Skeeta! You're my hero!! I love you!
Skeeta, you've deleted a lot of content that I posted on Iron pills, which represented a lot of research and compilation of fan discussion. If you think that there is something wrong with what I've posted, I would appreciate it if you would do me the courtesy of bringing it up first in the Talk section first so that I have an opportunity to respond. Thanks --Treefunk 12:46, 5 December 2006 (CST)
Hi Skeeta. The production information about cast members and such was included in an e-mail from The Creators to TWJaniak. So information like the names of cast members, and who was a producer and such, is official information. Also, when you're editing a page, if you hit the "show preview" button at the bottom of the page, you can proofread there. This way you don't have to edit the same article many different times in a row. We all do it sometimes, but if you can try the "show preview" it helps.--JayHenry 23:56, 10 December 2006 (CST)
Talk pages and comnents
I mentioned this as a reply to your comment about Bree's parents. If you don't mind, could you not post comments unless you have something important or constructive to say? When users log on and go through the Recent Changes to see what's been going on, it's really frustrating to have to go through a bunch of sarcastic and/or critical comments that don't help anyone improve on the wiki.<bt> Often, if you just looked around a little more before posting "um what" the question would be answered for you. On Bree's parents, if you'd clicked "What links here" (on the menu bar to the left), you would have seen that Bree's parents comes from the disambiguation page Parents. It further tries to direct you to either the article on her mom or dad. There's a lot of information on those articles that would be redundant if we wrote more on the parents page. If you had something to add that wasn't on either, you could have done that.
Lastly, if you do have a question or require clarification on something, use the Talk page for the article. Glad you're using LGpedia, just try to be a little more thoughtful of others. OwenIsCool 09:30, 11 December 2006 (CST)
- stop overreacting. i was being constructive, i was pointing out that the page was useless, and i would have nominated it for deleting if i knew how to. don't get all offended just because i thought a page was pointless and pointed it out.--Skeeta 21:14, 11 December 2006 (CST)
- what? all i said was that he was overreacting. sheesh. --Skeeta 21:21, 11 December 2006 (CST)
he was not overreacting, he was trying to polite and say,be careful on what u do. I know it may seem like it, but he was being really nice, he even welcomed you to LGpedia. I also welcome you, feel free to Contribute but dont go overboard alright. im sorry for What has happened in the past 20 min on this dicussion.Have a good day ok. ---Iris2009
On the Topic of Ridiculous
Skeeta. I'm sorry you think my article, Water Theme, is ridiculous--a lot of fans clearly disagree with you as the theory has their origin in their comments and posts and as they have sent me notes complimenting this article. On the topic of ridiculous, I would venture that nearly all of your regrettably prolific edits have constituted only degradation of the quality of this wiki project. Your edits are either contemptuous and sarcastic, factually incorrect, or irrelevant, but they are always dumb. The tedium of "fixing" the mess that you leave here has sapped me of my interest in this project. It may be a sad truth of wikis that it is necessary to ban users who may have at least somewhat benign intentions, but who lack the mental capacity to deliver upon those intentions. --Treefunk 23:15, 13 December 2006 (CST)
- Since the last time I tried to give Skeeta some feedback it was rather badly taken, I thought I should show some support for Treefunk's points. While I would contend that Skeeta does make some good, factual, and appropriate edits at times, I have to admit that when I see a streak of edits done by Skeeta, I know I'm going to be spending a lot of time cleaning them up. Often times the edit may be apropos, but the way they are done is unacceptable by our standards, so I feel obligated to fix them up. Other times, Skeeta is just plain disrespectful of articles and carelessly, sarcastically, or sloppily implements needless edits that help in no way. Although you've shown improvement, I hope you try to be more responsible. I know you're first reaction to this will be to tell us to "stop overreacting sheesh", but think about it. You could learn more if you just read pages more carefully, and you could save everyone a lot of time by not making "fixes" that others then have to fix for real. We all have more fun or interesting things that we'd rather be working on and sometimes you hinder that process. OwenIsCool 23:43, 13 December 2006 (CST)
- did you even read my comment, treefunk, or did you just stop at ridiculous? i assure you i did not mean it as a personal insult.--Skeeta 00:36, 23 January 2007 (CST)
I hear UPenn is a good school.--JayHenry 00:41, 19 January 2007 (CST)
- oh, thanks! that's one of the ones i'm looking into.--Skeeta 20:28, 20 January 2007 (CST)
Same thing u normal do, like revert vandlism and such and help new people grow!--TJ Marsh 17:12, 12 March 2007 (CDT)
No worries; I'm really glad to see you're enjoying the wiki more. It's ok if we didn't completely understand each other at first, I'm always glad to have another good editor around. I hope you have fun with it and keep contributing to articles that interest you, such as Nikki B's. If there's anything I can help with you with (editing tips, wiki code, new projects, anything), just let me know!
OwenIsCool 02:20, 1 February 2007 (CST)