User talk:Interrobang

From MediaWiki
Revision as of 01:30, 23 February 2011 by ACIDSTORM92 (talk | contribs) (→Foreign names: new section)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Things to get a bot to do

  • Replace all instances of {{m-}} with —.

Remove redirects

Things to do by hand

STOP

How many dimes do ye have to tell you? Don't fucking make new categories without a discussion. --FortMax 18:49, 7 September 2010 (EDT)

When exactly did this occur? The only time I've been reprimanded for making new categories (which is pretty fucking often) was the nationality mess. I do hope you're going to go around and shame everybody who took the initiative on making noncontroversial categories. (I.e. everyone.) —Interrobang 18:59, 7 September 2010 (EDT)

Wikia

I don't know if you've heard, but wikia has decided to make a change (mandatorily!) that is 100 times worse than what drove you guys to a new server. I am interested in finding info on how you guys actually performed your move, and what would need to be done before, during, and after to make it work. If you could give me even a link (so that I can show others), that would be hugely helpful.

If you could message me on my wikia talk page, that would be most appreciated. Thanks!KrytenKoro 10:18, 28 September 2010 (EDT)

Are you stupid or something?

You're the one who takes this wiki way too seriously.

Last I was on here, this entire wiki was sarcastic and full of humor.

I will now be undoing all your edits. Thanks. --Tommy-Vercetti 18:00, 8 November 2010 (EST)

Please read Transformers Wiki:Caption. It's true that we have humour here. But the wiki doesn't run on it. And please, refrain from personal attacks. --NCZ 18:02, 8 November 2010 (EST)
And you've never had a problem with these type of additions before, so this guy's reverts have no basis or point. So, I guess encyclopdias should have absolutely no interesting information and should be as boring as possible, right? Why don't you go join Wikipedia then if you want that kind of bullshit.
Personal attacks? More like fact; I call it as I see it.--Tommy-Vercetti 18:05, 8 November 2010 (EST)
I said that "we have humour here, but the wiki doesn't run on it", not that humour should be totally banned. And I really don't know how calling people "stupid" is not a personal attack. Not only that, but Interrobang has given detailed reasons for his removals. You are undoing them for no real reason aside from personally disagreeing. --NCZ 18:13, 8 November 2010 (EST)
Spare me the "he's described"
"Why are you adding pointless formatting" was the extent of his "reasons". Here's why, it adds emphasis... gasp, you know, comedy. And, gasp, I give my reasons. Oh, but that doesn't count, right? Since I'm not your little buttbuddy.
This entire site are worse than Nazis, seriously. You want some pointless trivia, but yet you pick and choose. You're all just a bunch of hypocrites.--Tommy-Vercetti 18:15, 8 November 2010 (EST)
Again, comedy isn't the focal point of this website. We generally just prefer people to make serious contributions before adding humour. I'm just trying to help you out. --NCZ 18:24, 8 November 2010 (EST)

Please go back to Wikia. —Interrobang 18:34, 8 November 2010 (EST)

I don't know, I like him. Can we keep him in a cage or something? -- Semysane 18:40, 8 November 2010 (EST)

Flagging user subpages for deletion

I feel extremely uncomfortable with us as a wiki deciding when to delete sandbox pages independently of the users that create them.--RosicrucianTalk 21:38, 14 November 2010 (EST)

Alright, I'll rescind my current suggestions. I still think there should be some sort of moratorium on old user pages that have outlived their usefulness. (And pages just plain useless to the Wiki.) —Interrobang 21:42, 14 November 2010 (EST)
Oh, I can definitely agree that some of them are vanity pages or otherwise of questionable usefulness. I've just seen some users nurse an article draft along at a glacial pace, so those in particular are the ones I'm not sure we want to delete.--RosicrucianTalk 21:53, 14 November 2010 (EST)

Hello

Hi, I'd like to apologize about missplace the comment in the wrong place because a small part of the words in the comments look same. Sorry about that. :) --TX55TALK 00:17, 23 November 2010 (EST)

"Micron Legend" <> "Micron Densetsu"

Why "Densetsu" instead of "Legend"? --Lonegamer78 04:08, 25 November 2010 (EST)

Because it's the actual name of the series. And if you wanted to translate it, the official translation is "Legends of the Microns". —Interrobang 14:07, 25 November 2010 (EST)
Can't argue that, although I think "Legend of the Microns" would be a better redirect instead of using "Densetsu"... At least mention something like that in the future in the editing summary instead of just suddenly changing everything out of the blue. --Lonegamer78 15:26, 25 November 2010 (EST)

Bolts

You've linked the name "Bolts" to the Eject article a few times. Is there any evidence/suggestion Bolts became Eject rather than that he inspired both him and Rewind? Geewunling 10:20, 11 December 2010 (EST)

Bolts is a "tough robot". The closest character to that descriptor is Eject. If you don't feel that's enough, then you can remove the links; I don't really care that much. —Interrobang 10:48, 11 December 2010 (EST)
It's not that I don't think Eject is the most likely candidate, but I find the description "tough" weird as a description of personality when the rest of the descriptions only cover transformation, not to mention that the role of fighting Ravage went to Rewind. So, I just wanted to know if there's solid evidence for Eject before I'd add clearer notes. Geewunling 11:12, 11 December 2010 (EST)

French episode titles

While other info on this page seems suspect in certain ways, are the episode titles listed here correct?

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformers#Premi.C3.A8re_saison_.281984.29

--Monzo 01:53, 14 December 2010 (EST)

Interesting question. This site offers different titles for a whole bunch of those, but they just might be the Québécois version's dub titles. --Detour 02:01, 14 December 2010 (EST)
Good question. I have no idea. My short search tuned up some French DVDs with the same titles, but there's always a chance that the DVD's title doesn't match that of the episodes. —Interrobang 16:28, 14 December 2010 (EST)

Rodimus vs. Cyclonus

Uh... fuck you, too, asshole, and your crazy over-reaction. That's a perfectly acceptable way to do things in Animated, why not G1? - Starfield 18:26, 25 December 2010 (EST)

Yeah, because in Animated the comics were written by the show's story editor (ie the show-runner), explicitly indicated as taking place in perfect continuity with the TV show itself (barring some art goofs/liberties), was published at the same time the show itself was on the air, etc. This comic, on the other hand, is something written by Furman (who had nothing to do with the cartoon) almost 25 years after the movie's theater run and features numerous differences, especially with character designs. --Detour 19:28, 25 December 2010 (EST)
To the point that, frankly, I almost question putting it under the "cartoon continuity" header. - Chris McFeely 19:36, 25 December 2010 (EST)
What Detour said. The logical outcome of your method would be to assemble every single piece of G1 cartoon fiction into one abomination of a section. Including the Madman comic, Scramble City, the Japanese cartoons, and the Japanese comics. Or assembling all of the BW fiction into one section. Surprise! We don't do that. I am sorry our organizational structure that we've had for years has escaped your purview.
In regards to "cartoon continuity", I wouldn't be opposed to moving it out, if we regard the bodies as a distinct enough aspect for continuity separation. —Interrobang 19:42, 25 December 2010 (EST)
My brain really wants to consider RvC like the Wings of Honor continuity, taking place in a cartoon-like continuity but not THE continuity. But the tag at the end of the comic that says "to find out what happens, watch the 1986 animated film!" makes me think it actually takes place in the literal cartoon continuity, different bodies be damned. --ItsWalky 19:45, 25 December 2010 (EST)
  1. Character designs are not canonically significant with IDW these days or every issue of the ongoing would be out of continuity with the next.
  2. The issue does say "This story was concluded in the 1986 animated film: Transformers: The Movie".
  3. I don't know what the author has to do with anything in Transformers fiction. Once a piece of fiction is made, it isn't like it is "theirs" and off-limits to everyone else.
  4. I don't know about numerous differences. Not any more than that the usual number of differences, I'd say. We didn't know before that Lugnut was at the Battle of Autobot City. Anything else? - Starfield 21:33, 25 December 2010 (EST)
The difference is we don't put those latter-day additions into the original section, concurrent with them. Note the Madman DVD pack-in comic (the one by Furman and Roche) is in its own subheading, despite being part of cartoon continuity. We should do the same here. As Detour explained, yes, Animated is a special case. --ItsWalky 21:39, 25 December 2010 (EST)
I didn't know much about the Madman comic. If that's how its done, that's how its done. - Starfield 22:05, 25 December 2010 (EST)

Kup (Prime)

Yeah, there's a voice clip of Kup reciting the universal greeting, but it's so heavily processed, it's difficult to recognise the voice. Alas, he's not listed in the credits. --abates 05:11, 2 February 2011 (EST)

Thank you for answering my query. —Interrobang 05:14, 2 February 2011 (EST)

Lugnuts Supreme

See the newest section of the Lugnut Supreme Talk page to find out just what SFH was doing.--Apcog 17:22, 13 February 2011 (EST)

Foreign names

All right, I now understand. Thank you. But...why?-ACIDSTORM92 20:30, 22 February 2011 (EST)

Retrieved from "https://tfwiki.duckdns.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Interrobang&oldid=556271"