This is an archive of past discussions. 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.
Edit conflict. When I went through them, I must have missed a few links that you didn't miss. So when I saved my edit later, it reverted those. Sorry. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 02:53, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Seems like an ok user to me. But the title templates will get out of hand. Not too sure how to approach this. Might want to bring it up at WT:PW. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 01:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Re: Templates
I've been making them simply for easy navigation, I wont be making any more Championship templates as I was just making templates for major titles. TheJayExperience06:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
HBK
So do you plan on leaving it 8 months (maybe more) off date? It isn't a very good article being so out of date-- Falegas (talk) 18:54, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
It actually gives three options, but not for sports. It states "v (legal), vs. or vs (sports)" All of the articles I moved are sports articles, so they use "vs". If they has been articles about legal cases, I would have used "v".--2008Olympianchitchat
I see how one could read it that way, but I read it as v for legal, vs. without any designator, and vs for sports. Personally, I prefer vs. as well, but I was trying to follow the guideline. If you are going to move this one, then please move all the other fight nights as well, they all have been moved in the same manner. I don't see how WP:ENGVAR has anything to do with it, however. And you can't just cut and paste to move pages. If you want them moved back, you need to actually move them or list the pages at WP:RM.--2008Olympianchitchat14:22, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Sonic 3
Hi.
Can you chip in on the Sonic 3 Talkpage - it took a long time to gain consensus on the box art, and it normally degenerates into an edit war (See talk page) - I think we can justify having both boxarts in the article, without violating WP:FP. Would value your input, preferably before it all kicks off again for the umpteenth time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.137.159.61 (talk) 17:37, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Just a note, its not mandatory or necessary to replace every redirect of the ECW article.--₮RUCӨ23:20, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:
Regarding your revert[1]. sure, the old template converts all the mumbly junk required by {{death date and age}} into a real date. The question is, why needlessly complicate dates with all this mumbly number junk? Which is more readable:
{{Death-date and age|February 24, 1993|April 12, 1941}}
or
{{Death date and age|1993|2|24|1941|4|12|mf=y}}
The new template does all the stuff old template does, and actually, quite a bit more. Two years ago wikipedia didn't have functions that could handle dates except in that numeric form. There is currently no need for it. Certainly folks can use the old one if they want, but it is arcane. -J JMesserly (talk) 23:18, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Who is gonna read it though? Someone just looking at the page will see the same result, and since it is their death date it won't be changing. The old one does the exact same job but takes up less space. Using the template also lets those who use British formatting to have it displayed DD/MM/YYYY (which is another benefit of doing it that way). TJSpyke23:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
The person that first puts it in. The people that update it because someone messed up on the date, and they mess up and change the birth date day not the death date day because they figured death comes second not first. It's unnecessary baloney. Regarding euro style,
{{Death-date and age|24 February 1993|12 April 12 1941}} works just fine for me.
It sounds to me like you are used to the old way, and that's fine- you can use the old template all you want. The docs just affect what new people do, and this makes it easier. Although it isn't relevant for wrestlers, the new format also handles other problems like specifying time like for military events supporting timezones, and also handles old form dates like under Julian calendars. The old template doesn't do any of that. Like I said, unless you start doing write ups on wrestlers from the 17th century stuff like that doesn't matter. But why should folks be using one date template for those, and something different for wrestlers. More detail on some of the arcane nonsense of the old template is discussed here, and the overwhelming concensus among contributors was that the old template bites. You are welcome to your POV though. I just don't get why we need to make it any more difficult for new folks than it has to be. Face it, this syntax is totally unnecessary and rude:
I don't know why the death date is listed first (common sense dictates you would put birth date first). Other than that, I think the older template is just as easy to use. I honestly don't care if others use it or not, I will still use it for that reason. The end result is the same for readers, so I don't care. People don't even need to use templates if they don't want, they could manually enter the info. TJSpyke01:15, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
←Sure. It's trivial when you know it. But what could be easier for a newbie than this:
Preference, I suppose. I was taught good capitalisation, it was practically beaten into me when I was in primary school, and so when it's a link like [[professional wrestling match types|professional wrestling matches]] I change it to [[Professional wrestling match types|professional wrestling matches]] 'cause a) it doesn't show up in the main text and look stupid, so I feel I can, and b) purely personal preference. One of my many idiosyncrasies I guess. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 20:29, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
I read what you posted on the HBK page when you reverted back the changes which I did (adding details for the Wrestlemania match). They had added it to the Undertaker's page and I think they do it very commonly, especially when the announcements are made officially for such a big event as Wrestlemania. The WrestleMania XXV page also contains it, so I am not sure why it cannot be mentioned on the wrestlers' pages. I'm not denying that there is a policy, but I'm just saying that the policy doesn't make sense to me because if its stated in one page of Wikipedia already, then why can't it be stated on another?
The Ultimate X match was the first match announced. Before the first Impact after Against All Odds the promos were introduced announcing that the Ultimate X match would return at Destination X. Before any storylines were developed for Destination X, the Ultimate X match was announced.--WillC22:56, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Well I believe the In Demand link also states it and it came out before AAO. But I don't care, just trying to make sure everything is correct and is following guidelines.--WillC23:16, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
The reason I keep going back is because having all the matches in the table is OR for the order. You are saying that is the order the matches are in, as before for all the other events. We keep the matches outside the table until they take place so we don't have to involve the number. Plus you keep changing the link to the woman's tag match.--WillC01:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
There are currently 559 articles in Category:Stub-Class Professional wrestling articles. It still would be greatly appreciated if anyone could help expand and/or source an article or two. A list has been placed on the stub article subpage of stub articles of well-known wrestlers that should be fairly easy to improve.
Events Calender
This section is intended to warn users about potential targets of vandalism and speculation: professional wrestling events from major promotions for the month of March.
Well that's a point. In Shane Douglas IC case, no I would't consider him holding it for a day. And that's not what I'm disputing, anyway. The thing is Austin, for example, had a 140 days reign plus a 15 min reign. How do we differentiate both reigns on the combine table? Cause the combined tables aren't entirely exact. Sure Austin's second reign didn't last a day but his first didnt accurately last 140 days either if we counted the combined minutes (which is impossible). Who's to say Austin's first reign lasted 139 and x hours or 140 and x minutes? It creates a double standard. The thing is in Douglas case, were his reign to be represented in a combined table it would be easy to represent it as <1, but in cases like Austin those 15 min in which he held the title must be accounted in addition to the estimated 140 days he held the title. At least that's my view on it. Secretaria03:16, 16 March 2009 (UTC).
I agree. It's a tricky subject cause less than a day reigns will either be represented by 1 day or 0 days and neither is entirely accurate so I guess it will all depend on the point of view of a majority. Anyway, it's a long debate and it's really late on my part to continue this now so I'm leaving. Do what you gotta do. Secretaria03:30, 16 March 2009 (UTC).
I know WWE is celebrating tonight's episode as the 500th episode, but it will actually be #501. WWE did the same thing with Raw last year. They celebrated an episode in November as the 800th episode, but the real 800th episode was in September. WWE is also calling this years WrestleMania the 25th anniversary of WrestleMania when it is actually the 24th anniversary. In short, WWE doesn't only go by the actual numbers. TJSpyke22:18, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Ah ok sorry about that, I originally was correcting the date (Because I thought some dude didn't update that) and then decided to add in a reference, anywho no harm done I guess. Afkatk - The Mind Reader (talk) 22:26, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
VR
I didn't, some ip created the articles about three to six months ago. Oh I remember, it was during last year's VR. Just thought it would be easier, less characters. Smaller article.--WillC---Joe's gonna kill you!!!)18:39, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Okay, just wondering. Been trying to clean them all up today, and when Nici changed the format to the table she changed all the pre show matches to dark matches. So I don't know which is which anymore. But it won't matter if I ever get all these done. And lets all hope this turns out to mean something.--WillC---Joe's gonna kill you!!!)00:54, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, TJ. Do you remember me? I'm the person that upload a lot of photos and wrote the text in spanish. I have to tell you that I have upload a lot of photos of Dicember to Dismember 2006, with Burke, Daivari, Thadys and the Chamber. Can you put they in English wikipedia? Please, answer me in my discussion. --79.156.23.40 (talk) 22:49, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
PD:Do you se the photos of André and Ricky the Dragon?
Sure, you need to register if you want to upload them here though (IP's can't upload). They need the right license tags too. As for pics, I wish I did. TJSpyke00:46, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Oh, no, you don't understand me. I have upload photos in commons, my name is Techarrow and y tell you if you can put the photos in the articles, because I don't kwon where the photos will be better. --79.156.23.40 (talk) 14:40, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Howdy, I think you misunderstood. The user who moved the article is a long time wikipedia administrator and the sole contributor to the article. JackSchmidt (talk) 03:01, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
I think you still misunderstand. It is not really a move, it is a new article. Please look at the page histories.
Due to technical reasons, not even an admin can currently move the page. This is because of a new feature currently in testing called the abuse filter.
I made quite a few points in our discussion of the World Tag Team Title's status right now that I wish for you to reply to at [2]. I would like to read any rebuttal you may have to the points I have made. TonyFreakinAlmeida (talk) 22:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
TNA Grand Slam
As explained by Mike Tenay on the last episode of Impact, AJ winning the Legends belt established him as the first Grand Slam winner.
If you look at the Grand Slam Champions article, here on Wiki, you'll see the source, so it's not simply a case of taking my word for it.
Tenay mentioned it when A.J. came down to the ring to be interviewed by Jim Cornette
I'm not the only one to bring it up, and like I said, go to the external links on the Grand Slam page, and you'll see an outside source backing me up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vjmlhds (talk • contribs)
Chyna's reign as 61 days was that was and CORRECT for years on wikipedia, also in June Chyna sat out of her contract negotiations therefore she was taken off TV, and so was the womens championship. The title was vacted for one day! it was inactive for many months. Seeing as the womens championship was inactive and taken off TV her regin ended in June due to her and the title being off TV. Yes this is a grey area, and both our perspectives can and are in their own way correct, but using WWE.com isn't a great tool, most of their regin ending and starting dates are totally wacked out compared to this list! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.3.236 (talk) 05:20, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Yes the title became inactive, but she was still champion. Why would we not use WWE's word for when they considered THEIR title to become vacant? It's pretty clear here, WWE says they didn't strip her of the title until November and so that is when we have her title reign end. Anything else violates WP:OR. TJSpyke18:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
If you wanna go by WWE.com, fine, it says she held it untill she left the WWE. She left in June, she went home in June. Her Contract expired in November. therefore June was when it ended —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.87.41 (talk) 12:23, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
No, she left in November. She didn't appear on TV after June but she was still with the company. Try checking the link in the article, this is open and shut. TJSpyke14:51, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
That kid is holding the NWA World Heavyweight Championship, so I am not sure what good it would do in the TNA World Tag Team Championship article. I will take a look at Christian's article and see if I can put it in. TJSpyke18:02, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Oh, really that is the NWA Title? Sorry, I confused him with the TNA title. In any case, we can put the photo with the kid in the NWA Tag Team Championship article? Thanks for put the Cage photo. I couldn't --79.156.23.40 (talk) 18:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
The reason I did Creed and Booker is, Creed has only been in TNA since April. Only won a 27 day tag belt that on tv was three days long. Wrestled on the indy circuit and debuted in TNA under a different name then changed it upon his second. As for Booker, He has Booker T and King Booker. I even asked one of my friends if he knew who King Booker was, he said yeah. I asked about Booker T, he said no. So, it seems to me they are somewhat common together. There is the explanation--WillC---Joe's gonna kill you!!!)22:15, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Go ahead and add the sources, but lets keep linking to the character. Lets face it, when don't know when Kaz quit being the character and there isn't going to be a formal announcement that Kaz has taken the character back over. This way, we have no problems on that situation.--WillC---Joe's gonna kill you!!!)00:02, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I still think we should link to the character only. I believe Daniels was at DX, but I can't prove. It would be better to state all the information on the Suicide article. The Title reign goes to the character and not Daniels nor Kaz. Daniels and Kaz get a few notes that they were playing the character but no backstory on it. Also, about Hard Justice 2008, I liked to the Mexican 6 man tag since I had nothing else to link to. That was the closest match type, until I created the Multiple man teamed section for 6, 8, etc man tag matches.--WillC---Joe's gonna kill you!!!)00:13, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
There are currently 564 articles in Category:Stub-Class Professional wrestling articles. It still would be greatly appreciated if anyone could help expand and/or source an article or two. A list has been placed on the stub article subpage of stub articles of well-known wrestlers that should be fairly easy to improve.
The Article alerts for WP:PW is now up and running. This page lists recent changes that affect the status of an article in a variety of categories. Please use this in maintaining the articles of the project.
Events Calender
This section is intended to warn users about potential targets of vandalism and speculation: professional wrestling events from major promotions for the month of April.
It was reported by a Nielsen Media Research ratings report that the March 19 broadcast of TNA Impact! earned a 1.34 television rating, the highest number the promotion has ever drawn.
Howard Finkel was announced as the seventh inductee into the WWE Hall of Fame as a part of the Class of 2009 via WWE's official website.
Editing tips
This is a section in the newsletter devoted to help familiarize project members with the Manual of Style and general editing tips.
Consider expanding an article from the project's list of stub articles and nominating it at Did You Know?. The project's goal is to have 100 total DYKs by the end of the year, and we are currently on 74.
When editing an article, use the edit summary to provide a brief summary of your edits; this helps users understand what was changed in the article.
All Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point-of-view, representing fairly, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources.
The project's New Year's Resolutions are listed here, and a list of topics that are close to Good topic status is listed here. Consider helping by achieving an aim listed or by improving an article on the Topics list to Good Article status.
I meant like "Green Mountain State Arena?". The question mark implies you are guessing because you don't know for sure. TJSpyke16:09, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm currently taking out the arena names column for 1993 (and will do for the other years) so that name will be gone shortly, but I see what you mean, the 1993 set of dates should be what it will all look like. Afkatk - Afro Twinky (talk) 16:12, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Don't Bite
I noticed the message you recently left to WWE Extreme Rules. Please remember: do not bite the newcomers. If you see someone make a common mistake, try to politely point out what they did wrong and how to correct it. Especially when you consider how often the information is changing, your comment to the IP in the edit was really uncalled for. Mshake3 (talk) 16:15, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible I could get your opinion on the finished (as I write this I'm working on it) 2009 section on the episode list, that's what I'm hoping everything should look along the lines of, unless something is changed, thanks. Afkatk - Afro Twinky (talk) 14:00, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Yea, I'd be inclined to go with the source that's already in the article, though if you want to change it to the other source feel free to go ahead. It's a shame WWE doesn't post the times for eliminations for the RR for the older years like they did this year, it'd make everything so much easier. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 06:40, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
i said they were right about the 5 titles and that jeff was not the second to do it. so before you start trying to be all smart why don't you try learning how to read a paragraph to the bottom line so you don't look stupid for calling someone stupid. maybe if you want to go back and read that, we can clear this whole mess up? i admit that i was wrong about that, but not about him being the 1st to grab the 6 titles. not the second to win the 5 titles. i admitted i was wrong because i am not a egotistical kind of person. when you can admit you were wrong for that comment, maybe we can talk like intellectuals about wrestling or trade tapes or something. for the record, i'm not calling you stupid. you were calling me stupid for thinking something that was in the paragraph, which just comes off looking stupid. later broham. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.248.229.206 (talk) 03:09, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Re: Lockdown
I'm cool with it. I was just looking for an excuse to change Three way match to Three Way Dance. No biggie. I have a thing for correctness, for some reason I can't stand to see things like Tag team only have one capitalized letter when I feel both should since it is a match and division name. Plus I prefer Three Way Dance over Three Way match, IDK why. The samething applies to Standard wrestling match and singles match, I just prefer standard over singles since it makes more sense in my mind and is easier to use in a sentence. I'm weird, but your revert doesn't bother me, if it did I would have said something and reverted you back. Also, I read the spolier reports and the following is someone who returns on the April 16 episode of Impact! to face Kurt Angle, click here.--WillC04:22, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
They didn't even announce the match. They have no build to half the matches announced. The IWGP Junior tag, Women's Title, Queen of the Cage, and Xscape matches weren't ever announced. Tenay mentioned the Xscape match would be at lockdown and a few of the members. The rest just showed up on the web site. I just use Three Way Dance since that is usually what TNA has. They rarely name it anything else. I did find one time they used Triple Threat instead of Three Way or Three Way Dance. It was at Destination X 2005 for the Ultimate X Challenge match. In the tale of the tape they say Triple Threat and have it on the graphic.--WillC22:08, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Please take this as a formal warning. If you continue to edit war on the article referenced above, regardless of if you violated WP:3RR or not I will block you. Please try using the articles talk page. Thanks, Tiptoetytalk01:21, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Open Season Wii.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NanohaA'sYuriTalk, My master02:42, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
April 2009
Well, I add that, because I saw the ppv again of my WCW ppv collection..please dont edit that!..all my edits are beauce I saw the ppv tapes..thanky you Eric. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericystephi (talk • contribs)
Yes, my apologies for that. I read the diff wrong and so I thought you had removed the links. Once I realised my mistake, I reverted myself. Sorry for the misunderstanding. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 19:08, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, but its an abbr. of his ring name. I think its best just to have it separate, like I did to his and MVP's article.--Truco00:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Must have been a mistake. I probably somehow read the comparision wrong. I don't even remember that edit actually. Either I read it wrong or my brother was screwing with my account. My apologies. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 04:15, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
I was thinking of publishing the lists today once 1993 is complete and then proceed to work on 1994-2008 at a later date once they are completed, what would you think of that? Afkatk - Afro Twinky (talk) 17:05, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Sure, I understand, but marking the cell with 0 is kind-of unencyclopedic. Obviously, "Vacated" did not hold the title for 0 days... what about an N/A or a -? I still think the number of days the title was vacated for should be the most notable one, but that's just me. However, it's obvious that 0 does not go there. Raaggio17:35, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, marking it with a - would be fine, but that's not what the article is doing. It's showing the 0. Raaggio17:36, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Re: Turning Point (2004)
Hi. I just reviewed this, so it's a little disheartening to see an edit war start right after the review finished. Can you do me a favor? If you have any concerns, take them to the talk page and I'll try and help you, ok? Viriditas (talk) 02:40, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for taking this to the talk page. I'm sure we'll have a quick resolution to this issue in the next day or so. Viriditas (talk) 11:18, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
One other thing I forgot to point out: I really don't think you needed to use Twinkle to revert Wrestlinglover; That kind of reverting leads to unnecessary escalation and can be perceived as rude. Save the Twinkle reverts for vandals and newbies, not for long-term contributors. Viriditas (talk) 11:35, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Problems with two photos
Hi, TJ. I have a problem ith two photos that I have uploaded. Are there
That is what I'm starting to think. The base is all sliver with just gold outlining. I'm trying to work on the belt in a subpage, so I can take it to GAN. The belt design is a problem considering I can't tell how to describe a belt I don't know what is made of.--WillC20:52, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Sacrifice 08
Just to tell you, the reason I have the amazon link in there is to follow other examples, such as movie articles, which have those sort of links in the external link section.--WillC00:06, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I'll remove it. I haven't read any of the policy articles fully yet. I got ADD and ADHD (yes, somehow I have both) so I never can finish any of those articles.--WillC00:23, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
ADD is really just a slower form of ADHD. Attention Deficit Disorder and Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder. No one is supposed to have both, but somehow, the doctor said I had a bit of both. Plus those articles are really boring, so that doesn't help.--WillC00:29, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Okay, first it seems someone can't remember what year it is, and second why would WWE take Shark Boy over Angle, Sting, and Foley. [6]--WillC21:49, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
No, that wasn't what I meant, but I misread what was written. I thought it said he was the most famous wrestler to have ever signed with WWE, meaning he was more famous than Hulk Hogan and Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart every other WWE wrestler throughout history. Oops. :) -Mike Payne (T • C) 02:05, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
The Colóns
I undid this revision, in my opinion the first defense of the undisputed championship is notable for the team, subsequent ones are just filler, but this one turned them into the first team to defend both titles at once. Just letting you know. Regards, - Caribbean~H.Q.02:12, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Lions Gate Entertainment
Hi.
While you are probably correct, it surprises me that a seemingly experienced Wiki user has the audacity to simply move a page with out any form of consensus. Problems arise in the case where the page then has to be moved back. Maybe it's just the brashness of youth ;-) Normally a consensus would have to be reached before moving a page. Happy editing. TINYMARK09:40, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi again.
I don't disagree with the move (in this case). But I was under the impression that some form of agreement was required before a move to avoid unnecessary work on the part of the admins. I can't imagine that anyone will contest the move. All the best. TINYMARK07:29, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Err, I'm not convinced that the legal name of a company is necessarily the same as the way they spell the name in their corporate communications and their branding. I would think the latter is more important and what Wikipedia ought to use. Also, I'd agree with TinyMark -- you don't always know what will be objected to, and the most justified things may have problems. So please ask for concensus first! Thanks. jhawkinson (talk) 14:58, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
From April 10 to May 10, WP:PW will be hosting the first Professional Wrestling Stub Reduction Drive. Details can be found here and all memebers are encouraged to get involved.
Events Calender
This section is intended to warn users about potential targets of vandalism and speculation: professional wrestling events from major promotions for the month of April.
Avalanche have confirmed that it is not the final boxart and the link provided as a source for the image is a dead link...why do you keep reverting it? The boxart has only been seen on a few game sites and that link I posted. Everything points toward it being fan-made. So basically it can be cited as an official boxart on wikipedia until it's confirmed as UNofficial? So I could upload a picture of of some scribbles I did and use that for the buxart until Avalanche says it's fake? No wonder so many people think wikipedia is unreliable...IT IS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.199.45.110 (talk) 23:50, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
It's a bad crop of this artwork for the game: http://www.juegaunjuego.com/wp-content/uploads/just-cause-2.jpg that on top of it not being used officially by avalanche AND the first appearance of it having "only on xbox" and "xbox live" logos (both of which are NOT true) seems like proof enough to me until a confirmed REAL boxart is published. Also what proof do you have that it's real? 12.199.45.110 (talk) 00:09, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Normally it's not a problem. Tonight it's like 6 or 7 editors at least. It seems like every editor editing a article related to the draft tonight is too lazy to get links right and are content to do a half-assed job (forcing other editors like myself to fix their laziness). TJSpyke01:33, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
In most cases, it's not laziness. With casual editors, maybe. But, more experienced editors may be editing multiple pages in a short period of time, and don't notice their mistake immediately. There are only a few things on WP that I feel are worth getting angry over, and this isn't one of them. But, I don't think that's the issue the only issue here: pause for a moment, take a deep breath, and relax. Fixing grammatical mistakes is huge part of any wiki (trust me, a large portion of my own edits are fixing such mistakes). It certainly isn't anything to exasperate yourself over. Bmf 51 (talk) 01:48, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Well u said on the Melina history page that I didn' t edit the page correctly ? So I was just wondering what you meant ? Melina was drafted to Smackdown so what do u mean ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrick700 (talk • contribs) 01:53, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
