User talk:Sergecross73/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

→

Archive 15

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Possible ban discussion on Niemti?

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Possible ban discussion on Niemti?. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:17, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, while I am starting a peer review on Sonic Adventure, I've started an RFC subpage for additional evidence here. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:45, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

I will try to look over Sonic Adventure some soon. As far as your Niemti project goes, I am monitoring it as it develops, and will give a stance once you bring it to AN/ANI. Sergecross73 msg me 01:27, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Personal attack...?

Hi, Serge. Looks like the indef-blocked user MegaCyanide666 (talk · contribs) has made what appears to be a disruptive personal attack on Niemti's talk page. I don't want to get involved, but can you please do something about this? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:25, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Blocked for block evasion. Thanks for the heads up. Sergecross73 msg me 00:37, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:39, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Device (2013 album)

Maybe it should've been an AfD, not a PROD, but it was hardly a "terrible call" - album is unreleased, the majority of the sources appear to be about the band, not the album anyway. Lukeno94 (talk) 12:10, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, a number of things made me think it was a terrible call:

• It's hard to make the claim that all the sources are "about the band, not the album", when there is only one album by the band, and its a self-titled album. Once could argue they're all about the band...but one could just as easily argue that conversely, just about all the information is also relevent to the background/recording of their first album as well, because the band's entire history deals with recording said album.
• Even beyond that argument, there are plenty of sourcessources like this regarding the special guest appearances on the album, which involve individual tracks, which would specifically be in regards to the album versus the band. (In this respect, I feel it it meets the WP:GNG.)
• It pretty clearly meets the requirements of WP:HAMMER.
• Let's be realistic here. The frontman of a multi-platnum band teams up with a guitarist from another platinum selling band, and have an album scheduled for release on a major record label, and it's coming out next month. I could maybe see an argument for redirect (though I'd still personally object), but there's no way it's not going to be a notable release with those sorts of traits, and it's pointless to delete now to rebuilding in a few weeks. Sergecross73 msg me 13:02, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Wrong version

You might want to take a look at WP:WRONGVERSION before you make an edit after protecting a page in the future. Just an FYI. --Izno (talk) 21:03, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't follow. An editor continually rearranged the template in an irrational way without any explanation or discussion, and refused to discuss at the discussion I started for him on the talk page, or his own talk page. So, I protected it. I had hoped that would have lead to discussion, but the user has yet to discuss still. I can unprotect it if it seems people deem it necessary, but if you go through the talk gage and article history, these sorts of problems are frequent and perpetual, and date back well before I even joined Wikipedia. Sergecross73 msg me 21:15, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

The point I'm making is that you shouldn't edit something you've just protected (forbidding gross vandalism or BLP issues, naturally), as that can be seen as an abuse of admin powers. In other words, to go along with the essay, you also shouldn't pick the "right version" to protect. If there's a content dispute or edit war, you lock the page down, leave a note on the talk page for people to sort it out, and go along your merry way. And you naturally should avoid taking a side in that same content dispute (if you do decide to stick around).

I'm just trying to make your ride less bumpy for the future, when you end up protecting and then editing through protection on a page where there are people who actually care. :) --Izno (talk) 21:28, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I'd understand your concern if I had been doing it in order to make a new change of my own, but I was merely restoring it to the last version that had been discussion/consensus behind it. Anyways, I understand what you're saying though. Thanks for the tip. Sergecross73 msg me 21:35, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Another issue

Hi. Can you please take a look at the differences here, here, here and here? I've been trying to minimize contact with Niemti, but apparently he's going around badmouthing me to regular established editors by calling me a "stalker" (I think that its only stalking if the edits are not done in good faith) and accusing me of "lying", which I never have and is considered a blatant personal attack. And that was after I posted on the WP:RSN and supported what Fladrif said. Also, to clarify, since editing on behalf of another editor is called meatpuppetry and can lead to a block, I am trying not to recruit meat puppets nor am I a sockpuppet. What a piece of work... Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:07, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm currently sort of busy, and somewhat INVOLVED so I'd prefer not to be the one to block Niemti, but PresN the other day gave him a final warning or its a two week block comment on Niemti's talk page, so if you think he's violated that, notify PresN. It'd be more appropriate for him to handle this I would think. Sergecross73 msg me 19:31, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Got it. I notified PresN about this here and also removed the personal attacks from the RfC subpage. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:46, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Niemti has been blocked again for two weeks. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:17, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I just caught that from my watch list. Good call. I'll help defend it if contested. Sergecross73 msg me 02:28, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Template:Sonic games

Hi Sergecross. I thought this to be rather extreme; as it isn't that frequently edited and hasn't been vandalized much (if at all; the worst seems to be just edits against consensus). I'm not sure about this (I have no experience with templates generally), but I think generally navboxes aren't fully protected; there are many more navboxes that I would consider to be more "highrisk" than this (examples being here and here) which are not. Thanks. Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 08:07, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, it was actually an admin 5 years ago that deemed it "high risk", I just upped it recently because for he last couple years that Ive monitored it, it seems likes its been endless cleaning up of POV pushing without discussion. However, you're not the first to complain, and I trust your judgement, so I'll change it back to the inder semi-protection it had been at for the last 5 yrs. Sergecross73 msg me 10:14, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the unprotection and the quick reply. Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 10:37, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Sergecross73 msg me 10:58, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Oton

The user Gaming&Computing has removed a large portion of the ad-drivel, but I still believe GNG is not met. If you still support your initial !vote, please reiterate your support on the Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Oton page. Thanks! -Kai445 (talk) 22:56, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I reasserted my stance. I don't think the closing admin would buy into their argument, but its good to argue against it anyways. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 23:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Ban proposal on Niemti

FYI, Fladrif has proposed a ban on Niemti at at his RFC. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:46, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, an interaction ban between me and Niemti has been raised by Ched and Fladrif. Do you have any comments or concerns about this? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:49, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Please don't try to skirt around or ignore the fact that I am the one that raised the idea... :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 19:05, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry. I have not been ignoring the fact that you raised the idea too. I guess I forgot to include you too. My mistake. I was only asking Sergecross73 to take a look at the interaction ban and see if there are any comments. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:07, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

It appears things are going exactly how I've been saying it would go, which is why I wanted to take a passive role on things.

1. Niemti hasn't had a grave enough offense to convince people outside of WP:VG that these sanctions are necessary.
2. Sjones, you've pursued this too aggressively, and as such, the focus has shifted from Niemti's issues, to you.

I have no comment on an interaction ban. I do think that you should personally should want to stay clear from him, so it doesn't get you into trouble though. Sergecross73 msg me 19:31, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I obviously admit that I was too aggressive in pursuing a ban on my part, and I know better than to do that, so I apologize for what I have done. I hope I did not violate any policies in doing so, because being disruptive would lead me to be blocked. I do agree that I should stay clear from Niemti so it doesn't get me into any trouble. Thanks, Serge. By the way, I wanted to ask you about how long should we wait until it's time to close the AN discussion? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:44, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Its alright, I just don't want you to get in over your head where I can't defend you, because you are a great contributor. Anyways, we should probably keep the AN thread going for quite a while, since bans are a big deal. I'd recommend taking a seat and watching the rest play out. Sergecross73 msg me 23:51, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, it's time to take a break from AN and get back to work on other articles too. I obviously know better than to stalk any editor or as they say "gravedance" on any occasion, and it's only stalking if an edit is not done in good faith. Some of the users involved do not actually know that I have a good track record when it comes to article contributions and maintain a civil demeanor, but I don't want to cause way too much drama in this matter, so I think taking a break from AN and letting it play out should work. What would be the best time to ask for a request for closure? We cannot let it fizzle out after a couple of weeks and I would hate to see this go off-topic again. Also concerning the Wikihounding issues, the off-topic accusations have been brought up again, even though I said that I have no interest in discussing about it anymore and one of the users is bringing things off-topic again by saying that I am gravedancing and going after the user while he was blocked and calling it a battleground. Sigh, what a total piece of work but, oh well... I think at this point, it's really time for me to take a break from the AN discussion and let the rest unfold until it's time to close it. I want to participate in the discussion, but I don't want to get too involved. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:17, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I recommend that you don't participate anymore, unless directly addressed, so that the focus isn't misdirected on to you. With the rest of your concerns, I wouldn't worry, AN is monitored by many people, and things will be taken care of eventually. I'd focus on content creation, and merely reading AN. My 2 cents. Sergecross73 msg me 04:35, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. By the way, Niemti has posted a statement in case you aren't aware. I will probably have to get back to work on creating content. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 12:29, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

You're not disengaging very well, here or at AN... Sergecross73 msg me 13:34, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Now then, I have clearly decided that I will leave AN to the rest of the editors. Shall we work on Sonic Shuffle? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:41, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I have been meaning to clean that article up, although I'm unsure how much time ill have for editing the rest of the weekend. I will help though eventually, when I can. It's a good idea for a new focus though, definitely. Sergecross73 msg me 16:47, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll help out on Sonic Shuffle as well. It's a pretty ugly article in its current state. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 16:58, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I know Sjones23 is reading this so, I'll just post it here-- Sjones23, I don't think it's a good idea to copy what I wrote on the AN page and make it your own... while I'm flattered you like my comments, regurgitating what the others are saying won't really help your case (you and Niemti's interaction is pretty "edgy" to say the least) and it kinda shows you're not really attempting to back off from the discussion and let it run its course. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 17:30, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I see your point now and apologise. Now then, on Sonic Shuffle, I think we should use Crash Bash or Crash Nitro Kart as models for the article. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:36, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Deckers again

Hey man. Remember Ludwig von Decker (talk · contribs) being a sock of Larry Decker (talk · contribs), who in turn is a sock of Mason Decker (talk · contribs)? Yeah, looks like Mason Decker1 (talk · contribs) and Mason Lee Decker-Brant (talk · contribs) have arrived. Their behavior is pretty much identical to past socks of Mason, and well...  Looks like a duck to me ZappaOMati 23:06, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I can't say I understand what in the world this guys trying to do, or why he names himself something in regards to a "Decker" every time, but I blocked those two. Sergecross73 msg me 02:06, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Here we go again: Mason Decker2 (talk · contribs) just showed up yesterday. I don't know their intentions, but sometimes it's vandalism, sometimes it's constructive. ZappaOMati 20:24, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I hope you don't think I was ignoring you. Yeah, I noticed it too, as I saw him on my watchlist at Mario Kart. I could technically block him now, but I was going to wait until he (seemingly inevitably) starts being disruptive first. Sergecross73 msg me 15:37, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Breaking Benjamin

The argument you are making for not removing the 'Hiatus' tag from Breaking Benjamin can be used in the same way against why you are wanting to keep it in the first place. To quote you:

"Please stop doing this unless you've got a reliable source stating they have officially broken up. You can't just deem them broken up because you haven't heard any updates from them in a while, that's called original research."

In this same vein, you can't deem them 'together' when the band is a two-member team and the latest anyone has heard is a heresay interview from an unaccredited 3rd party website. The latest, in fact, is that Ben Burnley has been writing songs for other bands:

https://twitter.com/MikeStreer/status/292073374539186176

The box on Wikipedia clearly says "years active." The years they were active ENDED in 2010. In the same way you can say "unless there's official word they've broken up, they're still together," I can say "Unless there's official word they're together, then they've broken up."

Further evidence:

http://www.ace show biz.com/news/view/00042590.html (sans the spaces)

The title of the article is "BREAKING BENJAMIN SPLITS..." So if "Hard Rock Haven" is considered a reliable source, then this site is as well. The first lines of the article are: "Breaking Benjamin, who are currently in hiatus, have broken up"

Thanks, --Vemnox (talk) 20:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

In the most recent source in the article, the drummer of the band literally says "Breaking Benjamin is still together". This is from February 2012, and as far as I'm aware of, the most recent official word from a band member. Not only is your source outdated, it doesn't cover the whole story. Billboard, about as reliable as it gets with the music industry, confirms that "Mr. Burnley intends on moving forward using the name Breaking Benjamin and the band will continue." Unless you've got a more updated source, "hiatus" is a much more accurate term. Sergecross73 msg me 20:26, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

oops

I guess you're right, I'm sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kbra (talk • contribs) 18:14, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I just wanted to trim it down some so we didn't place too much focus on one source. Sergecross73 msg me 18:29, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I have a doubt, do you think it would be a good idea to make a separate category for the awards in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kbra (talk • contribs) 21:42, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with that unless a game only has a single award or something, which is not the case for Xenoblade. You can re-add that, I only removed it when it was caught in the revert of your other changes. Sergecross73 msg me 21:44, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok thank you then, yeah Xenoblade has got plenty of awards year after year in the places it has been released, so I will add it, thank you, sorry if I have bothered you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kbra (talk • contribs) 21:59, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Sonic Shuffle

It's a very good thing to let me know that I might have gone a little too far, as Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia. :-) Fortunately, while I can find some sources for Sonic Shuffle including quotes from the game itself, I've asked ThomasO1989 if he has any magazines or articles in mind for this article, Sonic Adventure and Sonic Adventure 2. I was wondering if you have any sources as well. If so, I think we should post these on the talk page. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:41, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, I've posted an announcement on my talk page in case if you or anyone else is willing to read it. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:17, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I've commented there. Sergecross73 msg me 02:25, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, looks like everything is all settled then. At least I just don't have to make a big fuss over it anymore. :-) Now, in addition to Sonic Shuffle, I plan to make the Sonic the Hedgehog series a Good Topic obviously. I have tried to help expand the list, but I still feel that there are issues with the FA. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:06, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, hopefully those discussions are done forever or for a long time at least. So...eh, what list do you mean? Like the list of titles that would need to be included to make it be a Good Topic? Or am I reading it wrong? Sergecross73 msg me 16:14, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm referring to the List of Sonic the Hedgehog video games. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:17, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Ohhhh gotcha. Yeah, I'm not real familiar with the standards for list articles like that, and as such, have always focused more on the Sonic (series) article and the main Sonic games template. Sergecross73 msg me 16:30, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

You may want to take a look at WP:WIAFL for possible standards in an FL. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:07, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I shall. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 17:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

the D in BRD

It would be great if you at least replied once to the discussion per BRD?Lucia Black (talk) 03:19, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Would you calm down a bit? I hadn't been on Wikipedia since I reverted you, so I hadn't even realized there was a discussion. (Come on, what was it, like 10 hours ago only?) Furthermore, I left a pretty clear edit summary, so its not like I didn't discuss at all either. Now, I'll respond on the Sonic series template talk page, but yikes, tone it down some... Sergecross73 msg me 10:42, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

i think you're assuming harsh tone. I did not mean to imply it. But discussing is meant to be on talkpages. It helps avoid edit wars. Imagine if the only way to reply back was to revert your revert.Lucia Black (talk) 10:48, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I know that, what I'm saying is, here was no reason to think I wasn't going to discuss things. Sergecross73 msg me 10:52, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

You've left discussions before and I usually end up empty handed (meaning, my editing philosophy never changes because no one attempts to update it with the current debates im involved in). Hence my progress in wikipedia has been halted.Lucia Black (talk) 11:08, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) No need to be so quick to accuse Serge of neglecting to discuss. Assume good faith. TheStickMan^[✆Talk] 12:48, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

i previously made a similar responce back then, in which (as expected) reacted horribly despite similar circumstances happening to me. All because i read between the lines too much? Im simply stating that trust in wikipedia (for me) has gone nearly down the drain.Lucia Black (talk) 12:56, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Stick Man. Sadly, it seems Lucia tends to find my most mundane, vanilla responses to be offensive somehow. Anyway, Lucia, the reason people like myself tend to end our discussions with you, is because they degrade into an endless circle of rehashed arguments. At a certain point, there is simply nothing left to be said. You need to learn when to let it go. Sergecross73 msg me 13:09, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

My goal is to get at least 1 GA. Letting go, meant giving up on previous high potential articles.. i think letting go affected me worst to the point where i need a good answer. Not a half baked one. Stick man got offended by my vanilla responces before. It happens, and i did it intentionally to show its not me. It just happens that im the only one adressing it. But beside the point. Ive let go more than you can imagine.Lucia Black (talk) 13:28, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

First of all, I think you're being a tad melodramatic here about this whole "letting go" thing. Second of all, have we met before? Your username doesn't strike me as familiar... TheStickMan^[✆Talk] 14:20, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I would agree on that assertion. (Sidenote: I'm not sure if it helps or not, but I believe she used to go by another user name. Ninja Breadman or something like that. Bread Ninja.) Sergecross73 msg me 14:29, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

That name rings a bell but I don't remember ever having any significant interactions with him. TheStickMan^[✆Talk] 14:48, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

No i changed my pretty early as i realized i couldve gone with kunoichi, the female version. But since bread kunoichi wasnt as catchy, i changed it to it having my real name somewhere. Im not being melodramatic. Im expressing how low the bar is right now and i cant even make one article onto GA because its usually 1 passionate editor vs me. When people get in your way of improving articles, let me know.Lucia Black (talk) 18:33, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Most regular editors on Wikipedia are here to improve. Naturally, we all have different ideas on what should be considered "improvement". In the end everyone is just trying to help, and acting like people are just trying to get in your way and hold back your progress as an editor is a terrible attitude and screams "bad faith". The way I've noticed you and Serge clashing a few times in the recent past makes me wonder if you think some editors have a vendetta against you or something like that. TheStickMan^[✆Talk] 20:19, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Fragments of Jade sockpuppet

I've already posted this on Salvidrim's page, but since there's no response as of yet, I just want to inform you of something that may require your attention as an administrator: 76.120.178.220 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), whom I suspect to be a sockpuppet of Fragments of Jade (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (who has been banned by the community for her abusive sock puppetry), is on the loose. Same interests (i.e. Earl Cain, Professor Layton), same addition of speculation, same geographical location (Pennsylvania), same attitude. Isn't it time to give this IP a long block? Also, should we use file an abuse response or use an edit filter if possible? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:30, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I think what you're looking for can be found here. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 05:07, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I see what you mean now. I was only asking a few administrators to deal with the sockpuppet. Merci beaucoup, Salvidrim. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:16, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I probably would have sent you there too in this instance, since I haven't been involved in this person's antics. At least the IP hasn't been that active either way... Sergecross73 msg me 01:12, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree. Not to mention that I first got introduced to FOJ (as Yomiel) in that RFC over at the Silent Hill video game article back in 2011 and I only got involved trying to help out initially by posting on the VG talk page. I reported her for her disruptive behavior, personal attacks, adding speculation and edit warring (which is characteristic of FOJ's behavior) at ANI which led to a short block. The next ANI report resulted in FOJ arguing despite my best to calm the situation down. Diannaa, BelloWello (who was banned in July 2011) and I tried to help the user, but helping her did bring more harm than good. And only did I realize that I was being trolled by FOJ after Hula Hup (aka Golden Sugarplum) filed an ANI report on her a few hours later (at that point she revealed that she was involved in that "Wild Arms" incident back in 2009, which is one of her favourite topics in addition to Layton, Silent Hill, Professor Layton and Earl Cain) and her Yomiel account was caught. That incident taught me an important and valuable lesson: You cannot trust sockpuppeteers or sockpuppets if they are acting disruptive. But of course, all of that is water over the dam now. FOJ often changes her IP range whenever she gets blocked as an IP. Given the fact that some users (i.e. Erigu, Hula Hup and MuZemike) has dealt with FOJ before and is no longer a sysop, I did report the sockpuppet to SPI though. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:21, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Super Mario All-Stars

Hey, would you mind helping out at Talk:Super Mario All-Stars? A user is insisting on including a list of differences between the game and its NES versions, but I don't consider many of the differences to be notable and it goes against WP:TRIVIA, WP:GUIDE, and WP:FANCRUFT. He's not budging on the subject until more people give their opinion and I don't want to get into an Edit War. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 14:11, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Sure, I'll look into it. Sergecross73 msg me 14:13, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Unrelated to 8th gen consoles!

I know most of our interactions have been @ 8th gen, I was wondering though if you could help me with a double-move? Rutgers-Newark to Rutgers–Newark (from hyphen to en-dash). There's no opposition on the talkpage to moving it back, and it used to be there (but things got moved during an editor argument, which has since been resolved). It is also consistant (the Camden and New Brunswick articles both are titled in such a way), and correct (Rutgers Style Guide says to do it). Thank you! (Or if not I can put it on RM, I just figured I remembered you were an admin and might be willing to do it). -Kai445 (talk) 00:51, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Remind me to do this in a day or two if there still isn't opposition. I don't want to be too hasty in making the change considering all of the arguing on that talk page. (And I'm not familiar with the subject, or hyphen/en-dash usage in titles, so I'd be going strictly off of the discussion and its consensus, which doesn't entail very many people yet. I'll do it in a day or two, unless you think a RM would be faster and would rather push ahead with that too, its up to you. Sergecross73 msg me 12:47, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! I just noticed they were arguing again, I thought it was settled, but I should not have underestimated how personally editors can take wikipedia arguments. -Kai445 (talk) 13:01, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I know sometimes these discussions on article titling can drag on forever. Normally, I'd gladly do this for you, but I don't want to jump in on this one unless there's a pretty solid consensus, since again, not familiar with the topic. Keep me posted if things clear up down the road and you still want me to do this though. Sergecross73 msg me 13:14, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice.

Although I wasn't please with the outcome, I sincerely appreciate your advice on Talk:Super Mario All-Stars. I'm glad I was able to come to a peaceful conclusion as opposed to an "edit war". I love video games, but I hate when people fight over what is posted. glad to move on. NintendoFan (Talk, Contribs) 07:44, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for being understanding. Sorry things didn't go more in your favor. Over time, you'll grow to see what types of stuff is acceptable on Wikipedia, and this sort of things will be easier. Feel free to ask me questions if you need help with anything. Sergecross73 msg me 14:10, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Issue

Hi Sergecross. Could you please delete the categories created by this user, as editors have already determined the WikiProject to be unnecessary due to the existence of the Grand Theft Auto task force. Thanks! ~ Satellizer el Bridget ~ ^(Talk) 22:56, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, Ive had limited Internet time this weekend. I'll look into it tomorrow. Sergecross73 msg me 01:23, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

UPDATE: I think I got them all. Sergecross73 msg me 12:41, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. ~ Satellizer el Bridget ~ ^(Talk) 22:45, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Template talk:Bullying#This reversion

You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Bullying#This reversion. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:22, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Wow, there is a lot going on there! I'll look through it, but as I'm not especially well versed in Bullying and whatnot, I may or may not be of any help... Sergecross73 msg me 12:55, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

There is no rush. I just don't want to get involved in an argument with users who have disagreements about me. That's why I ask uninvolved users to get involved. I have had my own share of detractors on Wikipedia, but I feel that it's best to just ignore them. If you don't mind, can you please taie a look at Talk:Abuse#Problems? There appears to be a disagreement between two users over numerous problems with the article. As they say, "keep calm and carry on." Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 15:08, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Shinedown

I listed a source for him to add as I was in a hurry. I kinda just get on sometimes to check my messages then leave. But I provided a source and the info wasnt challenged, he removed it because of no source despite me telling him where I found it many times. He even said himself that it was true so he wasnt challenging anything, just removing it. BlackDragon 00:02, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

1. You hadn't "provided a source", you merely mentioned their Facebook in an edit summary.
2. It's not a good idea to link to a band's general Facebook page like that - it's too vague. After a couple of months pass by, there will be so many other "Updates", "Posts", "Pictures" and other stuff that will come before it that it'll be hard for people to verify in the future. Sergecross73 msg me 01:00, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah but I gave an address just to show him so he would stop removing it. And you know im not the only one you can provide a link for it. I might some other time but for now its about every post on their page. BlackDragon 18:41, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I find it rather puzzling that you took the type to put it into an edit summary, but not into the article itself, doing either should take roughly the same amount of time/effort. Also, no one said you were the only one who can provide a source for it, you're just being targeted/blamed because you're the one who is repeatedly re-adding it without a proper source. Anyways, your Facebook source will work for now, but like I said, if you want it to stay long term, you'd be much better off finding a more specific source, or someone may end up removing it. Sergecross73 msg me 12:51, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Because I didnt have a link at the time besides its home page and didnt have time to find a proper one and I also am not sure how to add a ref without checking out the other refs first to see what to put. So thats why I just gave a link. And again "your source", "you", The main link is directly at the top of the other one and besides im the only editor in like the past week at least on that page. And most people wont bother if they just "see" a ref. So they are still heavily promoting it and its probably on their website so If it wont work in a month then you or someone could also add another ref. BlackDragon 02:11, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Why are you still arguing this? Provide sources. Follow WP:BURDEN. The end. Sergecross73 msg me 02:25, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Sonic Adventure

There seems to be concerns about the article's sources. I am using the instruction manual as sources for the gameplay and plot section, as well as the quotes from the game itself. I was wondering if you, Salvidrim or ThomasO1989 have any sources that would be beneficial to the article as a whole? Also, keep in mind I have an exceptionally low tolerance for uncalled for disrespect or venomous comments over trivial matters about me or unfounded allegations of my behavior without clear evidence, as well as contentious disputes that can be easily settled at different talk pages. That's why I ignore detractors and users that are what I believe to be trolling me or who show disrespect over my shortcomings (which are fairly small), as well as those who drag up past problems that have nothing to do with situations at the present as well as contentious confrontations. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 06:50, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I can try to help with SA later today. (Where are these other troubles you speak of? I didn't see that happening at SA, and doubt that part was in regards to me, Thomas, or Salvidrim, haha. (Or is Salvidrim trolling people against. Kidding. ) Sergecross73 msg me 10:52, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. When someone post questionable aspects of my behavior in dealing with users whose comments are out of line, that's when I get a little annoyed. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 13:12, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, that's always upsetting. But where is this happening? Sergecross73 msg me 13:14, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Nowhere at the moment for me. But I recently found out that Dreadstar (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) was driven off of Wikipedia by an abusive editor during a ban appeal at WT:BASC (I was obviously uninvolved). Very sad news.... Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 13:20, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I see. I didn't know him, but that's too bad none-the-less... Sergecross73 msg me 14:30, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

For reference, the discussion in question is at WT:BASC#User:Will Beback appeal voting results. But I digress. Now, getting back to the SA business, there are some concerns that need to be addressed. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 15:01, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Also, on an irrelevant note, I hate it whenever an editor is subjected to comments which I find to be disgraceful or ridiculous comments and I sympathize with them. If you take a look at my barnstars, you will see that these are all for my improvements to Wikipedia, nothing more. Having dealt with some conduct issues and sockpuppets of Yourname, FOJ and Zhoban, it has led me to believe that these users often cause me extra trouble to the point of taking it to SPI or alerting it to an administrator. Well, anyway, about the game's story section, I am going to try and help trim it down. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:27, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Akuma and Kazuya Mishima voice actors article

Hi Sergecross73. I've seen that you created a lot of articles, including Device (band). I didn't know that. Can you also create articles for Taketora and Masanori Shinohara ( Akuma's and Kazuya Mishima's voice actors).Articles for them doesn't exist, but it should. I would be very thankful to you if only you could do that ( if that's not problem to you). If you can do that, message me please. Thanks, DisturbedAsylum — Preceding unsigned comment added by Disturbedasylum (talk • contribs) 07:39, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

• Normally I'd like to help you, but I would find this to be difficult. I don't know much about voice actors in general, let alone these two, so it's hard for me to know if if Wikipedia's standard for whether or not its notable enough to have its own article. And it would take me a lot of research to even know what to say. Beyond that, most of the articles I write are about video games or music CDs. Articles about people also have to follow stricter rules, which I was comfortable with doing with Device because I was pretty familiar with the band's backgrounds, but would again be harder with these people, who I'm unfamiliar with.
• It does seem that you're getting better at learning Wikipedia and its rules. Perhaps over time you'll feel comfortable enough to be able to write these articles on your own. Best of luck, and feel free to keep asking me for help, even if I couldn't really help you this time. Sergecross73 msg me 13:09, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

When you said that you write articles about video games, does that mean that you also write articles about video game characters? --DisturbedAsylum (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:08, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

• Not very often, I usually just write about games as a whole. I think the only character article I've worked extensively on is the massive, work-in-progress Characters of Chrono Cross. I only really helped with Akuma because I wanted to help solve the problem between you and The Stick Man (talk · contribs), who is someone I've worked with in the past here at Wikipedia. I can help clean up existing video game character articles, but I wouldn't be the best person for the job. (I could probably learn to do it, but if I was actually motivated enough to do character articles, then I'd probably start with a few character articles I've been thinking about doing first, so it'd be a long ways off...) Sergecross73 msg me 12:59, 24 April 2013 (UTC)