User talk:Thibbs/Archive 2

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Why do you identify me as Samlaptop every time I edit?

edit
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hi Thibbs

How do you know I'm Samlaptop? I know I am but when I edit articles, how did you know it was me?--92.14.125.75 (talk) 16:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I'm not completely sure what you mean. I don't use sockpuppet accounts, myself, but I have tagged your sockpuppet accounts as a way to help later editors who are trying to get your newest sockpuppet banned when you're in a vandalism-creating mood. I notice that many (if not most) of your edits are vandalistic edits and unfortunately, new editors who are unfamiliar with your history treat you as a new vandal and give you many warnings rather than banning you immediately as a known and ceaseless vandal. I thought I'd try to help out the community by identifying you before you are given any warnings and hopefully this will save everyone a spot of trouble.
As far as how I know that your sockpuppet accounts are you, you leave a trail everywhere you go. It's very easy to figure out who a person is on the internet. I would recommend that you try harder to refrain from vandalism since it's so easy to find out exactly who is doing the vandalism. Editors at wikipedia aren't nearly as anonymous as they might think they are... -Thibbs (talk) 17:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think you should come to Simple English Wikipedia. Like Majorly, you would be able to identify vandals from english wikipedia and also improve articles.

Thank you for the invitation, Mr. Locke. I'm currently more interested in improving regular en.wikipedia, but I will keep your suggestion in mind and perhaps some day I will create an account at Simple English Wikipedia. Cheers, -Thibbs (talk) 20:08, 1 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
Note: To clarify my confusion in my first response, this subsection used to be called "Why do you sock?" before SamLaptop altered it to its current form. In other words I'm not crazy... Or at least not any more crazy than the average editor. -Thibbs (talk) 01:58, 18 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thank you!

edit
Hello Thibbs! I have to thank you for all you do in dealing with the sockpuppets on Talk:The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. So drink up, my friend! -sesuPRIME talk • contribs 14:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)Reply
No problem, and thanks for doing your bit to monitor the page too. I'm keeping some track of things now, but I don't normally watch the page (i.e. it's not on my "Watch" page) and it's going to need to support of editors who do watch/monitor it if it's to stay free of Dr90s' baleful influence. Hopefully what I'm doing now will at least set things up for the future so that others who struggle against this guy can deal with him more quickly. -Thibbs (talk) 16:41, 18 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

VG project notice

edit

Thibbs- I'm going to post a notice about Dr90s at WT:VG. If you could follow it up with information about articles, edits, and behavior to look for that would really help members know what to look for. (Guyinblack25 talk 22:16, 18 June 2009 (UTC))Reply

That was a great idea, Guyinblack25. I just left a pretty detailed list with his characteristics underlined. I am also considering creating a profile at WP:LTA. right now I think things are kind of quieting down with him, so I'll probably go back to my normal editing, but the next time I check out the Dr90s scene and find there to be yet another outbreak, I'll file at LTA. Cheers, -Thibbs (talk) 18:22, 19 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Talkback

edit
Hello, Thibbs. You have new messages at GSK's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

(GameShowKid)--(talk)--(evidence)--( 17:33, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

No problem. Thanks for the good luck wishes. -Thibbs (talk) 17:43, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Samlaptop Report

edit
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hi Thibbs

I have read the Samlaptop report and everything you have written is eactly true, good one!

But my vandalism will stop even if someone unblocks me because I have officaly been warned that if I don't use my laptop properly, I will have it taken away. Warning from the council.--92.12.195.143 (talk) 12:44, 27 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Well that sounds encouraging. I hope you can control yourself. Good luck, -Thibbs (talk) 12:37, 29 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Well, they didn't say that Wikipedia:Vandalism Wikipedia doesn't affect my laptop being taken away, but if I don't use it sensibly then I will have it taken away. So, I will be making constructive edits just in case I get it taken away. They will be checking termly to see if I use it for school only.--Sam8521 (talk) 09:44, 4 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Looks like I got here a bit late. I'm sorry to see you were unable to make edits on wikipedia that matched what appeared to be your intentions to reform. I guess we've all learned something here. You've learned that you can't control yourself and we've learned (for the 8th time by my count) never to trust you. -Thibbs (talk) 13:24, 6 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

IP Removal

edit

Hi there Thibbs. 2 Questions: On a recent debate for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kasia Al Thani, it was suggested by an IP user that her material was being erased and/or removed inappropriately and I'm fully aware that is violating wiki guidelines. The accusations are incorrect. I did not erase nor remove. I did revert an edit that was previously reverted by an admin that the IP user re-added. In addition, I contributed a clean-up on reference replacing it with a more substantial concise reference to support the bio statement and moved the original reference to external links. Does the above actions violate the guidelines? Lastly, The IP user in question that made the accusations removed an admin bolt from her user page and out of my own personal curiosity for guidelines WP:AGF, is that permittable? Please don't hesitate to correct me if I'm wrong! I value your opinion and expertise for any future edits and contributions. Thank you! BioDetective2508 (talk) 18:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi BioDetective, and welcome to wikipedia. Let me start by saying that I wasn't referencing you specifically when I brought up AGF. The tone of the RfD when I got there was such as to suggest that the contributions being made and reverted by the IP editor were biased contributions being added in violation of WP:NPOV. This is fairly well summed up by this edit by User:Parkerparked. In reviewing the references, I found them to be reliable sources (i.e. The Daily Telegraph) that meaningfully (albeit briefly) discussed the subject of the RfD. Because this is an RfD and the IP editor was the only one defending the article via substantive additions/improvements, I felt that the accusations of bias coupled with the removal of the IP's attempts to add reliable referencing were in violation of AGF. While I acknowledge that the first person to remove the IP's contributions post-RfD was an administrator, I think this was not an administrative action and so the removal should not necessarily have any more weight than if a non-admin had removed it. The admin's edit summary states "seemingly off-topic" (emphasis supplied). Clearly to other editors this information seems not to be off-topic. Per WP:TROPHY, reverting to an admin's version simply because he's an admin is inappropriate at wikipedia. I am sure you meant no harm, and I doubt it is anyone's intention at the RfD, but it seems to me that the IP editor's edits are being disregarded mainly because they are an IP and there is an AGF-violative suspicion that they are biased.
Finally, as far as the IP editor's removal of an IP bolt, a determination of AGF-violation would depend what kind of bolt was removed. If the bolt was removed from the user's talk, then it probably doesn't violate AGF, but if it was a notice of admin action intended to notify other users then I imagine it would violate something. AGF is a policy concerning assumptions about the editor rather than his edits so it might not apply, but in general I think it's poor form to remove others' comments even if they are bolts.
Good luck in future edits. -Thibbs (talk) 12:51, 6 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Fuck the dealer - merge

edit

It is my humble opinion that the decision to merge Fuck the dealer into Euchre_variations#Making_trump is in error. The similarly-named Screw the Dealer (plus some equivalents) in Euchre refers to the fact that the dealer must make trump even though he may not want to. Fuck the Dealer is a totally separate card game. It uses a standard 52-card playing deck while Euchre is played with a 24-card deck. Its rules are totally different from Euchre rules. Since the merge discussion is already closed, I am not sure what steps should be taken to correct this error. Since your comments seem to be the main force behind the decision to merge, would you please consider taking whatever action is appropriate to cancel this incorrect merge effort. Thanks. Truthanado (talk) 00:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

The only version of Fuck the Dealer that I've played was a drinking version of the Euchre game. I have no idea how common or indeed notable this is, and by the look of the merger discussions it would seem that the second place vote was for delete. I think your best bet would be to gain consensus on the talk page for Euchre variants. (NB: In creating the link just now I notice that you have started discussions there already). If there is consensus to remove the material on the drinking game then it should be removed. Otherwise, if nobody responds at talk, I'd go by WP:SILENCE and assume that there is broad support for your version. If you have any other questions, please feel free to post a question here. Good luck. -Thibbs (talk) 00:22, 18 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Re:User talk:Junkcops#Languishing POV discussions

edit

Thank you for the notification. The part behind it, I realize that the article you mean, Nonviolent video game, has non-neutral parts. The Junk Police (reports|works) 05:36, 24 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I'm sorry, I did indeed mean the article Nonviolent video game. Sorry if that wasn't very clear.
So are these POV-related objections your own objections or have you identified objections that have been raised by another editor or editors? If they are your own objections, could I ask you to clearly state your POV-related objections at Talk:Nonviolent video game so that we can begin to move in a positive direction? Cheers. -Thibbs (talk) 15:43, 24 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Your tagging of Super Mario Bros. 2

edit

A while back, you tagged Super Mario Bros. 2 as having a plot summary that was too long. I thought it odd that you would place it in the Gameplay section, but I went ahead and rewrote it as best I could, removing what I thought was trivial. I understand that the article can still use some work, but is the "plot summary" fixed? Larrythefunkyferret (talk) 07:19, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

These edits seem to have done the trick as far as I can see. Thanks. -Thibbs (talk) 06:54, 23 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Just because

edit
The VG Barnstar
I don't believe I ever properly thanked you for the amount of time and effort you put into the Dr90s incident. Your diligence is most impressive and deserving of more praise than I can express here. Though the prevention of vandalism is important, I personally consider the greatest effect was Prince returning to edit. I've seen a number of editors leave for one reason or another, but I have seen few come back. Editing here is often a thankless job that can put a strain on our resolve. So thank you for your efforts, they do not go unnoticed and are greatly appreciated. (Guyinblack25 talk 22:05, 24 August 2009 (UTC))Reply

Thank you. I really appreciate it and I'm happy I could help. Cheers, -Thibbs (talk) 01:53, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

IP Vandalism in Kirby articles, others

edit

Hi Thibbs. GuyinBlack mentioned that you should probably take a look at this incident at ANI, involving someone from multiple IP addresses over the last few weeks who's been adding unverifiable information to numerous articles (most notably all of the Kirby games). The ANI discussion is at WP:ANI#Persistent vandalism from a range of IP addresses. Thanks. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 00:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks very much for bringing this to my attention. I've responded at WP:ANI. I think that there are some similarities, but I'm hesitant to make any definitive call that these IPs are the same as Dr90s. I'll try to look into it in a bit more depth in the next few days. -Thibbs (talk) 16:52, 26 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Arbitration

edit

Hi Thibbs, I've removed your post from the arbitration requests page. Please complete the text of your arbitration request before reposting it. Thanks, Nathan T 22:15, 17 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, it took me a long time to find all the required difs, etc. I'll repost immediately. -Thibbs (talk) 22:16, 17 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Simply awesome

edit
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For your continuous efforts in dealing with the worst aspect of Wikipedia, sockpuppets. This particular puppetmaster is sneaky and persistent, but I feel confident with you on the case that it's all under control. I can't think of a more appropriate way to let you know your efforts haven't gone unnoticed than to award you this barnstar (and I see I'm not the first). Some Wikipedians are just smashing! -sesuPRIME 22:24, 18 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
Thanks so much. I'm happy to try to help out, and I'm really glad it's appreciated. -Thibbs (talk) 16:44, 19 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

List of Dance Dance Revolution characters

edit

Ha, I honestly did not expect anyone else to be working on that particular article. As you're probably aware that WiP has been sitting there for some time. I wasn't about to repost the article without some major retooling to how it was presented due to the fact that it's been deleted multiple times in the past (Yet never the less seems important enough for an article). I kinda like the way you have yours laid out better and I'll gladly merge the content of the two into mine if that's what you want. It may still be a long time before anything ever gets done with it though.

And remember, Wikipedia editors never quit, they just go on vacation. ^_^  æronphonehome  11:58, 21 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

OK great. No worries about how long it'll take. And yeah I'm not completely gone yet - just slowly trying to phase myself down to less contributions so I can deal with real life. I'll be back to full steam at some point. Cheers man, -Thibbs (talk) 01:40, 22 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Requested Translation

edit

Sure, I can do it; just tell me where it is. Paul Richter (talk) 07:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Great! I wrote back at your talk page. I hope the scan I'm linking for you isn't too difficult to decipher - that's the best resolution I could get... Cheers, -Thibbs (talk) 08:05, 30 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

jeff minter

edit

why did you undo it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.218.156.7 (talk) 06:36, 25 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Because the note was a footnote to the expression "software house," not a reference for the whole sentence. The way it looked was pretty weird since it had a citation needed tag immediately following what looked like the citation sought. -Thibbs (talk) 14:23, 25 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Music game

edit

Stop going around changing links to redirects, you are hurting articles and there is no reason to change them. TJ Spyke 21:16, 25 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

The changes I have made absolutely do not hurt the articles. They were all self-reverts I've been meaning to attend to for a long time per this earlier administrative warning. Please review WP:Redirect#NOTBROKEN. -Thibbs (talk) 21:18, 25 October 2009 (UTC)Reply
That does not mean you have to go back and revert edits, it just means don't do it in the future. It is hurting the articles to go and change them back to redirects (especially since some are months old). Just leave them alone and simply avoid doing it in the future, it's not helping anything to go around changing links back to redirects. TJ Spyke 21:28, 25 October 2009 (UTC)Reply
I disagree that it hurts. Per pagrashtak's suggestion I actually did read WP:NOTBROKEN where I learned that:
Reasons not to change redirects include:
  • Redirects can indicate possible future articles.
  • Introducing unnecessary invisible text makes the article more difficult to read in page source form.
  • Non-piped links make better use of the "what links here" tool, making it easier to track how articles are linked and helping with large-scale changes to links.
Furthermore, not only are Wikipedia editors asked not to worry about performance, changing redirects to direct links does not significantly improve performance anyway. See also Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups/About fixing redirects.
I've been meaning for quite a while to undo any problems I might have introduced into these articles back in 2008. But anyway you can do whatever you want. I don't think either way is that big of a deal to be honest. There's plenty of discussion under NOTBROKEN that suggests it's best to leave it in the format it was in before I touched it originally in 2008, but that's just a content guideline, right?... If you think you've got a better idea of how to proceed, you won't find me stopping you. Cheers, -Thibbs (talk) 21:41, 25 October 2009 (UTC)Reply
Nothing wrong with what Thibbs did, but boy was I confused for five minutes this morning when I looked at my changelog.  æronphonehome  01:19, 26 October 2009 (UTC)Reply
Yeah I probably should have done it differently. Like I said above, I'm not opposed to changing it back to the way it was after I changed in on 22 July 2008 (i.e. to avoid the redirects). I just didn't want to be the one who had made that executive decision especially in light of the comment I linked from user pagrashtak. The thing that made me most interested in restoring the original language was the fact that there is and has been legitimate debate at Talk:Music video game about whether or not the article should be called "Music games" or "Music video games." I have supported "Music video games," but by changing links to avoid redirects it looks like I have much more support for my preference than I may actually have. Hopefully this will allow users who wish to rename the article "Music games" a fairer chance to make their argument. -Thibbs (talk) 15:46, 26 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Help:Moving a page

edit

I noticed that you renamed Simulation videogame to Simulation video game by cut and paste on 13 February 2009. I may agree with that move. But please DON'T rename a page by cut and paste (see Help:Moving a page). That move has been reverted. If you still want to rename it, please place a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Thanks. --Pengyanan (talk) 00:01, 20 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I just placed a move request at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Simulation videogame will be hopefully moved to Simulation video game soon. Please rename a page by moving it, not by cut and paste in the future. Thanks. --Pengyanan (talk) 00:23, 20 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Indeed let's hope so. Thanks for alerting me to the fact that you caught this. As you can see from my edit history I haven't ever done anything else like that in the past. In an attempt to clear my name a little bit I'd like to point out that the advice listed at "Help:Moving a page" on 13 February 2009 was notably lacking the suggestion to post at "Wikipedia:Requested moves" in the event of a page requiring admin help (this has been updated on 24 June 2009). So in other words, it's not as if I didn't look for help before trying to BOLDly move the article. I actually spent some time researching before giving up and doing it the only way I knew how. Anyway thanks for taking the initiative to do it right for me, though. I appreciate it. -Thibbs (talk) 00:24, 20 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
Simulation videogame has been moved to Simulation video game. Thanks for your contributions. As for my user name, for some personal reason, I don't want to use Neo-Jay as my name, at least in some months. Maybe someday in the future I will re-activate it as my account name. Now I just use this talk page for discussion. Thanks.--Pengyanan (talk) 06:31, 20 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
OK great. (replied to the rest at user's page) -Thibbs (talk) 16:12, 22 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
Many thanks for your concern. I will consider it. --Pengyanan (talk) 20:43, 20 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
No problem. -Thibbs (talk) 16:12, 22 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Zelda translation

edit

I've put the translation in Talk:LCD_games_from_The_Legend_of_Zelda_series. Please have a look. --Paul Richter (talk) 03:02, 20 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Oh great! Thanks so much, that's perfect! -Thibbs (talk) 03:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
Glad I could help out. -- Paul Richter (talk) 12:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I like Chomper!

edit
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I like Chomper!--Oooh Chomper! (talk) 20:02, 21 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Duly noted, Samlaptop. -Thibbs (talk) 16:12, 22 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Re: Alternate account?

edit

Not me, haven't been on here in a long time. Were you thinking of that Dr90s guy? Haipa Doragon (talk) 13:09, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yeah I was. The edits are actually not improper. It's true that the edits concerned with Miyamoto serve to reduce him in position within the article, but they actually only restore a prior consensus version (to list directors alphabetically) so as of yet there's no problem. The only thing that made me do a double take was the fact that the editor who did that particular edit took a name rather confusingly similar to the name of an established and respected editor. Anyway I'll keep an eye open about the possibility that he's back and is lurking, but I don't think I'll file anything yet. I know Dr90s is still active at ja.wiki. He's made droves of edits there. It bothers me a little, but what the heck I spend minimal time at ja.wiki anyway. Anyway thanks. -Thibbs (talk) 15:36, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Abuse Report

edit

Hey Thibbs, I thought you would be interested to know that I have closed the Investigation for Samlaptop. You are of course welcome to add more as you see it but I've moved into the contact phases and have already had a conversation with one of their investigators. Also to make things easier the report has been moved to Wikipedia:Abuse response/Samlaptop. Let me know if you have any questions and THANK YOU for all of your diligence on this. Jamesofur (talk) 00:16, 4 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Oh excellent. I was glad to help, and I must thank you for doing all the 3rd party contact work (telephone, email, etc.). That's a job I really couldn't have done and I truly appreciate it. -Thibbs (talk) 00:24, 4 December 2009 (UTC)Reply
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I don't realy want someone contacting me about stop vandalizing wikipedia. I am a bit worried about you contacting my ISP. STOP IT! I don't want my ISP calling me just to warn me. I will stop. I don't want any more contacting on this!!!!! STOP IT NOW!--78.150.7.136 (talk) 09:04, 28 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I am not contacting your ISP. I strongly support the actions of the administrators at Wikipedia who are, though. It's really a pity you can't control your vandalism here. If you did stop vandalizing Wikipedia then no further abuse reports could be filed regarding your actions. Your ISP would also probably be less likely to go beyond a mere warning if your vandalism stopped. If you continue to vandalize, however, the administration at Wikipedia will certainly continue their efforts to stop you and correct the damage you are producing. This includes contacting your ISP and making follow-up contacts if the abuse persists. This may ultimately result in the termination of your service contract (or your parents' service contract) with the ISP. I strongly recommend that you cease your vandalism. Good luck. -Thibbs (talk) 19:11, 31 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ok. I will stop my vandalism now and I also have my own Wiki now so I will post on there instead.--92.11.205.4 (talk) 10:24, 1 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

You've said that so many times in the past that I don't really think I can believe you. I guess we'll have to just wait and see if you're finally telling the truth. I hope you are. Have fun with your own Wiki. -Thibbs (talk) 13:59, 3 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Do you think my behavior has improved now?--92.8.40.236 (talk) 11:15, 13 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

For the most part, yes. You are no longer blanking pages or replacing them with "Mmmmmm Vandalism," and that is definitely better than it was before.
The only problem is that because you wouldn't stop doing that before, you are a community banned user now.
Although no one may have told you that you were "community banned," because you are indefinitely blocked and through community discussion it has determined that no administrator is willing to lift or reduce the block, you are effectively considered to have been community banned. A ban is worse than a block because when a block wears off you can return. A ban is something that in theory lasts forever. The way to get out of a ban is to appeal it before ArbCom. Instruction can be found here.
Until the ban and blocks are lifted you are unwelcome to edit wikipedia. Your edits are considered to be unwanted edits. So in that sense your behavior hasn't improved that much. You still can't seem to respect the decision from the administrators that you aren't allowed to be here any more as a result of all those problems you caused earlier. I think you should stop editing Wikipedia and instead focus on your own Wiki like you said you would. If you're determined to edit Wikipedia, though, please stop making edits before you appeal your community ban to ArbCom. Until that time any editor can revert any edit you make at any time and can (and probably should) also report you to the admin for sockpuppetry and block- and ban-evasion. Edits made from sockpuppet IP addresses while you are under a ban do nothing to help your case that if you were allowed to resume editing without restrictions that you would respect the rules of Wikipedia.

Re: Suggestion

edit

Thanks a lot for that suggestion, my conviction was beginning to wane due to the fact I've got so much work to do. I find that sunthesis rule bizarre. Thanks again. Autonova (talk) 12:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

No problem. There are either problems with the synthesis rule or with most of Wikipedia depending on how you look at at. I think most people begin editing Wikipedia due to the way the "most of Wikipedia" already is so the problems seem to strike closer to the rule against synthesis to me. Yet, the synthesis rule is definitely necessary. It's hard to say where the line should be drawn. I liked the prior footnote allowing simple logical combinations, but consensus seems to have changed. Sadly the synthesis rule also seems to be mainly cited by those wishing to exclude material they find personally distasteful, but I try to always assume good faith. -Thibbs (talk) 12:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

BS Zelda no Densetsu Kamigami no Triforce

edit

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BS_Zelda_no_Densetsu_Kamigami_no_Triforce&redirect=no is marked as {{R from incorrect name}}, but you haven't provided the correct name -- {{R from incorrect name|correct name}} and I can't guess what it ought to be. Can you supply a correct name please? Josh Parris 06:48, 19 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

No problem. The correct name is simply "Zelda no Densetsu Kamigami no Triforce" (i.e. there is no "BS" component to the title despite the fact that it was broadcast via Satellaview.) This is a common mistake. I've made the change to the redirect. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. -Thibbs (talk) 17:16, 19 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, I'm cleaning up all the {{R from incorrect name}} templates at the moment. Josh Parris 02:15, 20 January 2010 (UTC)Reply


Thanks for your continued support with Fred Raynal's wiki page

edit

Not many guys nowadays care about this very special developer, and the few that do don't always check for news. Thanks for your support and fixes to my small contributions. I do the best that I can with the info I get (which is very limited, to be honest).

Sorry if sometimes I make some mistakes!!

RG4ever (talk) 06:03, 27 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

No problem. I have a special interest in Raynal ever since playing the first LBA back in 1994-95. I have followed his career with excitement and have taken great pleasure from his games. I appreciate your additions to the article because they keep me updated on new developments. I was really glad to learn about Soul Bubbles, for instance. Don't worry about any mistakes you might make. I make mistakes all the time. :) -Thibbs (talk) 15:25, 27 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Dr90s

edit

Thanks so much for stepping in, again. When issues like these pop up it can make working on Wikipedia discouraging, but it's editors like you that keep it running smoothly. If anything ever comes up again, just let me know if I can help in any way. Best, The Fwanksta (talk) 02:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

It's my pleasure to see that the disruptions caused by this particularly combative vandal are kept to a minimum. It seems that every time a major content dispute arises at OoT, he's at the root of it. For all the hundreds of edits that have been made to the article and that have been added in talk by this guy, I feel like the positive contributions he has made have been exceptionally minute. The content disputes on the other hand always become battlefields. The whole project is hurt by his presence. I know of at least one good editor who completely left the project after a number of unsuccessful conflicts with Dr90s in the early years. He's returned now, but I hate to think how many times this has already happened in the past.
Anyway, you're welcome. Thanks for letting me know my efforts are appreciated. -Thibbs (talk) 13:02, 4 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Re: your last set of comments at the Panesian AfD's

edit

For demonstrating an openness to compromise in service of finding meaningful consensus, even if that consensus isn't necessarily going to fully satisfy you, me, or anybody else...

(Seriously, and regardless of how it turns out, it's a relief to see even an openness to agreement between two previously opposed persons in these crazy debates!)

ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 16:32, 11 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I really appreciate it and I completely agree that it's refreshing to encounter other editors who are willing to compromise rather than just stick dogmatically to their position. In politics we are taught that the flip-flopper is someone who has no conviction. I think the flip-flopper (as long as he's not vacillating out of control) is a person who demonstrates that he has a brain. I'm glad we could both come to a respectful understanding. Cheers, -Thibbs (talk) 17:57, 11 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

List of Star Fox titles

edit

I noticed you added the Nelsonic game watch to the list of Star Fox titles-- I'm not really sure if it's inclusive in the list because it's a list of "titles", not media. If you think we should change the game to a media list, I'd probably be willing to along with it. -- Nomader (Talk) 05:29, 20 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure I understand... The Nelsonic game has a title. It's called "Star Fox." Does "titles" mean something different from its standard definition at List of Star Fox titles? -Thibbs (talk) 05:34, 20 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

re:Reference Library Request

edit

Hey Thibbs. Well, I bring some good and some bad news. The good news is that I have the image you wanted (it's a photograph instead of a scan, but whatever). And as you can see, the bad news is that it's a mere two sentences long! I doubt there's anything useful you can pull from it, but here's the reference anyway:

{{cite journal|author=Chris Slate|title=Lost in Translation|journal=[[Nintendo Power]]|date=February 2008|issue=225|page=61}}

Cheers. -sesuPRIME 01:00, 21 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well thanks all the same. Information on the subject that's written in English is scant enough that every little bit helps. I'm much obliged to you. -Thibbs (talk) 01:22, 21 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Possible Dr90s sockpuppet

edit

Hey man, I thought I'd relay my opinion to you since you were involved in Dr90s sockpuppet investigations, and I don't know what the procedure is regarding these things. But yeah, I'm pretty sure this user, Vesperydia, is another Dr90s sockpuppet. His virtually only contributions thus far to Wikipedia are to the Ocarina of Time article which, while not vandalism, go against consensus which was reached through much deliberation. These changes are identical to those made by Haipa Dragoon, a user you established was indeed a Dr90s sockpuppet. I tried to discuss my findings on the Ocarina of Time Discussion page under the section you set up, but Vesperydia deleted what I said and posted on my talk page warning me not to 'attack' editors or risk being blocked. I suspect he's a sockpuppet from the above behaviours and additionally his writing hints at a good grasp of English but with a few errors which seem similar to those made by Haipa Dragoon in his speech. Good luck with this information. Thanks, Autonova (talk) 11:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

He has a Japanese account as well so the indicators are all there. I agree this looks very suspicious. He is involved in promotion of Eiji Aonuma, he is concerned with game rankings, and as you say he seems to be making edits against the prior consensus. His edit-record is occasional and monothematic and above all there are not a lot of users who in their 13th edit would warn other established users that they were likely to be blocked. Would you like me to file a report with SPI? -Thibbs (talk) 13:00, 12 May 2010 (UTC)Reply
Yes exactly, I'm glad I've been useful. I wouldn't mind him being a sock puppet and keeping his account but whenever I feel like editing the Zelda page that I've spend weeks discussing over I know he's just gonna revert it to go along with his minority opinion. A report would be great, thank you. Autonova (talk) 17:31, 12 May 2010 (UTC)Reply
OK I filed a report here. You can add comments yourself under the "Comments by other users" section if you'd like to clarify anything that I missed or just to comment generally. I also gave Vesperydia a courtesy notification at his talk page. I hope all goes well. I'm actually on vacation just now. Cheers, -Thibbs (talk) 18:45, 12 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Bop It Article: Super Click-It

edit
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hi Thibbs

I can't seem to find any references on the Super Click-It Game. It is made by MGA Entertainment though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.171.240 (talk) 16:23, 21 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

If there are no references for Super Click-It then it should probably be removed from the article. It's not actually a Bop-It-related product is it? It's just a third party clone. If there are no sources then it's presumably not notable enough to merit inclusion on Wikipedia. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, Sam. -Thibbs (talk) 11:51, 28 May 2010 (UTC)Reply


Super Click-It is kind of a Bop It Product as it does have a Twist It. It is real but it's discontinued. M&S did sell it back in 2003 but they don't now.--78.150.49.200 (talk) 15:28, 28 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

A "Bop It" product would be one that is made by Hasbro or one of its affiliates and that uses the name "Bop It" or some variation of that. The Bop It article contains entries on the "Zing It," "Top It," and "Groove It" because they are similarly named products created by Hasbro or its affiliates, however they are not "Bop It" products but instead only similar "sister" products because they don't have the words "Bop It" as part of their name. They benefit the article by allowing the reader to find other related products. The "Super Click-It" is a third party product. Unless it can be shown through sources that it was inspired by "Bop It" or designed as a clone of "Bop It" or that it bears some relationship to Bop It beyond merely incidentally then it sounds very much like an unrelated topic (which might deserve its own article if sources could be found to demonstrate notability). Unrelated topics do not benefit articles. -Thibbs (talk) 15:35, 28 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Do you think I should have my main account back?

edit
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Thibbs

Since I stop vandalizing anymore, do you think I would be able to have my main account back? Then I would be able to make edits with my account and add references etc. I hope an admin decides to unblock my account so that I make make constructive edits on it.--78.150.49.200 (talk) 18:54, 28 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well I like the fact that you've been helping with the Bop It article today, but unfortunately I can also see that only a week ago you were vandalizing the articles on Physical education and Avatar. I don't think I could possibly recommend to an administrator that you should be unblocked because every time you've been unblocked in the past (3 times at Wikipedia and 4 times at Simple Wikipedia) you have returned to vandalizing. The fact that you were vandalizing articles as recently as a week ago doesn't encourage me. I'd be very concerned that in another few days you'd be back to vandalizing again.
In order to be unblocked you have to establish trust in the administrators that you will not vandalize. The best way to do this is not to edit at Wikipedia for a prolonged time. Simply ceasing to make vandalistic edits (for a few days) is not enough. You don't seem to be able to demonstrate an ability to restrain yourself from vandalism and your efforts to demonstrate this are having other negative effects. Right now you are banned from Wikipedia so whenever you edit using an IP address you are in fact editing as a sockpuppet. Like vandalism, sockpuppetry is also forbidden at Wikipedia so the administrators who might consider unblocking you won't like that very much at all.
If you really want to be a helpful and productive editor at Wikipedia then I suggest you stop editing completely for a period of at least a year. You should instead make edits at your own Wiki (which you told me about earlier) and then after the 1 year is up you could ask an administrator here to unblock you. You could then show him what sorts of good edits you would like to make by showing him your wiki and you should probably apologize to the administrator as well for causing so many problems here and at Simple Wikipedia, Italian Wikipedia, Japanese Wikipedia, and French Wikipedia among other places.
You seem to know a lot about the Bop It so it would be nice to work with you as a fellow editor rather than as the sockpuppet of a banned user. But that all depends on you. If you're serious about it then I wish you the best of luck. If you're not seriously interested in helping here then I wish you would find another less destructive hobby than vandalizing Wikipedia. -Thibbs (talk) 21:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

edit

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Benjamin William Mkapa Special Economic Zone
Straight Life (Freddie Hubbard album)
Heme-regulated inhibitor kinase
Scot Eaton
Alpha,alpha-phosphotrehalase
Gianluca Freddi
Alpha,alpha-trehalase
Dextrin dextranase
SERPINB6
Anthology of Tom Waits
List of fictional lions
Frederick Ransome
Jessica Priest
Excitebike (series)
8 March 2009 Baghdad police recruitment centre bombing
Skitz
Nidovirales
Marshmallow Alpha-Bits
List of best-selling video game franchises
Cleanup
Abby Klein
Homer Price
Nintendo
Merge
List of Mario games by genre
Gameplay of Pokémon
Ric Lansing
Add Sources
Homophone Word Game
Epic hero
Princes of the Universe
Wikify
Holly Sutton-Scorpio
Dental pellicle
Sharon Newman
Expand
Echoing Green
New Play Control!
Tori Scott

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:07, 2 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I left detailed feedback at your talk. From what I see here I give you a 27% accuracy rating for interest but only a 15% accuracy rating after mischaracterizations about actual help needed are factored out. This compares to a 35% inaccuracy rating for interest and 38% grey area. -Thibbs (talk) 22:42, 3 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
I responded to your feedback on SuggestBot's talk page too, just wanted to pop in here and again say thanks for the detailed feedback, it's greatly appreciated! Nettrom (talk) 16:10, 5 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
My pleasure. -Thibbs (talk) 05:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Nintendo Edits

edit

"Hi, I was interested to see the edit you made in relation to the Satellaview subsystem. It's not very well-known to English-speaking fans and I was surprised by your ability to dig up so many names for the Personnel Lead column. Out of curiosity, where did you find this information?"

We have had a nintendo staff data project at n-sider.com for many years. this was just a small bit of that information. all those credits come from the japanese bsx games themselves. (NOAWiki (talk) 02:04, 4 June 2010 (UTC))Reply

Could you provide me a link? I did a little searching and couldn't come up with anything at n-sider. I would be curious to see how the information you guys have over there compares to the information I have collected on my own. I am also interested specifically in some of the details you had listed in connection to BS Zelda no Densetsu: Inishie no Sekiban. I am curious, for instance, as to how you know that Tatsuo Nishiyama and Yuichi Ozaki were the Leads out of the 9 Production Staffers that are listed in the credits for the game. In addition I cannot find the names of Yoshinori Tsuchiyama, Tatsuya Hishida, or Keiko Izawa among the personnel listed in the credits. I'm not saying that this info is inaccurate, mind you. The credits are notably lacking info on personnel including the names of seiyu. I'm just curious as to what part of the Japanese bsx game the names were extracted from. Or if not from the game itself then from where? -Thibbs (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

"I was also wondering what your criteria was for which 4 leads to include. I noticed for instance that with BS The Legend of Zelda you listed the director (Takao Shimizu), the SoundLink coordinator (Tatsuya Hishida), one of the designers (Hisashi Nogami), and one of the sound personnel (Akito Nakatsuka) as the Lead Personnel. But then in the commented out portion of the table you say "Please put no max than 4 lead designers on the Personnel Box. It is enough and would otherwise ruin template." If you're interested in designers, should you put Tetsuka Takashi and Shigeru Miyamoto in there and cut out some of the people who only worked on sound aspects? I'm not saying that we should definitely change it I'm just wondering how you came up with those 4 people out of the list of all those that worked on the game."

Miyamoto nor Tezuka worked on any of the BS-X games. Other staff at Nintendo were delegated to those game projects. I usually put the producer at the manager section and put the actual hands-on staff leads usually. I think its very accurate actually. If you are a Nintendo staff enthusiast.. stay tuned for more of that stuff (NOAWiki (talk) 02:04, 4 June 2010 (UTC))Reply

Both Miyamoto and Tezuka are listed in the credits for BS Zelda no Densetsu for "Original Game Design" (オリジナル ゲームデザイン). Is there any reason to suspect that this is inaccurate? The game also lists Ayaka Yakushiji as a coproducer with Yamato (the same is true for Inishie no Sekiban incidentally). It's true the Yakushiji was St.GIGA personnel and not a Nintendo employee per se but the same is true for Hishida (SoundLink Coordinator) as far as I can see. Meanwhile, Nogami is listed as but one of five designers and Nakatsuka is one of two sound staff (the other being Yuichi Ozaki). How do you know that Nogami and Nakatsuka are the staff leads? The credits don't seem to reflect this.
The staff positions (i.e. personnel) that have been listed in the credits for BS Zelda include:
  • Voice Cast - 3 people credited
  • Voice Broadcasting & Scenario Coordinator - 1 person credited
  • Designer - 5 people credited
  • Programmer - 11 people credited (split between BS System Programmers (4), Game Programmers (4), and Map System Programmers (3))
  • SNES Sound - 2 people credited
  • Original Game Design - 2 people credited
  • Special Thanks - 5 people credited
  • Producer - 2 people credited (1 Nintendo, 1 St.GIGA)
  • Voice Broadcast Director - 1 person credited (a St.GIGA employee)
  • Game Director - 1 person credited
and
  • Production Copyright - 2 companies credited
If I was trying to list the most important "Personnel Leads" I think I would name Game Director (Shimizu), Voice Broadcast Director (Itakura Hiroyuki), Voice Broadcasting & Scenario Coordinator (Hishida), and then the Original Game Designers (Miyamoto and Tezuka). Under "Producer" I would list Yamato and Yakushiji. Does this make sense? -Thibbs (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
The credits we archived are for the actual development staff of the game, the St. Giga's production credits are merely for the music and voice streams that would accompany several BS-X games. The two were kind of merged together in a package, but at the same time they are completely separate. In the full credits, we will list them, but for a Nintendo centric small input field, i would keep it to the hands on guys from Nintendo. Takashi Tezuka and Shigeru Miyamoto were designers of the original Zelda games, and they are credited for that. But they were not involved in the actual BS-X games themselves. Again, you will soon see an archive where all the information is listed my friend. (NOAWiki (talk) 18:05, 4 June 2010 (UTC))Reply
An archive at n-sider you mean? I hope it lists its sources rather than just the names without any indication of where they came from. I'd love to find out how you guys determined that Yoshinori Tsuchiyama, Tatsuya Hishida, and Keiko Izawa had been involved with Inishie no Sekiban for instance since they don't appear in the credits. That sort of information is usually extremely hard to find. -Thibbs (talk) 18:20, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Bop It Bounce Instructions

edit
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hi Thibbs

Hasbro have uploaded the Bop It Bounce instructions here: http://www.hasbro.com/common/documents/87e9fbe8d56fe1124784f6d2788f8ce8/FA475DB419B9F369101CC25EBC794204.pdf

It's the best time to add more info about the game. Their copyright has a pattern. e,g: Bop It Download was copyrighted in 2006 and released in 2007. Bop It Shout was copyrighted in 2008 and released in 2009 and Bop It Bounce was copyrighted in 09 and released in 2010. So that means we might see a new Bop It being copyrighted this year, and being released in 2011!--92.12.120.17 (talk) 20:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

I added the info to the page, but it was a difficult decision for me to do so, Sam. The fact is that I could get in trouble for making edits on behalf of banned users. If you read *this* Wikipedia Policy rule you will see that because you are banned, when you tell me to make edits in place of you I am doing something called "meatpuppetry". It is similar to the sockpuppetry you are already very familiar with. If I carry on making edits like this then I could be warned by the administration and I could eventually end up getting banned just like you. That would make me very unhappy because I am here to improve Wikipedia and getting banned would mean that I would have to stop improving it. I enjoy improving Wikipedia because it helps people learn about the topics I am writing about. I usually write about things that are interesting to me and that I think other people might be interested in as well. I also spend some time trying to reverse the effects of vandals like you and others who try to destroy all of the hard work that editors like me try to put into the project. If I end up getting banned for performing edits on behalf of a banned vandal and sockpuppetmaster then I would probably cry.
Please don't ask me to make any more edits on your behalf again. As I've told you many times, you shouldn't be here at wikipedia any more. You should stick to your own Wiki and make edits there. I told you before that you should wait at least a year without doing any bad things at Wikipedia before you ask the administration to unblock you. Well although you were trying to be helpful here by linking me to the instructions for a Bop It game, you were also doing something naughty. You were using a sockpuppet account again to make edits even though you are banned. What this means is that the 1 year waiting time now resets to 7 June 2011. If you make any more edits on Wikipedia while you are still banned then the waiting time will just keep stretching out 1 year in advance of your last edit. If you ever want to get unblocked then I suggest you stop editing at Wikipedia altogether. Even edits of talk pages are forbidden. You had the privilege of editing your own talk page at first but then you abused that privilege as well so you can now no longer make edits at Wikipedia. Your best option is to wait without making any edits for 1 year and then ask the moderators to unblock you. I know I'm being repetitious but I want you to understand that what you are doing when you try to help is actually making your situation worse for yourself. Instead of having a recorded 129 instances of sockpuppetry in your past (by last count) you now have 130 (accurate as of today). Add this to the huge number of acts of vandalism that you have performed and your case looks pretty bad. If you continue to make edits - even helpful edits - then your number of sockpuppetry actions increases. This is why I keep suggesting that you stop editing Wikipedia for a year and instead only edit your own Wiki.
I don't know how else to explain to you your situation and how to explain what it will take for you to become a member in good standing again. I hope you will listen to my advice this time. -Thibbs (talk) 18:40, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

WP:FEED

edit
Hello, Thibbs. You have new messages at WP:FEED.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Thanks! That's just what I was looking for. -Thibbs (talk) 05:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Brain Warp Article: Sister Products

edit
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hi Thibbs

I have added info about the Brain Shift on the Brain Warp article. I was wondering if you could improve the section in any way? The good thing is that I manage to find the instructions for reference!--78.150.49.200 (talk) 10:28, 12 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Looks like User:Fences and windows already fixed it up to the point where it looks good. -Thibbs (talk) 20:06, 12 June 2010 (UTC)Reply


Special Note for Samlaptop
Sam, you should read these policy points:
1) WP:INDEF - This says that since you have been such a problem editor in the past and have caused so many problems that you are indefinitely blocked then provided that no administrator is willing to unblock you you are "effectively considered to have been banned by the community." You were unblocked several times and you betrayed the trust those administrators put in you over and over again so I think it's extremely unlikely that you will be unblocked. This means that you are effectively banned. So we go to point #2.
2) WP:UNBAN - This says that to become unbanned you must write to the Arbitration Committee (arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org) and that if it is an indefinite ban then you must wait more than 1 year before writing to them.
  • So it looks like I was wrong about the idea that your sockpuppetry and vandalism resets the 1 year counter, however I still think that you are really damaging your own case by engaging in these activities while you are banned because these are the very issues that got you banned in the first place and they seriously undermine your claims that you will cease engaging in these activities after the 1 year is up.
  • Since your last indefinite block was issued on December 27, 2009 that means the soonest you can write to ArbCom is December 28, 2010. Since your last non-indefinite block for violating of the rules was on June 12, 2010, however, I think it would be the most prudent for you to wait (without any more sockpuppet editing) until June 13, 2011 before you ask to be unblocked and unbanned. I honestly wouldn't bother writing to ArbCom to be unblocked until at least 1 year and 1 day following your last violation whether you were blocked for it or not.
Best of luck in trying to keep yourself from violating the rules again! -Thibbs (talk) 17:34, 14 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thibbs, I do understand about the bans and blocks, but at the moment, I'm more insterested in editing at Wikipedia, not at my own wiki. I would rather had my own account back on Wikipedia so that I can make new articles, upload images and improve them. Please adminstrators. I want to edit on my own account. I never vandalise Wikipedia anymore. Would you be able to dicuss about unblocking me Thibbs?--89.243.30.91 (talk) 16:18, 26 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi Sam, I'm glad you saw my note for you. I understand that you want to edit Wikipedia, but at this point I think it's impossible for you to do so without breaking the rule against sockpuppetry (See WP:SOCK). You saw earlier how I said that the earliest date by which you could appeal to get your ban removed is December 28, 2010. I know that your ISP assigns you an IP address dynamically which allows you to evade the ban and edit Wikipedia despite the ban, but what you may not realize is that each time you evade the ban you are actually doing something called sockpuppetry. Just like your vandalism, your sockpuppetry is another thing that is against the rules at Wikipedia. In fact that's the second reason why you've been banned so many times. First it was just for vandalism and later it was because of "block evasion" which is another phrase for sockpuppetry.
Right now there's no way that you can properly edit Wikipedia from a normal account because you are banned. If you would like to properly edit at Wikipedia in the future, however, then you should really stop editing while you are banned. If an administrator who is reviewing your file sees that you've repeatedly evaded your many bans and especially if he sees that you've done it recently, then it is really unlikely that you will ever get your account back. The only reason I keep suggesting that you edit your own Wiki is to suggest some other activity besides editing Wikipedia.
I know how much you want to edit here but when you edit while your ban is still in effect it really hurts your chance of ever properly editing here again. I would strongly recommend that you stop editing using IP addresses and then that you wait until at least June 27, 2011 before asking the Arbitration Committee to give you another chance. I am not an administrator, I'm just a simple editor. So I'm afraid I don't have the power to unblock you. The administrators also don't read my talk page. So if you want to talk directly to an administrator then you could try one of the people on this list. I would strongly recommend, however, that if you want to talk to an administrator that you should just write an email to them using the email function (just click "E-mail this user" under the Toolbox section from the links on the left side of the screen). If you try to talk to them by editing their talk page then that would be considered sockpuppetry again...
Good luck, Sam. -Thibbs (talk) 05:17, 27 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

You are now a Reviewer

edit

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:59, 18 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. That's very cool. I'll be happy to help review all articles subject to review. I can see this as being quite helpful to Wikipedia. -Thibbs (talk) 20:30, 18 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Radical Dreamers: Nusumenai Hōseki

edit

Hello! Do you happen to have a scan of the reference you added in the Radical Dreamers: Nusumenai Hōseki article? As a fan I would be interested in seeing this reference :) Jonathan Hardin' (talk) 16:34, 15 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Unfortunately no. Satellaview Tsushin scans are pretty hard to come by... I did a bit of google searching just now and the best I can find is this link (in Japanese) where you can see the cover and table of contents for the specific volume you're interested in. I hope that helps a little bit. -Thibbs (talk) 18:17, 15 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Re: Another Nintendo Power request

edit

It says "Inside Zelda: Part 11" in a bubble at the top left of the article, but it seems like the actual title or subtitle is "Beyond the Landscapes in Hyrule". The author is Makoto Sasaki, and the pages are 36 to 38. You were right about the date and issue number. Tezero (talk) 20:47, 15 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Ah, great. Thanks! -Thibbs (talk) 22:56, 15 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Music video games categorization

edit

Hi, could you take a look to my message? --Micru (talk) 16:26, 17 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the heads-up. I responded at the category talk page. Cheers, -Thibbs (talk) 18:47, 17 July 2010 (UTC)Reply
Well, I noticed that there is a lot of hard work behind, so better to ask. I have added a new comment about new cattegories. Thanks for the follow-up. Cheers, --Micru (talk) 12:59, 20 July 2010 (UTC)Reply
I honestly haven't done that much with the music video game articles and categories for several months/years now. My interests have shifted a bit. I do remember trying very hard to get a good system for organization that would stand the test of time and there was a good bit of discussion about it at the time but I sadly forget most of the particulars. If you can see areas that need improvement, by all means feel free to make improvements. Good luck. -Thibbs (talk) 14:57, 20 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hamasaki

edit

What exactly was it that Hamasaki co-hosted? You added that she co-hosted a "SoundLink magazine", but for one thing, one can't really "host" a magazine. Was it like a talk show or something? エムエックスさん 19:22, 22 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes the program that she co-hosted was much more a variety-style talk show than a true magazine (see this link for an example of the same show hosted by Hikaru Ijuin). The term "SoundLink Magazine" is something Nintendo and St.GIGA came up with to describe their (at that time) novel satellite broadcast. In looking it over I can see how it is confusing so I have created a convenience redirect that more clearly explains what it was that she hosted. Perhaps it would be best to enclose the term in quotation marks as well. I'll make the appropriate change. -Thibbs (talk) 19:36, 22 July 2010 (UTC)Reply
Oh, I see. Thanks for clearing it up. One more thing, assuming that there's no definite English version of the title (放課後の王様), do you think it would sound better as "After School King"? エムエックスさん 04:01, 23 July 2010 (UTC)Reply
As far as I know you are correct that there is no definite English translation of the title. My usual rule of thumb is to translate the Japanese "XのY" to the English "Y of X," so "After-SchoolのKing" becomes "King of After-School" but I concede that "After-School King" would certainly have the same meaning. If you think it is grammatically preferable in this format then feel free to make the change.
  • I would recommend, however, that a hyphen be used between "After" and "School," considering that the term "After-School" is a compound adjective. This is something I was considering earlier as well but I think it is a necessity if we go with "After-School King" because without the hyphen, "After School King" could be interpreted as either "After-School King" or "After [the] School King."
So generally I am fine with whatever you decide, but please let me know which title you end up using. Cheers, -Thibbs (talk) 04:52, 23 July 2010 (UTC)Reply
Ok, I ended up using "After-school King". Also, I changed the "[[SoundLink Magazine]]" to the [[SoundLink]] "[[SoundLink Magazine|magazine]]", since it's just magazine that needs the quotes. エムエックスさん 17:59, 23 July 2010 (UTC)Reply
Perfect. I was actually thinking about suggesting that earlier as well but I didn't want to alter Nintendo's original expression. Your solution to split the phrase into two different links is ideal. -Thibbs (talk) 18:15, 23 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Please stop placing socktags

edit
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hi Thibbs

Please could you stop placing socktags on my ips. It's rather annoying. I want my ban lifted now. I can proove that I can behave on internet sites here: Windows 7 Forum

The admin was very pleased on behavior and he won't ban me again.


I hope I get unbanned, Sam--78.145.232.106 (talk) 17:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

No you don't understand. By editing while you are banned that proves that you cannot behave on this internet site. Sockpuppetry is forbidden behavior. You should probably go ahead and actually read WP:SOCK this time. Actually reading it will explain to you why it is forbidden. Your only chance of having your ban lifted is to completely stop sockpuppeting. -Thibbs (talk) 17:40, 26 July 2010 (UTC)Reply
  • SAM: Let me explain how to prove that you can behave on internet sites. Wikipedia's policy is such that you aren't really out of options. Your ban is not really a complete and total ban, but to get it lifted you have to do things according to Wikipedia's rules. If you can't follow Wikipedia's rules then nobody will think that you should be unbanned. Your repeated failure to follow Wikipedia's rules was the reason you were banned in the first place.

    So to get the ban lifted you have to prove that you are a changed person. You have to prove that your old edits that broke the rules are the kind of edits that you would never make again and that you are sorry that you made them. To do this you have to find a place on the internet that is NOT Wikipedia to act like a good person as a demonstration. So you kind of have the right idea about trying to demonstrate your ability to be good through your posts at windows7newsinfo.com. That is an excellent step in the right direction. You haven't been banned from that forum yet and considering your track record that is a very good thing! But the other part of your demonstration that you are now a reformed person who wouldn't violate Wikipedia's rules is to stop violating Wikipedia's rules completely. And that means to stop making sockpuppet edits here.

    Right now you are making a good attempt to be a good person at windows7newsinfo. That's great! But at the same time you are constantly breaking Wikipedia's rule against sockpuppetry. As I told you before, EVERY TIME YOU EDIT HERE WHILE BANNED, YOU ARE BREAKING THE RULES. If you can possibly manage to stop breaking Wikipedia's rules for 1 year while still making good and useful edits at a place that is NOT Wikipedia then you will have demonstrated that you may be capable of respecting the rules here and the administrators might consider your appeal to be reviewed again. They will not even consider your request to be unbanned if you cannot stop sockpuppeting. That means that you will remain banned. It's really up to you. Good luck, -Thibbs (talk) 10:27, 27 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Haruhiko Shono/Zeddas

edit

Hi. You efforts on Haruhiko Shono's page are very much appreciated, but I assure you that he did not work on Zeddas. You can see the full credits on MobyGames, it was directed by Yoshio Kawasaki and Yayoi Yamada. Haruhiko Shono had nothing to do with that game, other than working at Synergy Inc. It's a good thing, too, since that game is quite sub-par, in my opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.23.71.174 (talk) 06:49, 16 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hmmm... If what you say is true then I agree that the game (Zeddas) should be removed from the article. I haven't seen more than pictures and clips of the gameplay and I agree that it doesn't really look like Shono's style at all. I am quite confused, though, about the general concurrence by numerous third party sources that Zeddas was directed by Shono. I was concerned that your earlier edits were speculative or even vandalism but you seem to have based your opinion on the credit evidence presented at MobyGames. So what I'll do is to add a "dubious" tag to the game in the article to show that the game has been questioned whether or not it is by Shono and then I'll flag the whole section as "disputed" in the hopes that someone can come up with better evidence than either of us (Neither MobyGames nor the sources I used are considered particularly reliable at Wikipedia sadly). I'll also start a thread on the Haruhiko Shono talk page and you can add your thoughts to it if you'd like. This way there'll at least be a record that some sources say one thing while others indicate another. If no further information emerges in a fair period of time - a few weeks to a few months at least then I think we should start discussing complete removal of the game from the list. Again, I am completely fine with removing the game if indeed he took no part in it but at this point the evidence is fairly split as far as I can see. -Thibbs (talk) 11:50, 16 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Proposed deletion of Zentropy Partners

edit

The article Zentropy Partners has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:N a defunct name of a company that was absorbed by MRM Partners Worldwide which closed in 2009.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jeepday (talk) 12:39, 21 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

The topic appears to be covered by sufficient reliable sourcing to signify its notability. I'll see what I can do to add sources in the next few days. -Thibbs (talk) 02:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Improve the Bonzi Buddy article

edit
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hi Thibbs

Please could you try to improve the BonziBUDDY article and find sources for release history and bonzi.com.--92.28.133.165 (talk) 07:53, 24 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi Sam,
Editors at Wikipedia are not allowed to make edits at the direction of or on behalf of banned users. See Wikipedia:BAN#Edits by and on behalf of banned users. If I do as you say then it is likely that I will also be banned. I don't want to be banned. Sorry but I can't help you in this way. -Thibbs (talk) 12:00, 24 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I am not a banned member. I didn't get any confirmation from Wikipedia that I was banned.--92.28.133.165 (talk) 13:27, 24 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Right now you are using a sockpuppet account to evade the indefinite block that was imposed on your many many Samlaptop accounts, but this is what it says at WP:INDEF: "If no administrator is willing to lift the block, the blocked user is effectively considered to have been banned by the community." So yes, you are banned. You don't need confirmation from Wikipedia. I am sorry that I can't help you. -Thibbs (talk) 13:46, 24 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Arbitration notice

edit

You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#MOS:JP – Romanization for words of English origin and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

Thanks, Prime Blue (talk) 22:19, 7 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I've commented at the ArbCom page. I can't be of much use regarding the underlying dispute since I've lost track of the argument weeks ago. I do agree, however, that it would be nice if Ryulong could cease making edits related to the dispute as long as the discussion is ongoing - especially considering the trivial nature of the matter. -Thibbs (talk) 01:58, 8 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Request for mediation of Video games developed in Japan

edit
A request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to Video games developed in Japan was recently filed. As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. The process of mediation is entirely voluntary and focuses exclusively on the content issues over which there is disagreement. Please review the request page and the guide to mediation requests and then indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you would agree to participate. Discussion relating to the mediation request welcome at the case talk page.

Thank you, AGK 22:58, 21 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the heads up. I certainly agree to mediation on this issue and I have indicated so at the request page. I think mediation is rather overdue by this point. -Thibbs (talk) 00:40, 22 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

NuJam Guitar

edit
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hi Thibbs

The NuJam guitar is a bop it product. It is also called Rock It. It was made by Hasbro in 2003.--86.134.148.233 (talk) 12:17, 27 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

I think only you and "bozmagic" call it "Rock It," Sam. There are no sources that call it that. We must strive to keep Wikipedia free of speculation, fan cruft, and inaccuracies. -Thibbs (talk) 12:24, 27 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Amazon also call it Rock It. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hasbro-Rock-It/dp/B00008NB3U--86.134.148.233 (talk) 12:44, 27 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Amazon.com is not usually used as a source. At this discussion at WP:RS you can see that Amazon Reviews can only be used as sources about themselves (i.e. about the review itself). So this wouldn't qualify. Furthermore the claim that is being made isn't just that NuJam guitar is called "Rock It" by fans and Amazon.com's Ben King, but that NuJam Guitar is somehow a member of the Bop It line of toys. Reliable sources would have to be found for both issues. We'd need to find sources that clearly state that:
  1. NuJam Guitar is called "Rock It" by Hasbro, the press, or so widely by fans as to be notable
  2. NuJam Guitar is part of the Bop It series as Hasbro defines it.
I can't find sources that cover any part of these two statements. A better alternative would be to create a new article called NuJam Guitar. Hopefully some user in good standing will do that in the future. -Thibbs (talk) 12:57, 27 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

I understand why I was blocked now!

edit
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hi Thibbs

I do understand why I was banned in the first place. I didn't understand what I was doing at the time but now I do, I promise not to avoid my ban every again. I do know now it's forbidden to Sockpuppet on Wikipedia so I will stop. But I really want to create articles on electronic games as I have the whole lot from Hasbrro. This will be the last time until 2011 and then I'll speak to the admins. See you next year dude!--86.134.148.233 (talk) 11:12, 28 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Great! I hope all works out for you. It'll be fun to have you editing alongside the rest of us on the side of good instead of on the side of evil. -Thibbs (talk) 11:44, 28 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

And a final question before I leave until 2011: Will I be using my Samalaptop85213 account? Will my scokpuupet records be destroyed? Will my abuse response be deleted?--86.134.148.233 (talk) 12:49, 28 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

There's no guarantee that the administrators will decide to unblock you. All I'm saying is that there's no chance that they will unblock you before you've spent a year away from Wikipedia making constructive contributions to a different project that you can then show to the administrators here and beg them to give you another chance. They aren't obligated to unblock you.
If they do decide to unblock you, though, then they might allow you to use the Samlaptop85213 account if you want to. The records will almost certainly stay and the abuse response will not be deleted. This is to enable administrators to act quickly if unblocked users who were blocked for vandalism/sockpuppetry have a relapse and start to vandalize/sockpuppet again. Assuming you stop vandalizing and sockpuppeting when you come back then there should be no problems for you even though the records are preserved. Good luck. -Thibbs (talk) 13:59, 28 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.