• Could you please add Expelled: No Intelligence allowed to the List of 2008 films page: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_in_film>. Thanks. 69.215.156.197 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 18:03, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the most part, they're not very informative, but they do help if some editor removes an image for a bad reason. Also, the image warning I just got was wrong -- there was nothing wrong with the poster image for 30 Days of Night, so I don't know why I got it. Thanks for the heads-up about that, though... maybe I'll consider usage down the road. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:05, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone please make this redirect for me, because I'm clueless about what the proper term is. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 09:15, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I believe the word you are looking for is escalator. I don't know if a redirect would be in order here, however. -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR 09:21, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I want you just to know that I support the merge of the episodes. Maybe it's better if we create 3 articles, one for each season, instead of 1, so we keep as much information as possible but at the end we trim these huge plot descriptions. The vast majority contains only two lines of real-world information. If you go and do it, I'll support you. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:41, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, and I know this will be sound really flippant, I just don't care. I already list my FAs on my userpage without being so egostistical to also include them in my userboxes or categorize myself as such. Alientraveller (talk) 16:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the article needs an image, but do you believe we can upload a better one other than a VHS/DVD cover? Best pic I could find was this. Please reply on your talk page, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:04, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this discussion would be better suited on Jafar's talk page. But I agree the VHS cover kinda sucks, I like that image, if you want to upload it go for it. If you can make it fair use. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 19:20, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't care for it that much. Just expressing my thoughts here. Though if I ever see a better one, I *might* set it up ;) Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• No, it's not a barnstar. But, many users put them with their barnstars.--LAAFan 17:18, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• yes, it's like a barnstar.--LAAFan 18:35, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Cookies, smiles, etc. promote WikiLove, while barnstars are strictly on merit, except for a few (ex. Signature barnstar) While the cookie I gave is for your constructive edits, it is not a barnstar. It is instead a little thank you for your work. Barnstars are harder to get than cookies or smiles, and mostly for major contributions to articles.--LAAFan 19:36, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Really, you haven't gotten one? I've looked at your edits, and you deserve one. If you want to stay online, I will whip one up for you soon.--LAAFan 19:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Minor Barnstar
		I award this Minor Barnstar to TheBlazikenMaster for your many constructive edits that go unnoticed. LAAFan 19:46, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But I'm not done yet. I still have to put disclaimers to the talk pages. That will take a while. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 22:05, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's done. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 22:36, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, do you think you could keep an eye on the articles for me? You do a great job already, but I'm heading off on a Wikibreak shortly, and I was wondering if you could keep an eye on them for me when I'm away? Cheers. Qst (talk) 17:47, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Look, if you're going to complain about the "encyclopedic format" then at least rewrite your sections so they're understandable instead of just taking out the bullets please? Because when I first looked at it, it looks like thats exactly what happened, which is why I put them back in. The entire cultural reference section on the page I edited is darn near the most kludged section I've seen in a while. I won't edit any more FG pages because I apparently don't do it right, but if you're so worried about that section being formatted like an encyclopedia then modify it so it is, please. Don't just do sentence after sentence after sentence that doesn't make sense in a paragraph like that. My $0.02. →ClarkCT^Talk @ 04:29, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just saying, if bulleted lists don't work for you (and the other regular editors of FG), then reword the paragraphs where the bullets have been removed so it doesn't just look exactly like you removed the bullets and added a few "also"s. That's what it looked like to me, so thinking someone had just done that without reason I put the bullets back in. As I said, I won't edit any more FG pages, I'll stick to ones I regularly edit.

And just as an FYI, I absolutely abhor when people use snide and sarcastic remarks in an edit summary. "God, will the changing into non-encylopedic format ever end?" is to me a horrible summary, as well as being horribly demeaning to the person who makes the edits. If you had said something more along the lines of "Reverted bullet list to encyclopedic format" I never would've started this discussion. If you had done that to someone who was new and just trying to do what they thought was right you probably would've made them leave wikipedia for good. This may be "teh interweb" and such, but not everyone is a vandal trying to piss you off. Some people are just trying to do well here and you make it seem like its the worst offense in the world to edit a page. Isn't that the point of Wikipedia? I totally understand the concept of trying to keep uniformity, I have the same problem with some of the articles I work on, but I also make my edit summaries meaningful, not just sarcastic. →ClarkCT^Talk @ 14:41, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the belated response. I think I know what I do about movies because I've done a bit of research for Wikipedia articles. I haven't just found online articles that talk about films; I've used subscription-only databases to find coverage from newspapers, magazines, and journals. I've actually been reading some film journal articles since I want to write a pretty hefty "Critical analysis" section for Fight Club. I guess in my research, I just see trends like how a film's release is not guaranteed until it actually begins production. I've kept up with future films and seen how they collapse for a wide variety of reasons. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 01:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. :-P It's a blogger, so I'm not up in arms about it. If The New York Times did that, though... might have a bone to pick with them. I like to hang the plagiarizers out to dry, though. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:33, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How have you been, anyway? See any good films? Did you ever put up these YouTube reviews and the transcripts? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 18:28, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I will look when I get home. I don't have an account, but I should just go ahead and make one. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 18:38, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is not yet serious enough for such a hidden note. Lets first wait to see how persistent this person is. If he/she is a troll, such a note might only work feedy. Perhaps s/he will eventually just give up, or decides to talk to the rest. If the edits continue however, such a note might indeed be a good idea, as the person is using dynamic IPs, and it might be the only way to warn him/her directly.
At least one of the ranges the person used is 90.202.89.* (see the contributions of 90.202.89.2, 90.202.89.104 and 90.202.89.178). The address 90.211.190.146 was also used by this person, and might be dynamic as well. Cheers, Face 15:17, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He/she is on it again, using 90.202.89.160. - Face 20:25, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we have a central talk page for a reason. Perhaps you can notify the others about this? If (s)he does it again, we could throw in the hidden comment you spoke of. Sorry that I can't help you any further at this moment. I have to get some sleep now. Cheers, Face 20:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I almost forgot to tell you: I notified the rest. 90.202.89.76 has been used today. I have also discovered 90.202.89.59. Cheers, Face 15:22, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to contradict you twice in one day! Please feel free to tell me I'm wrong and totally retawded. / edg ☺ ☭ 16:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{HelpMe}} Why are those discussions still open? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 15:42, 25 June 2008 (UTC)}}[reply]

Because an admin never got around to closing them. There's always a huge backlog with deletion discussion. Take a look through WP:AfD, you'll also see a huge backlog ——Ryan • (talk) 16:05, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I tried that but it didn't work! Besides, I wasn't even asking you! --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 18:15, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am calm. I just don't even know you. Not that that's a bad thing. I just was surprised you answered my question! --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 18:19, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no please! You're free to talk to us! I'm always up for making new friends! Let's just forget about what happened earlier because we started off on kind of the wrong foot. Here, I'll start. Hi, my name is Soccer5525 and I'm a fellow Wikipedian of yours! --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 19:36, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou, I just have a lot of practice undertaking prose reviews at GA. I don't want to disparage Qst, s/he has found and properly referenced the sources, collected the information and formatted the page all to a high standard. They just have a little problem with writing coherently and neatly. I'm not adding anything new to the article, just organising what is there into a more defined order and brushing up the prose.--Jackyd101 (talk) 00:56, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 14:59, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. I just thought it would be a nice gesture. Hope we can keep in touch still. :) --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 00:56, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lool very funny [1]. --SkyWalker (talk) 06:31, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your sympathy. But I guess you misunderstood what we're talking about. The person that died was a dog. Did you think it was a person? --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 19:26, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even so, it's nice to hear that you care. I'll be sure to tell my friend that even complete strangers on Wikipedia still care about her dog. --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 19:29, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it's me again. I was just wondering.......have I done anything that could be awarded a Barnstar from you? I mean, am I a nice person. I just haven't been awarded a Barnstar yet, and would like one. I know, I sound pathetic, but you don't have to reply to this if you don't want to.... --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 19:40, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind. If you don't give me one, I won't give you one. That's fair. :) --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 19:49, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree! Personally, I'd rather have a cookie than a star. Cookies taste better. :) --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 19:57, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign my new autograph book! --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 13:21, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's on the bottom of my userpage! You can't miss it! --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 13:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, I can hear, just can't make out all the words. Besides, I'm in the living room with people conked out on the sofas and floor. Link me to it, I'll watch it without audio. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 12:50, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You, sir, are a true patriot. Wear these colors proudly! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:00, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any comments for [2]?--SkyWalker (talk) 05:17, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problemo. How is life and how are you doing. :) --SkyWalker (talk) 11:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is good any other good news?. --SkyWalker (talk) 14:16, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, I did not realize there had been a discussion about that at WT:FT. Sorry about that. Cirt (talk) 21:20, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Cirt (talk) 21:33, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

omg, you SO have to hear this! I showed my BFFL Leah one of your youtube videos yesterday, and she totally thinks you're hott! she adores your hair too! --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 14:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BFFL = Best Friend For Life. --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 14:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

She would tell you this herslf, but she doesn't have a Wikipedia or a Youtube account. --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 14:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I've been notcing something. Every friend I have or every person I talk to on Wikipeida is a boy. Why is that? And also, I've only told Erik about this but, one time on Wikipedia, a guy I don't even know called me a, (please excuse my language...) "sex kitten". I won't disclose his name, for that could cause issues. Do know any girls that I could befriend on Wikipedia? --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 14:50, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you know what I mean! I doubt that you're even the least bit manly in real life either! For example, you're interested in Pokemon. Now I don't mean to be rude but, don't you think Pokemon is a little babyish for you? I mean, how old are you? --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 15:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, it says that you're 19 on your Wikipedia page. I'm 16, so we're close to the same age. --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 15:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How could you like that word? It's terrible! --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 15:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for understanding. So anyway, what do you think about be BFFFL thinking you're hott? (I don't think you're cute, no offense!) --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 16:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How is it nice of that guy to call me that? --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 16:56, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. I thought you emant the other thing. And she's a she by the way. --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 17:38, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

why did you want to see if we had things in common? --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 15:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please leave a little message where you signed on my guestbook. As you can see, everyone else did. --Soccer5525 (Tk • Ctrb) 22:36, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because "Nite" is the way it was originally spelled in Pokémon Gold, Silver, and Crystal. So we should preserve that spelling. Artichoker[talk] 15:32, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Chev Chelios, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. P4k (talk) 00:28, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you editing. Are you back? Cheers, Face 21:20, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I missed your help, even though nothing special happened. Well, except for a small quarrel on Talk:List of Pokémon (241-260). A sentence about the Mudkipz meme was added. This lead a few people to proclaim "victory" over Wikipedia and Jèskè, because he supposedly had "abused" his admin tools. Cheers, Face 22:12, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I've removed your comment. Let's not make lame things worser. Jèskè has had enough. - Face 08:01, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's no problem. How many pages do you have on your watchlist? I have 357, but a lot of them are red links that I keep just in case an editor creates an film article too early. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 01:22, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Had something of a "brain fart" on that one but thanks for the tip. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oosh (talk • contribs) 23:00, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could I ask for your comment here, please? I asked ThinkBlue to leave the situation open to comment, and it would be nice to see it. Best, Qst (talk) 13:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blaziken. Ehm... I don't know, but I tend to see a slight anger in your words at my talk page and here. Sorry if I, in any way, offended you. But don't you think my idea at least sounds nice? Let Bulbapedia have the lawyers! *chuckles* - Face 22:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As for that "block me" link: I have that because I sometimes fear for my own mental health. If I ever 'go bad', then that link might come in handy, you never know. I still have to make a page which explains why a block is not a big deal to me, and make the question mark (?) the link to that page. I will abandon the rest of that Contribs_and_logs template, by the way, because the contribs and logs are already in the "Toolbox" menu. Cheers, Face 23:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wanna say to you one thing, in the article List of Family Guy voice actors i'm looking the actors in Spanish audio, the Family Guy in Spanish is dubbed in two versions Spanish (European) and Latino-American. But here only just writting in the Latino audio, could be better added the European dubbing. What do you say? --Ravave (talk) 20:29, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who i speak then?. I say to you that could create a column apart, i direct to you because you are of the Family Guy WP and i want to suggest you this. I know how call them the Spanish actors names, if you want, i same add they names. --Ravave (talk) 20:43, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you remember when i say you about make other column for the Spanish (European) audio of Family Guy?, well i do it in this moment, i'm say you an other thing too, The actors in Latinoamerican almost all are wrong, the actors appear there are the European, no the Latin --Ravave (talk) 08:00, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Here the reference [3]

No pal,you don't understand me, i want to say you, i was that already have created a column apart and have corrected what was badly --Ravave (talk) 15:32, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"His name is face because he is the Face of what's relevant and what isn't on Wikipedia. (I hope you don't get offended by what I assumed, Face.)" [4]

So... what does this means? Cheers, Face 21:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I asked you a question here, because I thought that you had this page in Watchlist. 2 days passed, you haven't answered, so I assume I was wrong and inform you about this question here. Hope you answer ;). If you answer my another 3 questions that I posted there, it will be great too ;) Quolav (talk) 23:37, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's bad news! I think only Artichoker and me are currently watching the lists, but Artichoker has many other interests. Other patrollers help out now and then, but sometimes I feel I'm the only one in the watchtower; help is certainly appreciated. I understand your decision though. Patrolling gets boring quickly if you don't feel that what you do is sensible. But he, someone's gotta do it. Lately, I haven't been very active on WP, but soon I'll be doing the regular patrolling again. Thanks for your notification, and good luck with whatever you're going to do. See you around, Face 18:27, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 06:41, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I and have reopened the discussion here [[5]]. Would you care to chime in? thanks. Smatprt (talk) 01:02, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry about the merge proposing. It's just the only alternative I know to just losing the info outright. And I don't think you should quit the project if you feel that something at least *should* be done.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:49, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 21:25, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was removing an edit made to insert a vandal edit summary. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 16:43, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of northest, check out northernmost. That should do the trick. — CactusWriter | ^needles 15:25, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to make sure you were aware that we will still have an IMDb link in the "External links" section of film articles. It's just an additional click of "External links" in the table of contents to jump down and see IMDb and other links. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's alright. Your argument doesn't suck. It just seemed like from what you said you were thinking IMDb was being removed in its entirety. I understand what you mean by convenience, and it's a valid point. I guess the debate is over whether or not it's worth the extra click because we've been so used to having these three links there. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:58, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!ZenCopain (talk) 00:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

for the most part I removed spaces from the article that were at the end of paragraphs with a semi-bot run tool. A State Of Trance (talk) 14:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Blaziken Master. You can join our Wikipedia:Wikiproject SpongeBob SquarePants. -Porchcrop ^{(talk|contributions)} 03:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where is this discussion that you have already been through deleting that template? I'd like to take a look. Also, why would you even give your opinion if you are saying it can be discounted. CTJF83Talk 15:29, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for finding it for me! CTJF83Talk 15:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a problem with you commenting in opposition to me on that TfD. CTJF83Talk 16:08, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well feel free to comment (constructively) :) on my TfD. Ya, as mentioned in my Vand notice board report He did it because "I can't block him" [6] User also has several personal attacks, or near personal attacks [7] and [8] CTJF83Talk 16:34, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{help|No, I'm not leaving just yet, but I'm thinking about it. Could someone tell me the best place to say goodbye if I decide to leave? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 01:20, 23 October 2008 (UTC)}}[reply]

Please stay, but you can say goodbye on your userpage.--Res2216firestar 01:24, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there no more specific place to say goodbye? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 01:44, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, not really. Tombomp (talk/contribs) 11:54, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I had a valid point if you look at WP:Notability that an article still has to illustrate why an article is notable and have a verifiable source. The first criteria is "significant coverage". Before PC edited the article earlier all it said was "...is a short film directed by George Lucas". If it had even said is a "30 minute film directed by George Lucas about Coppola's film this would have seemingly addressed the problem. A subject isn't inherently notable if it is devoid of any content whatsoever. The reason why I removed my comment is because I don't want to see another tiff with Giro over something trivial and somethign which was only used as an example of redundant content from an obviously "notable" director. Best Blofeld of SPECTRE (talk) 12:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will be checking this back this weekend though, but that's it. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 12:15, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Farewell, and may you find peace on another site. Alientraveller (talk) 12:18, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to see you go; I wish you could have found a better niche here on Wikipedia. I hope you at least got something out of the experience! If you ever change your mind and have a blossoming interest in film, you'll know that there's a community here to belong to. :) Best of luck in all your endeavors! —Erik (talk • contrib) 14:56, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yay, glad you're sticking around! I'm trying to understand the issues you've had on Wikipedia, though... can you give me some examples of what has bothered you? —Erik (talk • contrib) 01:21, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia can definitely have its share of angels and demons. I think you have the right notion in mind, to limit your scope of articles to watch. It's easy to feel the need to fix everything out there, which is just plain time-consuming. Some editors have the patience of saints. Just remember that at the end of the day, if a Wikipedia article is left vandalized, it's not the end of the world. Someone will eventually come by and fix it. As for movies, are you watching stuff that seems like a waste of time? I don't blame you, I try to make good film choices when I can. I try to follow top film lists (10 Best Sci-Fi Films, that kind of thing), Rotten Tomatoes, etc. Definitely don't trust trailers too much... they have professionals out there whose job is to get you to see the movie, so they can combine clips to make it seem like a gem. As for the newsletter, I'm not sure... I know you put your name on the no-delivery list, but it still came to you, right? Maybe you could take your name off anything related to WP:FILM but still work on film articles... that way, you won't be added to any unnecessary list. —Erik (talk • contrib) 01:45, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of a good user page design; you can tell from mine I just try to do what works for me. I just use it if I need a link that I can't remember, though I usually use Firefox's keyword search so I can type "wiki WT:FILM" in the address bar and go to it instantly. For userboxes, I'm not that big of a fan of them. I try to choose the ones that reflect the work I do. I have a lot of hobbies besides films (politics, science, technology, deaf studies) that I don't really explore on Wikipedia. You've probably seen some people that have a billion userboxes, and I think that it detracts from Wikipedia a little. It's great that someone would have hobbies, but I prefer to find out an editor's interests through conversations, not all upfront on their user page. Save something to talk about, you know? —Erik (talk • contrib) 02:35, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kind of shifted gears here, didn't we? :) I really don't think that the United States is that bad. I've never had trouble with the law, but I am not really a rebel. I think that the U.S. is falling behind already in this age of globalization -- insufficient health care, education, and economic standards. You're right, though, that a lot of countries still look to the United States. People abroad are excited about the Presidential election. I don't want to get started on my worldview 'cause I could really go on and on... —Erik (talk • contrib) 03:28, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it would be fun to watch, especially if you liked Casino Royale. I don't usually go to theaters unless the movies are worth watching on a big screen with other people, but I'll go for Quantum of Solace. Trailer looks great, but from what I've heard, it won't have quite as much of the 007 humor of previous films. It's okay by me, though, I like the gritty take. Not to mention the contemporary situation of a villain pretending to be "green" is just wicked cool. —Erik (talk • contrib) 14:02, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I need some serious help here, I don't wanna be the inventor of a ridiculous word. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 09:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)}}[reply]

You should probably start with not using phrases like 'corrupted admin'. The consensus in the past has been to keep it. The consensus may still be to keep it, or may be to delete it. That's how these things go, there's nothing you can do to change it one way or the other. One minor page in a history stretching back almost two years is basically guaranteed to go unnoticed. Take a deep breath, let it out, let it go. [ roux ] [x] 09:34, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. I have no idea what you're saying about something "ruining your career," but I highly doubt that one redirect will have any impact on any career of any kind. GlassCobra 10:12, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Man, that is a lot of pressure to make your Halloween great. Are you wanting a recommendation for a good Halloween film? I have to admit I am not a huge fan of horror in general, and I am not sure what you like. I think that The Descent is one of the best horror films I've seen; it has a very claustrophobic atmosphere. Beyond that, I'm not sure what else there is... I tend to prefer thriller films, which have less to do with jump-out-and-scare and more to do with tension. Two great examples that come to mind are The Silence of the Lambs and Seven, but be warned, they are very adult films. I hope my recommendations at least come in handy. By the way, the redirect seems fine to me. It's close enough, I think. —Erik (talk • contrib) 11:57, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perfectly understandable, Blaziken. All the best. -- Altiris Helios Exeunt 14:43, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, He is not leaving. He is too important for this mission.--SkyWalker (talk) 15:03, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, oops. Breakdown in communication. -- Altiris Helios Exeunt 03:31, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, hope you've been well! To be honest, I am not sure if either movie is worth seeing in theaters. I tend to rely on Rotten Tomatoes, which normalizes the rating. (Meaning that with a large enough sample, then additional reviews will not change the rating much.) Pride and Glory has 34%, and I am not sure if I will ever see it, even though I like Edward Norton. Body of Lies has 50%, a little weak, but it might be enjoyable to see in theaters with the big action scenes. I will probably see Body of Lies on DVD when it comes out, more because it's not captioned in theater near me. Cheers! —Erik (talk • contrib) 20:29, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Check my user page to see why I'm planning on leaving. I made this section so all goodbyes will be kept at ONE place, and I will merge any new "goodbye" section to this place if more people wanna say goodbye. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 01:26, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I think I might go too! (no, seriously, forget that smiley) But yeah, it's irritating to see all that work gone down the drain. Most of my contributions were to the Pokemon articles concerning May and Pokemon Emerald; now that both articles have merged, there isn't much else for me to look at. If you want to leave, feel free. -- Altiris Helios Exeunt 11:29, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote: "In case you don't remember me, we used to watch the Pokémon lists on Wikipedia. I will miss you. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 01:01, 29 November 2008 (UTC)"[reply]

Of course I remember you Blaze! And your video blog! You are a good guy, despite your... oddities. Too bad you quit, but I can understand your decision. I agree with you about the Pokémon lists. They were created to make Wikipedia better, but no one is satisfied with how it is now. The same counts for just about anything related to Pokémon on Wikipedia. However, every time I catch myself being frustrated about it, I think about something more serious. Poverty, just to take an example, or the violent repression of the Tibetan people. After thinking about that, I take a good look at WP:VITAL. That reminds me of why Wikipedia really exists. Seriously, Pokémon isn't worth getting frustrated about. I must admit though, that I have myself rarely added some real content to Wikipedia. I have used this site more as a hobby than as a scientific project. In addition, I'm not very active around here lately. Basically because of school, as well as some personal issues. But I swear you, if I had the time and the energy, I would help Wikipedia, because I love the project.
Good luck with whatever you will do. I will continue to visit your YouTube channel, so keep it updated! Yours sincerely, Face 17:17, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not only because of everything Pokémon related, Charmed episodes got merged, and I'm not happy about that at all. I should leave this place, not only because everything fictional got merged, also because I'm obviously useless here. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 21:00, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All anyone can do now is rack the internet for sources to prove something's notable. And it ususally turns out it isn't. I created articles (since the big merge) for Mew and Deoxys, and Deoxys prompty got deleted. Nobody goes on fucking Bulbapedia. No one ever did. Bye. ^Tezkag₇₂ 14:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, does that mean you don't quit entirely? Are you semi-retired? Cheers, Face 12:15, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It could be a fun movie if you like Adam Sandler; I enjoyed Click but passed on You Don't Mess With the Zohan. I probably will not pursue Bedtime Stories... there are some award contenders that I'd rather see, like The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. —Erik (talk • contrib) 14:10, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Woman tits (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you.  – iridescent 22:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated !!!! (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you.

Control-alt-delete ★ user◾talk◾contrib◾favs 22:40, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Bad Boys III. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bad Boys III. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:04, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated The word fuck (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you.  Glenfarclas  (talk) 01:53, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you're watching this page, I just wanna let you know that I'm back. But I'm not going to be involved in a lot of discussions, from now on I will mainly revert vandalism. I obviously had no idea what the hell I was doing most of the times. I have created many unnecessary redirects, been involved in many discussions without even knowing what I was talking about, I even nominated some things for deletion or something like that without even knowing what I was doing. To avoid doing stuff like that today, I will only be watching out for vandalism. I will try to stay away from discussions. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 16:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I won't be around nearly as much as I used to, the only reason I decided to come back is so I could learn more about stuff. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 17:56, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On seconds thoughts I'm not back yet. Watching articles and making minor edits doesn't cut it.

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But the reason I left in the first place was because I felt like I was causing nothing but trouble. How can I be on Wikipedia and not feel that way?

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, please place a new {{help me}} request on this page followed by your questions, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page.

That's not really a question we can answer in general. Can you outline as to why you felt that way? Then maybe we can assist you. Regards SoWhy 15:06, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's because of spamming. You see I kept on having random discussions with no clue what the fuck I was even talking about. I made pointless redirects, brought up inappropriate discussions, took everything too seriously, made idiotic edits without even knowing they were idiotic, abused the warning system, made immature jokes when reverting vandalism, tried to become an admin, I can go on, and on. I also pissed a lot of people off. So am I welcome back here at all? I highly doubt it. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 22:31, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You'd be welcome back, if you added to the Encyclopaedia. Blocks are not punitive; they're just to prevent the wiki being harmed.

If you want to improve Wikpedia, you'll be very welcome.

But if you want to disrupt, then you won't; you'll be blocked again.  Chzz  ►  19:07, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're misunderstanding, I was never blocked from this site, but I was still causing trouble, which is the reason why I left. And I'm sorry, but that doesn't help my issue much. So I wanna ask, how can I edit here on Wikipedia without acting like an asshole? The policies are confusing, not to mention a lot of them contradict themselves, so I have no clue what to do. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 19:30, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain which policies you find confusing? What sort of editing do you wish to do? Maybe {{WelcomeMenu}} will give you more links to all the policies, (and may be better than the original welcome message given when you started editing) you can add that template to your page if you see it of any use..  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:12, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to welcome me, I already know how this site works. How is it confusing? Because the policies are very hypocritical. One official policy says we must obey the rules, and another one says that we should ignore them. And what exactly does civil mean? Is it being civil to use the word fuck? Some say it's possible to say fucking and act civil at the same time, but others say it's not. I don't need to read any of the policies, I read them a few years ago, and to be honest I doubt they're any less hypocritical to this day. So if I return to Wikipedia, what should I do? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 13:55, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think he included the Welcome menu not because you're new, but because it has a bunch of relevant policy links all in one place, and it's simpler to type {{welcomemenu}} than to type out a bunch of links instead. As to your question - This page on Meta may be relevant. On ignoring the rules - There's a difference between shortcutting a process here and there and throwing out the rules entirely. Ignore all rules lets us short-circuit a process if that process is going to harm the project. It's never a license to be disruptive. A better page to review might be WP:BOLD. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 14:05, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is another possibility to get familiar with our policy: request a adoption at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user and an experienced user will possible help you to learn what and why our policies are so complex and not easily understandable by a "new" user. mabdul 00:59, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think everybody acts stupid sometimes. Wikipedians are humans (nobody's perfect). Please don't feel alone in your case; count at least me in. The fact that you know what you did was unconstructive is a good sign you won't do it again. Think twice :)
And if things are too complicated around here, try the Simple English Wikipedia from time to time. I edit 'round there as well. Many 'pedians who left here went there. And there's plenty to do. - Benzband (talk) 09:06, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I for one don't care what you've done. Just don't do it again, and you'll always be welcome here. onyx³²¹ 13:08, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For now I think we can leave this request as help, unhelping that if you think it isn't enough! 84.169.189.31 (talk) 00:13, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You know what, I will return to Wikipedia slowly and patiently, and I will only watch a few articles at a time, I watched over 100 articles back when I was active here and that's obviously too much. But before I officially return there is one more question I wanna ask. Is it ok to make jokes when reverting vandalism. If some vandalism says "You all can suck my dick" I know it would be inappropriate and immature to revert it by saying "What a coincidence, so does your mother" and I don't want to go anywhere near that. I will be careful about the immature jokes I make when reverting vandalism, and I don't wanna sound like an asshole. How do I know which reverting jokes are appropriate and which aren't? I'm also scared about giving vandals warnings as I'm worried I might abuse the system, that's something I don't wanna do either.

Yeah, I will have the helpme template on for a bit longer as I don't think any policy will tell me straight answers, those are things I need to figure on my own. And if I try I can be a good Wikipedian. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 18:47, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will return shortly.[edit]

So I look forward to being back. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 08:19, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Abraham Lincoln, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Vrenator ^talk 12:17, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I did a mistake, I should have discussed this first. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 12:51, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will be better and try to help the encyclopedia rather than hurting it. And I will treat everyone with respect. If I do something wrong feel free to point it out to me. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 12:51, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You know what I'm gonna do shortly? I'm gonna read the guidelines and try to understand them better. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 12:53, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you make this edit? It's not appropriate for Wikipedia. Don't add content to articles unless you are going to back it with a reliable source. Erik (talk | contribs) 18:13, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you're right. I should discuss before I add anything. BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 18:32, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So I was reading the article about reliable sources, and all I saw in that article is that reliable source is public knowledge. Now let me tell you something. All websites have their share of lies, and just because most people believe something to be true doesn't mean it is. In fact most people could believe in total bullshit. So my question is, how can I trust those so-called reliable sources in articles? The truth is I don't. For example, I don't believe for a second that John F. Kennedy was a fucking hero. Sure, he did great things for his country, but am I honestly supposed to believe he didn't do any harm? Yeah, I refuse to believe he was an all-good president and seriously think the media is overrating him. I know he was a nice guy, but nice does not mean good. I don't trust the articles on this site. That is why I am going to go to a bunch of talk pages and question them. So what I wanna know is, how can I trust a reliable source? That's something I have hard times figuring out. BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 21:08, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Between "Well, I'm back, and honestly don't know what I can trust on this site. I don't want to harm this site, but I still question most of the articles" and "I'm no longer active on Wikipedia so if you want to contact me...", I can't fathom why you're even asking this question.

We have a guideline that explains what Wikipedia means by reliable source, but clearly that's not what you're asking about, and your statement/question really isn't relevant to Wikipedia. If you're not interested in improving the encyclopedia, perhaps your return wasn't such a good idea after all. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, in fact I'm removing the help me tag now since this comment answers the question. I will mostly be just watching the articles and see what's going on. I will revert vandalism a bit, but other than that I really don't have a lot to add. BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 21:39, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, please place a new {{help me}} request on this page followed by your questions, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page.

Here for example I want someone to reply to the things I say. I'd love to use tags to bring awareness, but I'm worried that if I did that I'd look like an attention whore, and I don't want that. So what should I do when nobody replies to a message I post on a talk page? BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 20:14, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about "attention-whoreing". This project works only because people take an interest and if posting to a talk page does not work, alert people some other way. In non-dispute situations, I think your best way to proceed is to post at the corresponding WikiProject, in this case Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink and ask for input there. If that does not work, choose another related WikiProject or ask at the reference desk. Last but not least you can always use a request for comments, even when you are not in a dispute, to facilitate discussion. Regards SoWhy 21:20, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, if I want something done right, I shouldn't let anything stand in my way. I will be civil and respectful. BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 22:45, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Come on over to Talk:Coca-Cola Schmidt,' ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:10, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are too negative. Your initial edit summary was negative too!! Yes, some people try to delete notable content, others try to search for it and start it like myself!! Try to remember that for every deletionist there is somebody who works hard to build notable content/. We should have 10 articles on Icelandic newsreaders.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:49, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, a lot of articles and uneven coverage just sucks. But we can each make a difference to that.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:09, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Shane Dawson. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. -- Jeandré, 2012-01-07t19:42z 19:42, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I'd much rather vandalize this site than helping it. Because I don't find it fun to make good edits, not to mention looking for reliable sources is boring. But I know I can only do that for less than 4 edits before I get banned, ah well. BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 17:25, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Screw this, I'm better than that. BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 19:09, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I said that the reason why I'm not active on Wikipedia is because I don't trust the site. But to be honest, I now remember the reason why I love the site. Despite popular belief you can't put EVERYTHING on the site, and it has a strict policy on what qualifies as reliable source. So I will come back some day, for real. But not yet. BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 19:09, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect This century. Since you had some involvement with the This century redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 19:29, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing because it is believed to have been compromised. Note that edits to your user talk page might not indicate that you have regained control of your account. If your rights to e-mail and edit your user talk page have been revoked, contact ArbCom at arbcom-llists.wikimedia.org. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:24, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No it was defiantly me who made the edit. I don't care much for this website, so it doesn't bother me one bit that I got banned. BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 16:26, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkpage and email access have been revoked. Please contact the arbitration committee at arbcom-llists.wikimedia.org if you wish to be unblocked. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:31, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since it has become apparent via checkuser that you indeed were not compromised:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect In Soviet Russia Wikipedia browses YOU. Since you had some involvement with the In Soviet Russia Wikipedia browses YOU redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). MichaelSchumacherMercedes (talk) 06:02, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Note for future reference I have informed BlazeTheMovieFan of WP:Standard offer via the Unblock Ticket Request System. --Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 22:27, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect O. B. L.. Since you had some involvement with the O. B. L. redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Jawadreventon (talk) 18:02, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Epic Movie 2. Since you had some involvement with the Epic Movie 2 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 14:44, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As one of the previous contributors to {{Infobox film}} or as one of the commenters on it's talk page, I would like to inform you that there has been a RfC started on the talk page as to implementation of previously deprecated parameters. Your comments and thoughts on the matter would be welcomed. Happy editing!

This message was sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 18:26, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Current President of the United States. Since you had some involvement with the Current President of the United States redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. TheChampionMan1234 09:46, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Adult comedy. Since you had some involvement with the Adult comedy redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. McGeddon (talk) 19:43, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect What the ****. Since you had some involvement with the What the **** redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 05:19, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Gosh darn. Since you had some involvement with the Gosh darn redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 05:37, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]