User talk:Doktor Wilhelm/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Welcome!

Hello, Doktor Wilhelm/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  CambridgeBayWeather 13:07, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I Never Did Say Thank You...

Hehe, I've only just realised that the above message isn't just a automatic system Mailout or such, and was actually posted by a real person? I feel bad for never saying thank you, also if anyone ever reads this, I'd really be thankful for any advanced help about Wikipedia (in Layman Tems)...  Doktor  Wilhelm  00:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Help? Well you seem to be doing a fine job on your userpage, so you must be an intelligent, computer literate person. I'm sure if you just click the links above and explore for a while you'll find everything you need, and more. Sometimes you can find helpful stuff using search. I found http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_essays an interesting browse, but it's probably not what you need right now. Have fun! --Akiyama 01:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you.  Doktor  Wilhelm 

I made this userbox

This User is a fan of: "Burlesque and the Art of Teese".

I just want to know what I'm ment to do with it, specifically how to make it better known? anyone know?  Doktor  Wilhelm  03:48, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

{{helpme}}

Hi. What do you need help with? - Rjd0060 04:00, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Use the infobox as a template. Store it in one of your subpages, like User:Doktor Wilhelm/Userboxes/Fan of Burlesque, or store it at User:UBX/Fan of Burlesque or some other creative name. Oh, and please ask your question below the {{helpme}} template. Hope I helped! Goodshop 04:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Help me

{{helpme}}

How do I complain about a fellow wikipedian, making disruptive edits and being offencive towards myself?  Doktor  Wilhelm  15:22, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

If the user is violating No Personal Attacks you can make a report at Administrators' Noticeboard/Incidents. If it is just vandalism a report at Administrators' Intervention against Vandalism will be sufficient. Hope this helps! - Rjd0060 15:28, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Special Effects on Hellraiser

What would make it okay to include that information in the article? Surly it is of use to know just how much Clive Barker worked on the film? (Sorry to aske here, but I wasn't sure how these things work!?)  Doktor  Wilhelm  17:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Have you listened to the commentary yourself? If you have and you can tell me the specific DVD release etc, I'll put something together and cite it properly. The key is that we can't simply paste stuff from IMDB; and if someone decides to ask for a citation (as they did here), there needs to be attribution to a source. --Domestic Correction 18:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I never really knew it was a " copy and pasted" job, I'll have a look see about the DVD (I've listened to it), it's part of a box set released by Anchor Bay (though I doubt that link'll be any good for citation), I'll have to find it for more details, if you let me know the exact details needed I'll try and supply them (sorry if this is causing any trouble, I'm still a bit new at this)  Doktor  Wilhelm  19:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, the link's sufficient for me to write the citation, as it gives me the right title. Primary sources are allowable, provided they're properly cited. --Domestic Correction 20:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Virtual Console

No problem. I know they upgraded the visuals, but it was still the same basic game. I kept it in on the Virtual Console page, but mentioned the fact that it had been translated as part of Super Mario All-Stars (not that there is much to translate in the game though). TJ Spyke 20:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Nintendo Page Redesign

A new page design is being considered for the WikiProject Nintendo page. A rough draft can be viewed here. Please add all comments and thoughts to the discussion. From the automated, Anibot 22:43, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Revert of edit by Froth on Nintendo

There wasn't anything wrong with reverting his last edit, but you should be more careful with what you call vandalism, he could easily have been led to believe the false information (Nintendo's founding date) from an error on a website, magazine, etc.. Only claim vandalism when it's obvious, and per WP:Vandalism#What vandalism is not (although I would assume you've seen that by now). Haipa Doragon (talk) 21:45, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, and sorry, I assumed vandalism, because Froth changed a message left by someone else, that was intended to tell people that the date was right (and asked for it not to be changed), into a misleading message, even a quick scan of the article would have proven the original date to be right (as this wasn't changed, only the date at the top of the article was changed), and as such, unfit for change! Though if there is an easier term than "Vandalism" to use in such matters, I will gladly use it (I didn't mean any trouble).  Doktor  Wilhelm  22:14, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I Feel Bad Now!  Doktor  Wilhelm  23:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

CruftC

Cruft is a shortening of "fancruft". It generally means it has lots of information that fans of something, but only the fans would be interested in. Just so you know :) i ^(talk) 00:11, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Metal Sonic

I keep removing the part about Silver Sonic II from the "games"-section of the article because it has nothing to do with the games. Mentions of the various robotic Sonic incarnations in the comics belong in the "comics"-section. Nowhere else in the game-section of the article are the comics versions of robot Sonic's mentioned. And in order to keep the article uniform and simple to read, i feel that the paragraph about the Sonic Adventure-robot Sonic should be no exception. Rattis1 (talk) 19:01, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Though the character from the game influencing the comic, is not details of the comics chracter, but a detail of interest about a character in the game, who otherwise, really isn't worthy of his own section with the lack of anything other than: "He's in Sonic Adventure", I could understand if this "uniform" article idea waas applied to all Sonic The Hedeghog articles, with any mixed information being seperated into Games first and then comics, but because of influences on both, this wouldn't be possible!  Doktor  Wilhelm  20:35, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Invader ZIM

Hi, I was just wondering if you wanted to help on Invader ZIM being moved since you're a member of Invader ZIM task force. :)Leslie Granger (talk) 03:32, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I must note that Invader ZIM and there is already a Invader Zim are two diffrent articles, for the same thing? I just found this out while looking into moving the article!  Doktor  Wilhelm  20:06, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

NIN Wikiproject

I'd like to invite you to join the newly-formed Nine Inch Nails WikiProject. There's alot of NIN-related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help us get this project off the ground and a few more Nine Inch Nails pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks! Drewcifer (talk) 03:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Dealing with spam

Hi Doktor. Regarding your post to User talk:24.211.8.58, the way to deal with this is to revert the links and warn using the templates series {{Spam}} ({{Spam2}}, {{Spam3}}, {{Spam4}}). Since when you came across the conduct the user had already added many, you would revert them all, then warn once using the first level warning. For each subsequent instance after that first warning, you would esclate the warning until reaching {{Spam4}} which is a final warning. If the conduct continued after placing that template, you would go to WP:AIV and report the user or ip to get a preventative block (follow the instructions there). There are many such escalating series depending on the type of improper conduct. Please see WP:UTM for a organized list of warnings. The helpme template was not a bad way to go, but it's more for placement at your own talk page. Hope this helps. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:25, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

"In the original STH 2, there are no rings, and debug doen't bring up any rings!"

Here :) -- RattleMan 17:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Emulation is pretty much a perfect copy of the original. I don't know why your game seems to not let you place rings in DEZ... @_@ -- RattleMan 14:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

At first you removed my edit because you said it was not possible to get rings then you claimed that wikipedia was not gamefaqs to defend your decision to remove my edit after i posted video proof that i was right. I don't know what cheat you used but it wasn't debug mode and if it was it would be pretty hard to miss the rings when they are one of the only two items available. In case you didn't see this already here is the video proof and i just did the same exact thing on my sonic 2 cartridge http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVcEWyoKuOc Next time make sure you know what you are talking about before you tell others they are wrong. I will not undo your revision only because I stated it would be my last edit on the issue. The only reason i linked to the video was to show proof that what i said was valid and I should not have needed to in the first place.

Help Me

{{helpme}}

User:TTN keeps deleating articles, with out warning: specifically: Other characters in Sonic the Hedgehog (games) and Other villains in Sonic the Hedgehog (games), I really don't want an edit war, but I don't know what I should do!

Next time, he does it again, give him a final warning. If then, he should repeat his behavior, you can report him on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Then the administrators will take care of him. Happy editing.--Thw1309 (talk) 18:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Block threats

It's pretty obvious that there's disagreement over TTN's trimming of material, right? Do you see people both agreeing and disagreeing with it on the talk page? You'd do better to engage in actual discussion of the issue instead of just leaving warning templates which threaten a block. Friday (talk) 17:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

The block threats arn't about "triming of material", they have been removing entire articles without any warning!  Doktor  Wilhelm  18:37, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, but please don't call it vandalism. It's not. Friday (talk) 18:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is, as they keep doing it, with out first discussing it, or giving any reason!  Doktor  Wilhelm  18:40, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Sonic articles

That content does not belong on this site. You are welcome to utilize Wikia if you would like to continue editing that form of content. Restoring the articles only prolongs the inevitable, so it would be much better if were to stop reverting them. TTN (talk) 17:55, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

The way you are editing the articles, would be more suited to something like a Wikia! But that isn't my main problem, it's your lack of warning &/or discusion before removing/redirecting the articles!  Doktor  Wilhelm  19:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

No, Wikia is for fan information, not pruned, encyclopedic information. If I had proposed removing the lists, I would have received the same response that I am now, so that is also pointless. TTN (talk) 20:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

So, because you knew no one else would want it deleted, you deleted it wthout warning? your not really pruning anything, just copying bit's about the chraracters from the game articles, and adding it together within one big List, which is not good enough to survive on wikipedia!  Doktor  Wilhelm  20:32, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, people would be fine with them being merged and trimmed; just not you guys. There's no point in trying to run it past die hard fans. The list is fine, and it has a better chance of surviving than the others. It'll be beefier after I merge the characters that are less important than Amy. TTN (talk) 20:37, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I will be reverting those articles and setting up a merge discussion for the rest non-notable characters. Please leave the articles as they are until the discussion is over. If the discussion does not end up working, the articles can go back to the way that they were. TTN (talk) 16:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Why can't you just leave them alone until the merge discussion is over?  Doktor  Wilhelm  17:03, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I need people to be able to see how the articles are going to be structured. Just please leave it. TTN (talk) 17:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Please remember that if the discussion does not end up working, everything will go back to the way it was. You have nothing to lose. TTN (talk) 17:09, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I am not trying to win anything, if you continue to remove content from Wikipedia, I will have no choice but to report it to a Admin!  Doktor  Wilhelm  17:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

This is a content dispute, so the only thing an admin would possibly do is block both of us for edit warring. Please leave the articles until the discussion is over, so people can see the actual outcome instead of a indiscriminate list and two bloated lists. TTN (talk) 17:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Please stop the reverting and discuss this on the talk page. Also, please don't refer to a content dispute as vandalism. Friday (talk) 17:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Removal of content/articles, without warning &/or dicussion, could easily be Vandalism (and in this case I believe it is), and I will take it to 'a higher power' to see what they think, if TTN continues to remove the articles!  Doktor  Wilhelm  17:52, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Friday is a "higher power", and again, this is only a content dispute, so nothing will come out of it (admins cannot do anything with content disputes past protecting pages). I really, really suggest that you head over to Wikia because the changes that will be happening here in the next few weeks will not be to your liking. For example, the main characters are going to be severely cut down after the list is all set. If they do not have a Sonic wiki already set up, I can help you move articles over after you start one. TTN (talk) 18:12, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Right- I happen to have admin tools, but an admin's opinion means nothing more or less than that of any other editor, when it comes to content questions. The reason I object to calling this vandalism is that TTN has clearly explained that he's doing what he thinks is best for content. Vandalism is intentionally making an article worse. TTN is trying to make it better. You may disagree, but this is why we have talk pages. Calling it vandalism just makes useful discussion more difficult. This appears to essentially be a disagreement over how appropriate it is to have detailed information that's only relevant to the game universe, rather than to the real world. Friday (talk) 18:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I think you've got the wrong end of the stick! They never said what or why they were doing it, originally, they hadn't even posted merger or deletion tags, they just removed two articles! This 'disagreement' is a about how TNN is going about doing what they have done, it's not even about the content of the articles, as I have stated within the merger discussion!  Doktor  Wilhelm  19:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Centralized TV Episode Discussion

Over the past months, TV episodes have been reverted by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [1]. --Maniwar (talk) 21:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, though I haven't been involved in anything TV related! My areas of editing are mostly related to Music and Video games, the latter of which is where I've been at odds with TTN and their merge-hunger! I do have a interest in TV, but as I've hardly edited at all in that area of articles, I'm not sure I should be involved!  Doktor  Wilhelm  00:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Resident Evil articles

See thats the thing. The links I added are not external links - they are third party references, which are far more important that notes from the game itself. They meet WP:RS and WP:Verify. Furthermore, the links help verify down all'' the information in the article. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 23:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I still do not see why you feel they are not needed. You are seemingly violating WP:Verify be removing them. Furthermore, they i no way infringe on Capcom's ability to make profit; the author's of each clearly address all legal issues. Other FA articles use a 'general reference' section to verify information like this. If you were to completely rely on a notes section, the article is susceptible to an AFD, as it possess no 3rd party references. Infact, without the general reference section, the article can , and will be deleted on terms of WP:A. The section even meets WP:EL, which states that links are allowed given they directly provide useful information to the article. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 23:48, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

You are failing to see that the links are in fact references; I do not recall any lines within the context of WP:Cite that claim references need to be wrapped in references tags. Articles such as History of the New York Giants, Starship Troopers, Chicago Bears, and Fight Club (film) all use “sources” or “further reading” sections, which verify general content within the article. The legality of the references does not seem to be a particular problem – Section 2.2 of WP:EL only restricts links that directly interfere with someone’s copyright text. Since the pages do not directly inhibit Capcom’s ability to make profit, and are only used for educational purposes, I their inclusion into articles is any different from the use of images. Furthermore, the links provide information directly from the game itself, in essence, providing an infallible and official plot summary.

As I stated before WP:A is Wikipedia’s most important policy, as it allows users to remove unverifiable information, or delete articles without verifiable and encyclopedic content. Without third-party references, all the Re articles I spent the weekend working on can, and will be deleted. I have justified the use of the these references with respect to WP:A, WP:EL, WP:RS, and WP:V. Simply removing these links for the sake you “feel” they do not belong on Wikipedia because they seem unencyolpedic is not really a feasible rationale – ask user:Tecmobowl, who was banned twice for doing so. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 00:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The links state that one is not allowed to directly copy its content onto other sites; it does not directly state that one is allowed to post links to it on the internet, or other websites. What is the difference between the section I added and the reference/notes section of Rex Grossman#References, which also contains several articles and webpages? Both sections are being used to make sure their respected articles stay fair with WP:A and WP:V. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 00:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Once again, do you have a specific policy that explicitly states what I'm doing is wrong? If you cannot come up with anything, I'm going to re-add the content, and take this up with WP:AIN if anything else 'comes up'. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 01:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

As I stated for the fifth time, the links are solely being used to verify information. The five policies I previously listed support their inclusion, whereas your removal of them can be seen as vandalism, similarly to the user:Tecmobowl incident. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 01:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Goon Moon

Umm thanx for the myspace bulletin, just what is goon moon? I have never heard of them, are they the band Twiggy left after rejoining Marilyn Manson?Mutlee (talk) 15:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

3RR

Regarding your question in an edit summary on Lyn Z, it does not count with the removal of obvious vandalism. With the birth date thing, there isn't actually a reliable source cited- perhaps if you did that, it would deter the IPs a little. I don't think changing the birth date (unless it is changing it to 1412 or something) counts as vandalism- we will have to assume good faith and call it a content dispute, especially where 3RR is concerned. J Milburn (talk) 11:50, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps, I'm not sure. There does seem to be an awful lot of dispute over her date of brith- if you find a reliable source and cite it, then we can count any changes as vandalism, I reckon. J Milburn (talk) 15:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Whoops

I guess I should read things like WP:3RR, then I'd know how things work, I also guess it might help with my editing of Wikipedia, not that I'm gtting more into it!?  Doktor  Wilhelm  23:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for your help, sega project should be up and going soon Gaogier ^Talk! 01:42, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Let me find a random act of kindness award.

You jumped just in time, maybe you could get Dr.eggman and the rest of the characters tagged for me?Gaogier ^Talk! 01:47, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

80px		The Sega Project BETA Award
		For all your help starting up and promoting The Sega Project we hope to see you as a great member of the project. Gaogier Talk! 02:06, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Queen plays Wii

I've gone to the dicussion page for a more in-depth imput, but don't worry, by all means I have my reasons and am not a troll nor up for edit wars. Stabby Joe (talk) 14:01, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

MSI genre

Stop reverting, I'll talk to him. J Milburn (talk) 22:15, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

He seems to genuinly be a good faith editor, I don't want him scared off. This edit warring is not good- I agree with you on which page version we should use, but I have left him a polite message. If he continues to be disruptive, I will block him. J Milburn (talk) 22:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I do sympathise with you, honestly, I have found a lot of these kind of disputes on pages I watch. I am just trying to offer an outsider's perspective, and try to avoid losing a potentially good editor. J Milburn (talk) 22:38, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Mindless Self Indulgence

How is it vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jelnock (talk • contribs) 22:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Assessments for the Sega Project

Hi. I saw on the assessment department page that you expressed discontent at the temporary copy of the WP:VG/A page there. As a member of the Sega Project, I have fixed the page and made it new, and could use your help with some of the article assessments now if you've got time. The page is still the same old link, but there's a new shortcut to it named WP:SEGA/A. If you could help me make this assessment department a success, that would be great. Gaogier also approves of the new page. Redphoenix526 (talk) 21:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:Doktor Wilhelm.jpg listed for deletion

A tag has been placed on Image:Doktor Wilhelm.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Wikipedia is not a blog, do not upload images of yourself or friends that are not for use in articles

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on [[Talk:Image:Doktor Wilhelm.jpg|the article's talk page]] explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Gaogier ^Talk! 21:33, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Doktor Wilhelm.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.  Denelson83  22:39, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

• Well, the policy allows active users to put a reasonable amount of personal material on user pages; indeed some users have uploaded their photos on Wikipedia and this is also generally tolerated (as long as the photo is under a free license and is actually used in user space). Now if you genuinely don't want your photo to be used on Wikipedia any more, you can mark it for deletion by placing the {{db-author}} tag on its description page. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 11:59, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I suspect that these are the same person

{{Helpme}} Two diffrent editors and a ISP number have all vandalised my user page in close sucession, I have a feeling that they may in fact be one person due to the wording/timing of the vandalism and the original set up of editors user pages and talk pages, the users are Special:Contributions/ConjurusRex, Special:Contributions/PerilSpellbinder & Special:Contributions/86.129.174.152. I have looked for a way to flag this up, but everything seems to be for admin to report cases? So I was wondering if there's anything I can do? Even just so that someone may look out for any old/further suspicious vandalism by the 'two editors'? Sorry if I'm causing trouble!  Doktor  Wilhelm  03:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets. I hope this helps, if you have anymore questions feel free to ask me on my talkpage.--Sunny910910 ^{(talk|Contributions)} 03:55, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Alternately, you could have reported them at one of the administrators' noticeboards, such as intervention against vandalism or (if some discussion is needed) incidents; that might have resulted in a swifter response. That said, I have blocked ConjurusRex for a month for vandalism, trolling, and sockpuppetry (he seems to have made some useful edits, so I am being lenient), and PerilSpellbinder permanently as a vandal account. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 11:36, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Otah! I suspect nothing!!!!!!!!! Otah! Kamrein L. Laemmle 20:14, 8 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niermak (talk • contribs)

Oy

Pay attention to my newest posts, my signature was reduced in size over a day ago..., if that was what you were talking about Gaogier ^Chat! 02:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Im afraid it was vandalism my friend but not asking me before removing things from my pages is vandalism too so i think its just great XD. Gaogier ^Chat! 00:13, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Is was joking to see what your reply was, if you look i was only helping XD Gaogier ^Chat! 00:20, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

HOW VERY DARE YOU ACCUSE ME OF THIS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, MY IP BEGINS WITH 71.!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaogier (talk • contribs) 10:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

For your information

I have added content here and tagged the message as resolved. Please come directly to me should this user again - at any time - edit your user page or act in other ways in a disruptive manner and I will assess what needs to happen next. Best wishes--VS ^talk 08:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

• I will also add that this editor does use an IP address that begins with 81 not 71 as he indicates above. see here and here for proof.--VS ^talk 09:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

• Upon further investigation - see his talk page - I have blocked this editor indefinitely.--VS ^talk 10:30, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:SEGA

Hey, Doktor Wilhelm. I'm sure you've seen by now that Gaogier's been blocked indefinitely. With that, I wanted to discuss with you where we should take the project in his absence. I've seen the visual changes, and they look sharp, though we really need to link those red links somewhere. I had a discussion with Gaogier before he was blocked, and it sounded like the two of you had some type of fallout? It looks pretty bad seeing what's above. Anyway, he wanted to kick you off the project if he could have, and I think that's just plain overreacting on his part. You've contributed so much to the project that I would like to work with you to improve it. I'm keeping up with the Assessment Department pretty well, as I assessed about 75 of those articles and we haven't had an unassessed one in a while. I'm not experienced with templates, though, so the visual designs are completely your changes for now, unless you've got some suggestions that you want to run by me first. Thanks for your time, and I look forward to improving WikiProject Sega with you in the future. Redphoenix526 (talk) 18:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Nothing really comes to mind for being a part of the header except that we should have links to all of the project's pages. Gaogier actually had a set of his templates designed in blue and white, which he was using for Wikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft. He said he had no plans to use it at The Sega Project, though, so I'm not sure exactly what he was thinking.

Also, I can't believe I'm about to say this, but I think TTN might be right about one thing: it would be a good idea to start up a Sonic Wiki and link it to the project. The problem is that I have absolutely no clue how to go about this or even if I could run it. I'll just take the idea and archive it, and we'll consider it later. Anyway, thanks for the help! Redphoenix526 (talk) 19:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Looks really good, but you missed the bar that said "WikiProject Square Enix" on the left panel. I've fixed it, though. I really like the look, but we do need to change it up a bit so we don't look exactly like WikiProject Square Enix. Redphoenix526 (talk) 20:55, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I've got something for you

I think you've really helped The Sega Project, and for that, I want to award you this new award:

File:Hereimage.png		The Sega Project Honorable Mention
		To Doktor Wilhelm for all your help improving The Sega Project. We hope to see you as a great member of the project. Redphoenix526 (talk) 04:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's my pleasure to award you it. We'll come up with a formal nomination for the actual Award (the one I have from Gaogier) later on, but I thought we really needed this honorable mention, and you definitely deserve it! Also, I'm going to change the background color of the invitation just to differentiate it from the award. Might I also recommend you put this on your userpage; wear it with pride! Redphoenix526 (talk) 08:11, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your heads up

Thank you for coming directly to me. I think I have everything covered but if this sort of disruption and sock puppetry rears its ugly head again let me know directly. Best wishes--VS ^talk 04:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Sega and Sonic Portals

Thank you for the invite. Both portals should be a part of the project. Janadore (talk) 12:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The deletion of Sonic's Edusoft

Unfortunately this went by without me noticing. I can't believe you did this on the basis that you believe this was or is a fan game. While you might ask what evidence people had to the contrary, I would also ask what evidence you have that it is a hoax? A lot has been explained on web sites about this title, very detailed responses about why analysis of technical evidence and related suggestions as to why it might have been a hoax have been put forward and a number of leading archive experts and sceptics eventually came forward and express their belief in this, some of whom contacted the author.

You didn't do your research before taking this very whimsical action. I am not surprised there was a delete because the people who supported it also have no idea of the game. Another suggested that if it was not a hoax, then it was notable and worthy. Well, again...what evidence do you have of this being a hoax?

You made a mistake and you deleted important history. This was the first Sonic game that never made it to market.Freakchild (talk) 07:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

So to have responded as you did about this, I guess you did not look at both links that were on the page before you deleted it. I am guessing that because you mention you looked at the link on the page...but there were two and this other link explained much of what you appear to be sceptical about and even noted Sega's involvement with the project. Your correct course of action on this should have been to asked for additional verification prior to deleting. This is an advised alternative prior to taking that course of action.Freakchild (talk) 08:33, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

The link provided very detailed information about the title, including very detailed information on technical implementation. While not proof, it was generally regarded on that particular site to have the webmasters concede this was not likely a hoax as is explained in that thread, as well as a number of others on that same site. There thoughts were further supplemented at a later date with a number of additional screenshots that were eventually linked here, which do indeed provide some evidence that this title exists. While some people can go to elaborate lengths for a hoax, the number of screenshots in existance and the variety of graphics available, the variety of game modes depicted, along with the technical information available and explanations of screensshots suggest a considerable level of credibility to what is going on, much much more than an article worthy of deletion, without asking for improvements warrants. Now I personally don't care whether you think there is enough proof or not. You have the right to question it as any other editor, but ultimately you are not an authority on the subject just a sceptic. There are other sources of information about this title on the web, a google will tell you that. A ROM image was once linked from the wikipedia article too. You should have followed the guidelines and asked for the article to be improved if you felt strongly that there was an issue with it. As it is, two links is enough for verifiability and it should not have been deleted on this basis. Reliability could likely have been questioned, but there is also benefit of the doubt which should have been called into question and debated prior to deleting it. You certainly could have done no wrong by asking for the article to be improved and you might have helped Wikipedia by following such guidelines, as opposed to deleting a factual article. Freakchild (talk) 09:25, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Additionally, simply suggesting that something is not good proof based on a guest of a forum using a psuedonym for anonymity isn't good enough. Most people, including yourself use an alias of some sort to post information on the internet. The fact that is was a guest account is irrelevant as it only suggests the poster is not a regular or had reasons of anonymity. It is clear from the article that this is what the poster wanted, despite the fact he couldn't elaborate. While this might add to the mystery of the post, it does not make it any less valid. Freakchild (talk) 09:51, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

According to the reasons for deletion, the only reason it is felt not to be notable it because it was felt to be a hoax. Felt is the key word and there is as much evidence either way. Even if you feel this is a hoax, there are famous Sonic hoax games listed on this site. It is not a reason for deletion and you should have moved where it was linked from and stated your reasons for moving it there. Again, one of the people who backed up the idea of deletion even said that if it is not a hoax it is notable. Other people will come along and put this article back at some point when more evidence appears, this should be acceptable to you. Now if beyond debating the subject of a potential hoax a number of key SMS historians have accepted as plausiable then you still feel that what was going to be the second or third Sonic game to be released, the first on the Sega Master System, the first Sega sanctioned (licensing and approval is a different issue and I wouldn't expect you to have insight into this) 3rd party Sonic title in development, the first game involving Sonic outside of a 2d platformer, first educational game on the master system...and so on, if you find that to not be notable then you probably shouldn't be editing things on this site and certainly shouldn't be involved in a Sega Project. As I've said, you are a sceptic and that's fine, but at least be open minded. You've provided no evidence to back up your claims this is a hoax and you have to understand that if you are to delete things without investigating them thoroughly enough, then occassionally you will delete something that is factual, even if it is incomplete or open to question. This is precisely why this system encourages alternatives prior to deletion. I would like to politely recommend you re-read the guidelines for deletion. As it is, this article had been questioned before and further information had been provided in response to that. The article continued to exist for over a year since the last debate about it, so it is safe to assume that other peers had deemed the updates enough to keep the article open. In the meantime my edits to this topic are over. Someone else can bring this back online when the programmer publishes his up and coming article. Wikipedia is getting a bad name because of excessive and unreasonable policing between peer editors and I for one don't have the time to play my role in jumping through the hoops. Facts and history are being destroyed in the process and there's too many people prefer to take the negative approach of deletion instead of asking for articles to be improved, which does not make the site better at all. How can deleting factual information be better than asking it to be improved? Freakchild (talk) 19:55, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

So it was originally linked from the Sonic page under unreleased games. I can't see a reason why it would be linked from anywhere else. I will leave this for now. You have your viewpoint and I have given mine. The article will be added back in due course when the appropriate links have been updated. These will verify the name of the programmer and witnesses to the development of the software. Freakchild (talk) 22:39, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Pacman quote

Hi,

Just thought you'd like to know that the original author of the quote on your user page is Marcus Brigstocke (who hates the way he almost never gets credited for it!). Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 19:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Idea for an ad banner

Hey, Doktor Wilhelm, I've been looking through your awards setups on the discussion page for Awards, and the more I think about it, the more I think we could modify the text (and maybe color or something else) and use it as an ad that we can put on our userpages to attract more users to Wikiproject Sega. What do you think? Redphoenix526 (Talk) 20:40, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea!  Doktor  Wilhelm  13:46, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Answer to your question

To answer your question concerning In-Universe content for the Chaos Emeralds, anything thats theory or not based on relavent fact is In-Universe. If you desire to learn and not waste other readers time then I sugest you take this advise:

People dont care about unsupported claims about what the chaos emeralds may or may not be, they just care about what the games and the makers of those games say they are. If you want to expand your personal beliefs on the emeralds start a FAN SITE!!!

Get this perfectly clear I'm not your friend, all I care about is seeing this page become a respectable article and not a chat room for other people's childish imaginations!!!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.61.25 (talk) 02:03, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments

Though I believe your rant to be badly placed, and your offencive behaviour is just that, offencive, if you do not wish to be blocked from editing wikipedia, I think you should rethink your need to call people names! Specially if you are going to be telling people what they should or shouldn't be doing on Wikipedia! As this makes you seem to be a bit of a hypocrite!

and the term "I'LL BE WATCHING YOU FROM KNOW ON YOU GOTHIC REJECT!!!!!!!", is wrong on so many levels, the phrase is "I'll be watching you from NOW on" (which I will do the same for you) and Gothic Reject, implies that I was once a building built in the *Gothic architecture style but was rejected from the that architecture clasicfication!

And I must also state that you mixed mixed up sub-cultures, Emo and Goth are different, I'm afraid! And other than for sarcastic reason (where I refer to myself as 'got',), I am neither!

Now what any of this has to do with the Chaos Emeralds featured in the Sonic the Hedghog series of games, I have no idea!

Please grow up!  Doktor  Wilhelm  00:47, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

What's up Dok?

Hey there Dok. Just wondering where you've been for the past few months.Fairfieldfencer FFF 16:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

"Shhh, I'm hunting Wabbits!"

I've been maintaining a low profile, waiting for a lot of issues with Wikipedia to be sorted out, wikipedia is becoming an online variant of the dusty books, and I just want to wait and see what is actually allowed to be written about subjects (soon, I'm sure Video Game Article will contain nothing other than a list of who made the game, and what console it was first on!), and I was getting involved in to many fights with editors who fight dirty (hidding behind the rules) and refuse to see wikipedia as anything other than their personal site! I still do a small spot of editing, and I am hoping to come back to wikipedia soon (though most of the information that brought me to wikipedia, both as a reader and editor, are long gone, and on a Wikia somewhere, the web address of which I will never find), so to sum up, I was taking a brake from Wikipedia before I was tipped over the edge, but am coming back! Lol, and thank you for the censorship of 63.228.61.25's comments!  Doktor  Wilhelm  01:06, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Those people are back and are going through with the merge. Take a look for yourself. List of characters in Sonic the Hedgehog I could really use your help.Fairfieldfencer FFF 09:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

You could go to this wiki [2] Me and a few other users are trying to get rid of all the fancruft there. We could use an editor like you there.Fairfieldfencer FFF 14:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Are You Ready...TO ROOOOOOCCCCCCKKKKKK?!

User:SLJCOAAATR 1/Sandbox/Template:Sonic Characters

And so, the revolution shall begin. Skeletal S.L.J.C.O.A.A.A.T.R. 00:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it's terrible, what has become of several of my favourite articles on Wikipedia, I guess Wikipedia is now only good for looking up names of chemicals and rock formations, everything else is being butchered.  Doktor  Wilhelm  22:15, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Wii Shop channel.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Wii Shop channel.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:11, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Happy Halloween

Hey,  Doktor  Wilhelm . Happy Halloween! Fairfieldfencer FFF

Message from WikiProject Punk music

Hello!

You may be interested to know that WikiProject Punk music has recently undergone a major revitalization. Please visit the project page to see our new look and check out some of our helpful new features, such as the Assessment Department and the Collaboration of the week. There are also a number of tasks on our Things to do page that you may be interested in helping with.

We are currently holding a roll call to help gauge how many active project members we have. Please visit the project's talk page and add your signature to the roll sheet to express your continued interest in the project. Also, if you have not already done so, please take a minute to add your name to the Participants page along with a brief summary of your punk-related interests, so that other project members will be better able to collaborate with you. If you do not add your signature to the roll sheet by November 30, 2008 your name will be moved to our list of inactive members. We may also take the liberty of removing the project userbox from your userpage if it appears there, to prevent you from automatically appearing in Category:WikiProject Punk music members. Of course you are free to rejoin the project and re-add the userbox at any time if you would like to become active in the project again.

Thank you and we hope you will continue to support WikiProject Punk music!

--IllaZilla (talk) 00:10, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Bloodwork (album)

Just a friendly note on Bloodwork (album). You removed the notability tag on this article with the comment "His other albums are notable enough, so is this one, specially as it's wednesday 13's first EP as a band." Just because his other albums may be notable (and looking at Skeletons (Wednesday 13 album) and Fuck It, We'll Do It Live, there's no claim of notability on those) doesn't automatically make this one notable. (See WP:OTHERSTUFF.) Also, being the first EP by a particular band doesn't automatically make it notable -- at least I've never seen a WP guideline which says that, and I'm quite familiar with WP:N and WP:MUSIC.

If you'd like to show notability for any of these, the best way is to find reliable, independent sources that show real world notability -- charting info, professional reviews, etc. Until then, the notability tag should stay. Thanks!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:49, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Just a friendly reply, as stated at WP:MUSIC: "In general, if the musician or ensemble that recorded an album is considered notable, then officially released albums may have sufficient notability to have individual articles on Wikipedia.", just because an album doesn't have references does not mean that it is not notable, Wednesday 13 as a band are notable enough to be on wikiepedia and the articles in question are more than just track lists, so I will remove the notability tags, but I know that the reference tags need to stay, as they actually need references in the articles!  Doktor  Wilhelm  14:42, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Read that sentence again. It says may be notable, not is notable. The notability tag is entirely appropriate. (And no need to duplicate the reply on my talk page. I watch list pages where I post, or use {{talkback}} if you think the reply needs immediate attention).--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:23, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I have removed them again, as the reference needed tags are all that is needed, and sorry I though you may have needed me to post the reply on your talk page as you don't seem to be able to use Edit Summarys (instead bringing it to my talk page, with "a friendly note"), so I wasn't sure you would know how to read a reply here?  Doktor  Wilhelm  21:16, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Could you point to where I forgot an edit summary? I apologize if I missed any. (And the "bad faith" edit summary on your part is not appreciated).--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:58, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

The Sega Task Force Newsletter (Issue 5)

• Newsletter delivery by xenobot 16:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)