– Rtkat3 (talk) 16:40, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want a fun and exciting Wiki challenge? An opportunity to get involved in some of the most important editing on Wikipedia? A giant shiny cup to display on your userpage? Well then you should join the WikiCup challenge! Folks of all experience levels are welcome to join. It's a good way for veteran editors to test their mettle, and for new users to learn the ropes. The competition revolves around content creation, such as good and featured articles, DYK's, reviewing such content, and more. See Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring for full details. Over the course of the year, users compete to create the most and best content in a round based format. The top performers in each round will advance to the next, until just 8 remain in the final round. Out of those, one Wikipedian will walk away with the coveted silver Wikicup. Could that user be you? Find out by signing up! Signups are open until January 31, 2020. May the editing be ever in your favor! ~~~~ Argento Surfer (talk) 13:48, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jerome and Jeremiah Valeska you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kingsif -- Kingsif (talk) 03:01, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Jerome and Jeremiah Valeska you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Jerome and Jeremiah Valeska for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kingsif -- Kingsif (talk) 22:41, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Jerome and Jeremiah Valeska you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Jerome and Jeremiah Valeska for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kingsif -- Kingsif (talk) 01:21, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy belated holidays, and I hope you're having a great start to 2020. DrRC (talk) 02:11, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --DisneyMetalhead (talk) 17:45, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:01, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi There, I would suggest you not to bother much about the title of the thread. Although it is not a neutral one, but it hardly matters. The entire thread is supposed to be non neutral. You however are free to start a subsection in the same thread addressing the conduct of the other editor/s and you can choose your title there. If the title still bothers you I can mediate a middle way, but just know that changing the title isn't that important. --DBigXrayᗙ 17:26, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] This is again uncalled for. Although I am not reverting it, but in case Eagles reverts it, please do not edit war. Please stop bothering about the titles and focus on the content. The content will have a bigger impact on the case, not these titles. --DBigXrayᗙ 12:23, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. I will probably end up having to file a report about Eagle427's administratorship. His overall behaviour has been the most blatant case of administrator corruption I have seen in my time on Wikipedia. I'm working on a section explaining what's really going on with the whole TTN debacle. The fact that their only "dirt" against me is fabricated diffs, and pointing that "he kept mentioning ANI but never got around to filing it" is very reassuring. DarkKnight2149 12:27, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for understanding. For the record, I am neither aware of this case nor about the editing behavior of any of of the people in this case. Consider me completely neutral and ignorant of the case. I am watching ANI as I am participating in an ongoing case, and only commented here due to the revert war about the trivial section headers. Please proceed with the case in whatever way you deem fit. Without any knowledge I am not in the position to make any comment if your plans are good or not. regards. DBigXrayᗙ 12:34, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please check before reverting, and WP:DENY recognition, thanks. 74.73.230.72 (talk) 06:54, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar with the situation, but two reputable users reverted you and the back-and-forth is pretty absurd. I think you should file an edit warring report or inform an administrator if this is a case of WP:DENY. DarkKnight2149 06:58, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just check the diffs and get back to me, thanks. 74.73.230.72 (talk) 07:03, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

For this 74.73.230.72 (talk) 04:09, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear that you're going through a rough patch. I hope things settle down for you soon. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:40, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

for not being any help with the SPI. Time just got away from me. Doug Weller talk 08:43, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen my comment in the thread there? What do you want to do? -- llywrch (talk) 20:24, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It used to be that when an editor received a message from a second editor, it would be responded to on the second editor's page. Practices have changed, so it feels a little odd responding to you here. But I think this is best due to the situation. Let's just keep this quiet & personal.

Don't worry about the thread about the block evasion: I'll look it over & close it in the next 24 hours.

You can ask for a block from Bishonen if you want, but I suspect you really don't need help staying away. You might even be happier if you stay away with your own power. This place can get under your skin, eat up too much of your energy, & makes everything here seem so critical & important. Only it isn't that important. There will be block evasions in the future, disruption will happen again, assholes who won't listen to common sense, & it will seem at times like it didn't make any difference. It probably won't matter whether you open a thread at WP:AN/I.

I don't want to sound as if I'm being defeatist here, just stating facts. You & I can focus on the bad things -- or we can focus on the good, that despite that we have no freaking clue what we are doing, the bunch of us have actually created something more useful than what a picked band of professionals with a billion-dollar budget could create. (And I can assure you they would manifest even worse cat fights than what is seen here. Writers can be heartless bitches to each other, & publishers are even worse than any of them.) -- llywrch (talk) 06:28, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you were on Wikibreak. -- llywrch (talk) 18:27, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm not mistaken, the official Wikibreak was for 30 days expiring on March 21. In real life, I'm quarantined in my house because of the pandemic. Though in mid-April, I'm having to move houses, so I'm not going to be able to edit much then anyway. I'm going to try and get some of the major stuff on Wikipedia out of the way before then. DarkKnight2149 18:47, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an intention of canvassing. In fact you don’t have to vote. I am pretty sure it would be keep. But again TNT and Piotrus showed their true colors in the AFD and I couldn’t resist calling TNT out at always being one sided. It’s getting sad. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 02:37, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jhenderson777: Sorry for not getting to you sooner. I have been dealing with real life situations on a mandated Wikibreak. The Coronavirus pandemic isn't really helping either. I'm almost finished with a larger report on the disruption taking place at AFD. One thing that's fascinating is that, when you asked TTN if he has ever voted keep on an AFD before (which is a fair question, given his behaviour and the number of years he has been on Wikipedia), Piotrus immediately accused you of making a personal attack. After Eagles247's retaliatory report against me, one of their main talking points now seems to be Calling out TTN's disruption = Personal attack. Are they expecting this gaming strategy to work? Particularly if this reaches the Arbitration Committee, which is where this seems to be headed anyway? It's frustrating that I have once again had to postpone the content goals I have been working on (including getting certain articles to GA quality and a collaboration with another user), just to deal with another time-consuming conflict. DarkKnight2149 22:37, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've added this page to my watchlist. When your GA nom gets picked up, I will do my best to respond to any comments from the reviewer. Argento Surfer (talk) 20:01, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Same here man! I do have it on watchlist and I will keep an eye on it. Try to cool off as those weeks are happening. I understand the struggle too. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷

Whatever happened to you -- I didn't follow the details -- it sucks, and my condolences. Try not to let it faze you. My policy is to remain calm and be in it for the long haul. It's not just TTN -- he's a driving force, but he is getting the votes after all. So we need to work on that. It will take a long time and much work and level heads. But justice is a dish that is still nourishing when served cold. We need to stick together. Herostratus (talk) 01:39, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously. You don't want to get in a pissing match with Iridescent. I doubt that any kind of ArbCom case is going to work. Anyway we're a community based project... we need to work on the community. As I said above. We need you. We need you here. Getting yourself blocked is not going to help us. It's going to be a long haul, we need to be cool headed. IMO. Herostratus (talk) 15:07, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Professor Pyg you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 20:40, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Professor Pyg you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Professor Pyg for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 13:21, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Professor Pyg you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Professor Pyg for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 09:41, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your contributions on Professor Pyg. Jhenderson 777 00:56, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi man. Like you I love DC Comics but sometimes I read Marvel. My help is about this guy Argento Surfer and I don't know how many users are sabotage articles about Superheroes. You have more time than me here in Wikipedia. Please talk with some administrator for block all this people. I'm tired of this people deleting because they do not think so and also believe that the mentions and non-physical appearances are trivial. And I say this because I am politically correct. Let's stop this ridiculousness once and for all.--FocoCasti (talk) 15:44, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@FocoCasti: Why would Argento Surfer be blocked? This is a content disagreement, not a disruption issue. Surfer also happens to be correct that there has long-been a consensus at WT:COMICS against trivial non-appearances (I.E. including stuff like some character's name appearing briefly on a computer screen in a movie or Doctor Strange getting name-dropped in The Winter Soldier). Such things are seen as trivial and don't really add anything to an encyclopedia article about the character. DarkKnight2149 15:54, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're in the worng side. But as I said before I will use all possible forms of fighting for include this stuff.--FocoCasti (talk) 17:19, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Beware of the WP:BOOMERANG then. DarkKnight2149 17:22, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your recent input. regards Mztourist (talk) 04:24, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good day Darkknight2149!

I dropped by your talkpage to ask regarding a new user, Cardomahalay's activity here on Wikipedia. It seems odd that his account was created just an hour ago and the first thing the user does is to go to Anarchyte's talkpage to oppose my application for rollbacker rights. Now I wouldn't have minded it if there really was an opposition to my application coming from users of good standing or an admin, but considering this was a new user and the first activity that it does is to go after me right off the bat (pun not intended), it does seem a little weird isn't it? Likewise, the reasons that the user gave in opposition to my application appears to me to be from someone who has been doing research into my activities so well, as if the said user has an axe to grind with me (kind of like a really angry Tommy Elliot hiding behind bandages to go strike at Bruce Wayne). I was thinking it might be connected to that IP user we ran into the other day that got blocked, or possibly one of the many sockpuppets that I've reported over the past few months. Gardo Versace (talk) 22:28, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Gardo Versace: On the face of it, it does seem odd for an account with no prior history to show up with an axe to grind at a nomination. Especially after the situation you named with the IP suspected of sock puppetry. Tagging: NinjaRobotPirate. DarkKnight2149 02:31, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Darkknight2149: Thank you! I knew I chose well when I decided to turn to you for help in dealing with this issue. It's becoming more likely that this is a new user account created by the IP user that recently got blocked, after all, I suspected it of being a sockpuppet of You've gone incognito. I've asked NinjaRobotPirate to look into the matter too and we couldn't connect it to another suspect I was thinking of, Albe23413, whose gripes with me is over the fact that I've reported him for sockpuppetry and have continued to watch out for his numerous sockpuppets. According to his investigation however, it doesn't seem likely to be a sock of Albe23413. That leaves You've gone incognito who we suspect is also the IP user. He hates me because his last sockpuppet, ISpitonYourGravy and IP user 119.93.40.241 instigated an edit war against me, tried filing an ANI report, and got boomerang'd twice. The timing of all this is pretty suspicious too because right after IP user 119.93.40.241 was blocked, You've gone incognito started apologizing for his first block. Deepfriedokra then started looking into it by asking the blocking admins NinjaRobotPirate and EvergreenFir about it. Now I went to EvergreenFir's talkpage to look further into You've gone incognito's actions and found this discussion about another IP user, 112.201.139.16, who acts very similar to 119.93.40.241. Notice how 112.201.139.16 was connected to You've gone incognito by the complaining user? That user, however, was blocked by NinjaRobotPirate for incivility. I'm guessing that after Deepfriedokra declined his unblock request, he's taking his anger out on me and the first order of business for him is to smear my name. Gardo Versace (talk) 06:53, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Darkknight2149: Well, the results are in, my application got rejected. I don't feel bad about it really, I guess it just isn't my time yet. Even though Anarchyte said that Cardomahalay's message on his talkpage didn't sway him, can't help but feel it did. I never editwarred but I still got rejected for 3RR violation, nevermind that those that did accused me of 3RR got the boomerang and got blocked themselves. That aside, I checked the user's activity. There isn't any after that message. It appears that that was the sole purpose for which the account was created. If You've gone incognito is truly behind the account, I'm concerned about further retaliations he would make. When I found out about his request to be unblocked, I started worrying because he has a serious WP:OWN problem and once he starts editing a page, he'll shut everyone out until he's the sole editor of a page. If that's the attitude he exhibits, subverting blocks and holding on to his vendetta, then maybe he should not be allowed back here on Wikipedia; not even under WP:ROPE. To be honest I'm not animated by a desire for revenge, but of worry about what stunt he'll pull off next. Considering all the cases I've laid above, about how he has evaded his block through sockpuppetry, suspected or otherwise, will there be a chance he'll be allowed back into Wikipedia? Gardo Versace (talk) 14:01, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Darkknight2149. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "The Onania Club".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:11, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

At Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Editor Anjan10: Agenda-driven editing, fringe content, edit-warring, etc. you closed with a mention of a site ban but there's no discussion of a ban; should it say indefinitely blocked? Peter James (talk) 13:12, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Darkknight2149 17:52, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Batman is a an expert strategist and tactian. Add it in his powers and abilities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:3a80:469:728a:8487:8edb:607a:c7d1 (talk • contribs)

SIR. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:3A80:469:728A:8487:8EDB:607A:C7D1 (talk) 23:48, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]