User talk:Erachima/Archive 12

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Erachima. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

This archive contains topics 276-300 made on my talk page. Its history on the main talk page ends at this edit.

Image review

I'm going through the list here, all mass-uploaded by a single user. I appreciate any help you can provide with these images. (ESkog)^(Talk) 03:18, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Characters in Berserk

I was actually going to do the conversion myself, but I see you're a man of action =) I bet that was one boring edit, good job. --Darkbane ^talk 03:26, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:SPOILER

As I told User:Poetic Decay, WP:SPOILER is not yet policy. I don't think you should post a note using something that is not yet a policy as its base. Gdo01 02:05, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Commander

Really? That might be worth mentioning. Where's it listed? — Someguy0830 (T | C) 23:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

WHOA

Orihime and Ishida have a kid?! Then does that mean that Chad and Yoruichi have a flash-stepping demon-armed spawn too?! But seriously, I think I have a point... Chozen1 02:05, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

List of Bleach episodes

For consistency reasons, should articles similar to List of Bleach Agent of the Shinigami arc episodes be created for the rest? Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 02:14, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

By all means, I did not mean that they all should be submitted to WP:FLC, but perhaps I was unclear. Thanks for the response in any case. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:12, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

implications

no, im saying that you would call a natzi a natzi, even if it wasnt bery nice, thus, when i see someone who likes to erase history and replace it with sometihng warm and fuzzy, i call hem such. the example was only to illustrate a pointCharred Feathers 08:14, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Re:Redwall comment

My apologies for that. I had a little too much angst that night from a rather inane discussion at Talk:Naruto Uzumaki. Best of luck to your Redwall editing. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 18:03, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

That clears up everything. Chozen1 18:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

helpfull thought(hopefully)

to answer this question "(Graduation's over, so I'm not really a senior anymore... but what am I?)" isnt that called an alumnus?Charred Feathers 10:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Re:GAC

Can you please review my article namely- Himachal Pradesh. I would be really grateful to you. May i know where would you review it (if it eases you). i mean to say can you gave me a link to that page where the review for the article would be done. Sushant gupta (talk · contribs) 10:51, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Re:Vizard abilities

I just got done watching BLEACH episode #117 on YouTube. Clearly, the Vizard demonstrate superhuman speeds and flight. If jumping from the air isn't flight, what would it be called? You've seen the episode before? Lord Sesshomaru

Sorry for replying late, got caught up in a heated arguement. So, the Vizard walk on air? Hmmm... does that even have a name? Air bending perhaps? Or does it have more to do with their ghostly nature? Lord Sesshomaru

Ok, I would consider it "flying". I mean, you saw how the two jumped from the air and slowly landed onto a building right? When about to battle Toshiro? I'll place them in that flight category, and the super strength and speed for now. If anyone disagrees and reverts, I won't continuously dispute it as I have my reasons. As for Ichigo Kurosaki and Yoruichi Shihouin, I'm leaning towards adding them to the flying category too since the grandparent cat says: "The category also includes characters flying using items or tools as opposed to through force of will...". Any more objections then? I think this has been decided. Lord Sesshomaru

Yes, and I plan to categorize the Arrancar redirect with the three top mentioned categories as well. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru

I wish there was a way to categorize "air walking". Maybe a new category needs to be made for that. Your feelings on the flying item usage is negative? Lord Sesshomaru

Okay, to your belief, a character should only be categorized by popularity. Meaning, Ichigo's trademark cat. is speed, not the flying item. Same for the Yoruichi girl. That right? Lord Sesshomaru

What did you mean when you said, "I disagree on all counts but one", in your edit summary? What was that one? Lord Sesshomaru

I understand about the fire example. But of your edit summary? Lord Sesshomaru

I guess only the anime and manga superhuman strength and superhuman speed cats. shall be added to Vizard. Anything more you'd like to add before I do so? Lord Sesshomaru

It is a group of characters page, hence, the categories can serve for a group as a whole. Did you not see that? Lord Sesshomaru

Shouldn't the page be moved to Vizard in Bleach for consistency? And what about categories for D-Roy and Grimmjow? Redirected articles can have categories, as I've done for Chaozu and Piccolo Daimao. Lord Sesshomaru

You forgot to mention if the redirect is targeted to a section or list, as such {{R to section}} or {{R to list entry}}, then other categories are allowed since this guideline section is neutral, not all against it. From what we do know about D-Roy and Grimmjow is that they specialize in air combat, as said in the anime at least. Overall, are you saying that I should drop this category talk and move on? You're hinting towards it, as I can see, you don't think any other categories are needed for the Bleach-related articles. Are you 100% sure on that? Lord Sesshomaru

It also tells you when it's a situation where a legitimate altername name or the like is being categorized. "X can fly" is a trivial use, not a legitimate one. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 20:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Your edit at WP:NOT

Hi, my guess is that you were trying to revert the anon who was soapboxing. However, I had just reverted him/her, and I'm not sure what your edit did.[1] Could you take a look, and self-revert if you think it necessary. It may have been some kind of software glitch, and I can't see what it did to the actual page, but it may have changed the coding. Thanks. ElinorD (talk) 22:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Name in lower case, as you wish, sir. Peacent 07:33, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Not at all, Tristan. I hope luck is on your side. Peacent 06:18, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Lolicon

That image is not free nor was it drawn by Kasuga (as the signature next to Wikipe-tan's arm states). It was uploaded by trolling accounts locally, and then they have gone to the Commons. Please leave the image that is at the article there.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:34, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

list of characters that heal category

why are you taking it away?!!! i saw here wasnt a category so i made one.-hotspot

Sorry

i dont know wat op stands for is it opening credits

does he get is powers for good it says "in the anime's Bount arc, Uryū recovers his powers for a short period through an ancient Quincy artifact" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Replacment 4 the hulk (talk • contribs).

Agent of the Shinigami arc episodes

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but has it not been ten days since the nomination? Sephiroth BCR (Converse) Sephiroth BCR 18:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Lolicon?

If LoliWikipe-tan is not a Lolicon image, why is she illustrating that article? Why is her name LoliWikipe-tan? Folks were insistent that a proper image was required that accurately illustrated Lolicon, and that a new one was needed because the previous image was too mature. Please correct the specific terminology if necessary, but the word Lolicon should be there somewhere, don't you think? If there's nothing wrong with it, why obfuscate the nature of the image with the caption that is there? -Jmh123 22:41, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I see what you're saying. The entry says, "The meaning of lolicon has evolved much in the West...In the West, lolicon refers to anime or manga that contains sexual or erotic portrayals of prepubescent or childlike characters, and is thus close cognate to the Japanese term lolicon manga.[4] The use of the word lolicon is an indication that the material is overtly—even if not explicitly—erotic.[5]" I was thinking if you can have an anime figure, you can have a lolicon image. My problem remains; the caption shouldn't hide the true meaning of the image. How about "Wikipe-tan in a pose suggestive of lolicon anime"? -Jmh123 23:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I am not fine with it, obviously. Rather than edit war, I am trying to work out a compromise. Are you unwilling? -Jmh123 23:07, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

ep?

what episode does he get his powers back the first time? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Replacment 4 the hulk (talk • contribs).}

thanks

u got good info thanks for the help —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Replacment 4 the hulk (talk • contribs).}

Don't want to derail the Lolicon discussion, but this bugs me

I didn't see you invoking WP:IDONTLIKEIT to those who wanted a new image because they didn't like the old one, or questioning the validity of the argument when it was made to Ryulong. 83.245.135.80/AKA Anonyymi's argument at the end is completely self-contradictory. I don't think you are applying WP:IDONTLIKEIT consistently. Granted one regards deletion of the image and the other replacing it, but the spirit of the idea of "not liking" is the same. -Jmh123 23:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I know how to make diffs, but because I was addressing a large number of comments, it was easier to just quote. I apologize for messing up your user page. Like I said, it's the spirit of "not liking" I'm questioning. That the motivation of those comments I quoted was in the nature of pure aesthetics in the spirit of improving the encyclopedia is an opinion we'll have to agree to disagree on. You said the same thing to Herostratus as you said to Tony, and his opinion was definitely not without explanation beyond, "I don't like it." He was objecting specifically to the use of Wikipedia symbols and would've left the whole thing alone if not for that, as would I. -Jmh123 01:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

I'm sorry about your RfA, I really hoped you would have carried on as it was by no means certain that it would have failed. I still think you would have made a fine admin and I really hope you'll apply again in the future. Ryan Postlethwaite 00:43, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

RFA

Hi, I just saw that you withdrew your RfA. I thought that you were sailing through it easily, and was wondering why you decided to withdraw. I hope you decide to stay here at Wikipedia, and if youre ever nominate agian I will support you. BH (Talk) 00:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Aww, you would have passed, too. Ah well, next time will likely be better. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 00:59, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Why the sudden closure? I think you could have made it. Well, shucks, your RfA shouldn't have been so damn tough. Anyway, please drop me a note if you ever change your mind. You can count on my support as many times as you need. Peacent 02:53, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't understand either. Disputes are disputes, I believe you would have succeeded regardless. Lord Sesshomaru

Recent Vanadlism on my user page [Ticket#2007061510002946]

I had left my user page on Wikipedia as it was on May 12, 2007. I find out almost a month later following an off-Wikipedia source, thet my user page was vandalized.

I do belive and have CONFIRMATION that the vandals (cyberbullies) known as users Yonathan, in which I belive to be a man named Jonathan from another site called TV News Talk, and Marcus TVNT, who claims to work in that site's legal department and has made a legal threat against me, have vandalized my user page, and I have printed off the evidence in which most of the vandalized page has been since been proven false proving them wrong, as I belive that they are in my trap, and felt I needed to contact them on their user page, pursuant to Wikipedia policy.

So with that in mind, I would appreciate if I get to the bottom of this dispute that will eventually end at Wikipedia, as long as this dispute has been met to my standards.

Sincerely,

(Aeverine Frathleen Nieves 06:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC))