything he does...it was a lovely sketch, and I really didn't mind it on the Cronus page, but I just can't support anyone who's going to do that to other people. PMC 04:00, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Lizard King has made vulgar and libellous edits to another user's comments: [3] [4]. He seems to have created User:ScifiterX and User:The_Agent as yet more sock puppets. Salsa Shark 02:37, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- He may also be User:65.35.69.180 and User:69.22.99.231, and may have also created User:Marvelite as another puppet. I've been having issues with several of these users removing my edits to Strength level (comics). I also admit I find his general attitude to be obnoxious, but I try not to judge him on that alone. -mhr 04:13, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- How many internet connections do you think I can afford? I can only vouch for ONE IP address. The only person who sometimes shares it is Marvelite, one of my best friends, who has his own internet connection now anyway. --Lizard King.
- By the way, PMC, Tuf-Kat and I had a little discussion and apologies were exchanged. That issue is over with. I admit I said some innapropriate things but beyond that I was INSULTED FIRST. --Lizard King.
- If you really look at a lot of what these people are complaining about you will notice that it is people like UTHERsrg who continually say negative and demeaning things to me, and that it is not me who is initially obnoxious. I can only take so much, before I snap at someone. Just give me a break. By the way, if I had multiple usernanes I would have been banned by now. I have requested for people who were annonymously contributing before to become members to back me up in some forums but they have thier own IP addresses.--Lizard King.
Gently.:) User:Lizard King appears to be able to produce decent drawings and those will be useful. Lets all remember to slow things down and give him (and the others he says are using the computer in the same household) time to find their feet here. The initial reception was quite rough so we should give them a chance to recover. Lets be gentle for a week or two and see what develops... Jamesday 11:26, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks.--LK.
I would like to mention that I liked his bigfoot drawing, and That what I know of the image policy states that something is better than nothing, and only to remove completely unrelated drawings, assuming there is not a problem of size and formatting. Also, I particularly dislike the tendancy to label users as sock puppets, even if it is common, the possibility of wrongful accusation is clear, and I certainly don't feel very comfortable advising others in my household to create accounts considering. Guilty until proven innocent, are we? Jack 12:14, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- Some of these people declare that I am guilty just to attach a stigma to my name on this place. They know I am not vandalizing anything, and that I don't have multiple id's, but they also know that even if it comes out that I haven't done anything wrong, other users will still remember thier negative comments and associate everything I do with those comments from that point on. --LK
- What I said to Tuf-Kat and my actions in regard to the issue over the Cronus Image matter were entirely innapropriate. That was an emotional outburst over his comments that my images were poorly drawn. Although, in the sceme of things apologies don't amount to anything and usually do more damage than good, I will take this opportunity to apologize to TUF-KAT for my actions toward him.--Lizard_King
Hey
[edit]Hey man, are you back? Sam [Spade] 03:52, 25 May 2004 (UTC)
Not really. Just added a page on a military school. Like to see how long its up before it gets deleted Lizard King 04:15, 25 May 2004 (UTC)
- wow, great job, as usual. Hope you stay! Sam [Spade] 23:24, 25 May 2004 (UTC)
POV
[edit]As good as your recent article on Combat Academy is, at Wikipedia articles are written in a "neutral" format - for example, there might be someone out there who did think Combat Academy was funny, and might disagree with the article. Sadly, this also means humour in articles is, in most cases, innappropriate. I've amended your article as such - it's still not perfect, so feel free to amend as you see fit. I hope you enjoy writing many more articles to come Nick04 17:34, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Is the image public domain? -- Image-Man 15:34, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)