This is an archive of past discussions with User:Zodiiak. 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.
I like how Tyrus doesn't see fit to respond to the RFC and then goes right back to the kind of behavior that prompted the RFC in the first place. Help me try to keep that article encyclopedic. This is the reason I added it to my watchlist--I was worried it would turn into some cruft filled fanpage in no time. If Tyrus was left alone with that page for an hour I'm sure he could turn it into an NPOV nightmare. Aaron Bowen22:40, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I noticed he hasn't responded to the RFC, and probably will not. He continues to upset editors and violate wiki rules. I'll keep a watchful eye on articles he edits, especially on the Jordan article. Zodiiak06:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for helping out, I actually stayed up late as I knew as soon as his block ended he would start all over again. Aaron Bowen03:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
No problem. He can be a bit stubborn...I guess sometimes you just can't get through to some people. Zodiiak
Yeah, LOL...he's crazy. I don't think there's any point in trying to convince him otherwise. He doesn't realize how much work was put into that article. His obsession with Jordan is borderline inappropriate, LOL. Zodiiak03:15, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I like how on his talk page he acts like he's been a saint and doesn't know what people are talking about, yet at least 10-15 people have told him otherwise around here and he's completely ignored them. Oh well, 48 hours and counting down... Aaron Bowen03:36, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
His block has been extended another three days, as he made more personal attacks. I'll add them to the list. Aaron Bowen23:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
>>Wow. That guys a loose cannon. If he just toned down his attitude, limited his volatile word choice and biases he would be a solid contributor. Zodiiak00:54, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Lebron
Thanks for adding that ref, didn't mean to be a stickler but just listing a book would mean someone would have to look through the entire book. TayquanhollaMy work06:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
That may or may not be true. Read Wikipedia's policy on Verifiability. Also, it's unnecessary to include such specific details for his biography. It becomes trivial and can also be intrusive. ZodiiakDial Z06:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Lebron
You had it at the end of the sentence, no one moved it from by the stats it was never by there.[1] I was just putting the refs in numerical order since they were right next to each other and read [17][7] and by mistake moved it to the wrong sentence.[2]TayquanhollaMy work12:13, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh Ok. It seemed strange that semantic-like edits were constantly being made and when that ref was seemingly moved without explanation it caused me to question the edit itself. ZodiiakDial Z16:16, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Dashes
I'm not sure if you're aware of this, although you probably are, but the dashes are available in the edit box (On my computer screen they're next to Insert:). I find that easier personally, it also eliminates some markup. Quadzilla9922:02, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I didn't think it was a big deal though. I guess if you're trying to reduce the size of an article though it can become useful. ZodiiakDial Z01:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah but what's Wikipedia without some controversy? lol...thanks for letting me take care of the edit at D-Wade's article, I know you may have wanted to do it yourself but didn't want the edit to come off the wrong way. ZodiiakDial Z01:44, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Tyrus Mad
I'll take that as another personal attack, Zodiiak, since everyone on this site seems to think everything is a personal attack. I guess no one here has any emotion. They're all just robots? Anyways, please respond to my posts on the discussion for Career achievements of Dwyane Wade, as you appear to have been misinformed.--TyrusThomas4lyf02:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
You know, I can't say that I'm surprised. His behavior and attitude towards other editors was completely uncivil...it was bound to happen. ZodiiakDial Z18:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I actually wasn't sure either. I did a search for the masterpuppet name and the only sock which was detected was that one. I'm fairly sure both you and I filed a complaint before about him, but it looks like I filed mine under his previous anon-ip instead of his masterpuppet name. I'm not sure if I could resolve this in any other manner, other than attempting to stay more consistent this time. Any thoughts? Zodiiak00:02, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Use the input box below: replace the word PUPPETMASTER with the username you suspect of running sockpuppets, and click the "Start a case" button. If there were already previous reports on this username, for instance if you click that button and find yourself looking at an existing report, start a new case adding after the username whatever number is one higher than the highest existing report, for instance Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/PUPPETMASTER (2nd) ... or "(3rd)", or "(4th)", etc.
That is, I think you can just transfer the current set of edits to the new article (created as indicated above) and revert Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/TyrusThomas4lyf (2nd) to the previous state. This way, we preserve the record of his previous attempt to subvert the block that was placed upon him and create a new record for his latest attempt. Myasuda03:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I stated: "rv; wow are you trying to get us sued? lol, that picture has COPYRIGHT written all over it" The comment is obviously in jest. I did not issue a warning or anything of the sort. I also kindly contacted the user and informed him why I removed the image: Here. Is that not showing good faith? Also, the user was informed about fair use images, on May 10, 2007: Right Here. I've shown nothing but good faith towards him, as he has continually added unsourced and fan-like edits to the Bryant article. I simply removed them and in the summary explained why: here and here. All good faith. ZodiiakDial Z03:01, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Look at it this way, s/he has been on Wikipedia about a week and then sees a note accusing him/her of doing something that can get Wikipedia sued. How would you feel if you were in that person's position? The "lol" bit could be interrupted that you are laughing at the person for uploading a copyrighted image. S/he was never warned on his/her talk page for uploading fair use images or making unsourced edits. How are they supposed to know better? You gotta say more than "you can't upload copyrighted images" and instead please list the alternatives. It can be time consuming but it is well worth educating people about our policies. Just throw a link or something so they at least have a starting point. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 03:12, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, so long as we agree that I did show good faith =) Maybe I could've been more detailed on why I removed the image. I just assumed he read the guidelines about uploading pictures, since there are several warnings about uploading copyrighted images before and after you upload them. I'll retract these vicious claws! LOL...I'll shoot him a message and just let him know that I was commenting in jest and not looking to scare or intimidate him. ZodiiakDial Z03:18, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Argh, I just took a look at his talk page, it looks like he's uploading copyrighted images all over the place, even after being warned by other editors. I think he needs some guidance. Update: Sent him a message explaining some of the things about editing articles on wiki =) ZodiiakDial Z03:21, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Image:Barkley_1988_SI_Cover.jpg listed for deletion
Yeah, regarding those examples you used in your response to the deletion request; those are all going to be deleted most likely. I learned of this a couple of weeks ago when someone nominated all of the pics I had in LT for deletion. Despite my arguments they were all deleted (scroll down the page, there's like three in a row). Basically copyright paranoia has gotten pretty blatant around here lately. I probably should have just told an admin to delete all of the other ones I uploaded. Quadzilla9921:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't know. Copyright paranoia has gotten pretty much out of control here lately. They'll most likely be deleted. We're moving towards the model of the German WIkipedia, which doesn't allow any fair use pics (that's the one that doesn't even have a decent pic of Mickey Mouse). Quadzilla9921:55, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Got your message, I think his motivations are clear, which is a pity, because he did point out some good (but minor) corrections that can be made. Thanks for looking! Chensiyuan08:26, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
My sympathies regarding the LB James article. That's why I edit less popular NBA articles lol. I tried reading the sea of comments at the talkpage and the editing history and had a headache. If at anytime you prefer to push Sir Charles for GA let me know I'd try and help out. Chensiyuan15:43, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
I saw your notice on your userpage -- I'm sure you have your reasons. But, I hope it's got nothing to do with dealing with difficult people on wikipedia... Chensiyuan09:19, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
OK, now you're getting somewhere. Now, could you tell me, how is it a milestone to have the most points in your first three years? I mean, first off, any knowledgeable sports analyst knows that this is solely a stat of consequence; he played in the NBA Finals in his first three years, therefore had a long postseason. I mean, he has already played a fourth year, and is already no longer the leading scorer through 4 years of postseason experience. You see, now you will have impressionable young people visiting the page and thinking "wow, he made history!" when in reality he was just in the right place at the right time. Would you like me to include how player X was the first in playoffs scoring through 6 years, 7 years, 8 years, 9 years, etc. etc. Oh, you think it would be original research? Well, no actually, it wouldn't. All I'd have to do is cite old newspapers, where these sorts of stats abound. They just don't have the luxury of being on the internet. You see, these trivial analyses have gone on since the beginning of sports, and where they are used to glorify the modern player, wherein the past player does not hold this advantage, is where they are used unfairly, carelessly and all too stupidly.--75.32.39.10405:06, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Anything can be a "stat of consequence." Total number of points scored for X is a "stat of consequence" simply because the player was given the opportunity. For example, all playoff stats are "Stats of consequence" because many players, who are top scorers, have not made the playoffs as many times as say, Michael Jordan. Therefore, by making the playoffs, they are given the opportunity to bulk their stats. Dwyane Wade made the playoffs his first three years, and played well. I'm not going to argue this back and forth, we both make points. It is a historical Milestone, look at the top 5 players in that category. Zodiiak05:13, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
No, it really isn't a historical milestone, and here's why. Dwyane Wade is one of the few players to be lucky enough to have a great team from the start of his career. He is one of the very few players that has been on a TEAM that has advanced deep into the playoffs in his first three year, that has made the NBA Finals in his first three years. And that is the ONLY reason he is atop the leaderboard if you look at it for first 3 years. It's not like it's an ACTUALLY ACCURATE stat. It's team dependent, not individually dependent, hence making this individual stat flawed.--Hoopsknowledge05:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes, lets make every stat about the team. Larry Bird was only good because of Parish and McHale, Johnson was only good because of Kareem and Worthy, Jordan was only good because of Pippen and Phil. None of those players were good, they were all hyped because of their team anyways. Magic wouldn't have had all those assists if he played on a different team, hell Jordan wouldn't have won any championships without Phil, let's get serious. Do you see where I'm getting at? And besides, who did Dwyane have on his team as a rookie? He took the Heat from a 25-57 team to 42-40 and into the Eastern Conference Semi Finals. What's next, you talk about "It's the Conference he plays in!" or "Well that's because the NBA isn't like the 80s!" Everything may be dependant on something. Grant Hill would have more triple double's than Magic if he didn't get injured. Allen Iverson would have the most points scored in the finals if his teams weren't so terrible. Kobe would have another ring if he had a decent center. Dwyane scored the most points in his first three years because of his team? So Jordan only has 6 Finals MVP and highest finals scoring average because of pip as well...it's another individual stat that's flawed@# Give me a break. I'm not going back and forth with this, I don't have the time for pointless arguments, Goto a forum for that. Zodiiak06:10, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Charles Barkley
I think the article is worth a stab at GA nom. Since you are the chief architect of the article, what do you think? I just thought the NBA project has become a little stagnant in terms of pushing quality articles to GA -- that, combined with the fact that some really strange editors have come on board. Chensiyuan03:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
I think it needs some slight fine tuning, then we can make a solid push for GA nom. I'll give it a good look later on tonight and tomororw and make any necessary changes. I'll be sure to keep you posted. Zodiiak01:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
You know, it's comforting to see you cleaning up some of the mess generated by a ton of jokers who've been going around destroying NBA articles! Chensiyuan02:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
lol...Thanks. I'm trying to chime in where ever I can and do some more fine tuning with the Barkley article in my spare time. Is there anything in the article you feel needs to be added or tweaked? Zodiiak02:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
have looked through it quite a number of times and for purposes of GA im quite sure it's strong enough... that's my opinion. Chensiyuan02:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. I've tried to address them, except the Merlin part. I need to consult Onomatopoeia on that. I'm not sure who originally put it there, but I don't think the article would suffer without the whole "other interests" section. Please let us know if you have other suggestions. Chensiyuan23:34, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Will do. I'll chime in where ever I can and help as well. It's a solid article, I just think it needs some small copyediting. The Merlin nickname isn't a big issue. It was just one of the first things that jumped out at me. Zodiiak23:38, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Onomatopoeia has no issue removing the whole section and well personally I'm a little exhausted answering queries on the FAC. Why is it that every FAC I'm involved in has such a bloated discussion? At least the MJ and Raptors ones had happy outcomes; Tim Duncan looks likely to be razed to the ground lol. Getting tired... Chensiyuan13:06, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
lol. I've been there before, exhausted with wiki. Just remember not to take anything too personal and ask for help when you need it. Zodiiak21:28, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Hakim Warrick
Hey there. I'm trying to get the Hakim Warrick article promoted to GA status, and I've seen your name floating around the NBA pages. I was hoping you could take a look at the page and tell me what you think needs to be improved. Thanks for your help. Chengwes16:29, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for taking a look. I would love to add more about his professional career, but there just isn't that much out there. Do you think I should just write more about good individual games he's had in his second pro year? Also, I added more to the lead, and added a personal section. Chengwes15:05, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
I added a "player file" section as well as more information about his stint in the playoffs in his rookie year. Anything else you think I should add? Thanks. Chengwes02:15, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
The three-month long Summer Assessment Drive, organized by Psychless, was a huge success! It ran from June 1 – September 1, and reduced the backlog of unassessed articles from 113,385 to 56,237. In all, over 100,000 articles were assessed. Over 60 people contributed in some way.
A barnstar has been created for exceptional work on Wikipedia biographies and for assisting the project. The Biography Barnstar is listed with the other WikiProject awards and can be awarded easily with a template. See the template page for more details.
The newsletter is back! Many things have gone on during the past few months, but many things have not. While the assessment drive helped revitalize the assessment department of the project, many other departments have received no attention. Most notably: peer review and our "workgroups". A day long IRC meeting has been planned for October 13th, with the major focus being which areas of the project are "dead", what should our goals be as a project, and how to "revive" the dead areas of our project. Contribute to the discussion on the the new channel (see below)
We decided to deliver this newsletter to all project members this month but only those with their names down here will get it delivered in the future.
This is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue. Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned or post news on the next issue's talk page
New irc channel
Lastly, a new WikiProject Biography channel has been set up on the freenode network:
To receive this newsletter in the future, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. This newsletter was delivered by the automated R Delivery Bot16:10, 7 October 2007 (UTC) .
