User talk:Starship.paint/Archive 13

Roman Reigns 2016[edit]

The Persona and reception section of Roman Reigns is too much extensive. I would prefer only keeping the persona contents and omitting the public reactions. If the abated information appears to be very less, the whole section should be removed. What are your thought regarding that? Currently, I am working on it to be a good article (I had read the criteria). Thanks. Ikhtiar H (talk) 07:12, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ikhtiar H: - I disagree with omitting the public reactions ... the rejection of a top babyface by the audience definitely should be included. Others have raised the idea of merging the section into the History section, which can be considered... starship.paint ~ KO 10:06, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

semi-retired LOL[edit]

Yea so you are only spending time harassing me? Let's just start now... try to take this one down...

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Photograph_of_paper_rendering_of_Donald_Drumpf.jpg

--Potguru (talk) 06:05, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016[edit]

Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to Tay (bot) does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! Rezonansowy_akaRezy (talk | contribs) 14:04, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tay (bot) has been nominated for Did You Know[edit]

Hello, Starship.paint. Tay (bot), an article you either created or significantly contributed to, has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 02:59, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016[edit]

Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to Tay (bot) does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! Rezonansowy_akaRezy (talk | contribs) 18:50, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Tay (bot)[edit]

On 8 April 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tay (bot), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that within a day of the release of the Microsoft chatterbot Tay on Twitter, it was taken offline because it started making inflammatory tweets? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tay (bot). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:42, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Again[edit]

No, that's not from the printed Observer. That's actually a quote from Meltzer from the May 2 Wrestling Observer Radio. You can listen to it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_S89nawI5vM (55 minutes in). リボン・サルミネン (Ribbon Salminen)(ZOOM) 09:51, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really that well versed in the ins and outs of FA reviewing. I've never done it before, but I could look around if I see anything where I could give pointers especially if they're offering a review-for-review. Anyway, I'm ready for another go at the WK9 FA. リボン・サルミネン (Ribbon Salminen)(ZOOM) 10:51, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Let's hope third time's the charm. リボン・サルミネン (Ribbon Salminen)(ZOOM) 06:09, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reigns' reception[edit]

Hi Paint. I have a question. Do you think the Reigns reception it's a little bit long? I mean, the section is long as his WWE career. I feel is overdetailed. What do you think? --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 15:46, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@HHH Pedrigree: - do you think the problem will be solved by merging with the Career section? starship.paint ~ KO 00:59, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, it's my opinion, maybe you don't see any problem. I think the reception section is perfecto. However, I think it's not necessary to include every reaction he had in every raw. I know talking about Reigns is juicy and people like Metlzer, the Torch, ProWrestling.net usually talk about him and his reception... but I feel we included too much. We include he is booed in every PPV. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 01:08, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - @HHH Pedrigree: - so are you saying that we should keep the Reception section but shorten it? starship.paint ~ KO 01:30, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yes. I love reception/legacy section, but include every reaction he had in every PPV... I think its too much. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 01:48, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      - Okay. I'll work on cutting it down when I'm done with Damien Sandow. starship.paint ~ KO 01:49, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        @HHH Pedrigree: - can you check now? I feel like I have cut quite a lot. The section is also about his character, not just his reception... starship.paint ~ KO 05:07, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think the section looks much better. Thanks :) --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 16:22, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@HHH Pedrigree: - you're welcome! starship.paint ~ KO 01:20, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Emma and Dana Brooke[edit]

However the sources already said with Dana Brooke or Emma, how is managing consider for you?TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 9:48, May 16, 2016 (UTC)

@TheBellaTwins1445: - when members of tag teams or stables (two or more active wrestlers) support each other at ringside, it might not be managing. Ambrose ringside when Rollins and Reigns wrestled. Kalisto ringside when Sin Cara wrestled. Barrett ringside when the rest of the League wrestled. In these controversial cases, the higher standard of a source saying "Dana is the manager of Emma" or "Emma is managing Dana" is needed in the sources. Just because Emma is at ringside at NXT TakeOver: Respect does not make her a manager. Just because Dana comes out with Emma on an episode of NXT and stays at ringside does not make her a manager either unless the source says so. starship.paint ~ KO 02:52, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Primo & Epico[edit]

This page was moved again. Can you have it moved back, please? - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 04:20, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The page was put back again. Can you put it back to Primo & Epico? - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 23:05, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nicknames[edit]

Hi, Paint. I have a question. I saw you thanked my edition at Rhodes article, removing strange nicknames. I'll be honest, I'm really piss. Every time, I see a new "nickname" in the nicknames section, just because the wrestler or the commentarist called him one way or another. For example, AJ Styles, The Georgia Pitbull, The Blue Collar wrestler, A mastermind at innovative attacks... We're pretty fuck with Heyman and Wyatt promos. Do we have any method to include nicknames, not youtube videos? --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 00:42, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@HHH Pedrigree: - usually nicknames should come from text in WWE.com. WWE usually capitalizes nicknames "The Big Dog". If YouTube videos are used, we don't know if it is a nickname or a description. So if WWE.com writes it, it is good. starship.paint ~ KO 01:20, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- So, for example, what do you think about EC3? I removed some nicknames but an IP said these are "real" nicknames... --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 01:52, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - @HHH Pedrigree: If commentators continually call EC3 a certain nickname, then it should be quite legit. Commentary is representing the company after all. Go ahead and remove those that have unreliable sources per WP:PW/RS, like WrestleZone or ProWrestling.com. I think some of those nicknames are legit though. I'll try to help. starship.paint ~ KO 02:13, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey[edit]

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's all good[edit]

No reason to be sorry for reverting my edit. If I'm wrong I'm wrong it's all good. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 16:19, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@WarMachineWildThing: - much appreciated. Have a nice day! starship.paint ~ KO 03:07, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Starship.paint. You have new messages at MediaKill13's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Disambiguation link notification for June 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited SMS Körös, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scuttle. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:24, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article for deletion[edit]

I could use your input on this matter View AfD Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 06:21, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Check this out[edit]

So check this out I just reported user Danratedrko cause he has been warned Numerous times on his talk page by myself and others in the past month. Yet continues to remove content he doesn't like with no real reason to remove, personally attacks users who change or revert his removals, and is now edit Waring with me. Judging from his contribution history he has been attacking users all aver the place for months. I cant change anything back he has screwed up on Wrestlemania 32 now cause Im on my 2nd revert on each of his changes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=WrestleMania_32&diff=726853260&oldid=726804531

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=WrestleMania_32&diff=726853482&oldid=726853260

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=WrestleMania_32&diff=726853650&oldid=726853482

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=WrestleMania_32&diff=726854164&oldid=726854143

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=WrestleMania_32&diff=726854516&oldid=726854357

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Danratedrko

Admin it was reported to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JamesBWatson/Open#User_edit_waring.2C_removing_content_and_personal_attacks

Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 22:14, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Im back and...................[edit]

Couldnt stay away lol.............Anyways I am already past my 3rd revert on List of WWE_World Heavyweight Champions IPS and new users keep chaging the name on it and I cant do anything about it, pretty sure there are no sources to back up the changes. WWE.com shows WWE World Heavywieght Championship. Pretty sure im gonna get a ban after changing back it so many times. Admin locked it down for a few days and reverted it back. I let the admin know I broke the rule and if i need to be blocked i wont fight it. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 04:04, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@WarMachineWildThing: I looked at your edits and I think they are justified. These pages are just vulnerable to unsourced and well-meant edits. starship.paint ~ KO 08:31, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think we might......[edit]

I think we might have to get an admin involved in the Mr mcmahon deal.Shinkazamaturi keeps changing it even after a 3 to 1 vote for it to stay Vince not Mr, thoughts?? Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 05:25, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Admin already saw what he said and did, they said he changes it again he's blocked.Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 05:49, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@WarMachineWildThing: - okay. Should we acknowledge as a note "Vince McMahon (also called Mr. McMahon)". Also, there is an essay WP:VOTE you might want to read. starship.paint ~ KO 10:25, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think acknowledgement would be good. But not changing it everywhere. I don't know anymore getting kinda to the point where I just need to step away from all of this Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 17:51, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chris "WarMachineWildThing" is wrong. He also badly change the shield's accomplishment. For example, Adding WWE world title, Intercontinental title, Money in the Bank and Royal Rumble winning.--Shinkazamaturi (talk) 03:52, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wasnt gonna reply to this as I'm taking a break from WIKI at the moment but since it's a lie..... First off Ummmmm I never added any of those accomplishments to The Shield article NOT ONE, Which now makes you a liar and a troublemaker,Now I have in the past reverted edits which removed them from the article but that was before I noticed the memo on the article about nothing being added prior to Nov 2012 and After June 2014 after Starship pointed it out, then I removed them anytime they were added back and helped explain the memo better on the article so it was less confusing which I was thanked for by Starship, but I never added any of them to the article, others added them. As a matter of fact I removed the NXT title off of the article because I misread it to which I reverted myself and put it back. There is NOT one history log for The Shield that would show I EVER added any of the accomplishments you just accused me of adding to that article,they were added by others. So once again YOUR WRONG. Secondly you were not pinged by either Starship or I on this convo which means you are borderline WP: Harassment, Are you trying to get blocked or banned? Knock it off all your doing is making things worse for yourself and this is going to get you into nothing but trouble,LET IT GO,MOVE ON! Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 06:12, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

quite right[edit]

You are quite right, without the source review it would not have passed for FA yet, and I thanked him. Still not sure why people don't use google translate or other browser translators for foreign languages - there seems to be an aversion to those, which confuses me as I use them all the time and they're like 99% reliable. MPJ-DK 11:23, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Might wanna check this out[edit]

Not sure why it was ever nominated in the first place. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2016 WWE draft Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 02:33, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Starship, I've greatly missed your precision-style takedowns in discussions. It was great to see that again in the IC title discussion.LM2000 (talk) 23:10, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WWE roster[edit]

Hi. Can you help us? Since the Draft, Vjmlhds and I have different opinions (again) about the WWE Roster article. He want to change the format, I prefer to use the old one. Can you give us your opinion at the talk page? --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 15:23, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wrestle Kingdom 9[edit]

Hi -- sorry to see that Wrestle Kingdom 9 failed for lack of reviews again. I'll keep an eye on it and if you renominate I'll be glad to support again. Best of luck. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 08:51, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie: - thank you for support. I'll ping you when it's up again. Cheers! starship.paint ~ KO 13:48, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi Starship, re. this, we normally only waive the two-week rule when noms have received little or no commentary. OTOH I realise that for the last few weeks of its life this one was in a similar situation and there were no outstanding issues when it stalled. So okay, go for it, but suggest leave it till after the weekend as we usually clear a few from the FAC list just before the start of a new week, and if you're notifying previous reviews it's up again you may as well do that at the start. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 03:11, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you are about to have another FA.--WillC 06:42, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Wrestlinglover: - really, thank you! :) With how hard it is to get FA on these articles, it's not very likely I'll try again. All the more I appreciate your help! starship.paint ~ KO 10:20, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like our little 15-month project is finally over. Now all that's missing is our WP:FOUR recognition. You gonna get the ball rolling for that? リボン・サルミネン (Ribbon Salminen)(ZOOM) 20:18, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ribbon Salminen: - huzzah! Thanks for all the effort! I've nominated us at Wikipedia:Four_Award#Current_nominations. However, there have been nominations there since April >_> starship.paint ~ KO 07:58, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

TMSTFPWRS[edit]

re Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Archive 93#The Magical Search Tool For Pro Wrestling Reliable Sources

That links to http://www.google.com/search?q=%22insert+search+target+here%22+site:f4wonline.com+OR+site:pwtorch.com+OR+site:slam.canoe.ca+OR+site:pwinsider.com+OR+site:wrestleview.com+OR+site:baltimoresun.com+OR+site:independent.co.uk+OR+site:www.pwi-online.com

I am wondering if it would be possible for us to code this as a template that users might conveniently link to on their userpages (I would like to) if they would like to do a search for references which they could use to support material without generating objections.

I believe there is a way we could code this based on template:google and in the source code have an aesthetic alphabetized list of anything at Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Sources#Official promotion websites or Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Sources#Websites proven reliable so that we could easily do a visual comparison of the sites in the template and the sites on the sources page to make sure all of them are listed.

For example as a start from what you listed:

baltimoresun.com
canoe.ca
f4wonline.com
independent.co.uk
pwi-online.com
pwinsider.com
pwtorch.com
wrestleview.com

TBA I notice:

cagematch.net
impactwrestling.com
miami-herald.com
prowrestling.net
rohwrestling.com
rollingstone.com
skysports.com
thehistoryofwwe.com
wwe.com

I don't know if it's possible to site: for http://grantland.com/contributors/the-masked-man to limit to David Shoemaker's works in a search though. Actually that apparently redirects to http://grantland.com/contributors/david-shoemaker/ now. His latest article http://grantland.com/the-triangle/wwe-john-cena-next-babyface-roman-reigns-dean-ambrose-cesaro-alberto-del-rio-seth-rollins-hell-in-a-cell-raw/ makes me think if we had to include a URL it ought to be grantland.com/the-triangle/ which I figure is the name of his column there. Ranze (talk) 03:28, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite busy these days and can't respond quickly. starship.paint ~ KO 04:32, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Starship.paint. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Remember what I said all those months ago?[edit]

Yeah, it didn't happen. [1] Sigh, c'est la vie. Banedon (talk) 08:14, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Extended confirmed protection policy RfC[edit]

You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk (sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Wrestle Kingdom 9 for TFA[edit]

This is to let you know that the Wrestle Kingdom 9 article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 4 January 2017. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 4, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:09, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]