User talk:TreyGeek/Archives/2008

Welcome!

Hello, TreyGeek/Archives, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 03:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Full Contact Fighter Database

The Full Contact Fighter Database at http://fcfighter.brinkster.net/ is down temporarily for maintenance and will be back up shortly. Just because the database is being upgraded does not make the claims support by this source "uncited claims." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Id4abel (talk • contribs) 22:46, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

There has been a lot of incorrect edits and claims about Amir Sodallah's record. There was one link to a website claiming to have his fight record but was full of malware. If this is a legitimate site then my apologies. If this is more speculation, malware, or incorrect information, expect for it to be reverted. --TreyGeek (talk) 00:56, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Looking at the FCfighter listing now. Shows his name, weight, affiliation and country. No record. Should I assume there is more to this site if we are using it as proof of his record? --TreyGeek (talk) 01:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Perfectly reasonable. The Full Contact Fighter Database had all his amateur record details last week but the upgrade looks to not be going well. Took me a minute but found another database http://www.mmawiz.com/fighters/21055:Amir_Sadollah with the same details that the Full Contact Fighter Database used to show. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Id4abel (talk • contribs) 01:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

FYI

[1] — BQZip01 — ^talk 18:58, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Howdy

Thanks for weighing in at Talk:Texas A&M University. We're always happy to have other editors watching the page, and I see from your contribs that you are already helping to revert vandalism (thank you, thank you). I see from your user page that you are about to be a student there. I hope you enjoy it - I really miss College Station and the A&M campus. If you have any questions about Wikipedia, A&M or anything else, feel free to ask, either on my talk page or via email. Gig 'em :) Karanacs (talk) 04:13, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Help?

I didn't mean to be considered a spam by posting about Internet Radio shows regarding Deadliest Catch. Let me know how I can list it and not be considered Spam? Its my first post to Wiki and want to do more to educate the community about DC.

Thanks!

PastorOfFishing —Preceding unsigned comment added by PastorOfFishing (talk • contribs) 19:14, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I believe that any link to an Internet Radio station that is put up on an article will be link spam. The article is supposed to describe and inform about its subject matter (in this case the TV show The Deadliest Catch). A link and information about a radio show about the TV show does not help support the article about the TV show. --TreyGeek (talk) 20:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah ok...so basically I should create an entry about Deadliest Radio and then reference to Deadliest Catch and Alaskan Storm? —Preceding unsigned comment added by PastorOfFishing (talk • contribs) 20:56, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Only if an article on an Internet Radio show/station meets Wikipedia's guidelines on notability. --TreyGeek (talk) 21:00, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Jason Guida

The said "unreferenced" section on Jason Guida doesnt need references, all you need to do is scroll down and see who he has defeated or read the Ultimate Fighter: Team Nogueira vs Team Mir Wikipedia article and his Sherdog.com fighter page, which both have already been listed as references.Sepulwiki (talk • contribs)

The unreferenced section was the intro which, at the time, didn't have any references cited. While references have been added (note, circular references to Wikipedia are not generally acceptable) there are still statements that could use verifiable sources (his upcoming match for instance). --TreyGeek (talk) 19:39, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

-All references have been cited, thanks for the heads up I suppose...., i do not see any other statements that need to be cited, if so it is otherwise irrelevant. Sepulwiki 20:40, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Texas A&M

Howdy! As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject Texas A&M, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Texas A&M University. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks and Gig 'em! Oldag07 (talk) 18:17, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Joe Riggs

Hey, if you're still online; could you help me out over at Joe Riggs? Some anon keeps adding what is probably his "win" over Riggs. 100% certain it's BS, but I can't revert anymore because of 3RR. Thanks! --aktsu ^(t / c) 19:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Heh... I'm around, dealing with issues of Daniel Cramer(fighter) vs Dan Cramer. I just reverted the anon's edits. If he does it again, I'll report him to be blocked from editing. --TreyGeek (talk) 19:37, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Well, the 'consensus' part was wrong. (I was looking at the wrong line in the diff when I wrote that). The reason I changed it back is because the History of video game consoles (sixth generation) article mentions itself as the '128-bit era' and also mentions that the Dreamcast and PS2 used this as a marketing ploy (though that statement is uncited; I do seem to recall seeing some adverts to that affect, but I could be wrong). Also, the History of video game consoles (fifth generation) article mentions that it is sometimes referred to as the '64-bit era'. If you want to change it back, it doesn't really make that much difference to me. Also, my apologies for the misleading and incorrect edit summary. Regards. Thingg^⊕⊗ 04:14, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Efrain Escudero

Unlike some of you I don't rely on TV, I get real proof! I did alot more then a "quick search".

• [2] MMA site
• [3] MMA site 2
• [4] His own myspace, states nothing about Mexico, but every thing about Arizona!

So think what ever you want! But please get proof to back it up next time. --EHDI5YS (talk) 20:48, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Heh... I saw your edits to the UFC page and your comments on its talk page. I was never really against you or "for" them. I never had a chance to really research the problem and find sources of my own (I've got a nice to-do list at the moment). It's good to see that someone found sources to back up their claims. Good job. --TreyGeek (talk) 21:12, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm not going to lie, I just copied an pasted it for the UFC talk page. I have nothing against you at all! I just felt a little backed up against the wall, and for that I apologize! Thanks, if you need help just write me and I'll see what I can do? --EHDI5YS (talk) 21:21, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Can you please come read the arguments again and leave you opinion again, I would like every ones take on it, to solve the problem.--EHDI5YS (talk) 22:11, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what you want to do with this [5]? It's the definition of the word nationality. I would introduce it my self but I already see that people don't like to be shown that they might not be as "100%" right as they think. Also I have a huge problem with disrespect from people I like to call Internet thugs, those are the one who talk a big game, but would never really do sh!t even if they did see you face to face. So before I get in trouble and get blocked for some time on Wikipedia, I'll let you do what you think is best. --EHDI5YS (talk) 15:58, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

PlayStation 2 Edits

Black Reign 56 (talk)Excuse me Treygeek how was that edit vandalism? What was wrong with that edit. There was nothing wrong about it, it its true to. Please explain how it is vandalism —Preceding undated comment was added at 17:48, 24 December 2008 (UTC).

The statement you added was both unsourced and added nothing to the article. Therefore I viewed it as nonconstructive. You'll note that no one has un-done my revert of your edit, so other apparently agree with the revert. I viewed your talk page and saw numerous warning for improper and nonconstructive edits including two recent blocks of your editing privileges. That's how I justify my actions. --TreyGeek (talk) 17:55, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Black Reign 56 (talk)Yeah true, but that has nothing to do with this edit. What I contributed for Playstation 2 is true, and NOT VANDALISM. I will prove it to you right here - http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/sports/wwesmackdownvsraw2009/index.html?tag=result;title;0, http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/sports/maddennfl09/index.html?tag=result;title;3

. Please don't say I vandilaze Playstation 2 when I didn't.Black Reign 56 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 18:02, 24 December 2008 (UTC).

The warning that was left on your talk page was a standardized warning template available from WP:WARN. Due to the number of warnings you had already been given, I used the most appropriate warning message. If you wish to not receive these types of warning messages be sure that your edits add something constructive to the article and is sourced properly. Failure to do so, will result in future warning messages of this type and could result a possible block of your editing privileges. Even though you have blanked your talk page, someone did leave you a welcoming message with lots of links and information on proper editing habits. I would highly suggest you review that information. --TreyGeek (talk) 18:11, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Black Reign 56 (talk)Yeah I'll get blocked just for trying to improve an article. That is B.S. I see many wikipedia users not source their articles why not go after them ?? I don't need advice on how to use wikipedia. Everyone on this site always tries to tell me what to do, and how to edit. I don't need wikipedia's advice, and most of the administrators think they are better than everyone else on wikipedia. I got blocked a long time ago when I tried to improve an article. I just don't understand wikipedia sometimes ? Black Reign 56 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 18:24, 24 December 2008 (UTC).

FYI, I do revert all unsourced edits on the articles that I watch. I did not single you out. Also, if "everyone on this site always tried to tell [you] what do to, and how to edit" perhaps you should listen. Things are done a certain way in order to attempt to have articles held to a high standard. --TreyGeek (talk) 18:29, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Black Reign 56 (talk) I didn't know that every new edit someone makes needs to be sourced. Why doesn't it say that when someone tries to add content to a page TreyGeek? Perhaps that you also need to follow Wikipedia's guideline instead of just claming every unsourced edit added to a wikipedia page is "vandailism" I don't really like most of Wikipedia administrators, because I think most of them abuse their power as administrators, and think they are so cool, and better than everyone else on wikipedia. This is just my opinion though everyone has the right to their own opinion. Black Reign 56 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 18:44, 24 December 2008 (UTC).

WP:PROVEIT --TreyGeek (talk) 18:58, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Black Reign 56 (talk)Alright now I know, but what about other new wikipedia users. Let's say a new user tries to improve a biography and make it better. This is what Wikipedia would say do not vandilaze this page or you will be blocked. How are they going to know they wikipedia edits need sources. It should say so at the top of the editing page so people will know. Why does everything need to be sourced if it is common sense. Black Reign 56 (talk)

When I improved the Van Halen discovery page I noticed you changed my edit. Supposedly vandalism because I said -Van Halen has not released an album since 1998. It is unknown if Van Halen will release a new album with David Lee Roth. Tell me why I would need to source that ? It is on the page when the last album was released 1998 Van Halen III. This edit was not vandalism it I was trying to improve it. Black Reign 56 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:12, 24 December 2008 (UTC). \\

Have a happy new year geek Black Reign 56 (talk) 21:49, 30 December 2008 (UTC)