User talk:Daniel Supreme

Welcome!

Hello, Daniel Supreme, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Will (message me!) 20:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doomsday

Before I cleaned it up, the summary had italics where quotes should have been, verbatim snatches of dialogue where it wasn't necessary, no proper paragraphing, bad grammar, in-story statements in the narrative, and even some speculation. It also was missing some key detail. I retained as much of the substance of it as I could but expanded and rewrote it so the style was consistent and flowed properly. My main consideration was to improve the article to make it more readable and bring it up to an encyclopedic standard.

I'm sorry if you feel that it wasn't an improvement, but I respectfully disagree. Nobody owns a page, nor should there be ego involved in editing. Every edit page also states that "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it." If you believe that my work actually made the article worse, you are welcome to improve it yourself, or bring it up on the article talk page. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 23:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's quite all right. We're all ultimately after the same thing: making a better encyclopedia. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 15:27, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. What kind of abuse? In what manner? And what reason would I have to want to abuse you? I thought we resolved that Doomsday issue amicably. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 18:08, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What page where? Can you provide an URL? I don't see anything on your user or talk pages insulting your religion. In any case, I can assure you: it's not me. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 18:16, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, I don't have the time or energy to send abusive e-mails. Sorry to disappoint you, but it's not me. I haven't given you a second thought since the Doomsday matter. I suggest you look somewhere else for the culprit. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 18:21, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I try to be civil, but you respond with "nincompoop" and "fool". I believe that signals the end of this conversation. Bye. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 18:25, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please be civil, Daniel, and keep WP:AGF in mind. Prodego ^talk 19:42, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the last time, it's not me. I suggest you report this to the police or something and get them to trace the origin of the e-mails. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 00:18, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Medieval 2

Instead of just telling me that I'm wrong and to "go to the Total War page", why not cite it? Also, please sign your comments so I know who I'm talking to. Thanks. --DarthBinky 16:26, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, this is directly copy/pasted from the TW website:

"and Heresy being not so much a religion itself, but a more general opposition to organised religion"

Heresy is still not a religion. So I will revert to my last change (also note that the order is changed too, so it makes more sense- it tells the religions and then discusses them, rather than discussing them and then mentioning what the religions are). Cheers --DarthBinky 16:31, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I already found the comment on my own, as evidenced by the quotation above. I changed the article a little to compromise- it functions as a religion, but isn't actually a religion. Cheers --DarthBinky 16:43, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glad we could work things out! Cheers --DarthBinky 16:46, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The EU (mainly)

Hi, glad we agree about gay marrages (like u i am not against homosexuality but i think that gay marrages, are a step too tar)

Also glad to see that we are both interested in Mtw2, which i will get as soon as it comes out (if it works on my pc......)

But like u said i disagree with u on the EU. I admit that a united Europe would have a lot of power, but us Brits would not. A united europe, like the current EU, would be dominated by the France-Germany axis, and Britain would loose tones of world presteen-Not to mention money. We pay double the amount into the EU that we ever get back, and 40% of the EU budget is spent on farm subsadies, mainly for the inefficent Frence. Just one examply is that French farmers are payed to produce wine by the EU, then payed to destroy it as knowbody wants it.....lol....i might try that on second thoughts. look forward to your reply. P.S. soz about the spelling--Boris Johnson VC 09:51, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Medieval 2 demo

I had the same problem. It happens often with game demos- because it's not the finished product, it runs poorly even on high end systems. I would expect that the finished game will run much better. Cheers --DarthBinky 19:52, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]