Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an archive of past discussions about User:Mythdon. 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 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
Nothing "questionable" about it at all. "The show was not able to afford a live studio audience because of the lack of viewers during the series' run. The show utilized a laugh track so that viewers at home, that were watching by themselves wouldn't feel embarrassed laughing." is unsourced POV commentary that has no business being in an encyclopedia article. Bearcat (talk) 12:26, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
The edit I reverted has been a specific edit being added by multiple IPs and new users, despite consensus that was noted on the talk page, and through various policies, that such info is OR, and should not be included in the article. I realize that I probably should have just undid the edit now, as RB should only be used for blatant vandalism, and aside from the MvA article, I had been using it as such. I'm sorry for messing up like this.— Dædαlus Contribs 22:27, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Bless you. I am so sick of this little jackass's minions coming to this site to act like a bunch of brainless retards I can't even tell you. Thanks for watching my back. I'll keep on tagging and bagging the socks as they come in. Gratefully, --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:59, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
can i keep a picture of a dog on my page or is that banned. Funnyman390 (talk) 07:01, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I've been periodically looking at your edits for a few months now, and it's apparent that you are a pain in the collective ass of everyone on Wikipedia who has had to deal with you extensively. You adhere to the rules of Wikipedia in a completely useless, unconstructive and annoying way for which you are _constantly_ called out, yet you usually refuse to concede the slightest ground to those who complain about your anal-retentive efforts.
Yes, we get that you want to further the interests of Wikipedia. You can accomplish this by acting like a reasonable person and cooperating with others, not by following the letter of the law in a way that agitates everyone around you. Don't you find it at all telling that so many of your edits at any given time are concerned with fending off the complaints of people whom you've ticked off? I don't know what you're trying to accomplish by acting the way you do, but it's not constructive, not helpful to Wikipedia or its editors, and not cool.
You are an annoying little kid and need to grow up, and although the nice people here are bound to disapprove of my incivility in saying this, I doubt that anyone will disagree with my sentiments. 72.188.57.92 (talk) 00:28, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey Mythdon, just reminding you that you still need to respond to the questions posed to you at the Ryulong case. They're supposed to be done before the 29th, which is tomorrow. Thanks. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:02, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Huuki Sentai Toranger is a porno, to put it blatantly. As such, I considered that edit obvious vandalism, which is why I left the revert set for its default message. Arrowned (talk) 04:53, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
I have now responded to your request for my recusal in the Ryulong case. My comments and decision can be found on the workshop talkpage in that case. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:28, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Check the ANI thread. Apparently the one who blocked the possible sock was CU.— Dædαlus Contribs 04:05, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I recently came across your involvement in the Ryulong affair. Those that follow the history of Wikipedia feel that the RFAR on Ryulong is a significant event along the lines of Watergate. I humbly ask permission to interview you on behalf of my school IT Club's newsletter, if you have time. Thanks in advance. Yardleyman (talk) 05:37, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
We had some correspondence recently regarding the use of 'rollback'; which I do not really need to re-enter. However, it happened to surround the Brian Hyland article, which recently seems to be the subject of an ongoing 'cut and paste' copyright violation. I have reverted two or three of these, which on face value appear to be from different editors, although I suspect it is the same person. I do not want to get into a potential 'three reverts and you're out' scenario. Could I ask you to have a look and see what you think ? Many thanks,
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:20, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey Myth, nice to meet you. If possible, please take this suggestion seriously, for the time being. rootology/equality 05:22, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Per this, please stay off his talk page per his request. Discuss article issues on the article talk pages. rootology/equality 05:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
As a courtesy, I am notifying you of this. Now leave me be.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:57, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Since you want to claim Rootology is somehow involved, and in response to your posts on AN/I, let me say this as somebody who has never interacted with you in any capacity: I've added Ryulong's talk page to my watchlist, and if I ever see your username contribute to it in any fashion, I will block you. Period. End of story. Remove it from your watchlist and leave him alone. --auburnpilot talk 16:30, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.