User talk:Mega Linoone

Welcome to Bulbapedia, Mega Linoone!

By creating your account you are now able to edit pages, join discussions, and expand the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia. Before you jump in, here are some ground rules: Be nice to everyone. It's in the code of conduct. Make good edits. Preview them before you save to make sure they're perfect the first time around. Use wikicode and link templates when adding content to a page. Use proper grammar and spelling, and read the manual of style. You can't create a userpage until you've added to the encyclopedia. It's a privilege. See the userspace policy. Use talk pages to resolve editing disputes. Don't "edit war," or constantly re-edit/undo the same thing on a page. If you have a question about something, be proactive. Take a look at our FAQ. If you're still stuck, ask for help. The staff won't bite. Sign all talk page posts with four tildes (~~~~). This will turn into your name and the time you wrote the comment. For more handy links, see the welcome portal.

Thank you, and have a good time editing here!   GrammarFreak01 (talk) 20:57, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Talk page discussions

Please don't respond to discussions that are over 6 months old, especially if you're only commenting to note a spelling error. It is pointless to do so, as it is simply a mistake and the user that made the mistake may no longer be around to see your comment.--ForceFire 05:14, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

I will reiterate Force Fire's point, DO NOT respond to discussions that have been inactive for a long time. It's useless to get a response in that topic. If you want to start a discussion, create a brand-new section in the talk page. GrammarFreak01 (talk) 23:09, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

This is your final warning. Do not respond to comments that are (well) over 6 months old. It is pointless, considering that the user may no longer be around to even see your comment. Failure to abide by this will lead to a block.--ForceFire 04:59, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

What was that for exactly? If anything, you should be thanking me for straightening that person out. If this is supposed to be a fact-based wiki, then why should I not be able to provide facts? It is also incorrect to say the user might not be around to read my comment is wiki accounts cannot be deleted. Also, which is more important: how old a discussion is or how factual it is? Do you really think I have the time to check when a factually incorrect statement is written? Also, if you are so certain that the person who typed the statement won't see any comments on it, why are you reading them? If it really is pointless to reply to old discussions, then you shouldn't care. Am I not allowed to correct even one error without people threatening my account? This is a wiki. Wikis are based on fact. Are you really going to say that you would rather have people believe an incorrect statement simply because it is old? Was it really necessary to threaten my account for correcting a statement that the original stator has forgotten about stating? If I made a mistake, I wouldn't threaten you for correcting it. if this threatening persists, I will delete my talk page.Mega Linoone (talk) 19:08, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Do you even know how to delete a talk page? GrammarFreak01 (talk) 19:11, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

I do. What was that deleting my statement that just asks that people don't threaten my account? Any further editing to this page not done by me will be considered a threat to my account. Any statement of mine that gets deleted will be considered a threat to my First Amendment rights. Either one will result in me deleting this page. Mega Linoone (talk) 19:21, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Warnings like that aren't meant for the talk page. Also, there's no way you can delete a talk page. No one can. It's impossible. GrammarFreak01 (talk) 19:23, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

You are literally saying people are allowed to threaten me, but I am not allowed to tell them not to threaten me. Mega Linoone (talk) 19:25, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

There are certain rules and protocol for everything on Bulbapedia, including talk pages. And who said you were being threatened? You're overreacting. GrammarFreak01 (talk) 19:27, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Apparently, it is not a threat for some other person to say something along the line of "I will take away your ability to edit this wiki for a period of time if you don't let people believe incorrect statements."Mega Linoone (talk) 19:35, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

That is NOT what Force Fire said. This is just about contributing to talk page discussions that have been dead for months. GrammarFreak01 (talk) 19:37, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Apparently I have to leave alone all old discussions, even if they are incorrect? Also, how would you know who I am talking about?Mega Linoone (talk) 19:41, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes, you have to leave those alone. But nothing's stopping you from creating a brand-new section that addresses the same topic, as I told you months ago. GrammarFreak01 (talk) 19:43, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

If I create a new section, how will the person that made the incorrect statement know I an talking about his or her statement? Also, why is there a time limit to reply to discussions? Wikipedia has no such limit.Mega Linoone (talk) 19:47, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

First off, I'm not sure. Secondly, looking at the history of Aasquasar (talk • contribs), that user hasn't been active for years, so it's very doubtful you'll get their attention either way. Thirdly, we're not Wikipedia. GrammarFreak01 (talk) 19:51, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

How would you know who wrote the incorrect claims that Pokémon is futurist? To quote the editing guides, "Do not misrepresent rumors, misconceptions or opinions as fact."Mega Linoone (talk) 19:59, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

(resetting indent)I don't even know what you're talking about anymore. I just looked through your edit history, saw the discussion in question, and looked at the original poster's history. GrammarFreak01 (talk) 20:01, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

First of all, calm down.

Secondly, the user hasn't edited in years, so that means they're not going to see your reply. The wiki account not being deleted has nothing to do with whether someone will see your comment. The account is not managed by a machine, it's managed by an actual person. And that person hasn't logged into their account in years. I.e. that person is not going to see your message. Therefore, it's pointless.

Thirdly, I could throw that question back at you. If the person won't see your comment, why are you responding to it? It doesn't matter if their opinion is incorrect, the discussion was years old. There's absolutely no need to respond to it. It's not a big deal.

Fourthly, the namespace you were editing was the talk space, not the main space. It doesn't matter if non-factual stuff gets put on the talk page, since the talk pages are for discussing improvements and such. And you're putting a lot of faith into people actually bothering to read, and believe, whatever that section was talking about. No one even responded to it, so basically, no one cares enough to read it.

Fifth, you can't delete talk pages, normal users don't have the ability to delete pages. Removing content from your talk page is not the same as deleting your talk page.

Sixth, you've been warned three times about responding to old discussions. Meaning that you did not read your own talk page until now. You were only "threatened" with a block because you repeatedly ignored your warnings.

Seventh, we are not Wikipedia. They have their rules, and we have ours. Just because we're both wikis, doesn't mean we're going to have the same exact rules and guidelines.

Eighth, calm down. There was no need to overreact like the way you did. And in the long run, your misdemeanor isn't even that much of a big deal. Just don't respond to comments over 6 months old, regardless of how "factually wrong" it is. Just ignore it. If no one has responded to it all these years, then that should be a clear sign that no one cared about that section.--ForceFire 05:36, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Now you are just asking me to remove all the typing.Mega Linoone (talk) 12:07, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Don't take this as an insult, but how do I get you to stop talking? Mega Linoone (talk) 20:30, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

You don't. As an admin, Force Fire is obligated to warn you every time you stray from Bulbapedia's rules. And even if he doesn't warn you, someone else will, using the same script. GrammarFreak01 (talk) 20:45, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Talk Page Comments

Removing talk page comments, including the initial welcome template, is prohibited per Bulbapedia's talk page policy. Please do not remove any comments in the future. If you wish to clean old comments away, you should archive your talk page instead. Thank you! --Tiddlywinks (talk) 12:24, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Is there a way to leave them on and still not see them? I told those guys what they were going to receive. I alerted them. If I don't delete text, then I still see it. I just want to not see them.Mega Linoone (talk) 20:32, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Ignoring warnings is not going to be helpful if you want to contribute here. GrammarFreak01 (talk) 20:45, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

All I said is "I don't want to see this giant mess." I did not say "I am going to ignore Mr. whatever his name is." Do you know the difference? Also, what I do and don't want to see does not involve you.Mega Linoone (talk) 21:06, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

That still sounds a whole lot like trying to ignore it, since you said you wanted to wipe our comments off the talk page. Also, it does involve me, seeing as I also warned you about your edits. GrammarFreak01 (talk) 21:11, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

"I am going to ignore this" does not sound at all like "Remove my ability to see this'" This does not involve you as one, I only directed messages to you after your intersection so my original message was not aimed towards you ant two, it just deals with what I want to see. Replying to old comments has nothing to do with what I do or don't want to see. As my request is only and entirely about what I do and don't want to see, you have no part in this. Also, if this did involve you, you wouldn't have changed the subject.Mega Linoone (talk) 21:19, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Thing is, I have a right to voice my input in any discussion, whether you think it does involve me or not. So you can't tell me to buzz off. If you're miffed by me, all you have to do is ignore me, but I'm not going to ignore this. GrammarFreak01 (talk) 21:26, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Are you saying that if I stop talking, you and whatever-his-or-her-name-is will stop talking?Mega Linoone (talk) 21:30, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

No, just ignore me if you're so ticked by me. But don't try to hide messages or try to bar me from participating in discussions or any shady crud like that. That's not helpful or productive. GrammarFreak01 (talk) 21:33, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Final ultimatum

Your behavior throughout your talk page is appalling. There is absolutely no need behave as rudely as you are. And seeing as your first reaction to my comment was to remove everything, it is very clear that you did not read it nor do you plan to read it. You have repeatedly ignored three warnings for a misdemeanor that's not even that big of a deal, yet you made it into a big deal. Don't respond to comments over 6 months old. Simple as that. Read the Talk page policy if you want to see it as a written rule. And with you wanting to hide the comments on your talk page, it is very clear that you simply do not care about the warnings and just want to sweep the issue under the rug. Users are expected to interact with one another in a civil manner, abide by the Code of Conduct. Especially with staff members, users are expected to listen and adhere to the advice and warnings given, not avoid them. If you are unwilling to communicate in a civil manner and continue to behave in a disorderly manner, you will be moved on.--ForceFire 05:15, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

The following is not meant to be interpreted as offensive. My remarks are by no means impolite to anyone. Also, erasing the content was actually more like my 24th reaction. The phrase "it is very clear" cannot be applied in this scenario. "Three warnings" is another phrase that does not apply. What does is "two blank statements and one threat." The word misdemeanor was incorrectly defined, as the actual definition is a breaking of a minor law. Last time I checked, (and I did actually research this; if I was actually acting rude, I wouldn't have researched this) replying to someone is not a crime. According to a very thorough analysis, there was no remark I made that was impolite. I was actually being as polite as humanly possible. Also, I had the upmost regard for the guidelines, I just forgot to check what time the "Pokémon is futurist" comment was written, that's all. This page has grown into a mess (that is the most polite word I could find) over one thing I forgot to do. Is it really worth time to type full paragraphs to someone just because they forgot to do one thing? I fully understand what is being requested of me and starting now, will start checking everything, as I believe I am being requested to stay confined to a time limit of half a year, which I fully respect and will now start checking. Disorderly is better defined as the way warthogs act. My remarks were not unruly and had no malicious intent. If I actually had malicious intent, I would not correct the person who said that Pokémon was futurist. As stated before, this page quickly got out of control over something I just forgot to inspect. I guess that when something gets this uncontrollable, anything can be misinterpreted as impolite. No malicious or potentially harmful intent was meant or exercised. It is impossible to be impolite without harmful intent. I hope you understand that I did not ignore anything and simply forgot to check the time that the original post was written. That is all. I was not thinking "Screw the rules." I just forgot to check when the post was written until it was much too late. Hopefully you understand. Also, the last two words are offsetting as I am terrible at understanding slang of any kind. The preceding statement was the only time I crossed the line of politeness, and that time I was just insulting myself. Summary: No impolite remark was typed by me. I had no malicious intent. The reason I even got the first message is because I simply forgot to check the time, which I also have a terrible sense of. Therefore, my comments are mot appalling, they are just a result of me not willing to admit I am not good at checking time. Hope you understand that no malicious intent was meant. With upmost politeness and regard for the guidelines, I end this paragraph.Mega Linoone (talk) 01:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Intentional or not, your messages still communicated an air of hostility. If you did not mean to sound malicious and aggressive, you should've thought out your messages more thoroughly to avoid this mess. GrammarFreak01 (talk) 02:47, 2 April 2019 (UTC)