User talk:Navnløs/Archive 5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. 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.

Contents 1 The vandal 2 Rotting Christ article 3 Logos 4 Hi Navnlos 5 Re: Thrash Metal edits 6 Norman Beaker 7 Three-revert rule 8 Amon Amarth 9 User page(s) 10 Wintersun 11 Orphaned non-free media (Image:Massacre (band) logo.jpg) 12 Band logo Symphony X 13 Hi Navnlos 14 Hello Scarian 15 Maddox 16 Hi 17 Mistake? 18 I'm not a vandal 19 A Question 20 About the death metal list

The vandal

I'm not but the person who did the block User:Luna Santin forgot to add that to the page or was going to... I originally reported him at WP:AIV. −₪ÇɨгcaғucɨҲ₪ ^kaiden 23:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Rotting Christ article

Your extra paragraph in the article has been reverted - you included in the edit summary: im sure someones gonna disagree - so why add this edit in the first place? Why not use the talk page first? Didn't have enough space in my edit summary, but please see section Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_crystal_ball, this may apply to some other articles you contributed to as well. Thanks, --Danteferno (talk) 12:27, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Logos

Hello; sorry about the lateness of reply. I noticed your message just now; notification didn't engage for some reason. Anyway, I was thinking about raising this whole logo question at the Template talk:Non-free logo. The ensued discussion should attract a wider range of editors compared to the previous "consensus". Hopefully, the folly of considering the band logos as being somehow different from all other types of logos will thus be evident. I just need to conjure up enough courage and energy to proceed with something that will likely result in an excruciatingly long and boring debate. Hope you've backuped the stuff you uploaded. Who knows, maybe we'll have a chance to use it again. And yeah, I definitely share you frustration. Every time I see some bot leaving deletion messages on my talk pages... Well, let's just say, if this continues, I'll be soon diagnosed with bruxism :-) Óðinn (talk) 07:25, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know, I'm with you guys on the whole logo issue. Let me know if you need any support. --Managerpants (talk) 11:41, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Navnlos

It's great to see you've cleaned up your user talk page ;-) - Thank you for the kind words on my RfA and for the note afterwards. As a side note, I've always been a metal head ;-) - I just leave my music at the door... Long live metal, eh? Scarian^{Call me Pat} 23:58, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Thrash Metal edits

how were they vandalism?

142.162.199.43 (talk) 01:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Norman Beaker

Hello. Thank you for your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norman Beaker. If you have an extra few minutes, I wonder if you could revisit this debate, as I believe notability has been established and the article cleaned up a bit. Thanks for your time. ♫ Cricket02 (talk) 03:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Three-revert rule

The three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reverts in a 24-hour period. Your recent 3RR report was therefore misplaced. Stifle (talk) 10:18, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I thought that's where you also reported edit warring, yes? Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 18:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Amon Amarth

Navnløs (talk · contribs) and Twsx (talk · contribs) are banned from editing this article for 30 days, or until they settle their differences in the lamest edit war ever. Violations of the editing ban will be met with blocking (24 hours per violation). The ban may be lifted by the two editors posting to my talk page or WP:ANI that they have reached an agreement over their dispute. If there is no agreement, the ban ends in 30 days and any editor may remove this notice at that time. However, expect resumption of the edit war to be dealt with severely. For more information see [1]. Thatcher 19:02, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll ask Thatcher if it's possible to extend that ban to the Dissection (band) article too as there seems as though there have been troubles there. Scarian^{Call me Pat} 19:51, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

User page(s)

They were custom made. You don't need to be an admin to have them. Scarian^{Call me Pat} 19:48, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Wintersun

You may want to see whats been going on lately at Wintersun. We have genre troubles yet again... and I DO NOT want to go through that again. −₪ÇɨгcaғucɨҲ₪ ^kaiden 04:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Massacre (band) logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Massacre (band) logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Band logo Symphony X

No logos? Which rules, oh nameless one? Wikipedia rules are getting lamer by the minute... (User talk:Username-2008-02-19) 00:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Should have stated more clearly that I was actually unable to find the rules you referred to, not trying to pick a fight. :) Full reply can be seen at my user talk page. Thanks! (User talk:Username-2008-02-19) 11:38, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Navnlos

Of course you can call me a friend :-) - Okay, I took a quick look and it's a pretty WP:NN subject. Unfortunately, I cannot undo another admin's decision otherwise I'd be breaking WP:WHEEL and that'd get me into a lot of trouble. I'll AfD it for you if you'd like? There's no panic about getting rid of it... it's not hurting anyone just yet. But yeah, I agree, it's a pretty pants article. Take care. Scarian^{Call me Pat} 10:32, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello Scarian

Thanks, and yeah, I'd appreciate the AfD thing. I understand about the WHEEL deal. Didn't know the rule existed, but it makes sense. That article is hurting me. It's a total eyesore and when I see it, it makes me wanna gag. Pure inane ridiculousness. I just wonder if enough idiots not-quite-intelligent-people will argue that crow face is a real thing. It has no sources and is an orphaned article, so I don't understand why the other administrator would deny my speedy deletion, especially when I cited WP:OR. It's obviously an imaginary term, used by those who have no idea what corpsepaint is and shouldn't because they are obviously not cool/smart enough to live (WP:CIVIL!!OMG! ROFLCOPTER,LOLZ,StOptHaTgUY1) w/e, I hate people and I'm not ashamed to admit it. I can't stand for such superciliousness. Idiots need to go (and should definitely not be allowed on wikipedia). This is MY fuckin source! Bullshit stand aside. All hail the god, Maddox. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 21:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I've listed it. Feel free to add in your rationale of why it should be deleted. Scarian^{Call me Pat} 21:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Maddox

I really like how everyone piles on me after I reported the edit war... really encourages people to use dispute resolution. --Saber^Excalibur! 23:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi

I'm fine, I was very busy moving to a new home, so I didn't have much time to waste on WP. Since then, I noticed being away from copyright paranoid formatting nazis not knowledgeable of usability made me a better man.

To answer your question: If you have some programming/scripting experience you should be able to figure out this code User:Kameejl/Exp (edit), it's the code used for my custom infobox. If you need any help, please contact me. Kameejl ^(Talk) 09:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Mistake?

I noticed you recently changed glam, speed and black metal back to comma breaks. I would ask you to stop. Those articles were recently changed to comma breaks so I changed them back. Also if you look at the heavy metal article. Check ALL the subgenres and fusion genres. They all have line breaks. So since the 20 or so of them have line breaks why would we make 3 of them have comma breaks? Just letting you know. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 22:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Eventually they all need to be corrected to match Country and Jazz and Blues and Classical G boxes. Why should the heavy metal boxes stick out like an unencyclopedic turd and not conform to the standardised look of all the more elite music genres? 156.34.226.160 (talk) 22:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

WHOA, WHOA, WHOA!!! "More elite"?! "uncyclopedic"?! I'm not gonna say anything. I didn't expect this from you. I obviously prefer line breaks and I make no secret of it, and I think it would look way better on every article, but right now the heavy metal sub genre articles are standardized to each other. I'm telling you, I think more people prefer line breaks and I don't understand why we don't use them considering they were used for years on wikipedia and no one complained. It's not like they stopped working or something. I think they still work fine. Anyways, that's all my own POV. I don't really want to talk about the future, as that will only cause arguement and no one will agree. Right now it's fine and I'll leave it at that. I just don't see how using commas is suddenly going to make everything look more "encyclopedic" as you imply. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 22:39, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

It's all about standards. It's been agreed that it's OK for 2 genres to be split by a break but if there are 3 or more then commas should be used to avoid unwanted 'slide-ruling'. Even then it's still going against the "encyclopedia for all" philosophy. Look at a Britannica or Encarta or World Book digital article... they don't waste any time with length on any of their embedded information boxes. Wikipedia is supposed to be for everyone and yet you still insist on coding that descriminates against visually impaired Wikipedians using 'reader software' to assist them with reading and enjoying Wikipedia. Your desire to ignore copyright rules/laws just to make Wikipedia look like some dumbass fansite undermines the scope of the entire project. Just why are you here? Are you here to contribute (and follow the rules) Or are you here to sabotage? 156.34.226.160 (talk) 22:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

And I don't see wtf your problem is. Watch your manners. Wikipedia is for everyone. How the hell is putting line breaks in suddenly fuck up everything for the visually impaired? They can read commas but they can't see when something goes to the next line? Give me a break. Besides, the whole comma break thing brings in nowrap which goes against WP:KISS, which for me is reason enough to never use commas in the musical infobox if it goes over one line. I don't want wikipedia to look like some dumbass fansite or a fansite at all. It's an encyclopedia. I don't want to ignore copyright rules, either. I like it when articles have at least a few pictures, yes, I think it adds something to the articles and most would agree. What's wrong with an enxcyclopedia having a few pictures? Most of the encyclopedias I've seen have pictures here and there and they have a lot less room than us. By adding in a picture or so per article isn't going to make it look like "some dumbass fansite". Same thing for logos. I'm here to contribute. Look at my edits. They prove it. Now back off. You insulting me gets you nowhere. I already think you can be incredibly stuck up at times, and I do realize that is part of your right, having so many edits and all, but none of us can always be right, nor are we always going to agree. I'd focus on other things/issues. I do. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 23:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I was going to reply in length but I remembered that you are a metal-archives member... you have a long climb to shake that kind of damage off. You say you don't want to ignore copyright rules and yet earlier, on another talk page you wrote: "I also think that the fair use/unfair use issue is ridiculous! I think we should just use what we want." Hmmm??? You just won the hypocrite of the day award with that "revelation of true colours. I ask again.... why are you here??? 156.34.226.160 (talk) 23:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

PS... just so you know... your edit on the Rush article was wrong... proper Canadian ENG would be "Rush are". But over the years Canadians have grown into the habit of "dumbing it down" due to our close proximity to an English speaking nation that uses the singular form rather than the proper group plural form. 156.34.226.160 (talk) 23:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

First of all. I am a metal-archives memeber technically, but something you should keep in mind is that I never get on it. I only use metal-archives to find out such things as albums and what not. I do not participate in forum discussions (I have witnessed a few that were utterly retarded) or any of that. I am also not a hypocrite. I do believe the fair use/non fair use issue is utterly ridiculous. I think we should use what pictures we want and I can't see anyone suing wikipedia just cause they see themselves on it. Doesn't mean I want to break copyright rules. I just think they're ridiculous. I wish I could ignore them, but I don't (however foolish they may be at times). I didn't lie (or say two differing things) about anything. So now you just sound more like an ass than ever and more stuck up. I'm not an idiot y'know. I'm incredibly good at debating. I wouldn't make myself look like a hypocrite. Also, I already knew about the Rush thing. Since Canadians use "is," though it doesn't matter what they used to do.

Also I couldn't help but notice you chose to totally ignore some of my questions. You didn't deny any of my accusations. If this was true debate, you would have already lost. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 23:37, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Only Southern Ontario and Southern BC would tend to use the 'is'-isms. The rest of us still speak Auld English. I had lengthy comments about your earlier soapboxing but chose to edit and rv vandals instead. In the end Wikipedia was better for my choice. Plus I got another Barnstar added to my collection and a user has created several userboxes in my honour. I prefer to focus on editing so that these tokens of appreciation won't go unearned. My auld user account page was riddled with Barnstars... too many to count. And a year ago I promised several editors that if my IP contributions earned me 25 Barnstars I would use an account again and let my name stand as an administrator. I have always rejected the mop. My preference is to edit. But I can see some uses to having the tool box so.... back to work/hobby/work/hobby. 156.34.226.160 (talk) 23:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Well you still didn't answer any of my accusations which means I was right. I have no problem with you gettting awards or, indeed, even with you bragging copiously about them. You did never apologize to me about insulting over my editing. Howerver, it doesn't bother me. Whether you insult me or not, I will continue to edit as long as I want. I will continue to edit ony my terms as well. My terms do follow all wikipedia rules, and I'm here to help turn wikipedia into a better encyclopedia. Period. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 21:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not a vandal

I am not a vandal of the Cannibal Corpse page. I'm a huge fan of theirs and i love to spread knowledge about them so that people can understand controversial and misunderstood people like them, it's just that i don't like doing everything at once when it comes to editing, so that's why i've made about 20 edits to their page.

A Question

I'm being as careful as i can. And which post should i remove? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jumanji656 (talk • contribs) 23:11, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

About the death metal list

I explained the edits of the talk page. the flagicons were misused. read the manual of style at WP:FLAG. Flags are not used to emphasize nationality without good reason. Wikipedia is not a soapbox for nationalistic pride. Therefore they need to be removed to bring the page into proper encycopedic style. --neonwhite user page talk 00:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Then you will be warned for disruptive edits simple as that. The edits are valid and backed up by the manual of style try reading it. A consensus has nothing to with improving a badly formatted page. There is absolutely no jusifiable reason to emphasise nationality on this page. I repeat Wikipedia is not a soapbox for nationalistic pride and flagicons are not to be used to do this. Regardless of what was discussed in the past. consensus can change, especially one that obviously goes against a manual of style. If you want to discuss expanding the use of flagicon do so at the manual of style page but until them this page is inproperly styled. --neonwhite user page talk 00:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

You have reverted good edits for spurious reasons claiming a consensus that doesnt exist they were added by a single editor with little discussion at all and ceretainly not enough to be called a consensus, refused to discuss it on the talk page instead started a edit war and are rejecting the manual of style, this is disruptive. Other edits making disruptive edits without discussion will face the same warnings. These lists are the same as any other if you cannot justify the emphasis on a random piece of info like nationality then the flags will be deleted. WP:FLAG is quite clear that Emphasizing the importance of a person's citizenship or nationality above their other qualities risks violating Wikipedia's "Neutral point of view" policy. --neonwhite user page talk 00:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

There is no reason to know what countries the bands come from, it is not the purpose of the list. You might as well added other random info like number of band members or number of records released but that isnt the purpose. The purpose is a navigational list, it should contain nothing but the article links. I formatted it like every other list on wikipedia. Please refer to these well foramtted lists List of alternative rock artists, List of pop punk bands, List of house music artists. I quote the manual of style, unecessary emphasis on nationality is said to be a POV violation. Bands have lots of other attributes. There is absolutely no need to see what country they come from, it is irrelevant. You have yet to explain why nationality should be emphasised over any other attribute. --neonwhite user page talk 00:50, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

You haven't made a justification yet. Lists are not supposed to be interesting and decorative, they are useful. Flagicons are not for decoration (see WP:FLAG). I've done a few lists, i can't get round to them all right away. To make it easier use the talk page from now on. --neonwhite user page talk 01:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Talk:List of black metal bands you didnt make a justification, just voice an opinion. You haven't stated why nationality is of importance. --neonwhite user page talk 01:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

If this is decided by consensus it will be changed. It is not about winning or losing, the fact that you think this is some kind of battle highlights your poor attitude to editing and behaviour towards other editors. Disruptive reverts by any editors will be delt with appropriately. As i have said before there is no ownership of articles on wikipedia and no article is protected from improvement by any editor. The consensus actually seems to be in favour of removing them. --neonwhite user page talk 00:07, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I win. Lol. Flagicons are here to stay. The vote came out in the falgicons' favor. W00T. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 19:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC)