TNstingray
| This is TNstingray's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
Concern regarding Draft:List of Star Wars: The Clone Wars characters
edit
Hello, TNstingray. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of Star Wars: The Clone Wars characters, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:05, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
LOTR: The Rings Of Power
editHello, please stop reverting my edits to the LOTR: The Rings Of Power article. Thanks. Skcin7 (talk) 00:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Please stop edit warring and violating the standards of Wikipedia. Thanks. TNstingray (talk) 00:54, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- I guess you would rather Wikipedia be dishonest and violate WP:NPOV. You're the one violating Wikipedia standards, not me. Skcin7 (talk) 01:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- No, you are the one dishonestly skirting due process on Wikipedia and trying to force your POV onto the article, and the same can be true for much (actually most) of your editing history on other articles. Go to the talk page and talk about it if you truly care about Wikipedia's standards. TNstingray (talk) 01:04, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- How is it my point of view? All I'm doing is quoting The Guardian and Forbes articles which are perfectly reliable sources. NO WHERE in the entire Rings Of Power episode does it say ANYTHING about how everyone fucking hates the show, and nobody watches it, and nobody who tries to watch it ever finishes it. I've talked to like 50 different people and every single one of them HATE the show to the point that it's basically become a meme, I don't know a single person who has ANYTHING good to say about it, and NOWHERE in the current Wikipedia article does it say that, but there are TONS of news articles everywhere basically saying exactly what I'm saying now. So I looked around and found some of the reliable sources news articles saying exactly the truth, that the show sucks ass and EVERYONE almost-universally hates it, and I only add the word "almost" before "universally" because there's probably 1 person somewhere in the world who doesn't hate it, but I haven't met any of those people yet. And you reverted my edits immediately and then I guess got be blocked and banned for "edit warring", and now the article is not honest, it's not neutral, it's a dishonest article now, the article doesn't say the truth, and it's because of people like who you seem to be shielding anything bad that people everywhere are saying about the terrible show from being allowed to appear in the article. Why? Why do you do that? Why are you dishonest? I found RELIABLE SOURCES and made edits to the article citing what those RELIABLE SOURCES are saying, so why don't you go help Sauron or something because that's what you're doing. Skcin7 (talk) 01:13, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- It's not my point of view. When you cite The Guardian and Forbes, then it's clearly not my point of view, it's what they are saying. Not me. I'm just quoting The Guardian and Forbes. But I guess you're not allowed to quote The Guardian and Forbes on Wikipedia anymore. :-/ Skcin7 (talk) 01:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- I hope you're happy with yourself. The Wikipedia Rings Of Power article remains dishonest, good job, TNstingray. Skcin7 (talk) 01:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Butting into your conversation here.. but you are just pushing your own pov.. "everyone fucking hates the show, and nobody watches it, and nobody who tries to watch it ever finishes it"... nobody? The show would not have been renewed for a second season if nobody watched it or finished it... so that is clearly false.. And your asking "50 people" in your friends group if they like it and them agreeing with you is not a scientific survey of the viewing audience. I watched the whole show and while I didn't love it I didn't hate it either... so clearly your "nobody" survey is inaccurate. The reason that audience comments on websites arent credible sources is that people who don't like something are far more likely to participate in something like that while the people who like it or are just ok with it tend to watch it and then move on rather than going to message boards to vent like the haters do. Spanneraol (talk) 02:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- dont want to insert so much into this talk, but a) the second season will be mad,e because it is already funded and planed by Amazon, this is one of the problems of this show.
- b) 2/3 of the people, who started to watch it, didnt watched the end.
- c) it is still not neutral to ignore the majority of the viewer reviews disliked the show in any public domain to actual show their opinion. ErikWar19 (talk) 01:58, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- Butting into your conversation here.. but you are just pushing your own pov.. "everyone fucking hates the show, and nobody watches it, and nobody who tries to watch it ever finishes it"... nobody? The show would not have been renewed for a second season if nobody watched it or finished it... so that is clearly false.. And your asking "50 people" in your friends group if they like it and them agreeing with you is not a scientific survey of the viewing audience. I watched the whole show and while I didn't love it I didn't hate it either... so clearly your "nobody" survey is inaccurate. The reason that audience comments on websites arent credible sources is that people who don't like something are far more likely to participate in something like that while the people who like it or are just ok with it tend to watch it and then move on rather than going to message boards to vent like the haters do. Spanneraol (talk) 02:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- I hope you're happy with yourself. The Wikipedia Rings Of Power article remains dishonest, good job, TNstingray. Skcin7 (talk) 01:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- It's not my point of view. When you cite The Guardian and Forbes, then it's clearly not my point of view, it's what they are saying. Not me. I'm just quoting The Guardian and Forbes. But I guess you're not allowed to quote The Guardian and Forbes on Wikipedia anymore. :-/ Skcin7 (talk) 01:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- How is it my point of view? All I'm doing is quoting The Guardian and Forbes articles which are perfectly reliable sources. NO WHERE in the entire Rings Of Power episode does it say ANYTHING about how everyone fucking hates the show, and nobody watches it, and nobody who tries to watch it ever finishes it. I've talked to like 50 different people and every single one of them HATE the show to the point that it's basically become a meme, I don't know a single person who has ANYTHING good to say about it, and NOWHERE in the current Wikipedia article does it say that, but there are TONS of news articles everywhere basically saying exactly what I'm saying now. So I looked around and found some of the reliable sources news articles saying exactly the truth, that the show sucks ass and EVERYONE almost-universally hates it, and I only add the word "almost" before "universally" because there's probably 1 person somewhere in the world who doesn't hate it, but I haven't met any of those people yet. And you reverted my edits immediately and then I guess got be blocked and banned for "edit warring", and now the article is not honest, it's not neutral, it's a dishonest article now, the article doesn't say the truth, and it's because of people like who you seem to be shielding anything bad that people everywhere are saying about the terrible show from being allowed to appear in the article. Why? Why do you do that? Why are you dishonest? I found RELIABLE SOURCES and made edits to the article citing what those RELIABLE SOURCES are saying, so why don't you go help Sauron or something because that's what you're doing. Skcin7 (talk) 01:13, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- No, you are the one dishonestly skirting due process on Wikipedia and trying to force your POV onto the article, and the same can be true for much (actually most) of your editing history on other articles. Go to the talk page and talk about it if you truly care about Wikipedia's standards. TNstingray (talk) 01:04, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- I guess you would rather Wikipedia be dishonest and violate WP:NPOV. You're the one violating Wikipedia standards, not me. Skcin7 (talk) 01:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:List of Rogue One and Andor characters
edit
Hello, TNstingray. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "List of Rogue One and Andor characters".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 20:54, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:List of Star Wars: The Clone Wars characters
edit Hello, TNstingray. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "List of Star Wars: The Clone Wars characters".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 20:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
Ignored ANI request
editLinking this here for posterity: "Disruptive IP address at Rings of Power" [1]
I'm not sure what I did wrong for this to be archived and ignored. Next time I go to ANI, review this link and double check the formatting. TNstingray (talk) 12:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
edit
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 19 November 2024 (UTC)