User talk:Ryulong/Archive 34
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Ryulong. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 30 | ← | Archive 32 | Archive 33 | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | Archive 36 | → | Archive 40 |
Kamen Rider List
All the lists are copyright violations, not to mention there is not a single hint that each list of villans is notable outside the tv show. Wikipedia is not for indiscriminate lists of information.— Dædαlus Contribs 23:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- The lists are not copyright violations. They are fictional character lists, none of which is indiscriminate information. If you continue your activities, you will be blocked.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:55, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- They are also unsourced, and not-notable. They fall under A7 as thus.— Dædαlus Contribs 23:56, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- And yes, they are copyright violations. They are each direct copies of the information found on the website.— Dædαlus Contribs 23:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- You are completely wrong about all of those, because there is no website for these shows. They are indeed notable, and sourcing is an issue, but every page you are listing for A7 is for a series from the 1970s or 1980s, which would be very difficult to find sources for. As I said, if you continue your activities, you will be blocked.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:58, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, that website, well it is not a copyright violation as the information existed before that website did. That website does not hold the copyright on that information, and we are using it as a source anyway.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- In fact, you have a clear conflict of interest in regards to this information, therefore you should not be threatening me or reverting me, but rather letting an uninvolved admin handle the clear a7s. If the groups are notable, there shouldn't have been any trouble finding sources for them. As to a7, there is no indication on why each group is notable, and in fact, that is what a7 indicates: article does not indicate why subject is notable.— Dædαlus Contribs 00:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- What conflict of interest? I am simply more knowledged in the topic than you are. These are fictional character lists (or fictional character biographies) of clearly notable television programs from Japan. I simply found that you listed a page, with plenty of third party references that I recreated after an AFD to make it more fitting with Wikipedia's policies, and then saw you did the exact same to every single page in the topic area. And, as an administrator, I warned you that if you continued to tag those pages or similar pages, that you would be blocked for disruption, because there is nothing there that falls under WP:CSD#A7 or WP:CSD#copyvio. If you want someone else's input, I will gladly find another administrator to look into this situation.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- What conflict of interest? Are you serious? It is quite clear, you're in a project which deals with this type of show, users only join projects that they have interest in, you have a conflict of interest. The article are a7, period. They do not indicicate why the subject is notable outside the tv series, period. The article that was deleted at the afd is the same as it is now, unsourced, and does not indicate why it's notable.— Dædαlus Contribs 00:09, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- What conflict of interest? I am simply more knowledged in the topic than you are. These are fictional character lists (or fictional character biographies) of clearly notable television programs from Japan. I simply found that you listed a page, with plenty of third party references that I recreated after an AFD to make it more fitting with Wikipedia's policies, and then saw you did the exact same to every single page in the topic area. And, as an administrator, I warned you that if you continued to tag those pages or similar pages, that you would be blocked for disruption, because there is nothing there that falls under WP:CSD#A7 or WP:CSD#copyvio. If you want someone else's input, I will gladly find another administrator to look into this situation.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- In fact, you have a clear conflict of interest in regards to this information, therefore you should not be threatening me or reverting me, but rather letting an uninvolved admin handle the clear a7s. If the groups are notable, there shouldn't have been any trouble finding sources for them. As to a7, there is no indication on why each group is notable, and in fact, that is what a7 indicates: article does not indicate why subject is notable.— Dædαlus Contribs 00:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
No. Conflict of interest is when you have a monetary or other vested interest in keeping an article on Wikipedia. This is just a project designed to make these articles better such that users who have never seen them before and have no prior knowledge of the subject matter can see that the content is worthy of inclusion. If you would stop tagging absolutely every page in Template:Shōwa Kamen Riders, you wouldn't be arguing with me right now who is just about ready to block your account for disruption, but I won't, as you claim it is a conflict of interest if I do.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:11, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- COI is not always about money, the subjects of the articles have absolutely no sources, and do not indicate why they are notable outside the tv show. Notability is not inherited.— Dædαlus Contribs 00:14, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Note that A7 doesn't apply to fictional people or organizations. Any editor in good standing can contest a CSD, if this is the case, the correct approach is to use AFD. Cenarium (talk) 00:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- If I see a batch AFD, that will be a violation of WP:POINT in my eyes.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- If Ryulong as an administrator believes that the articles you have tagged do not qualify for speedy deletion, he may delete the tags and request that you desist from posting them. If you still believe the articles should be deleted, you could pursue deletion through other means, assuming that the issue has not already been addressed, that you believe in good faith that deletion is warranted, and that the size of any AfD is kept to reasonable limits. Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- An accusation of WP:POINT doesn't make it one, nor does it give you grounds to block me. None of these articles indicate why they are notable outside the tv show and thus why they deserve their own article. Take note that notability is not inherited.— Dædαlus Contribs 00:27, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- If I may interject and give some background, this all appeared to start with this edit [1] where Daedalus added a G4 tag to an article that was recreated by Rtkat3 (talk · contribs) and had been the subject of an AfD before (and handled pretty speedily). From there, it looks like Daedalus then looked at Rtkat3's other edits to try and find more examples of him recreating deleted material. It doesn't look like any explanation was given why his G4 tag was removed until it was replaced and removed a second time. Dayewalker (talk) 00:29, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- I found that the other dozen tags that Daedalus added were not applicable (and possibly disruptive, especially when there were articles that did not even comply with A7 if they were not about fictional subjects) and acted accordingly. The rest of this is an overreaction because Daedalus feels that he is the only one who can be right in this situation. Any further attempts at getting these pages deleted I feel would be disruptive.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:32, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- You have no idea how I think, so don't you dare assume about me. Besides that, of course you would feel it's disruptive, since you're a fan of the subject of the articles. This is a clear conflict of interest. I continue to present the facts, and you continue to present your opinion, which you have yet to back up with facts. The fact is is that these subjects do not deserve their own article, and there is no evidence to support that they are notable outside the tv series. Notability is not inherited.— Dædαlus Contribs 00:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- If notability is not inherited, why not suggest that the articles get merged back into their parent articles? And having an interest in something does not constitute a conflict of interest.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- You have no idea how I think, so don't you dare assume about me. Besides that, of course you would feel it's disruptive, since you're a fan of the subject of the articles. This is a clear conflict of interest. I continue to present the facts, and you continue to present your opinion, which you have yet to back up with facts. The fact is is that these subjects do not deserve their own article, and there is no evidence to support that they are notable outside the tv series. Notability is not inherited.— Dædαlus Contribs 00:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- I found that the other dozen tags that Daedalus added were not applicable (and possibly disruptive, especially when there were articles that did not even comply with A7 if they were not about fictional subjects) and acted accordingly. The rest of this is an overreaction because Daedalus feels that he is the only one who can be right in this situation. Any further attempts at getting these pages deleted I feel would be disruptive.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:32, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- If I may interject and give some background, this all appeared to start with this edit [1] where Daedalus added a G4 tag to an article that was recreated by Rtkat3 (talk · contribs) and had been the subject of an AfD before (and handled pretty speedily). From there, it looks like Daedalus then looked at Rtkat3's other edits to try and find more examples of him recreating deleted material. It doesn't look like any explanation was given why his G4 tag was removed until it was replaced and removed a second time. Dayewalker (talk) 00:29, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Geddon
Hi, Geddon seems remarkably similar to the version that was deleted at the conclusion of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geddon, so I think the G4 tag was reasonable. If you disagree with either the AfD closing, or that it is not substantially identical, you should take it to WP:DRV. Kevin (talk) 00:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- I did not check the former content. This is a larger issue that you can see above.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:38, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Oh isn't that just a surpise, so, you admit then, that your 'resoning' in the edit summery that you, as an admin, feel that the points in the AfD were addressed, was an outright lie, as you never checked the original version, and therefore, you cannot say whether the tag was appropriate or not. If you're going to use your admin status to back up your reasoning, you better actually check the material before you comment on it.— Dædαlus Contribs 00:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- STFU.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- No, not when you have a clear COI, and you're using your admin status to push your obvious POV and threaten me. I'm re-adding the tag, as the article is exactly the same as the version was deleted. As said by another, if you have a problem with that, take it up with a DRV instead of using your admin status to push your POV. As I said, I've brought up your COI at COIN. I'm not linking, I'm sure you have a link somewhere, and I'm especially not linking after you told me to shut the fuck up after you lied to me to push your POV.
- You want me to shut the fuck up? Stop using your admin status to push your point of view that the articles are notable outside the parent subject, when they obviously aren't, especially since notability is not inheirited, period.— Dædαlus Contribs 00:46, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- THEN SUGGEST THAT THEY GET MERGED.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:47, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- How can I when there is hardly any traffic on the article? An AfD is the only answer I can see here. No sources, no notability.— Dædαlus Contribs 00:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Well, several such discussions were brought up at WT:TOKU with similar low-traffic pages. And I'm about to merge Geddon into Kamen Rider Amazon anyway.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:53, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Be bold then, and merge every other article that I csd'd, as I do not think a single one would be able to pass an AfD. Yes, you, not me, but you, the one with more knowledge on the subject.— Dædαlus Contribs 00:56, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- No. Because many of them are too large to merge, or are notable on their own (Shadow Moon has multiple third-party sources which I added to the article) or the merges would be too complex (Tōbei Tachibana is a fictional character who appeared in multiple iterations of the show and has no single merge location). I was bold and merged one. You see, if your suggestions were posted to the WikiProject, it would get more than just the two of us working on this.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:59, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- I trust that if I even try, I'll be drowned out by things I don't even understand. All I understand is that the articles do not indicate why they are notable outside the tv show.— Dædαlus Contribs 01:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- You'll inevitably get a yes man with a user I'm not too fond of. But other than that, I am sure that the pages that should get merged will get merged. A few have notability outside of the series, but the sources are not there to support that yet, and that will be something the group will work on.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Alright, well, now that it seems things have calmed down, I'm going to take a quick break which isn't a break(moving heavy furniture), then I'll come back and try some.— Dædαlus Contribs 01:13, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- You'll inevitably get a yes man with a user I'm not too fond of. But other than that, I am sure that the pages that should get merged will get merged. A few have notability outside of the series, but the sources are not there to support that yet, and that will be something the group will work on.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- I trust that if I even try, I'll be drowned out by things I don't even understand. All I understand is that the articles do not indicate why they are notable outside the tv show.— Dædαlus Contribs 01:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- No. Because many of them are too large to merge, or are notable on their own (Shadow Moon has multiple third-party sources which I added to the article) or the merges would be too complex (Tōbei Tachibana is a fictional character who appeared in multiple iterations of the show and has no single merge location). I was bold and merged one. You see, if your suggestions were posted to the WikiProject, it would get more than just the two of us working on this.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:59, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Be bold then, and merge every other article that I csd'd, as I do not think a single one would be able to pass an AfD. Yes, you, not me, but you, the one with more knowledge on the subject.— Dædαlus Contribs 00:56, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Well, several such discussions were brought up at WT:TOKU with similar low-traffic pages. And I'm about to merge Geddon into Kamen Rider Amazon anyway.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:53, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- How can I when there is hardly any traffic on the article? An AfD is the only answer I can see here. No sources, no notability.— Dædαlus Contribs 00:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- THEN SUGGEST THAT THEY GET MERGED.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:47, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- STFU.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Oh isn't that just a surpise, so, you admit then, that your 'resoning' in the edit summery that you, as an admin, feel that the points in the AfD were addressed, was an outright lie, as you never checked the original version, and therefore, you cannot say whether the tag was appropriate or not. If you're going to use your admin status to back up your reasoning, you better actually check the material before you comment on it.— Dædαlus Contribs 00:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
The Point Of Impact
My point in bringing this up above was that Daedalus appeared to think (if I may) he had uncovered someone recreating articles that had already been deleted (as with Geddon). Ryulong, being more familiar with this area of the wiki, disagreed. It seems to be a matter where communication was strained and bad faith was assumed. Both editors are long-time valued contributors, so this may be a matter for a cup of tea and a handshake before this gets even worse. Dayewalker (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Carranger-related
The Carranger articles has Victrailer (ビクトレーラー, Bikutorērā), but do you know/have access to the Kanji & Romanji for Victrailer Battle Mode? Working on something off-wiki. Thanks! JPG-GR (talk) 04:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Search the ja.wiki page. It should be there.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:38, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Doesn't appear to be (already checked). *shrug* JPG-GR (talk) 07:27, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Well, if anyone hasn't added that yet, I done it just there. --Burai (talk) 12:45, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Doesn't appear to be (already checked). *shrug* JPG-GR (talk) 07:27, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
I apologize for the talk about rumors in the RPM talk page
Sorry how was I to know about that the page wasn't mention for that but there have been rumors about the show ending after RPM for good and no more live action Sentai adaptions. But I know better than to follow rumors. Again I apologize but I first learned about this rumor on facebook.
Red Polar Bear Ranger (Red Polar Bear Ranger 05:46, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Rumors about the subject are not suitable talk page content. Just make sure you know that in the future.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:47, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
You got it but however do you believe the rumors though or no and besides its best we wait until the spring and summer to see if Shinkenger will be adapted. Personally I disagree with the rumor about RPM being the last season though but like I said its best we wait until the spring and summer to find out if the show will be last or not. Red Polar Bear Ranger (Red Polar Bear Ranger 08:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- I am not going to take anything seriously for what is more than a year away.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:16, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Episode previews
Previously when a new episode of Go-onger, Kiva, Shinkenger and Decade were aired, a small piece of information regarding the next episode after that is added in their respective episodes lists. Recently, nobody had written information regarding the next episodes of Shinkenger and Decade that are going to be aired this Sunday and this may keep up for the rest of this year. Why is this do you think? Is it to avoid spoilers or something? --Burai (talk) 11:57, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- No. I just haven't been doing it lately.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- I see. Usually they're done pretty quick. --Burai (talk) 21:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- I haven't been around on weekends lately, so I don't get the chance to do the quick blurb thing immedeately—Ryūlóng (竜龙)
- If you're going to be inactive in weekends again, do you know anyone else that can write up short summaries of the next episodes? I tried to do that myself but I would end up messing up the template as I'm not an experienced editor at Wikipedia. --Burai (talk) 22:41, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- I dunno. Fractyl does a good job. He just needs spellchecking afterwards.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- If you're going to be inactive in weekends again, do you know anyone else that can write up short summaries of the next episodes? I tried to do that myself but I would end up messing up the template as I'm not an experienced editor at Wikipedia. --Burai (talk) 22:41, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- I haven't been around on weekends lately, so I don't get the chance to do the quick blurb thing immedeately—Ryūlóng (竜龙)
- I see. Usually they're done pretty quick. --Burai (talk) 21:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you
For reverting the vandalism on my user page. Much appreciated. Hope life is well :o). Redthoreau (talk)RT 21:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Saban et al.
You were right, he seemed to have returned. I've re-set the protections on both Saban and VR Troopers, to expire in a year's time. cheers, –xeno (talk) 21:08, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- Told you.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:58, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- That you did sir, that you did... –xeno (talk) 23:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- I can't seem to get rid of him. I had blocked swaths of IPs from Canadian ISPs before, but he always seemed to get a new ISP.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:07, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- I guess you gotta admire his determination ;> –xeno (talk) 23:19, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- I can't seem to get rid of him. I had blocked swaths of IPs from Canadian ISPs before, but he always seemed to get a new ISP.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:07, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- That you did sir, that you did... –xeno (talk) 23:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry I reverted your edit, Ryulong...
...but I don't want the English-dubbing of the Super Sentai Series (the production of Power Rangers seasons) to end. I'm not angry or anything.
Anyway, I just recieved word that my edit has just been reverted, and there's a message in my talk page saying that this page isn't a forum. Once again, I'm sorry. However, my video petition isn't garbage--it's a petition.
~~LDEJRuff~~ (see what I've contributed) 13:25, 8 March 2009 (EDT)
- It's still not proper content for Wikipedia. Take it to Rangerboard.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:31, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Mojikara?
Hello, I was wondering: on the Shinkenger article, for the Romanji of "Mojikara", why is it that "ヂ" is used instead of "ジ" for "ji"? Just curious...
Hoshinoarashi (talk) 08:25, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- The "jikara" part of the word comes from "chikara" which is rendaku'd into "jikara".—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:26, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- To add, "Moji" is a term used for "Characters" seen in Kanji. Fractyl (talk) 23:49, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- Not important.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- I disagree, I covered the Ji from "Moji" while you covered the Ji from "Jikara". Both sides are important to cover on. Fractyl (talk) 01:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- Not important.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
D-CON(anime convention)
You apparently recently deleted the page about the anime convention, D-CON. This was due to A7 which i believe was lack of notability or something. Where notability of the evnt is concerned - The event was the ONLY free anime convention in the UK and also was the biggest one in Scotland. (with attendance of 350 compared to "Auchinawa"s 300) I am completely shocked and confused that it was deleted. Please clear this up for me.
Thanks
Tamel Eidek (talk) 23:37, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but if this convention does not have any mainstream press or major guests, then it is not notable for inclusion on Wikipedia.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't know what you want for "mainstream" press. It was in Dundee University Press, local papers and on several webpages (including Forbidden Planet and Neo Magazine.) As for notable guests... Realtime worlds - well known games company - creators of "crackdown" for XBOX were included in the event performing talks and Q+A sessions. Ross Burt, EA concept designer and author of "Astro Funk" comic was exhibiting. Yishan Li - a professional manga artist with books on sale in the UK, America, China and Europe, was one of the exhibiting artists. Borders bookstore attended and sponsored the event and there were several other notable guests also. I don't know what else you could possible want!? Also to mention once again it was the most well attended anime convention in Scotland and the only free anime convention in the UK.
Tamel Eidek (talk) 11:14, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- If it's covered by a national or international newspaper, that's mainstream.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:16, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
But do you not clearly agree that it is a notable event? I really cant see why you would not allow a page for it. Do you have something against it?
I don't see anything about national or international newspaper coverage on AmeCon, Minami Con (who had less importance/coverage than D-CON) or on Tomo-Dachi (who had smaller attendance than D-CON) just to name a few pages which fall into the same category you deleted D-CON under then...
Tamel Eidek (talk) 11:00, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
- I saw D-CON's page and made the decision. If those pages fall under the same criteria, they're gone, too.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 11:06, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
- Notability is a guideline not a policy. Also CSD is only for clearcut cases. The article should have been kept. --§hawnhath 13:14, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- And I used the guideline to guide my decision. There was zero coverage for the conventions whose articles I deleted. Most of it was their own website.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:12, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- Notability is a guideline not a policy. Also CSD is only for clearcut cases. The article should have been kept. --§hawnhath 13:14, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I was looking at the log and noticed that 24.73.17.181 was notified by being blocked for 24hrs by Esanchez7587 but was blocked for 1 month without notification by Ryulong. Can someone please explain this. --§hawnhath 13:10, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- I've replied at the AN thread: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#User:24.73.17.181. –xeno (talk) 13:13, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Happy Saint Patrick’s Day!
On behalf of the Wikipedia:Kindness Campaign, we just want to spread Wikipedia:WikiLove by wishing you a Happy Saint Patrick’s Day! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 16:12, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Gripe about anonymous users... again
I may have expressed my anger about anonymous users making edits on this site before and I have to do it again as I'm really annoyed at the crappy edits I've seen with Decade and Shinkenger, especially 76.115.82.54 who vandalised the Shinkenger page with utter garbage albeit it got reverted quickly.
I really think just registered members of Wikipedia should make edits on articles, not anonymous ones (although a few make decent edits). What do you feel about this? And can you do anything about it since your one of the admins of this site? --Burai (talk) 21:55, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, a lot of stuff has been happening lately. I've had to deal with vandalism to the Kamen Rider templates from someone in Singapore who thinks that there's going to be a Blade Knight. Seems like a fanfic, but it's getting to be a pain in the ass. Some IP edits are beneficial, but if things get really bad, again, I'll semiprotect the pages as I did to several of the Blade pages.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- I remember I wanted the Kamen Rider KIva page to be semi-protected when somebody vandalised that page when the show was just new. And where the hell did the Singaporean person think there'll be "Blade Knight"? I do not know but I'm certain he's just being stupid like most other anonymous users. And I can agree with a few anonymous users making beneficial edits, especially some that find new stuff about Kiva, Decade and Shinkenger. --Burai (talk) 08:22, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure, but the various Blade pages and templates are protected for a month...or three.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:29, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
- I remember I wanted the Kamen Rider KIva page to be semi-protected when somebody vandalised that page when the show was just new. And where the hell did the Singaporean person think there'll be "Blade Knight"? I do not know but I'm certain he's just being stupid like most other anonymous users. And I can agree with a few anonymous users making beneficial edits, especially some that find new stuff about Kiva, Decade and Shinkenger. --Burai (talk) 08:22, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
IP blocking
Hello, on the 17th of March you blocked this IP, this IP and this IP one after the other. None of them have any visible edits, regardless an automatic one month block seems to be excessive given the only reason you gave was vandalism. Can you please explain these blocks otherwise i will assume you have learnt nothing from this and that would be a terrible shame. By the way, i do concur with what most people have said at that venue. Please read it, understand it and become a better editor. 211.30.96.181 (talk) 10:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
- Each IP has multiple deleted edits. JPG-GR (talk) 19:49, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:18, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
- And in those deleted edits, they show the IPs all filling Template talk:Kamen Rider Blade with a bunch of nonsense (I believe I also cleaned the history of Template:Kamen Rider and Template:Kamen Rider Blade of similar edits).—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:42, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Notification of Request for Arbitration
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Ryulong and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.
Thanks, Synergy 01:11, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
- That is one ugly looking box.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:42, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
- What can I say? It came with the statement. Synergy 01:43, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
- But why bother with the template at all?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:44, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
- You're my first arbitration case Ryulong. I was only following the instructions. Synergy 01:47, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
- That "don't template the regulars" thing never went through, did it?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
- Mmmm. Thats for warnings and such, not for notifications. If you have an issue with the template, you should request it be changed on the arbitration talk page I assume. But I get your angle. Synergy 01:53, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
- The icon could use some work.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:55, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
- Mmmm. Thats for warnings and such, not for notifications. If you have an issue with the template, you should request it be changed on the arbitration talk page I assume. But I get your angle. Synergy 01:53, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
- That "don't template the regulars" thing never went through, did it?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
- You're my first arbitration case Ryulong. I was only following the instructions. Synergy 01:47, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
- But why bother with the template at all?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:44, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
- What can I say? It came with the statement. Synergy 01:43, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
You're invited!
 New York City Meetup |
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, sign official incorporation papers for the chapter, review recent projects like Wikipedia Loves Art and upcoming projects like Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the January meeting's minutes).
In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.
You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:19, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
- Invited to a meetup in a city you don't even live anywhere near... you must be quite the popular fellow! :D Master&Expert (Talk) 06:53, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
- I'm in New York right now. I just won't be next week.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:04, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Episode numbers discussion more or less moved
Just so you know, Powergate92 has more or less moved the discussion here. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 04:01, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
gerald gonzalez
As not having been involved, can you give me some guidance on how certain you are that User:Unknownquinones is a sockpuppet of User:Gerald Gonzalez ? Asking because of this. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 14:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- There was technical and/or checkuser evidence when I first made the block. I'd contact FT2, because I believe he performed the checkuser here.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:08, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Disney XD
The RPM article says "Due to Toon Disney & Jetix becoming Disney XD the series is airing on ABC Kids in America." However that is not true. Disney XD doesn't want it on their channel (or something like that), but the rebrand itself is not to blame. I wanted to post this hear because I don't really know how to phrase it to make sense. ---Shadow (talk) 03:55, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- What we can source should be in the article.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:56, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Re:Number of episodes
Oops i thought you said discussion! I was up for i don't know how long at the time so i was not thinking at the time. Now just because you made your own separate decision doe's not mean all the users on Wikipedia will agree with your decision as the users at WikiProject Television don't agree with your decision. Also way should it be brought up separately at WT:TOKU if i think this should be different when there is a discussion at WikiProject Television about this? Powergate92Talk 17:37, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- Yes. WP:TOKU can decide as a group what we want the formatting to be.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:54, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- As there been discussion at WT:TOKU about this i think we should go by WikiProject Televisions decision. Powergate92Talk 00:08, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- Was there only a discussion between me and Mythdon? If so, then there was clearly no consensus reached.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:10, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- Typo it should be: As there's been no discussion at WT:TOKU about this i think we should go by WikiProject Televisions decision. Also you and Mythdon are not WT:TOKU. Powergate92Talk 00:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- Well, then make a discussion at WP:TOKU about it. And I'm aware that Mythdon and I are not the whole project. It is just that he and I are the only ones who seem to talk to each other because we disagree with various things and I try to get him to start discussions there where no one ever answers.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:20, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- I just started a discussion at WT:TOKU. Powergate92Talk 03:03, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- Good.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:14, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- I just started a discussion at WT:TOKU. Powergate92Talk 03:03, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- Well, then make a discussion at WP:TOKU about it. And I'm aware that Mythdon and I are not the whole project. It is just that he and I are the only ones who seem to talk to each other because we disagree with various things and I try to get him to start discussions there where no one ever answers.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:20, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- Typo it should be: As there's been no discussion at WT:TOKU about this i think we should go by WikiProject Televisions decision. Also you and Mythdon are not WT:TOKU. Powergate92Talk 00:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- Was there only a discussion between me and Mythdon? If so, then there was clearly no consensus reached.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:10, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- As there been discussion at WT:TOKU about this i think we should go by WikiProject Televisions decision. Powergate92Talk 00:08, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ryulong/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ryulong/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, MBisanz talk 23:23, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Pokemon Platinum
Hello there Ryulong, since you were the one who originally protected Pokemon Platinum I was wondering if you might be able to unprotect it? Per an established consensus it's been agreed that the Platinum content should be merged with Pokémon Diamond and Pearl, and as Pokemon Platinum redirects to Pokémon Platinum, this has created a double redirect. If you can't unprotect, would you at least be able to change the redirect so that it leads to Pokémon Diamond and Pearl#Pokémon Platinum? Cheers, MelicansMatkin (talk) 02:33, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- I wasn't sure that the consensus existed.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:55, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Cho Den-O and Decade
Help with translating the movie trailer to get the full plot?
Fractyl (talk) 06:32, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
- No. Wait till it comes out in theaters.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:55, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
University of Miami
They are non-anecdotal sources for the University of Miami being referred to as "the U".--droptone (talk) 14:15, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Ah...—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:14, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Problem user
The anonymous user 96.247.126.70 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) has been putting misinformation on several articles for several days and seemingly has the same MO as the vandal at 98.112.79.173 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). I tried reporting guy on WP:AIV, but my latest attempts are proving to be futile, since I found the guy's edits long after he's gone. Can you do something against this guy? - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 07:42, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- No. He's using Verizon which is a major ISP.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:52, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- *Sigh* He's just using one address in this MO now. The other one has been inactive for almost two months now. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 08:04, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- I've blocked the IP for a month. He'll very likely show up on another IP given enough time.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:27, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- I know, considering he does his edits sporadically (there is no pattern on when he does it). But still I will keep an eye on any of the pages where he had entered his misinformation to see if he does. Thanks for blocking the IP, BTW. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 08:37, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- I've blocked the IP for a month. He'll very likely show up on another IP given enough time.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:27, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- *Sigh* He's just using one address in this MO now. The other one has been inactive for almost two months now. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 08:04, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Banning
Excuse me, do you mind if you block my IP address (220.255.7.218) for eternity? (excluding my account, ThunderXANA) Well, it seemed that someone or something had 'cracked' my WEP protected wireless connection... It's better that you blocked it now just in case it spawned with tons of vandalisms later on. Thanks! ThunderXANA (talk) 11:03, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- I can do nothing of the sort.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:44, 30 March 2009 (UTC)