User talk:Ratchet and Clank 1995

See also:User talk:Ratchet and Clank 1995/Archive

Comprised of

Perhaps I can't help but be a little sensitive about this since it was recently a small issue, but I just want to let you know that "comprised of" isn't really wrong. While it's not worth it (or, after a fashion, justified) for me to revert your edit, I also just want to let you know that it's not actually something that needs to be "fixed". Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:20, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

As Tiddlywinks mentioned "comprised of" isn't wrong, so it's not something that should be fixed. Also, rather than revert an edit, discuss it with the user that reverted you.--ForceFire 11:12, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Just out of passing interest, I read that article you linked. And I thank you for the laugh. The article is comprised of numerous bits of hilarity. I found it interesting that one user's edit history is comprised of 47,000 edits including changing many quotations. Changing quotations is grounds for dismissal from Wikipedia, and he should be banned. Use of "comprised of" is not a guideline on Wikipedia, but rather one user's warped opinion. Please do not try to enforce the views of someone whose edits are comprised of quotation changes, thereby falsifying quotations, into Bulbapedia. You wouldn't last long here like that, and I will now use comprised of in whatever way I can myself now that this has come to my attention because there is nothing wrong with it. Thank you. CycloneGU (talk) 15:10, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

ForceFire above told you to stop making edits like this, and now you are making more like this and this. You most surely remember this warning, as evidenced in your recent participation in User talk:ShinyGiratina#Comprised. Once again, please cease your war on this phrase. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:58, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

I never actually received a warning, I did about the Kenya thing but not about this. You stated that they were "not needed" but revering them is not needed. You never explained why "comprised of" is incorrect.Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 18:51, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry "correct"Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 18:52, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

I meant "warning" a bit loosely. Also, this is not about me; it's about ForceFire's directions ("[comprised of is] not something that should be fixed"; ForceFire being a staff member, on the off chance you weren't clear on that).

Anywho, at this point, it's probably better if I just leave the rest to staff to sort out. Tiddlywinks (talk) 19:25, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

@CycloneGU: Changing quotations is not actually grounds for dismissal on Wikipedia as you are allowed to paraphrase quotations so long as you keep the original person's meaning. It doesn't "falsify" quotations because by this logic if I translate someone's quote from let's say French to English does it falsify it? No it doesn't. You stated that there is nothing wrong with "comprised of" please explain why there isn't because if there truly isn't anything wrong with it why would anyone try to change it? There is something rather obviously wrong with it because comprises means "contains" so "comprised of" basically means "contained of" you wouldn't change "contains" to "contained of" and expect it to have the same meaning so treat "comprises" in the same way. The reason why I linked the article was because it gave an example where it says "This book comprises three chapters" and "This book is comprised of three chapters" don't mean the same thing because the latter is like saying "The book is contained within three chapters" that sentence doesn't make any sense so at least if an alternative is used it would avoid this issue. Thank you.Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 11:30, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

The Preview Button

Instead of editing a page several times in a row, try using the preview button to make sure your edit looks the way you want it to. It's right next to the Save Page button. Please try it out, so as not to clog up the Recent Changes. Also, if you want to edit multiple sections of the page, make sure that you click "edit this page" at the top of the page rather than editing it by section. Thanks! --Tyler53841 (talk) 22:48, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Yeah sorry about that, it was just when I was editing the page, I though I removed all of the irrelevant information but then I kept realising that more information should be removed. I'll try to do what you stated in the future.Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 16:40, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

"Talk:ROM hacks"

Why did you change it? Lokki(Talk) 14:09, 11 August 2015

Talk pages are meant to discuss improvements to the article, per Talk page policy. Meanwhile, the associated page was changed to only list notable hacks. Linking a full list of hacks has little to do with improving an article. Berrenta (talk) 13:42, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Berrenta answered your question for me. I thank him/her for the response. If anything I answered the question in the edit summary, the page should not be used to advertise ROM hacks and should only be used to discuss how the article should be improved. Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 22:58, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Edit warring

If you have a problem with an edit, do not just simply revert them again and again. Discuss it with the user that reverted you. Yes, that is what you did, but you still reverted the edit anyway. Again, if you don't like an edit, go to the user first don't revert it.--ForceFire 12:14, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

I did go to your page before, you just took a while to respond, in addition the information in the edit summary didn't really explain why the information should remain on the page.Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 12:31, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Then you wait for my response. No response does not mean you can just revert the edit. Have a little patience.--ForceFire 12:43, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm sure you don't "need" a reminder, but I really hate hate idea of perpetually playing out your disagreement on the Pokémon world in relation to the real world‎‎ page itself...

Do not edit war. Discuss your issue. If discussion cannot bring the solution you want: too bad. You do not get your way simply by continually trying to make the article like you want it to be. Thank you. Tiddlywinks (talk) 23:55, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Block

Hello. Due to you continual edit warring one multiple pages on a subject you have been told to drop, you have been given a 30 day block. During this block, I want you to understand that if you don't like how things are done, you have to discuss it with others first. Do not just go ahead and make the edits, and do not just continually revert them when they get reverted. Thank you.--ForceFire 07:02, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm not the only person who believes that "comprised of" is incorrect. SnorlaxMonster reverted your edit on the Sinnoh page to replace "comprised of" with "composed of" why don't you drop the issue and just allow people to replace "comprised of" with an alternative as it would avoid all of the issues associated with "comprised of". Did any of the edits make the pages worse? No I don't think so and you didn't exactly give a reason for reverting my edits.Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 11:16, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Blocked, again

I have clearly, clearly stated why the Kenya point stays and you simply refuse to let it go. I have also clearly, clearly stated why the Paris point may not be a reference to the city, but you refuse to take the hint. I have clearly, clearly said to let this go, but you simply refuse to let it go. You do not, do not continue adding back/removing information. You do not, do not make edits just to get your way. You are being salty and your attitude is not helping your situation. If you come back here after your block to do the same thing, I may not be so lenient.--ForceFire 03:55, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Why isn't Paris a reference. Kenya is a given name, the Spearow could be called Kenya just as a given name.Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 19:13, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Also.. why is it "most likely the country" and not the mountain from where the name originates and if you say something like "it's the first thing that comes into people's head" so too could be the French capital. Given the character's background in fashion her name probably is a reference to the city. I think you're just trying to have it both ways that Kenya apparently mentions the country but you also stated that it couldn't be the mountain.Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 19:19, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Because there are people whose name are Paris. No one, repeat, NO ONE has the name Kenya as far as I know.

People would know the country more than the mountain. Period. Not sure how clear I can get with that, that's is the most clearest thing anyone could ever read. Honestly, just let it go, the decision is final.--ForceFire 04:18, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Check the site "behind the name" and search for "Kenya" although the name might come from the country which in turn comes from the mountain it states that it has been used as a name since the 1960. Apparently it ranks 700 in the US. There are people with the name Kenya, you just have to look Kenya Moore for example an actress who has a wiki page. If Kenya is a given name that has been used since the 1960s the Spearow could just have the name Kenya. I don't mean to be rude but do your research before saying no one has the name Kenya.Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 09:40, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

That's why I said "as far as I know". I can name a few Paris off of my head, but not a Kenya. And Paris is ranked higher on that user-based site you cited, see where I'm getting at? Paris is just as commonly known to be a given name as the country, but Kenya is more commonly known as the country not a given name.--ForceFire 10:35, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Just because Paris is ranked higher that doesn't mean Kenya is not significant. Kenya is a given name they could have just given it the name Kenya, just because you didn't know any Kenyas that doesn't mean that the name mentions the country as whoever gave the Spearow the name could have just called it Kenya, maybe they named it after a relative. If the Paris point doesn't apply then neither should Kenya as it is a name and no other information was given to suggest that it mentions the country.Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 10:42, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Just going to boil this down to one line since you keep skipping this: "The country is more well known than the mountain or anyone named Kenya, so it is most likely a reference to the country".--ForceFire 10:51, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

The city Paris is more well known than the name. By your logic this would make the character called Paris a reference to the city. As you used the words "most likely" this makes it an assumption at best and even then the name Kenya is probably still well known so it probably isn't a reference to the country and is instead just called Kenya. Your other arguments where "Kenya could refer to nothing but the country" as I mentioned before it is the name of a mountain so that point is invalid. Your argument for why Paris might not refer to the city is "Paris is a common name Kenya isn't" I just showed that Kenya is so again your argument is invalid. I have at least provided facts all of your arguments are assumptions like the one about the country coming to people's heads, that isn't a reason as no other information is provided to show that it is a reference to the country and it could reference the mountain. Some people might think of the mountain before the country, can you provide any evidence to show that this is not the case? If anything I think you're being "salty"Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 18:04, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

The name and the City Paris are equally well known, the same can't be said about Kenya. Just because there are people with the name Kenya, doesn't automatically mean the name is well known. You had to look up people whose names are Kenya, what does that tell you?

I'm not the one trying to fight a moot point, you're just trying to get your way even after I have said that the decision was final.--ForceFire 04:35, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Equally well know can you prove that? Provide evidence to show that it is true. Just because you're an admin doesn't mean you're always right and you have only got your way because of it. Maybe I should discuss it with others to see if they agree because so far only four people have been involved and only you have seen this discussion. Just because one person had to look it up doesn't mean that others have to.Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 09:23, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I think you can name a couple of Paris's of off your head without searching. I'm not saying I'm always right, you've clearly proven otherwise, what I'm saying is that my decision is final and that the Paris point stays off. You can ask another staff member's opinion if you want to.--ForceFire 09:41, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Edit warring 2

You've been warned above rather amply about edit warring. Please be very careful about this. Personally, I'm willing to allow a bit of leeway on when a dispute is edit warring, but when you added the gender trivia to Ash's Leavanny's page for a third time, that's crossing a line. When you have a conflict, do not edit back and forth with reversions, discuss your issues. Tiddlywinks (talk) 21:55, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

They didn't discuss it before removing it and their edit summaries where just wrong.Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 22:13, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Not the point. Do not edit war: DISCUSS it. Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:15, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Wouldn't it also be considered edit warring if a user kept reverting me without discussing?Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 22:18, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

You don't need to worry about others right now. Even if you feel others were in the wrong, that doesn't make it okay for you to also do wrong. All you need to think about right now is this: Do. NOT. Edit war. Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:23, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

comprises

hi i just wanted to say that i agree that comprised of is incorrect, and i think comprises or composed of is better. do you have any suggestions on what we should do?--EternalDragonX (talk) 23:40, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Multiple staff have said that "comprised of" is perfectly acceptable, as have several other regular users like myself. This is a dead topic at this point, please stop bringing this up. If you don't like "comprised of" then do not use it in your own additions, but the ruling of staff has been that current instances of "comprised of" are to be left alone. ChE clarinetist (talk) 00:15, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks EternalDragonX what I don't get is what is the issue with changing "comprised of" to an alternative. The phrase is completely redundant a lot of them say "it is comprised of" how about "it comprises" instead it removes the unnecessary "is" and "of". The user ForceFire really seems to have a fondness for the phrase and will revert anyone who tries to change it and believes he is right even though he should brush up his English skills as he believed or still does that less and fewer mean the same thing which I saw in one of his edit summaries. Completely wrong in the same way that "comprised" and "composed" can't mean the same thing. Why should ForceFire be allowed to do that? The alternatives are slightly different which would make the sentence more expressive if a specific word is used and not using "comprised of". There could be a way which is to change the entire sentence and not solely change "comprised of" for example removing an entire point that happens to use the disputed phrase.Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 10:30, 22 April 2016 (UTC)