User talk:Shards of Glass

This user is an admitted vandal; see his contribs and moves for evidence: Shards_of_Glass (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log).

Welcome!

Hello, Shards of Glass, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Kukini 22:24, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree

I agree that someone needs to calm down however it is in no way my fault. Nothing I have posted has been inflamatory or broken the rules in WP:CIVIL or WP:NPA. After the discussion last night was concluded, Daniel Decided to move the discussion to a page called "pointless bickering" which is a hostile move. He then decided hours later to make a post to my talk page with incorrect information. I responded to him on his talk page with the correct inforation, and he replied again to my page insisting that his incorrect information was correct. I then responded to his page with first party cited information showing that I was correct, and in responce he called it vandalism and came to my page and directly attacked me saying "you have no idea what you're talking about, and you need to do a LOT more studying if you want to appear knowledgeable about the subject" even though I have presented him with first party primary sources. I then decided the information from the first party sources must have been hidden in the jumble that I posted, so I picked out the relevant quotes and re-posted them on his talk page. Instead of responding he deleted my post, and then archived the entire page which is against the guidelines of archiving and is considered a hostile act. I have done absolutely nothing wrong in this situation, and as such I am going to file an RfC about his conduct. Seraphim 22:37, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware of the sitation and think your both at fault. You DID after all, engage in a six+ hour argument last night over a silly verb thing. Remember? You both have acted silly. Shards of Glass 22:39, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and that memory thing, I think it depends on your experience. I work with computers a lot, and we DO use 1024 and not 1000 when we talk about storage memory- this from an old guy whos been using computers since punch cards and reel to reel tape. Shards of Glass 22:41, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An RFC? I think that's way too premature, since you both have engaged in what I would consider to be uncivil behavior, man. Calm down!

The 6+ hour discussion was not about a "silly verb thing". The WP:MOS clearly states that if a user changes MB to MiB in a situation where both are appropriate we must accept the changes. The discussion was about a user wanting to ignore the Manual of Style on the PSP page and the revert war [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] that it was causing. It was in no way over a "silly verb thing" or "pointless bickering". To end the discussion since it was obvious I was getting nowhere I left the comment " won't revert if you put back the MB stuff, however if someone does decide to make an issue of it, you won't have much of a case since you are deciding to circumvent the Manual of Style.". And was ready to be done with it. However then the user "A man in black" posted a comment "Do we have a source stating that these measurements are in mebibytes? If so, we should use MiB. If not, we should use MB, because the reliable source we're using (Sony, for example here) uses MB." the discussion that follow was me showing that we do have a source that shows the measurement is indeed in mebibytes. At no point did I violate WP:CIVIL and in every post I only addressed the facts, I did not do any Personal attacks. Once it became clear that I had proof that sony was talking about MiB, he decided to take the entire discussion and move it to a page called "pointless bickering" and claimed that the argument was over simply a two/three letter term, which it was not, it was clearly about the Manual of Style and him wanting to go against it. And when I pointed that out he responded "Except, of course, that it wasn't any of that". If you read Talk:PlayStation Portable/pointless bickering it is impossible to claim that any part of that argument was not about the manual of style. I went to bed, when I woke up this morning he posted to my talk page, obviously wishing to continue the discussion, in his post he wrote "Here's the skinny of it. Standard RAM and Storage Memory don't use a seperate notation scheme. They both go by the same scale". Something which I proved was an incorrect statement the night before. I posted a completly civil responce to his talk page explaining "It's not actually the same scale. Ram uses the binary scale where 1 Megabyte = 1024 KB. With storage like memory cards, blank cd/dvd's and harddrives the companies use 1MB = 1,000,000" and that he can go to the SanDIsk website and verify that information. He then posted back onto my page that "Actually, it IS the same scale. A manufacturer might INCORRECTLY label storage space by the method you state, but it's not correct. As I've said before, the scale listed above is the correct." and "As I said before, the proper scale on BOTH RAM and STORAGE is the same scale. Anyone who tries to tell you otherwise is, quite frankly, either lying to you or doesn't know how computers calculate storage.". I then responded to his page, once again in a completly civil manner, quoting information from both the Sandisk(a memory stick manufacturer) and Maxtor(a harddrive manufacturer) showing that both companies lable their drives as 1MB as 1,000,000bytes. Once again this was indisputable proof as it was copied right off of the companies websites and is primary information. Instead of responding with apologizing for me and adknowledging that he was incorrect. He removed it from his page with the note "rm ignorant garbage" and on my talk page wrote "I've removed your comments from my talk page. It's obvious that you have no idea what you're talking about and are just resorting to copy/pasting random garbage in order to try to "prove" your point. I'll say this- you have no idea what you're talking about, and you need to do a LOT more studying if you want to appear knowledgeable about the subject. Don't speak to me again". Since he considered the post random garbage, I assumed that since I copy pasted the pages from the Maxtor and Sandisk support sites, the relevant information must have been lost in all of their technical details. I then responded back to him with only the relevant quotes here. He then removed that post saying "rm vandalism" and immediatly archived his talk page. I reposted the information once, since it was obviously not vandalism, and it was removed again. I feel that an RfC in a case like this is completly appropriate, his behavior is completly unacceptable. Seraphim 23:15, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow... Doom127?

You are sockpuppet of Doom127!

On the contrary, I am my own user. I haven't supported either side in their ridiculous argument, merely tried to get them to quit fighting. You can see that their tiff has dragged over many long pages and I am sure you're just as annoyed as I have been that they could not resolve their differences.

Cheers! Shards of Glass 00:53, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to PlayStation Portable, are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thanks. --Cyde Weys 04:18, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I have blocked you for 1 month for page move vandalism. --Improv 04:21, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have extended your block to indefinite for your vandalism using a sockpuppet, User:Shards of Ice. --Improv 04:40, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]