User talk:Shadowcrest

User:Shadowcrest/talk User:Shadowcrest/nav

History of this talk page
Dates contained	- 12/9/08	12/9/08 - 3/10/09	3/10/09 - 1/1/10
Personal and off-wiki	Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Wiki editing and content related	Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3

User:Shadowcrest/vandals

Userpage policy

Good idea on making one. I'd like to help you with it, if you'd accept my services. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 23:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Well really I was just going to take GWW's user page policy and modify it, though you're welcome to comment on it or submit your own draft if you feel so inclined. --Shadow crest 23:38, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

No it looks good! Obviously, the image rules will have to change (administration here doesn't like personal pictures on userpages). Other than that, I think It'll work. Just put it up and see what people think. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 23:54, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Just as a clarification, personal images are OK if they are an image of you. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 00:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I thought it was just one for smasher pages. So you're saying no personal images on userpages (unless they're of yourself). Cheezperson {talk}stuff 00:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Span style/font color

Hey Shadowcrest, it's MG. Do you mind if I ask you a small question? You see, I saw (overheard wouldn't make sense) your conversation with PG348 about span and font. Does that only apply to links to user/talk pages (in sigs and links in general), or does that also apply to simple text? Just curious. If this seems to unimportant, you can just cross out this comment. Thank you. MarioGalaxy ^{A Galaxy begins anew...} 23:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, it was not I who corrected you, but Sky2042. (that rhymed, I'm so ftw)

Secondly, font tags are depreciated and are no longer the standard to use. While they may work now as sky said, they may not always work so, whereas span is the offical tags used by html and xthml. Wherever a font tag is used, span is the preferable substitute, whether in links or text or what-have-you. --Shadow crest 00:00, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah. That's all I needed to hear. Thank you. MarioGalaxy ^{A Galaxy begins anew...} 00:01, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Aha

;D	This user thinks you rock.

Baltro [ talk ]

Well I know I'm awesome, but why this time in particular? :P --Shadow crest 05:02, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Uhh. I dunno. I mean, you know, just floating around on a wiki, you see things (hear them?) people say, and I just agree with alot of those things that you say. ;D And Vivaldi is one of the best fonts ever. Baltro [ talk ] 05:05, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Uh, let me explain. And I swear to god, if I get an edit conflict, I will bite somebody's head off. The thing that's included in the template is when you post one of those templates (like the welcome template) that has a page line (==you, know==) included in the template. If you try to edit the page line the template includes, you will end up editing the template itself. It's easily remedied by the old {{subst:User:Baltro/Rock}} Baltro [ talk ] 05:08, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Way to be humble, Shadow. :P You're one of the people who have a serious chance of becoming an admin, and I think all admins are awesome! :D Friedbeef1 Ho ho ho! 05:05, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I catch a lot of crap for what I say, so it's nice to know someone believes in me :P

Vivaldi is indeed the most awesome font ever. It is so awesome that I have increased my awesome level by a factor of 1337. This status is unattainable by anyone less awesome than me, so don't try :P

Oh, I see what you did thar Baltro. I don't know how that would have happened with the userbox template, though :/

I'm using Signet of Humility on Shadowcrest! --Shadow crest 05:20, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I love Shadowcrest too. Koopa Claus ^{Happy Holidays} 05:21, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Whoa, too many people. Think I might be sick. And yeah, it happens whenever a page header is included in a non-substituted template. (holy crap, those were some big words.) Anyways, I'm off to bed. Good night all. Baltro [ talk ] 05:22, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah

Uhm, Shadowcrest, I hate to ask, but is my signature accetable? Baltro [ talk ] 21:35, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. --Shadow crest 21:43, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

The <big> code on the B doesn't disrupt text? ;D Baltro [ talk ] 21:46, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

~~Not that I can tell... if I become aware that it does you'll have to change it, but afaik it's fine.~~ --Shadow crest 21:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it does look like it breaks it. I'll have to check and make sure, but it might be best if you change it. --Shadow crest 21:51, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

What's wrong with your old sig, Baltro? Friedbeef1 Ho ho ho! 21:54, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for being a disturbance, but I changed it again. I'm pretty positive this one is acceptable, since it doesn't use the big code, but instead uses smaller characters and the small code. BALτʀο [ talk ]

:O

Well, how do I get it? How does it work? *pillars you with questions* Koopa Klaus ^{Happy Holidays} 00:05, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Shadowcrest! =) Koopa Klaus ^{Happy Holidays} 00:31, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm there, but where do I enter "/join #wikia-smashbros"? If I enter it in the URL box it takes me to google results. :( Koopa Klaus ^{Happy Holidays} 11:19, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind then I guess.... Blue Ninjakoopa ^{Happy Holidays} 23:25, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Message from Wikia Community Team

I don't know if you already got this message, but: "All wikis will be "read-only" from 9am - 10am UTC Tuesday morning (that's 1:00am Pacific, 4:00am Eastern). During this time, editing will be disabled while we do some routine maintenance, but you will still be able to access the site." MarioGalaxy^Talk 23:22, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I got it on GuildWiki (where I'm an admin). I suggest you go alert the nearest admin and tell them to put it on MediaWiki:Sitenotice. --Shadow crest 23:24, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I hadn't thought of that. Thanks. I'll tell MaskedMarth, since he's here at the moment. He already made a forum for this message. MarioGalaxy^Talk 23:25, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Do only sysops get that message direrctly? I got one at CD-i wiki (I'm a sysop there). Cheezperson {talk}stuff 23:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Fallacy

You can't divide by zero, so the equation is null.SmoreKing Happy Holidays! 02:04, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Yep. --Shadow crest 02:06, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I need math lessons. Blue Ninjakoopa ^{Happy Holidays} 02:06, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah... I get it. Isn't that like the laws of zero or something? You can't divide any number by zero, meaning it's "undefined", but you can divide 0 by a number, although the answer will still be zero. MarioGalaxy^Talk 02:11, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

                    x = y
                   xy = y^2
             xy - x^2 = y^2 - x^2
          x * (y - x) = (y + x) * (y - x)
x * (y - x) / (y - x) = (y + x) * (y - x) / (y - x)
                    x = y + x

         If x = 1 and y = 1, then
                    1 = 1 + 1

                    1 = 2

Under those circumstances, this would happen:

                    1 = 1
                   1*1(1) = 1^2(1)
             1*1(1) - 1^2(1) = 1^2(1) - x^2(1) (0)
          1 * (1 - 1)(0)(0) = (1 + 1)(2) * (1 - 1)(0)(0)
1 * (1 - 1)(0)(0) / (1 - 1)(0)(Divide by zero; impossible) = (1 + 1)(2) * (1 - 1)(0)(0) / (1 - 1)(0)(Again, divide by zero, impossible)
                    1 = 1 + 1(although it didn't happen due to the divide by zero)

         If x = 1 and y = 1, then
                    1 = 1 + 1

                    1 = 2

If that makes sense.SmoreKing Happy Holidays! 02:13, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I'll sound like a nerd, but that was kind of fun to solve. Key word:Kind of.SmoreKing Happy Holidays! 02:16, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Chuck Norris can divide by zero... Masterman 20 09 20:45, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

My Navbox

You think you can help me with this navbox? Whatever Wiki is in it, it has that navbox, which is the idea. I had a theory that if that {{:w:User:Name}} would show my page on whatever Wiki I want, then adding "/navbox" would also apply. I was correct. But, now this is a very minor problem, usually if the link to a page is on the page itself, it will bold. That isn't happening in this case. You think you can help me on this minor problem? MarioGalaxy^Talk 21:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I believe the auto-bold on self links only works with internal links. Since the link is external, it doesn't auto-bold. Here, I had to manually bold it, which- if done in a universal box like you have- wouldn't work. I guess I just forgot to manually bold it here... --Shadow crest 21:31, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah well. Thanks anyway. MarioGalaxy^Talk 21:33, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Midna

Some Suggestions:

Up Tilt-Punches upwards with her hair.
Forward Tilt-Like her Neutral, but a bit stronger
Down Tilt-Foot jab thing like Lucas/Ness
Forward Smash-Spins Forward(Like Zelda's Nair motion) and releases twilight.
Down Smash-Creates a ball of twilight at her foot and spins around.
Up Smash-Creates a little thing of twilight at her foot that pushes foes up into her hair that punches upwards.(Like ROB's, but with a little upwards push at the beginning)
Uair-An upside down version of her Dair.

Yeah, something like that.SmoreKing Happy Holidays! 01:51, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Notes to self

Any help with filling me in on what I missed during my absense would be greatly appreciated.
If they exist, check:

Not much on anything, we changed a few words on Template:Violation, SZL broke his arm, DE created a page like you and SZL, and SZL's overhaul thing didn't get that many new comments.Smoreking^(T)_(c) 00:03, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

You should also check SmashWiki talk:Requests for rollback. Y462 (T • C • E ) 00:08, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I feel it would be wrong to express anything other than the truth here, no matter how bad it sounds, so here goes...

I am, frankly, disappointed. Nothing has been accomplished since my departure 10 days ago, and slightly more than nothing has even been discussed, with the comments on the RfR page and the creation of DE's new thoughts page being basically all. :/ --Shadow crest 00:32, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

ghey

Thanks for your support. I didn't think you had it in you. Blue Ninjakoopa ^{Happy Holidays} 06:07, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I r lazy :p

Can you give me the link to your RfA so I can support you? Blue Ninjakoopa 22:00, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

here. --Shadow crest 22:06, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I SUPPORTED YOU =) Blue Ninjakoopa 22:13, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Talk page messages

Hey Shadowcrest. This is something that I've noticed for a while, but I didn't think would be a big problem. Some users (such as yourself) usually reply to given messages on your own talk page (although that's what's supposed to be done, many users don't do that anymore or in the first place). Do you think we should try and make a template similar to this one from Wikipedia? Although, maybe we should use a different image, like maybe one of Mr. Resetti's pictures (you know, when he lectures players in the middle of a match). What are your thoughts on this? MarioGalaxy^{May Guthix be with you...} 03:06, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

You're/Your

I think that's the bigger problem, IMO :p Blue Ninjakoopa^Talk 20:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

y

Doesn't anyone use the #s no moar? Blue Ninjakoopa^Talk 00:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

In IE7, they're broken. I've had this problem with bulleted lists, too. I'm trying to work out what they are. Additionally, there is no downside to using a hardcoded list- it's not changing anytime soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shadowcrest (talk • contribs) {{{2}}}

Sorry. And what I said about his true interest in pokemon, I meant that he learns and studies everything so he can appear smarter and better than everyone else. Still, I was wrong, and I apologize. Blue Ninjakoopa^Talk 19:56, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

By the way, congratulations on your promotion to SysOp. I have no clue how you did it, but you made history. Blue Ninjakoopa^Talk 19:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I think it's best you tell Gargomon to leave me alone. Blue Ninjakoopa^Talk 16:54, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations

On your promotion to admin. Toon Ganondorf (t c)

Thanks! --Shadow crest 17:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Grr

Too much happens in a week. I missed so much stuff. Anyways, congratulations on adminship.Smoreking^(T)_(c) 00:32, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey. I completely understand what you were saying, but is there any chance we could make a page on this tournament?

Ok, I understand. Thanks for the warning. I will be more careful in the future. ~Teh Blue Blur~^{A revolution begins.} 19:34, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Just to let you know, he's still at it off smashwiki. I don't know if it really concerns you, but i can give you the quote if you want. ~Teh Blue Blur~^{A revolution begins.} 20:20, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

You should see his rant at me on Kirby Wiki...Silvie (talk) 20:24, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Policy

You have an interesting concept: that SW:ROLL has had any sort of consensus. It hasn't. In fact the only two people to talk about a rollback policy of any sort are you and me. No one else has left their opinions anywhere about this. I disagreed with parts of your version, and you with parts of mine. So why, may I ask, was mine marked as failed while yours was added to the RfR page? Miles (talk) 02:41, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Because I, unlike anyone else, commented on the page. If you like, I can bury you in walls of text about why mine is better than yours, but after months of trying to get people to comment on the proposed policies- it's in the freaking sitenotice and still not a single comment has been posted on most of those proposed pages- I gave up on the effort, as it clearly was not going to be successful. I can point out various flaws in yours- you did not for mine, simply stating you liked yours better- and then you state you don't really care which is implemented, as long as one was. Seeing as I have one that I very clearly support over the other and you really don't, and I have arguments for mine and as far as I'm aware you don't for yours, I adopted mine. If it means that much to you, go start a discussion on the RFR page about whether you prefer mine or yours. --Shadow crest 02:47, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

You are being far more civil than I had feared. I'll look into it. Miles (talk) 02:51, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

...er...what? --Shadow crest 02:52, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Never mind. Miles (talk) 02:55, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey

RFD, now.Smoreking^(T)_(c) 01:43, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

plz halp :(

The Blue Blur gets this stupid idea that I'm the one that's been harassing L33tSilvie using other accounts, and it's beginning to annoy me. Your words have more impact than mine do. Blue Ninjakoopa 20:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey

(I'm Getting Sick Of Writing These Messages) As you may have seen, I've been trying to change my ways and make peace with other users on the Wiki. I apologize if I may have gone to far in any arguements I may have gotten in with you. Kperfekt722 These Rules Are Stupid 23:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

O...k. What prompted that? :p --Shadow crest 23:49, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

IDK, I'm just sick of being enemies with 90% of the users on the Wiki. I'm not gonna lie, part of it is becoming an sysop at some point, but it's a small part, and I won't run for that until I have fully paid my previous wrongs back. Kperfekt722 These Rules Are Stupid 23:53, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

unbanned IP

Um, Shadowcrest? I'm pretty sure that IP is the same as 3 others that annoyed me with the same routine (one just did the same thing to me last week): Added a completely obvious fact to an article, and then informing me that he did so. The first to do this was from a month or two ago, but he actually wanted to brawl me first (which is pretty weird for an IP). I told him that if I win, he had to buzz off (didn't think he would keep to it, though, and I was eventually right). These guys all did the same thing, although I can't prove it's the same guy. All I know is that this IP isn't trying to contribute. MarioGalaxy^{Death has a price. I've paid it...} 23:47, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

If s/he continues adding pointless notes such as those, then I will reinstate the block. Until then, however, I will assume good faith and allow him to continue to edit. --Shadow crest 23:49, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

OK. It just seems weird to me that all of these IPs keep informing me that they added an obvious fact to an article. But, hey, you're the sysop. You know better. MarioGalaxy^{Death has a price. I've paid it...} 23:51, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Less deference tbh. --Shadow crest 23:52, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

For you...

	Nice work! Your contributions reflect the kind of awesome work we SmashWikidians like to see!
	Massive deletion of 100+ smasher pages/broken redirects that needed to go. Great work! Miles* (talk) 23:50, 5 February 2009 (UTC)*

O ty. --Shadow crest 23:51, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Some help please...

Hi shadow crest. I've made a wiki called "Bubble Bobble wiki" and i really need help with making a logo. I've made a logo with the right directions, but i can't save it as the actual logo. I thought, as you're an admin, you'd know about all this stuff. this is the file for the logo, I just dont know how to make it work as one... If you help out my wiki, i guess i could make you a sysop. --~Teh Blue Blur~^{A revolution begins.} 15:46, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

My post

Did you delete my post? If you did, why?

I did not technically 'delete' it- is is still accessable by going to the page's history, and you can see individual edits by comparing them. I removed your edit because it doesn't belong there- there's a note at the top of the Tier list talk page that comments about rankings should be taken to the forums. --Shadow crest 02:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Why it was deleted We don't need more complaints on the forums. - Hatake91 (talk) 02:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

WTF?

Why'd you protect the DYK template? Smoreking's edit was the correct one, so can you please change it back?? Blue Ninjakoopa 00:20, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I protected it because:

Because I didn't feel like giving out warnings for revert wars
Because the edit is true. If you read it, it actually makes sense. Whether or not it belongs is a matter of discussion- put it on the talk page and wait for consensus. --Shadow crest 00:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

So it makes sense now? Okay, I see how it is. Blue Ninjakoopa 00:32, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Here we go again...

Okay, that's it. I honestly don't know what happened to "Let's not make BNK angry so that it keeps him from blowing up and getting banned" attitude of yours, because it's changed to "The Blue Blur is innocent, so I'll back him up and call BNK a troll!", and I'm sorry for my recent trolling (you don't remember? Check PG's talk page and prolly TBB's as well... oh, and some of the forums). Will you please stop harassing me now?? KTHNX. Blue Ninjakoopa 21:33, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Screw all that, I was just wondering why you stood (?) there and let TBB accuse me of sockpuppetry. I've resolved the other part, with Miles' help, and I will no longer consult with those who annoy me. You know, that means no moar trolling, 'kay? Thnx, and reply as soon as possible! Blue Ninjakoopa 21:54, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Truly, I am not one that you can blame for trolling. The only other possible way that someone else could possibly have been involved is if they're baiting you. If they are baiting you (and from what I can see on wiki nobody is baiting you), then contact an administrator and do NOT reply to the baiter. Not only can replying result in a block for you, but you lose the "moral high-ground" or so to speak. "Maybe if you told PG and TBB to leave me alone, I wouldn't be so angry!" "The Blue Blur is innocent, so I'll back him up and call BNK a troll!" As far as I can tell, The Blue Blur and Paragoomba are "innocent", and you're trolling them, for what reason I have no idea. This is like the 9001th time you've tried to pass off your anger problems on someone else; I didn't buy it the first time, and I'm not going to buy it now. I'm sorry, but that is the truth.

Doing a quick contribs check produced these results:

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Well, there you go. I have procured 10 examples of you posting something unnecessarily aggressive, assholish, and/or including personal attacks. I had to go back only 4 days to find them. So, that's 10+ examples of trolling in 4 days, and 8 of those have occured in the past 2. Do you see the problem here? :(

(I also do not see the accusations of sockpuppetry you’re talking about. Can you give me some links?)

Finally...I do not wish to come across as rude or condescending with this last comment, so I hope you will forgive me, as I deem it necessary in order to speak the truth:

To tell the truth, I believe that you've been lucky that neither I nor any other admin has banned you yet. To be frank, some others that I have spoken to are of the opinion that if someone bans you again, it ought to be lengthened to a permaban. We've been through this whole trolling stuff several times before, and you've never seemed to understand. The reason I personally haven't banned you is that I see a sincere effort to improve yourself (unless you're a very, very good actor who is pulling my leg for the lulz, in which case I bow to your skills). Your record is like a roller coaster - you have ups and downs. Usually, right after a ban or a serious conversation with an admin, your behavior improves. You drop most of the assholish crap and become a decent contributor. However, after a while you reach the top of the hill, and the drop begins - personal attacks etc. become increasingly frequent, until someone steps up and says something to you and/or you get banned again. And then you get back on the ride again...

I have chosen to excuse you for the recent offenses (though if another administrator does not, I won't contest their decision). In other words, I will not ban you right now, though another admin may. I truly do believe that you're not editing in bad faith or being an ass on purpose. But honestly, I won't be able to keep excusing you for much longer; one way or another, this behavior has to stop for good. --Shadow crest 01:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I didn't read the whole thing because I know I'm the one guilty of trolling/making personal attacks, I just wish you'd help me out a little moar. That's all I ask. :( Blue Ninjakoopa 01:43, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Please read the whole thing. When I write a WoT to reply to you and run it past 3 separate people to make sure it comes out good, you can probably assume I'm saying it because it's important. :( --Shadow crest 01:51, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I read it. I know I've got everything mixed up; you've been letting me slide all this time. With all the trolling and flaming I've been doing, I could be banned any second. I apologize for attacking you, and hopefully you will forgive me. I never grasped the true definition of trolling fully, so I use the term loosely; act like a hypocrite and label others with the title.At least you know I'm improving (a little), because the old BNK responds to WoTs with cursing and attempts to demote intellect (calling you words such as "stupid" or "idiot", which you clearly are not). Blue Ninjakoopa 02:05, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm just curious...

But i was playing peach earlier on Brawl, and peach bomber does look like she's hitting with her butt, but i could be wrong... ~Teh Blue Blur~^{~You're too slow!~} 17:39, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

It seems to me that, even if she is hitting with her butt (nintendo is a bunch of pervs :]), that most people seem to think it's her hip, and butt (also look at that person's contributions on the Toad article) seems less appropriate than hip does. --Alice 17:53, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Alice. Unless Nintendo specifically comes out and says "Peach hits people with her butt", I'd like to keep that stuff out of main as much as possible. Death By Rape is an example of such stuff. Not to mention that IP's contibs on Toad (move) suggest that they are not contributing in good faith. --Shadow crest 18:07, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Deletion frenzy

While you're having fun with the deleting, please keep the Goombella trophy; that could be used on the List of SSBB trophies page, as soon as I add a new row. Thanks. ;) Friedbeef1 Love 23:13, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

K ppls, I just deleted like 400 images, where's my barnstar --Shadow crest 00:39, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

	Nice work! Your contributions reflect the kind of awesome work we SmashWikidians like to see!
	Good job deleting those unused images! <3

Alice 00:46, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, shadow. I know I'm pitiful T.T Friedbeef1 Love 01:08, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Uh... what? --Shadow crest 01:28, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

For keeping the trophy pic; can you do anything about the two videos in Unused Files? Friedbeef1 Love 01:47, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh. Sure. And no, I can't... I'm going to ask KyleH next time I see him on IRC. --Shadow crest 02:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

You=monster of deletion. I dubbeth you, Shadowdeletioncrest. Semicolon (talk) 01:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I shall add it to my list of adjectives --Shadow crest 02:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

You didn't check to see if any of them could be useful?... --Sky (t · c · w) 05:27, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I wish you would've taken the effort to continue clicking the "unused" box; that way people would actually know what the problem was. Now people will have to work harder to discover that. Zixor (talk) 05:38, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. It truly was a pointless post. I just found it as a strange coincidence. No need to apologize. MarioGalaxy^{May Guthix be with you...} 20:57, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

ban

Can you ban this person please? --Alice 07:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The Talk Page

Not to be mean or anything, but there are some people without a home computer. I am one of them. My school won't let me on most of the sites. This is the only site I can find with the available source. Please consider what you comment before you say stuff that could be hurtful to others. SapphireKirby777 ~Behold! -.- 14:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

What are you talking about? --Shadow crest 16:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

You were being an ass on his talk page (no offense) while making fun of my edit count. Blue Ninjakoopa 16:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Making fun of people is for trolls, and if you think I'm a troll then just epic lulz.

I had a reason to comment on your edit count, and it was constructive. If you followed my advice about less chatting and more editing, you'd be a better contributor, ye? --Shadow crest 18:23, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah. <--- Not trolling. Blue Ninjakoopa 19:12, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

"minor" PA

Check out this PA:
http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/index.php?title=Template_talk:Speedy_Delete&diff=next&oldid=254454
-Zixor (talk) 14:20, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

If that were bannable, pretty much all of the admins would be banned by now. You're welcome to take it up with Sky, but administratively there's nothing I can do about it. --Shadow crest 15:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

So admins can just up and say stuff like that? Blue Ninjakoopa 15:37, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

For once, I agree with BNK. Zixor (talk) 15:59, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I do not mean to say that it's acceptable, but just that if we were to ban our admins for the comments they have made we'd have like 3 admins.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Things I have to say about this:

These are all things that I personally find overly aggressive or personal attack-ish.
[edit] Also note that I do not necessarily disagree with what was the point of the message, I disagree with the manner it was said in.
I was going to look for more but I'm tired and I got bored. So whatever.
I am aware that I am not on this list despite others thinking that I should be. I plead the 5th, and if another person wants to go through my contribs and find stuff fine.

Summary: Yeah, I know the admins make personal attacks that (I think) they shouldn't. Hopefully after reading this they'll change. But unless they do something really bad, I'm not going to block them. What would the very few remaining admins do? Take 8 hour shifts? Lol. --Shadow crest 16:25, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Wow. They're... they're bullies! Blue Ninjakoopa 16:55, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I am an organized troll, remember. Organized. Semicolon (talk) 19:48, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Heh,
I would have to agree with you entirely (with the exception of SilverDragon's edits [7,8, & 9], which I feel were [generally] accurate and constructive assertions). -Likely nothing any admin has done recently would be considered ban-worthy, but this behavior is entirely unacceptable from any user, and they must be reprimanded. -And this is something I think you should do.

I have added in an afterthought in response. --Shadow crest 17:04, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

There is virtually no chance that any admin reading this thread would change their ways as a result, as they are all undeniably aware of their poor choices already. Attitudes toward PA's have become disgustingly lax, and must now be renewed. Zixor (talk) 16:58, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to point out that my edit above isn't intended to be anything even close to a PA. That's my (not very) humorous edit summary when I correct spelling and grammar errors. I can cease that behavior if some find it offensive -- I only meant it in a joking manner. I would guess many other admins feel the same about some of their edit summaries (I think this is roughly the same idea). Miles (talk) 17:25, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Miles. -As for the link, I would say that "LOLcat" (whatever it might mean....) is less an insult than a fairly harmless assertion of amusement. Assuming it was written along side an actual explanation, I don't think this would constitute a PA. -Zixor (talk) 17:45, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflictAlright, here's my thoughts on the matter. First, there's a big difference between a slight jab and an attack. The comments above fit into the first category (or at least I felt that they did when I was writing them and apologize if they were interpreted differently). An example of a personal "attack" would be something like this or our recent "friend" African American Ninjakoopa (the vandal account). Now, if every little comment about someone not being able to spell properly was considered a banable offense, Shadowcrest is right that we wouldn't have anyone around. Also, there's a difference between just up and telling some one to "fuck off" (unacceptable) and telling them that you don't accept their apology because you think they will continue until they are blocked (acceptable). You were perfectly fine in saying the latter (I'm not passing judgment on if I agree or disagree with you), but under the logic I see you presenting, you would be in fault as the comment could have been the same as "fuck off." Basically, what it boils down to is a matter of how things are taken by all the users. I really haven't seen any uproar from people about the "learn English" comments, and if there was, then there would be discussion about what we should do about them. As for the edit you originally questioned, my advice would be get over it. If one person on the internet calling you an idiot for one thing you did is a big enough deal to cause you emotional turmoil then you life must be pretty good considering you can spare emotional energy to be bothered by something that trivial. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 17:48, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

The difference between a jab and an attack is in severity, not principal: Both are wrong. Though it may at times be quite clear, the severity is generally open to a large amount of interpretation by the readers, and the exact distinction is somewhat unobtainable. (-And, let’s face it, we are all human, and frequently tend ‘’not’’ to assume good faith.) As such, and for other obvious reasons, it would be best simply not to make use of either. Regardless of the size, “every little comment” makes a difference; a negative one, in this case. –and ‘’any’’ amount of uproar is no excuse for this; discussion is happening right now.

Your final two sentences are irrelevant, overly personal, and (most importantly) based on circumstantial and largely imagined evidence.

-Incidentally, when have you ever known me to "get over" anything? I plan to have a nice long chat with you about your own numerous and egregious PA's. -Zixor (talk) 18:12, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

This is weird. Admins doing these things!? This is insane! What do we need to do? SapphireKirby777 ~Behold! -.- 14:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid there is nothing we can do -.- Blue Ninjakoopa 16:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Jab is a loaded word because it implies that an attack (albeit a small one) is taking place in the first place. Better might be to say that there's a difference between attacking another user and being blunt, which, believe it or not, can actually have a positive impact (meaning that it is, in fact, different in principal from an attack). What you're essentially proposing is that we can analyze the action without analyzing the intent (i.e. you're making the blanket statement that anything resembling an attack in character is automatically wrong/in bad faith/whatever you want to call it). The distinction isn't always clear, but there is a difference. – Defiant Elements +talk 16:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I would agree; though I don't particularly understand what you mean by:"What you're essentially proposing is that we can analyze the action without analyzing the intent (i.e. you're making the blanket statement that anything resembling an attack in character is automatically wrong/in bad faith/whatever you want to call it)."

One can be blunt without being unkind, yes. -Zixor (talk) 17:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

You said "The difference between a jab and an attack is in severity, not principal: Both are wrong." "Jabs," if you want to call them that, usually serve one of two purposes. Either they're intended to be funny or they're intended to be blunt. "Attacks" are purposefully aimed at another editor and are inherently non-constructive in nature. By equating "jabs" and "attacks" and saying that both are principally wrong, you're saying that, regardless of intent, anything that resembles an attack to any degree is inherently wrong. Intent matters. – Defiant Elements +talk 17:08, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, that wouldn't be my choice of wording. -We simply need to be more mindful of the negative effects of the particular way we say things. Zixor (talk) 17:15, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

And people need to stop taking things so personally and be mature enough to get over them. There was no problem with any of this until you showed up and started whining about it. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 17:20, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Negative effects of what I say=somebody else's problem. My words aren't meant to be hurtful; believe me, when I want to be hurtful, I can be extraordinarily hurtful. This is my matter-of-fact sometimes called my just-shut-the-hell-up tone. It's candid, blunt, and not very forgiving. I am very aware of what my words will do. I am hoping that my words will affect someone in a way that I desire. The way I desire is that the stop/start doing whatever it is I request. I don't do that by pandering. It is neither useful nor my style. I don't do it by not telling the truth about things. I don't do it by being so soft the message doesn't get across. I do it by telling the truth, telling it plainly, and not pulling any punches if I have to. It's not my problem the way these things are taken. I'm doing my job, and that's what's required of me, and all the other sysops and users on this wiki. Semicolon (talk) 17:42, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

-Both of your main points are dead wrong, and the root of the problem. Zixor (talk) 17:52, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Since you seem to think that justifying arguments is pointless, I'll respond with something simple enough for you to understand: "No, you're wrong." Guess what? I've got as much standing here as you, but as of right now, I'm ahead because we actually took the time to justify our reasoning. Please, if you're going to continue this discussion (which I would prefer you didn't) actually take the time to argue, not just assert that you're right. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 18:00, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I suppose I could copy and paste your arguments and add "not" in front of everything; but I don't think that would please either of us.

So, does that make us even? -or, am I ahead? -How exactly do we keep score? : ) Frankly, I don't know why you even bother arguing against me, as our styles are so obviously incompatible. Why not just let my insufficient arguments fail on their own?

-You've already insulted me several times throughout the course of this conversation. -Zixor (talk) 18:51, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

<sarcasm>You don't keep score, I just win.</sarcasm> Your arguments have already failed for being insufficient. I pointed it out so that maybe you would learn something, but you obviously haven't. Oh, and there's no such thing as "incompatible argument styles." That's what someone who can't argue uses as a cop out against someone who can. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 21:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Quoth the South Park: "If you would look at my opponent, he is a Turd Sandwich"--"You're a turd sandwich."--"No, if you would excuse me, sir, you are, in fact, a turd sandwich."--"You're a turd sandwich." Semicolon (talk) 21:36, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

This isn't a game tbh; there is no score.

My response to this argument and indeed this entire topic is: don't be a dick. Intent is important, but so is what you say.

This is the internet; there is no urgency to pretty much anything that this discussion could pertain to. You don't have to respond in a second like you do in real life. So take the time to make sure you're not coming off as a douchebag. Re-read what you write, especially if you're arguing; if you're angry, go jog around the block a couple times before you post something you shouldn't. Also keep in mind that while you may not think you're being a douchebag and that everyone else is, you might be. If you think you're going to say something slightly jerkish just to get even with people who were jerks before, though of course what you're doing isn't half as bad as what they did: you're being just as much of a jerk as they were, if not escalating the douchebaggery past what it already was. Also keep in mind that being a dick is not the same as being impolite/uncivil; though many dicks are impolite and uncivil, you can be a polite dick too. Keep in mind that what you say and how it comes across matters. (I strongly disagree with what semi wrote above- I believe that if you offend someone, unless it's clear the other person is overreacting then you are at least partially at fault.)

But, intent matters too. What DE and Semi said above about intent being important is true, though being my righteous-crusader carebear self my line is a lot shorter than theirs is. If what I'm saying is assholish but it's a joke and everyone knows that, that's ok. If the comment isn't damn clear that it's supposed to be a joke, you should probably rephrase it. If you make a blunt comment that is construed poorly but you're trying to benefit the wiki/its users/whatever... maybe. This is what administrators have discretion for. Does intent excuse a personal attack? Not necessarily, but it is taken into account. Blanket rules- in this case "any unnecessarily blunt comments are PAs and are a bannable offense"- are always stupid.

I guess what I'm really trying to say is be nice if you can. For people on the dickery side of the argument, just because we won't always ban you for minor asshattery doesn't mean it's cool. Don't be harsh unless you have a seriously good reason. I know being nice is a stretch for some people, but suck it up. For people who are offended by every less-than-perfectly-polite comment, QQ less. Not everyone is going to be perfectly nice and sugar-coated all the time, nor do they have to be. Keep in mind that they may have good intentions behind their slightly dickish comment.

Yeah, I'm overly idealistic and realize that not everyone is going to be nice, no matter what. But it trying to meet the ideal really so horrible? --Shadow crest 20:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

For clarification: I'm not saying that I'm not culpable if someone get's pissed off because of my comments. I'm saying it's not my responsibility. I don't go around trying to piss people off, I go around and do my job. If someone is offended by something I said, I can understand it. I'm not the most fuzzy admin around here, but the fact of the matter is, it's their problem if they're pissed about it. It's the internet--if you take personally what happens here, then you're in for a load of hurt when you get into the real world. Sh-t happens. Get over it. Semicolon (talk) 21:39, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, SC. I hope this will help for now, if only a little; and I will take what you've said into consideration. (-btw, what does "QQ" mean?)

-C-Hawk: You continue to insult me at every turn. I have asked you to stop, but you don't. If I'm to understand correctly, this is my problem. -I'll try again to "get over it". -Zixor (talk) 22:59, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Let's play a fun little game. Where are the insults? Semicolon (talk) 23:07, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I'd badly like to make one against you right now. -Zixor (talk) 23:24, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm giving you a chance to present your case. I'm being charitable--really, I am, because at this point most people who know how to argue would already have shut down and stopped listening, assuming you have no idea what you're talking about. Indulge me; what's your reasoning? Where are the insults? Lay your case down. Argue with us. Please. I'm not gonna give you another chance, because I already assume, based on most of your edits, that you have no reasoning, no logic, no case, evidence etc., but I'm willing to revise my assessment this one last time.Semicolon (talk) 04:57, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

That's nice. Did you know that false claims such as accusing him of personal attacks are libel? Additionally, you say above "C-hawk:You continue to insult me...", but the problem is you talked to C-Hawk while replying to semicolon. --Shadow crest 23:31, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Encouraging personal attacks violates NPA, doesn't it? -hopes not- Blue Ninjakoopa 23:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't say so, though it could be construed as baiting. --Shadow crest 23:31, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought it was clear that I intended to end this conversation, which is what you and C-Hawk wanted, but very well. I'm not particularly interested in your charity, nor in indulging you. I suppose I can, however, humor you.

I'm of the mind that people generally don't acknowledge that which they disagree with; therefore, I would think that you are actually aware of what I perceive as an insult, futilely deterring me from pointing it out specifically. -But let's try it out anyway:

You said, "Let's play a fun little game". This is the kind of thing one would say to a child. When I'm treated as a child, I am insulted. This should've been clear from my hostile reaction. Based on examples within this thread, it should also be clear ("based on most of my edits") that my responses are far more intelligible when I am treated with respect and dignity. If you wished to illicit such a response, why did you not treat me in a polite manner? (This would be an example of "incompatible argument styles")

I am frequently accused of "bad" arguing (by C-Hawk), which is a naive view, as it is perhaps merely "different". Simply because I choose not to point out "evidence" or "logic" which can be easily extrapolated based on what I have said, you say that I am without reasoning; when, in fact, I have simply not always yet stated it as such specifically. I would imagine that you already know this, but simply choose to argue your way around it.

At that point, I would perhaps usually elaborate on the point in question, but (when talking to you or C-Hawk) there has usually been a deterrent (insult, tangent, etc.) which I might choose to address first, or ignore entirely as it hardly discounts what I've written.

This is all part of my argument, and while my methods may be in question, there should be none as to whether or not I have any idea what I'm talking about.

-Regarding you comment, SC; I am unsure why you meant by "liability", nor why you thought I was replying to Semi.

Email

It was regarding African American Ninjakoopa. He's long been taken care of. THank you anyway. Toon Ganondorf (t c)