User talk:WhisperToMe

For 2003-December 2003 comments, see: User talk:WhisperToMe/Archive0 For January 2004 to September 2004 comments, see: User talk:WhisperToMe/Archive1 For September 2004 to August 2006 comments, see: User talk:WhisperToMe/Archive2

Yay!

Yay, indeed. ;P Highway ^{Return to Oz...} 18:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Case Closed Naming Question

I think it is in a deadlock, if we combine the opinions in Talk:Case Closed and Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Anime and Manga. I plan to invoke WP:RfC, and I want you to give an opinion for this. Samuel Curtis 09:56, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have prepared a RfC thread draft in my user space: User:Samuel Curtis/Case Closed RfC. If you think a RfC is necessary, please check if the RfC is appropriate. Samuel Curtis 11:51, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naruto

My mistake. Still, western naming order is common among such series, regardless of what time period they may be placed in. For simple consistency if nothing else, they should be ordered that way. I would also point out that the qualifications for using a non-western order specifically notes "historical figure" as the qualifications, which the characters in this series surely aren't. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 21:34, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And the anime uses Western order. Which do you think people will be more familiar with? I really hate to say it, but people these days spend far more time watching television than they do reading. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 21:41, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ha ha (or whatever typing-based laugh approximation you prefer)! Regardless of any interpretations one might make on the manual or style or however Viz may do their work, it's my simple opinion that the western naming order should apply to everything except historical figures. Regardless of a time period in which a series may take place, it's still created after that point. To avoid general confusion, surname should be last. I doubt I can change your mind about the order, but the reverse is also true. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 21:49, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stop vandalizing.

Template:Civil1 Do not add personal information about other contributors to Wikipedia without their explicit permission. Wikipedia operates on the principle that every contributor has the right to remain completely anonymous. Posting personal information about another user is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's harassment policy. Wikipedia's policy on this issue is strictly enforced and your edits have been reverted and/or suppressed, not least because such information can appear on web searches. Wikipedia's privacy policy is to protect the privacy of every user, including you. Persistently adding personal information about other contributors will result in being blocked from editing.

I urge you to stop blatantly accusing me, and the constant vandalizing of my talk pages. Apparently you are not civil enough to get the message from edit text. Refrain from posting my contact information, as I didn't put them in WP for a reason. I hope that you will come to your senses and stop this nonsense. MonsterOfTheLake 02:25, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Link

Sorry, didn't mean AI/V, meant WP:AN/I. — xaosflux ^Talk 02:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RYULONG Harrasment

Hi.. I too have been totally and utterly harrassed and wikibullied by RYULONG... two days ago... I was trying to bring up a topic on the JEREMY CLARKSON discussion page and he would just delete it every time I would paste it.

Look HERE and you can see that he just kept deleteing it over and over so that I could NOT have it discussed.

He was trying to paste a quote into the article where Jeremy had supposedly said that "Americans have sex with their cousins because that's what they do". He insisted that it should remain claiming that on Wikipedia you have to prove that someone DIDN't say something not that they DID. I COULD NOT BELIEVE IT... the guy is a total fantasist and bully. These people were often bullied heavily at school.

I deleted it and told him that he needed a SOURCE if he was going to claim something so controversial.

Naturally I wrote about it on the DISCUSSION page and he just kept deleting it over and over and then started harrassing me and sending me smug emails and messages. Eventually I told him to F.O. right on his TALK page as you can see for yourself... so naturally he had me blocked and I just kept coming back with different IPs and correcting his INCEST fantasies. It was hilarious, eventually RYULONG and some other WIKIBULLIES tried to block all of my IPs and then My WHOLE RANGE of IPs. and I just kept coming back and coming back and correcting the page. I have over 30 different ISPs I can connect through so It was funny to see their smug little bullying attempts overridden and thwarted again and again. I burned the shit out of them.

Eventually the ANTI-AMERICAN brigade were forced to go and PROVE teh quote by citing a SOURCE. As suspected, the actual sentence was NOTHING like the one that they were insisting that he "probably said".

This guy is not a proper ADMIN is he? He needs to be sorted out anyway. A real problem for nice folk trying to keep the books FACTUAL.

Any idea how to complain about his stalking and harrasment?

My username is YourCousin but they have blocked me for a week for REVERTING the fals INCEST claims. Weird place huh? Anyway... you can reach me on my User Page if you have any ideas on who helps with Wiki-bullies?

Ciao

YourCousin--86.29.114.38 11:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: 86 posted this to talk pages of many people. I doubt that he is correct in this argument. WhisperToMe 17:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no it's a NOTE in bold! ;) Current situation of this user can be found at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#YourCousin_sockpuppeting.--Andeh 17:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's unfair that you would say that 'you doubt' that I am correct. All you have to do is to look at the pages that I've been talking about, you will see that EVERYTHING I havbe said is true. Why would you sit on your hands 'doubting' when the TRUTH is a few click away? Are you BLINDLY on his side or are you a fair person? Why not have a look? The truth has NO HOLES EVER!!

Ryulong HAS been bullying and tried very hard to keep a false QUOTE on theJEREMY CLARKSON page. Using sock puppets I was able to force him through the aid of other editors, to acquire the ACTUAL quote and SOURCE it... what a criminal I am huh?!

Ryulong on the other hand, repeatedly deleted my DISCUSSION TOPIC in his attempt to place the FALSE INCEST statement on the page.

If you are going to quote someone claiming that they've made jokes about INCEST, then you should back it up with a source.

Isn't WIKIPEDIA about accuracy and integrity?

It's all there in black and white.

Also - I did not email tons of users... I left messages on approx 4 pages. I thought I was messaging people that had problems with the guy too. AFTER I did that, I discovered that the guy had been nominated for ADMIN... this was really bad news.

This all started with a group of Anti-American editors that PROTECT the Jeremy Clarkson page. Both incidents have since been corrected as I was relying on fact not ambigous anti-American information.

I am not a BULLY. I am not politically motivated. I am not a vandal. My issues have been about FACTUALISING the political works of crooked admin who abuse the 3rr rule and cite PERSONAL ATTACK REACTION as personal attack.

I hope you will actually look into this. You seem to have taken a great interest in it, why not be wholesome and fair and look into my claim?

Thanks for reading.

YourCousin --86.29.116.209 18:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]