User talk:Karaku

OMG

Post your messagesss.

Welcome!

Hi Karaku! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing!

Hell, nobody did it, and I was tired of no talk page. :P -Karaku (talk) 01:06, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

English

Actually this is simply the English language wikipedia. It is not American wikipedia nor is it Japanese or any other country wikipedia. Heve fun though! :)♦Tangerines♦·Talk 04:26, 2 February 2008 (UTC) Yes, this is the English Wikipedia. The Japanese release date can be put on the Japanese Wikipedia.-Karaku (talk) 17:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Code Lyoko

Please stop mentioning that they want to make a fifth season. The fact remains that they're not going to, and wishes mean nothing to actual content. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 07:01, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, so you have proof that they're going to not make a 5th season? Oh right, you don't. The creators will make a 5th Season when CN orders one, therefore, it's on Hiatus. -Karaku (talk) 07:03, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

No, that's not how it works. There is no fifth season. The movies are what's in the works, and they aren't considered part of the syndicated series, therefore it's over. Also, it's already over in France, which the date is based on.

As for your linking, stop linking to Code Lyoko in the same article. It just pointlessly bolds the words. Likewise, linking to a company homepage for no reason doesn't help. Find a direct source and use ref tags. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 07:19, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The red text makes it looks out of place, so sue me for fixing it <_< Also, the reason is so you don't say "LOL SOURCE!?". It's not for no reason. Also, it's. on. flippin. hiatus. -Karaku (talk) 14:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

No, it's not. It's over. It's only stopped showing on CN. The original network has finished. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 20:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Read the goddamn OFFICIAL website.-Karaku (talk) 23:57, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't get bitchy simply because you're inattentive. It's over in France. Period. That's what the end date is based on. We don't base it on dubbed version. We also don't link to the article in the article and we usually don't link to company webpages in text. Seriously, knock it off. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 23:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

-facepalm- Yet fucking again...the cerators say that CN didn't order a 5th Season, that means its on HIATUS. -Karaku (talk) 23:57, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Guys, chill! I believe you, Karaku! And here's even more good news: CL is airing in Japanese markets on their Toon Disney block! I heard the dub voices, and they rock! It's like you're watching an anime! Angie Y. (talk) 00:48, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Look what I found!

Here's something interesting I found at CL.fr...

[1]

Apparently, first film's due out beginning of 2009 (phew), with some novels and stuff being published in 2008. Well, it's a start.

Oh, and I think the shippers might like this...

Quote: Peut être que Yumi et Ulrich s'embrasseront finalement dans un de ces films...

There's also talk of a Season 5, too. Apparently, they're all equiped to make one, but they have to wait for input from France 3 and Cartoon Network.

(Of course, not understanding much French, I can't tell from whence these answers have come..)

Still, penguin dude, you have just been disproven. =P Angie Y. (talk) 17:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Noam (band)

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Noam (band), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 02:59, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Noam is not a band. Noam Kaniel is a person. --Nhjm449 (talk) 02:51, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Kingdom Hearts: The Manga

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Kingdom Hearts: The Manga, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 22:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Karaku, please tell me how Kingdom Hearts: The Manga is necessary when List_of_Kingdom_Hearts_media#Manga already exists? Nhjm449 (talk) 00:21, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

So, by your logic, we don't need Kingdom Hearts II when we have Kingdom Hearts (series). -Karaku (talk) 03:37, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Metaknight.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Metaknight.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) 01:44, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Mkpit.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Mkpit.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) 01:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Ininformation on Code Lyoko (Japanese dubbed version)

I think there should, in my way of thinking, be information on the dubs of Code Lyoko, such as the Japanese version. The episode titles have, for example, been revealed here. Angie Y. (talk) 02:27, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Noam (band)

An editor has nominated Noam (band), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noam (band) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 03:59, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Look on the contrustion tag someone removed. "do not tag with a deletion tag unless it hasn't been edited in several days". -Karaku (talk) 23:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Sources

Please read WP:RS, WP:WAF, and WP:FICT and actually learn about proper sourcing before you start removing tags. Ridernyc (talk) 15:37, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

It is a reliable source. THE WRITER FOR THE BOOKS, COMICS, ETC. IS A MEMBER THERE. And the BIONICLE.Com webmaster is as well. -Karaku (talk) 23:22, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Ridernyc (talk) 15:38, 8 February 2008 (UTC) It should not have been nominated at all- The construction tag clearly states that you are not supposed to add a deletion tag unless the page wasn't edited in several days. Therefore, It isn't supposed to be there. -Karaku (talk) 23:24, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. Since you didn't take the hint the first time, I'll make it clear. The AfD has been made. It is too late to complain now. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 02:44, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

The construction tag was there long before someone didn't obey the rule and made an AfD. -Karaku (talk) 02:47, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

That would be wrong. Plus, you weren't really working on it, which is why Rider removed the tag. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 02:50, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

You seem to expect me to be on Wikipedia 24/7. I have other things to do. Maybe if it had been about a week, that'd be fine, but for now, deletion tag is essentially vandalism. -Karaku (talk) 03:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

"Under construction" is not "I'll throw up an intro and come back a week later. You spent four days twiddling your thumbs, therefore it was not under construction. Your removal of the deletion tag is vandalism, plain and simple. You can't talk your way out of that. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 03:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

It says not to add a deletion tag unless it wasn't edited within several days- 4 days isn't several. Also, stop following me around everywhere, it's annoying. -Karaku (talk) 03:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Three is several. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 03:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

lol no. Several would be around 6 or 7. -Karaku (talk) 03:23, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 03:19, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

As are you, you are not listening to me.. -Karaku (talk) 03:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but you've broken 3RR already. I haven't. 3RR report comes next. it is a self-published source, and hence unreliable. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 03:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

It IS reliable. Look. Listen to me. The writer of the comics, books, and storyline and the Bionicle.com webmaster are active members. It's as reliable as the Code Lyoko official site. -Karaku (talk) 03:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

You have been blocked for 24 hours for violating the three reverts rule on Matoran. You may resume editing after the block expires (and you may continue discussing the issue here, on your talk page) but continued edit warring may result in longer blocks without any further warning. Please discuss instead of reverting, rather than in addition to it. Kafziel ^{Complaint Department} 04:37, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Help

You need help? I should probably remind you the {{helpme}} tag should be used on your talk page so if you need help, someone will come to you. So, what do you need help with? —BoL 05:32, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea what the hell is going on with the Music of BIONICLE article. It's messed up. -Karaku (talk) 05:53, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Well it's deleted, what were you trying to do with it? Here's my suggestion: you can start a draft here and work on it. It may be because you forgot to close the hidden messages thing (<!-- -->). —BoL 05:55, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

He means Music in BIONICLE. Karaku, you didn't write your comments properly. You wrote them like <!-- --!>, which isn't proper. --!> isn't recognized as a closing tag. <!-- --> is a proper comment tag. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 05:57, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Garage Kids. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Chetblong^{T C} 07:06, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Troll...

Don't be a fool. With your recent frivolous AfD, I'll have no trouble proving the opposite if you try. You're welcome to do so anyway, but it'd be easy to refute. Instead of the constant whining, why don't you listen to someone else for a change? — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 07:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

My recent AfD is not trolling. It's making a good point. She's not notable, but let's discuss that at the AfD page. Whining? Not listening? YOU don't listen to me, you just go off in your own little world where you act like you know everything and you're never wrong. And you made no comment about you Wikistalking me. I'm amused. -Karaku (talk) 07:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

When it's true in regards to you, then it's not my world. It's only Wikistalking if it's done in bad faith. You just make a lot of mistakes which need cleaning. Your AFD alone is more trouble than it was worth, since in a day it'll be closed per WP:SNOW. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 07:23, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

You never listen to me, especially on the CL article. I don't know how many times I told you the creators have made statements indicating it's on hiatus. And How the hell do I get a source for it not being on CN's schedule? Just leave me alone. You annoy me alot. And yes, your Wikistalking is in bad faith. No, i'm not making mistakes. -Karaku (talk) 07:25, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Karaku please assume good faith and discuss this in a more polite manner. Don't comment on editors, comment on articles. Thank you, Chetblong^{T C} 07:27, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

You get a source for it for it being dropped. On hiatus is true for Cartoon Network because it is not over there. It is not on hiatus as a whole, because the series has finished airing in France. That is what is important. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 07:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Chet, you're not helping the situation. The Troll Penguin, there is no source. go look at your TV's guide. It has not been aired on CN for months. And yes, for the last time, IT IS ON FUCKING HIATUS. LOOK AT THE REFERENCE. READ IT. THEN LEAVE ME ALONE. YOU ARE WRONG. LIVE WITH IT. STOP TROLLING. -Karaku (talk) 07:32, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Karaku please tell me the situation and perhaps I can help. --Chetblong^{T C} 07:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

TRP is refusing to listen to me and constantly RVing me, even when I give sources and references, he seems to not want to admit he's wrong. -Karaku (talk) 07:38, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I need to know a bit more than that, how is The Rouge Penguin refusing to listen to you and could you show me some links where he has reverted you. If you give me that info then I'll understand the problem better, and don't worry I will listen to you and try to find a resolution to this conflict. --Chetblong^{T C} 07:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

For now he seems to be off my back and realizing i was right, but I'll be keeping my eye out..-Karaku (talk) 07:46, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Just so you know I just reverted your redirecting until a resolution is reached. :)--Chetblong^{T C} 07:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't mistake my silence for consent. The only reason I haven't reverted you is because I'd throw myself past 3RR in dealing with you, which I'm not willing to do. One cannot fight stubbornness with stubbornness, because as much as I'd like to, you've shown that a 3RR warning won't deter you from doing whatever you want. For now, you may try to deal with him, Chet, for I am not willing to bother discussing when the return result is "TROLL!" or some variation therein. It's no use discussing when the other side is unwilling to assume good faith. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 07:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Karaku please ignore that comment and lets focus on solving the problem at hand. --Chetblong^{T C} 07:54, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Chet, I'm sorry, but I won't just let him get away with that. TRP, you are the one not assuming good faith here. You're not listening to me and refusing to realize you're wrong. -Karaku (talk) 08:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Like I said, Chet can continue the conversation. "Troll" is not good faith. it's you taking offense to being reverted. You're still wrong, you only get temporary leeway about it because I won't revert you. The show is still not on hiatus, only the Cartoon Network dub is, movies still aren't episodes, and fans wanting a season five doesn't make you right. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 08:04, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm suspecting you as being a troll for not assuming good faith. It's not. It's you insisting you're right when you're not. No, I am not wrong. The show is. If you'd actually look at the sources I posted, you'd see that. Did I include the movies in the episode count? No. I added next to that (and 3 upcoming movies). And last i checked, the creators aren't just fans. Look man, drop it, Face it, I'm right. Just accept that so we can move on! -Karaku (talk) 08:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

No, because you're not right. And you can't accept that. There's that lack of good faith. You've set yourself on being right and won't hear any different. It's really quite annoying. The show is only on hiatus in America. It's over in France, which the creators have confirmed. They're not making another season and one hasn't been ordered. Since the date is based in France, calling it on hiatus in the infobox is wrong, plain and simple. Likewise, adding three movies to the episode count, regardless of how you do it, is wrong because they aren't episodes. Just as Futurama doesn't include its DVD movies, neither should this. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 08:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Karaku I doubt TRP has been on Wikipedia for 2 years just to be a "TROLL!" please don't continue this fight because every time you reply he'll just come back with another reply and it will go in circles. Just take you're problems to me and I'll try to help, if you continue the way you are right now I can't help. --Chetblong^{T C} 08:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

TRP-, i am not wrong. That is a fact, unless you can show me. You're annoying me by trolling, wikistalking me, rving every edit i make, not listening to me, refusing to believe you're wrong, etc. The show is on Hiatus in general. READ THE SOURCE. THEY DID NOT SAY IT'S OVER FOR GOOD. And I don't care about what's on the Futurama page. Just because something is different on another page doesn't make it wrong on that other one. I'm trying to have a calm, intelligent discussion here, but you appear to want to troll and be rude. Dude. Just drop it. I'm putting this as polite as I can- You're not right. Just accept that and we can move on. Chet-I don't care how long he's been an editor, I don't care who he is, I don't care what he looks like, I don't care where he lives, i don't care how old he is, so on, so forth. He is appearing to be trolling. No offence meant, But I don't think you're going to be able to help. -Karaku (talk) 08:17, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Karaku you are not assuming good faith, I have to go to bed right now (2:26am CDT) but tomorrow I'll continue to try to work this out. --Chetblong^{T C} 08:27, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't see how I'm not. -Karaku (talk) 08:28, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Enough!

Guys, STOP! I firmly believe Karaku clearly! Code Lyoko is not cancelled! It is MoonScoop's main property and one of the most popular shows in the world. Season 5 is in talks, officially, so... =P Angie Y. (talk) 04:11, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Self-published sources

Please tell me which independent third-party publishes the Code Lyoko OFFICIAL website. For a source to be reliable on Wikipedia, it has to be a third party independent site. In any event, the site does not say what you say it does about a 5th season. It specifically says that a 5th season is not being made. So it falls down on two counts for backing up your assertion that a 5th season will broadcast. Harry the Dog (talk) 17:24, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

How the hell should I know? All I know is it's the official Website, therefore reliable. -Karaku (talk) 17:26, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Please look at WP:SOURCE as to what constitutes a reliable source. A self-published source (ie by the makers of the show) is not reliable by Wikipedia standards. If you want to contribute to Wikipedia you must do so under the standards that Wikipedia sets. You must also quote the source accurately, which you do not do in this case anyway. Harry the Dog (talk) 17:32, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I can't link to the exact news story, since that's not possible. I don't see how the OFFICIAL website isn't reliable. Seriously, think about it a little more, because the official website not being reliable makes as much sense as This. :P -Karaku (talk) 17:39, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Because a company (or a person) can say anything they want about themselves on a website. I can claim that my company is the greatest in the world on its website, but if that claim were used on Wikipedia (quoting my website as the source) it would soon be deleted - unless a third-party source could be found to justify the claim. Harry the Dog (talk) 17:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I doubt they'd be lying on the news section of the official website. We don't need a 3rd Party source, those are less reliable. -Karaku (talk) 17:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Your opinions are irrelevant. All that matters are the rules of Wikipedia. And you do not address the fact that the source does not say what you say it does. Please find an independent source that says there will be a 5th season before you add that information. Harry the Dog (talk) 17:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Tell me an actual reason as to how THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE isn't reliable. By your logic, we might as well remove every single source that's an official website. -Karaku (talk) 17:52, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Read WP:SOURCE. Apart from the fact that I have explained it above, it is explained further there. I suggest you relax and listen to what many people are telling you. You are welcome to make constructive contributions here, but you have to abide by the rules. Harry the Dog (talk) 17:55, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Relax? I am. trust me, I can turn into a really angry bastard, but I'm choosing not to. And I am making constructive contribs, thanks. -Karaku (talk) 18:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Edit war

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Code Lyoko. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Harry the Dog (talk) 17:32, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm rving it back to the proper version. -Karaku (talk) 17:40, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

You need to learn how to be a team player, how to achieve consensus, and a lot about how Wikipedia works. I suggest you discuss this on the article's talk page before you make any further revisions, or you will find yourself banned for a lot longer than 24 hours. Harry the Dog (talk) 17:46, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any point in discussing it on the talk page, since TRP will still refuse to listen to me. It's useful contributions, and you and TRP refuse to listen. -Karaku (talk) 17:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Then you will be blocked. You have been warned. Harry the Dog (talk) 17:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Why? Because i'm not going to waste my time discussing it on the talk page when clearly you and TrP will ignore my points and refuse to believe me? -Karaku (talk) 17:53, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not about "believing you" or anything like that. It's about achieving consensus. If you can show a reliable source for the change you want to make, which actually says what you say it does, then it will be easy to achieve consensus. Harry the Dog (talk) 17:58, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Karaku, you need to understand that you're in a position where you simply won't get your way. You're drawing your own conclusions from a source that says nothing of the sort. That's unacceptable. As long as you continue believing that you're right and everyone else is wrong, you will never achieve your goals. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 18:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

You are not clear. I wrote "indicating that it may be on hiatus". -Karaku (talk) 18:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Then you claim it is on hiatus in the infobox. Your words don't match your edits. Either way, it is still original research. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 19:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Then i'll go and fix that. -Karaku (talk) 19:12, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

You have been reported for violating the 3RR. Harry the Dog (talk) 19:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

From what i can tell, I fall under the exception for the rule. -Karaku (talk) 19:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

The admins will be the judge of that. Harry the Dog (talk) 19:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll say this again- Using the talk page won't work. Look man, I don't need this aggravation. I have enough BS going on as it is. I'm lucky that I can keep calm. -Karaku (talk) 19:21, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule . Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. B (talk) 20:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Unblock.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Karaku (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

There is no justifying my block.

Decline reason:

Oh but there is -- the three revert rule. — Revolving Bugbear 21:41, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Please see [2] for the relevant AN3 report. Thank you. --B (talk) 21:39, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Notice of temporary injunction

Hi Karaku, I noticed you redirected an article about a television episode[3] [4] [5] [6], and I am letting you know that there is currently a temporary injunction that applies to all editors[7] while this arbitration case is open. The injunction was enacted on February 3, 2008 and it reads:

"For the duration of this case, no editor shall redirect or delete any currently existing article regarding a television series episode or character; nor un-redirect or un-delete any currently redirected or deleted article on such a topic, nor apply or remove a tag related to notability to such an article. Administrators are authorized to revert such changes on sight, and to block any editors that persist in making them after being warned of this injunction."

The arbitration committee would like all editors to hold off on such actions while the case is open. I will also notify you when the injunction ends. Thank you. --Pixelface (talk) 09:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Look what I found!

Click the CL picture! There'll be a trailer! Angie Y. (talk) 21:28, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Original research

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles . Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. As you've been warned repeatedly, I'm skipping the first. You're making shit up. Stop. There is no possibly. There is no fifth season, and there is no basis for the "bullshit" claim other than some fan's piss poor translation. Unless you want another 3RR block, I'd stop. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 03:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC) Just shut the fuck up. I am tired of you and your shit. Go stalk and harass someone else. -Karaku (talk) 03:57, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Please be civil

I have removed your reply to Trust not the Penguin. Please do not use offensive language, even in response to language that you may find offensive. Please bear in mind WP:CIVIL. I hope that Trust not the Penguin will also do so in future. Harry the Dog (talk) 10:01, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't use swearing? lol wut? If you can't handle swearing, you're immature- I don't give a fuck who you are. -Karaku (talk) 19:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I can "handle it". It's just a breach of WP:CIVIL, and as you should know by now, you get blocked for breaching Wikipedia policies. Harry the Dog (talk) 13:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Selena Gomez

The warning that you removed certainly was legit. There is a note on the page as follows: "Img = Freely licenced images only. NO SCREEN CAPTURES. Please do not put a fair-use image here, it will be deleted - see WP:NONFREE." You put such an image on the page despite this note, it was deleted, and you were warned not to do it again. Harry the Dog (talk) 10:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

It was fine on the page for her character, Alex Russo. -Karaku (talk) 19:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

No, it wasn't. It was a copyright image, which you cannot use. Harry the Dog (talk) 13:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Code Lyoko season 5 is highly anticipated!

Yes, you heard it right! Season 5 just might come to fruition after all! Several polls are indicating it! Angie Y. (talk) 20:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Code Lyoko 2

Yes, the cover is fake, which is why only Amazon has it up. It's just the homepage picture copied in photoshop. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 20:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

You show no evidence of that claim. And you're editing an article with the INUSE TAG. You're extremely ignorant. -Karaku (talk) 20:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Please maintain civility

You have already been warned in the past about WP:CIVIL. I know Wikipedia editing can be frustrating but please tone it down. (And for the record, it's not your fucking swearing that is the issue, it is calling people you disagree with "MR IGNORANT," etc.) --Jaysweet (talk) 20:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Not my fault he's ignorant. -Karaku (talk) 21:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. It's just your fault that you said so in the edit summary ;)

I haven't looked at the edits, but just a friendly warning to be careful: Even if you are right, some of your recent edit summaries could weaken your case or even result in a block/ban.

If it makes you feel any better, I frequently patrol recently changed pages for vandalism. If you want to meet some boneheads on Wikipedia, woo boy, that's the way to do it :D --Jaysweet (talk) 21:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to User talk:WBOSITG. _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN} ^{aka john lennon} 21:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:LakeOswego

He is allowed to make changes to his talk page, and allowed to blank it if he feels like it. So long as no violations of policy are being violated, I expect you not to revert war him editing on his talk page. — Save_Us † 21:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

He's also removing warnings and things of that nature. -Karaku (talk) 21:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

He is allowed to remove warnings from his talk page, please read WP:UP, it states that editors are free to remove warnings as it is a sign that they have already read it. If his disruption is furthured, more warnings can be given, but his userspace isn't worth reverting over. — Save_Us † 21:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Another warning

You have committed WP:3RR twice today, once on Code Lyoko 2 and one on Garage Kids. I can safely say that you are going to get blocked later today for this and I suggest if you don't want to make it any worse on yourself, than you stop reverting. — Save_Us † 21:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. You have been warned about civility, reported twice for 3RR, and (somewhat questionably) reported for vandalism all in a thirty minute span. Either the entire community of Wikipedia has a conspiracy against you ;p or else you are doing something wrong! --Jaysweet (talk) 21:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

SaveUs-On garage Kids, I constantly tell you guys to read the talk page, and you guys decide to be ignorant and RV it. On CL2, It's in use and TRP decides to be disruptive and remove that tag and the image, therefore vandalism. I essentially fall under the exceptions. Jay- Civility? No. 3RR? I'm udner exceptions. Vandalism? No. -Karaku (talk) 21:33, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

First of all, there is no exception to WP:CIVIL. Read the policy. None at all.

Regarding 3RR, I happen to agree with your position on Garage Kids, but I don't agree that it counts as an exception to 3RR. The reverting was not for blatant vandalism, it was for what you believe (and I believe) to be an incorrect interpretation of the WP:Notability guidelines. That is not one of the exceptions to 3RR.

Honestly, when I stumbled on this revert war, if you had been more civil to the editors involved and less aggressive with the reverting, I might have supported your position on Garage Kids and we might have gotten the right thing done. Instead, you have just chosen to make yourself look foolish. It is very sad, since it seems you are usually a legitimate editor, when you are not having civility or 3RR problems.

Anyway, I've been around Wikipedia a long time and at this point I just cannot envision you escaping a block. Good luck. --Jaysweet (talk) 21:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Revert warring is not a step forward getting people to agreeing with you and in fact makes your argument weaker. Multiple editors reverting you, 6 in total now I believe, claiming vandalism is not an exception, you are under 3RR like everyone else, and those are not vandalism. Please read WP:VAND to see what vandalism really is. You have been excessively incivil, using all caps, implying shouting and revert warring. I suggest you take a step back from Wikipedia for a while. — Save_Us † 21:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

When did I say there was an Exception to WP:CIVIL? Again with the ignorance. -Karaku (talk) 21:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

And again with your personal attacks.. — Save_Us † 21:41, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, seriously. I misinterpreted your bald denial of the civility. Re-reading it, I see now that you are just asserting that you have not been incivil. Well, I suppose it's all up to one's definition, but this edit summary is pretty damning... Not to mention that you keep insulting me, when I am trying to help you! --Jaysweet (talk) 21:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Telling people that they're ignorant isn't a personal attack, sorry. -Karaku (talk) 21:42, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes it is, the policy in a nutshell is "Comment on content, not on the contributor." Your commenting on another editors intelligence, then it is a personal attack, no exception, no way around it. — Save_Us † 21:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Ignoring comments has nothing to do with one's intelligence most of the time. -Karaku (talk) 21:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

You point to the talk page, but there is no sign of consensus made to merge the two articles. You have made personal attacks against users. This is your last warning. If you continue to edit war and violate 3RR, you will be blocked. bibliomaniac15 21:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

There has already been a final warning but it was blanked. This is exactly why the Wikipedia policy allowing people to blank recent warnings on their own talk page is a terrible policy. ---Jaysweet (talk) 21:54, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and the only two people who wished to discuss it (me and TRP) agreed on a merge. It hasnt been discussed in nearly a month. The 3RR is the most pointless rule ever. -Karaku (talk) 21:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

And as I pointed out to you, there is currently an ArbCom injunction preventing any merges of television-type content. Plus, we can't perform much of a merge when both pages are protected. You simply choosing not to heed the warnings you been given does not justify edit warring with five other editors. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 21:58, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Three revert rule violation block

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 96 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule at Code Lyoko 2. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Sam Blacketer (talk) 22:01, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I hope you know that the block would have been a shorter period had you stop reverting a long time ago, like when I asked you to. — Save_Us † 22:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Karaku (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Unreasonable.

Decline reason:

That is absolutely untrue. You have engaged in 3RR and personal attacks. You've refused to communicate and discuss. That is not the way you should act if you would like your version to gain acceptance. --bibliomaniac15 22:20, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Agreed. And removing warnings given by other users like this is not Civil and does not show good faith. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 22:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

A word of advice

If it hasn't become obvious by now, your current editing strategy will not work. Claiming you're right and ignoring all detractors will only make you seem all the more wrong, and edit warring to enforce your position will only make it easier for said detractors to remove you from the process, such as this block is doing. Furthermore, the more you continue this pattern, the easier it becomes for that to happen. When you get off your block, I recommend the first thing you do is use the talk pages and not revert to your preferred version. Discuss your position, provide reliable sources, and actually try to show us why you must be right. As it stands, you have not done this, and as long as you refuse to, you'll find that getting your way will be impossible. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 19:08, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

That is the best way anyone could have put it. WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN ^{aka john lennon} 21:57, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Code Lyoko 2

I have nominated Code Lyoko 2, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Code Lyoko 2. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 14:58, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:CL2.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:CL2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Jack Merridew 08:33, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy delete of Code Lyoko 2

Sorry, Karaku, but the article failed an Article for Deletion nomination: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Code_Lyoko_2 . It is now clearly speedy-deletable under Wikipedia policy. This is cut-and-dry. --Jaysweet (talk) 23:23, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

If you think the AfD was done improperly (and you have an argument for that, since you were blocked when the AfD was started) then you should go through the deletion review process. Unilaterally recreating the article is not the appropriate way to do that, though. That is not likely to get anyone on your side.

I really hope that you'll take some advice here and go through the proper procedures. There is no reason why you can't be a productive contributor to Wikipedia, but you need to read and understand the policies first, and obey them even if you disagree with them. The first step would be to start a deletion review for Code Lyoko 2, rather than just simply recreating it. --Jaysweet (talk) 23:34, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Right the current version is mostly containing unsourced speculative content and rumours, which pretty fails WP:CRYSTAL and WP:V. You would have to provided reliable sources on the speculative content or simply wait until more info is provided. For the time being, it should be only included in the related articles, if there is no sources. Second of all, you should also read WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA on that last bit you added in my talkpage. This kind of behavior may result in a block if you continue and since you have been blocked before you may be at risk for a longer block. --JForget 00:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

AFD can kiss my ass. I was blocked during the AfD discussion, and the people voting Delete were lazy bastards whow ouldnt look it up. ZIGn and Amazon wouldn't list a fake game. -Karaku (talk) 01:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

This is the behavior I warned you about. You were only blocked for four days (96 hours). You had a day to comment in the AfD, not that the result would have been any different. Instead of snubbing the process, do as you've been told and find actual sources. Gamespot isn't enough. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 01:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

When did I mention GameSpot? IGN AND AMAZON WONT LIST A FAKE GAME! For fucks sake, TRP, stop being ignorant and stop acting as If you're never wrong! -Karaku (talk) 01:31, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Slip of the tongue. IGN then, and it's still not enough. Amazon is a sales website which posted a fake cover and IGN lists info which no reliable source, or any other site, can confirm. Also, I don't act like I'm never wrong. Acting implies I would have a reason to. The simple fact is I know what I'm talking about, and no amount of yelling and insults on your part will change that. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 01:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

You don't know shit about what the fuck you're talking about. It's a real game. The cover is real. Sorry. You're wrong. Get the fuck over it, stalker. -Karaku (talk) 01:39, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for reinforcing my point. So long as you act like a child and try to curse your problems away, others will always manage to come out on top. I'd suggest you learn this before you find yourself blocked again. Yes, the cover is fake and the game isn't confirmed. The cover scan is pieced together using the official website image, made obvious by the error in the DS side logo. game Factory doesn't even have a page up. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 01:45, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

BLOCK LOL

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for persistent personal attacks. Please stop. You're welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Gwernol 01:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Unblock.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Karaku (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

So I'm getting blocked for others' Ignorance! Oh yeah, that makes alot of sense, and that's so fair!!! .. O WAIT LOL

Decline reason:

The reason you were blocked is groce incivility. You need to learn how to communicate with other editors in a civilised way. If you can't do that, there is not much here for you. — — Edokter • Talk • 01:58, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You expect me to be civil when many people decide to be ignorant,a nd TRP decides to stalk me and troll? Is his ass blocked? NO! -Karaku (talk) 02:00, 7 March 2008 (UTC)