User talk:Paleface Jack/Archive 2

An Important Announcement

I'm posting this announcement in case anyone is wondering about my lack of major expansion and collaboration for the past several months. I have been swamped with working on non-Wikipedia related projects that have been eating away at my time that I usually spend editing here. Due to this, I'm going to take a brief break from this site (although I will be here to do the occasional minor edits and posts on talk pages). Until my work load clears up, the amount of edits I have time for will be extremely limited. Again I'm sorry about all that, there are a lot of projects I've involved myself with and I'm sorry about this but what can you do. :(--Paleface Jack 17:36, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Signature

Hey, so since December 21, your signature isn't linking to your user page anymore. Per WP:SIGLINK, "Signatures must include at least one direct internal link to your user page, user talk page, or contributions page". Please get that fixed, thanks. Opencooper (talk) 20:58, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Don't know how to do that...--Paleface Jack 22:36, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Go into your preferences and erase anything inside the "Signature" box so you just get the default signature when you sign. Also, make sure you are signing your comments with four tildes: ~~~~. Opencooper (talk) 00:37, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Stupid thing is still giving me problems and only appears as it should in my watchlist...--Paleface Jack 16:28, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Issue on Ultraman article

Hey there, I've noticed you've edited on the Ultraman page before. There is an issue on the talk page that requires your two cents on the matter. Long story short: an edit war broke out. From one Ultraman fan to another, your two cents would be greatly appreciated and it would bring a fresh perspective on the issue and contribute to what benefits the article. Cheers! Armegon (talk) 11:37, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Technically I'm not a fan since I haven't seen the series to begin with. I'm kind of swamped right now with Non-Wikipiedia related stuff at the moment so I probably won't be able to do that. Sorry. :(--Paleface Jack 21:03, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Dean Corll

195 references insufficient for this article, Paleface Jack? Please add citation requests where you feel they're lacking & I'll take care of this. Best regards. --Kieronoldham (talk) 02:27, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Check the article. There are some pieces of information that is unsourced, hence the refimprove tag.--Paleface Jack 02:29, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Add it, request-wise, at any tuned section. I'll add the references within 24 hours at a maximum..--Kieronoldham (talk) 02:32, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

That might take a while considering how busy I am at the moment.--Paleface Jack 02:46, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Well I understand skepticism and discretion, make no mistake. Just add requests where you like. I'll add maybe 15 or 20 random references tomorrow. Select beyond where you like beyond that. Regards.--Kieronoldham (talk) 02:53, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I've been working on a film project for a while now and I need to have it done by Wednesday so until then I'm going to focus on that. Then I will be able to work on other things like this.--Paleface Jack 02:55, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

No worries. Best regards. --Kieronoldham (talk) 02:57, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Will do.--Paleface Jack 02:59, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

I've added approx. 16 references in areas where the text was sparse. If you think a few more are needed, be my guest but please add that template on the chapter in question, or add citation tags where you feel they best belong. That way the concerns you have (or had) can be addressed. Best regards, --Kieronoldham (talk) 22:15, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Chronicles of BloodofFox's Strange Rantings

Revert and threat

Your edit here is currently a topic of discussion at Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard. :bloodofox: (talk) 00:31, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

I agree with bloodfox, please do not put threats into edit summaries, leave such messages on thier talk page and then carry them through if the actions continue, just making idle threats does no one any good.Slatersteven (talk) 09:33, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Read my reply and note that it wasn't a threat. Merely a warning. BloodofFox has been attempting to get rid of List of Cryptids for quite some time and has failed each time. Since that hasn't worked he has been using vandalous methods to quietly get rid of the WikiProject and the article by mass removing all Cryptozoology-related categories from articles on cryptids as well as rewording them in a particular way as to have them qualify under Mythology. His continued campaign resulted in a warning from both me and DarkKnight which has since gone unheeded and, unfortunately, either me or DarkKnight are going to have to report him to the admins. It's not like I wanted to do this but he has left me no choice.--Paleface Jack 15:44, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Removing folklore references, adding references to pseudoscience

I see that you've been removing references to the topic of folklore on folklore-related articles and inserting references to a pseudoscience, cryptozoology (like here, here, and here. Now is the time for you to review WP:PSEUDOSCIENCE, WP:UNDUE, and WP:FRINGE. :bloodofox: (talk) 18:56, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Oops! Didn't mean to remove that. Was trying to put a space in between stuff. I never added any references so I don't know what you mean about that.Paleface Jack 19:00, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Regarding this edit, I have no doubt that you can make your point without resorting to personal attacks. :bloodofox: (talk) 22:08, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Apparently sarcasm is now considered "personal attacks"...--Paleface Jack (talk) 22:15, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

(Note: I'm uninvolved and stumbled across this on recent changes. Unsure why or how I clicked it, but regardless-) If by "vandal" you mean Bloodofox, that indeed sounds to me like WP:NPA or, more accurately, not WP:AGF. Nanophosis (talk) 22:19, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Twas more of my ill timed sarcasm. I tend to do that in those kind of situations.--Paleface Jack (talk) 23:33, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

"Name calling"

You have twice claimed that I have 'called you names' (here and here). I've asked you for a diff of this claim, but you have yet to provide one. Please provide an instance. :bloodofox: (talk) 16:59, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

You write: "Hello BoF, Just wanted to apologize for not getting to you sooner and explain myself. The reason I haven't get back to your question sooner is this, I have been very busy working on a college film project of mine that is due this week and I haven't been on here because of that. I still need to finish this project so it might take longer for me to respond. The other reason being that I don't get any notifications on people replying to my comments on the noticeboard so I might not have seen anything. What I meant by "name calling" is making claims that users (including myself) are threatening you even though I and several others have explained that we were not threatening, merely warning. Looking back I probably should have said Undue Claims rather than name calling. That's all I was meaning. Hopefully that answers your question.--Paleface Jack (talk) 19:09, 11 June 2018 (UTC)"

First, keep responses here. Second, yes, you've made personal attacks against me, including threats. This talk page attests to that. This, which you posted yesterday, is also a personal attack. Again, do not make personal attacks. :bloodofox: (talk) 16:16, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

They were never intended to be a personal attack. I don't deal with this sort of thing and they rules/guidelines that come with it. If it sounded like a personal attack, that wasn't the intention behind it.--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:23, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:No personal attacks is very explicit. Additionally, posting about how much you "hate" another editor is also never a good idea. Enough. :bloodofox: (talk) 16:34, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

No comment...--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:37, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Personal attacks, again

As I've now referred you to Wikipedia:No personal attacks multiple times, this combined with the above mentioned incidents (such as this) demonstrates that you're ignoring Wikipedia's no personal attack policy. "Comment on content, not on the contributor" couldn't be any clearer: If you can't restrict your comments to comments on the issue, don't comment. :bloodofox: (talk) 20:48, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

You seem to not understand the difference between sarcasm and "personal threats". I've stated this several times before. The "threats you're calling them are merely pleas for you to stop your vendetta on the Cryptid articles.--Paleface Jack (talk) 22:15, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Again, Wikipedia:No personal attacks: "comment on content, not on the contributor". 22:25, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

(face palm)... I guess there is no reasoning with someone with preset opinions. Warnings and attacks are not the same thing. Nothing I do has ever been a "personal attack", warnings, pleas, reasoning are all they are. Nothing more.. Nothing Less...--Paleface Jack (talk) 22:29, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Eyes of Fire (1983) film poster.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:10, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Cryptids are covered by discretionary sanctions under WP:ARBPS

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding pseudoscience and fringe science, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

EdJohnston (talk) 14:55, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Alright good to know.--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:44, 13 June 2018 (UTC)