FANDOM

A FANDOM user
  Loading editor
  • There is only one team called the Underground. The other is the League, and the BTBATB group has no name - in fact, we don't even know whether they were organized beyond that one adventure. That's why the page was deleted in the first place, 3 years ago.

    Do not make that page again.

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Welling did play both Clark Kent/Superman and Clark Luthor/Ultraman. Jor-El was the father of both of them in their respective universe. How is this wrong? After all their early histories were the same until they arrived on Earth. On Earth-1 Kal-El was found and adopted by the Kents and given the name Clark. On Earth-2 Lionel Luthor found and adopted Kal-El giving him the name Clark.

      Loading editor
    • View all 12 replies
    • It's exasperation.

      Look at the response to your original post that started this thread.

      Of the 4 bulleted points, 3 were why Clark Luthor would not be added.

      The last, and least important, was the name issue.

      That you cannot remember the other two, that you cannot be bothered to review this thread is beyond belief.

      It cinches a few things though:

      • You contention that you have learned from your past actions is bunk.
      • You will repeat yourself here when you block ends and feel perfectly justified in doing so.
      • Your intrenched mindset makes it worthless to engage with you. You believe you are right and if you repeat yourself long enough others will fall in line. You do not engage in discussion, you rant, you bull through, you deny other's points and that they have been put to you before.
      • You are unwilling to accept you shortcomings even when you point them out. Based on your own statement, you are not competent to copy edit but you do it any way.
      • You may mean well, but you are more of a detriment to an active, healthy wiki than an asset. All of the editors are volunteers. They are giving their time to try and improve content, legibility, and accessibility. Yes, that includes copy editing. Bit it should not have to include cleaning up after possessive, zealous editors who keep making the same damn mess, often of the same articles. We have better things to do.
      • You are not worth the time to try and engage with to explain why edits have been changed or undone. You will not listen. You will not try and work with others. You will not even bother to try and follow along and/or read read the entirety of a post, much less try to understand what is presented to you in plain English.
      • And to be clear: This is NOT a request for your rebuttal. This is the imprison you have made and confirmed.

      Good bye.

        Loading editor
    • "Look at the response to your original post that started this thread.

      Of the 4 bulleted points, 3 were why Clark Luthor would not be added.

      The last, and least important, was the name issue.

      That you cannot remember the other two, that you cannot be bothered to review this thread is beyond belief.": Since you weren't clear that this was what you were referring to, how was I supposed to know?

      It cinches a few things though: ◾ You contention that you have learned from your past actions is bunk. ◾ You will repeat yourself here when you block ends and feel perfectly justified in doing so. ◾ Your intrenched mindset makes it worthless to engage with you. You believe you are right and if you repeat yourself long enough others will fall in line. You do not engage in discussion, you rant, you bull through, you deny other's points and that they have been put to you before. ◾ You are unwilling to accept you shortcomings even when you point them out. Based on your own statement, you are not competent to copy edit but you do it any way. ◾ You may mean well, but you are more of a detriment to an active, healthy wiki than an asset. All of the editors are volunteers. They are giving their time to try and improve content, legibility, and accessibility. Yes, that includes copy editing. Bit it should not have to include cleaning up after possessive, zealous editors who keep making the same damn mess, often of the same articles. We have better things to do. ◾ You are not worth the time to try and engage with to explain why edits have been changed or undone. You will not listen. You will not try and work with others. You will not even bother to try and follow along and/or read read the entirety of a post, much less try to understand what is presented to you in plain English. ◾ And to be clear: This is NOT a request for your rebuttal. This is the imprison you have made and confirmed.":

      "You contention that you have learned from your past actions is bunk.', wrong!

      "You will repeat yourself here when you block ends and feel perfectly justified in doing so.", Repeat what? What specifically?

      "Your intrenched mindset makes it worthless to engage with you. You believe you are right and if you repeat yourself long enough others will fall in line. You do not engage in discussion, you rant, you bull through, you deny other's points and that they have been put to you before."; "You believe you are right and if you repeat yourself long enough others will fall in line.", I don't "believe" I "am right" about absolutely everything. I do not "believe" "if" I "repeat myself long enough others will fall in line.". That has certainly not worked in real life and would not necessarily here either; "You do not engage in discussion, you rant, you bull through, you deny other's points and that they have been put to you before.", "You do not engage in discussion,...": How do I not engage in discussion? "...you rant...": What about? Where? When? "...you bull through,...": What do you mean by that? "...you deny other's points and that they have been put to you before.": What do you mean deny? I point out flaws in other's arguments but I don't deny them if they are valid. Sometimes points haven't been put to me before and I will state so when others say otherwise.

      "You are unwilling to accept you shortcomings even when you point them out. Based on your own statement, you are not competent to copy edit but you do it any way.", What do you mean that I am "unwilling to accept" my "shortcomings" "even when" I "point them out"? "Based on your own statement, you are not competent to copy edit buy you do it any way.", What "statement" are you referring to?

      "You may mean well, but you are more of a detriment to an active, healthy wiki than an asset. All of the editors are volunteers. They are giving their time to try and improve content, legibility, and accessibility. Yes, that includes copy editing. Bit it should not have to include cleaning up after possessive, zealous editors who keep making the same damn mess, often of the same articles. We have better things to do.", I am perfectly aware "All of the editors are volunteers. They are giving their time to try and improve content, legibility, and accessibility.".

      "You are not worth the time to try and engage with to explain why edits have been changed or undone. You will not listen. You will not try and work with others. You will not even bother to try and follow along and/or read read the entirety of a post, much less try to understand what is presented to you in plain English.", "You are not worth the time to try and engage with to explain why edits have been changed or undone": That is more or less the attitude I've been given at times: "We can't bother to explain to you, so we won't."; "You will not listen.": I will listen if I am given a reasonable and logical explanation for something; "You will not try and work with others.": Not true; "You will not even bother to try and follow along and/or read read the entirety of a post, much less try to understand what is presented to you in plain English.": What do you think I am trying to do at this very moment? It's not as plain as you think it is.

      "And to be clear: This is NOT a request for your rebuttal. This is the imprison you have made and confirmed.", What have I "made and confirmed"?

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • What does it mean? I've found 28 expressions it could be an acronym for.

      Loading editor
  • It's not fair to block me when the issue of debate is not resolved yet. It seems like you're blocking me so I can't argue my point because you feel I could prove you wrong. If not then there should be no need to block me over a debate on improving the quality of an article and ultimately the wikia.

      Loading editor
    • I'm not the one who blocked you, but I will say this:

      There has never, in any of the discussions I have observed you taking part, been an instance in which it appeared you could prove another person wrong.

      You consistently get blocked - and should have been blocked a week ago - for edit-warring and empty edits. The exact same reason you were blocked three times previously, and refused to change your behaviours when the blocks ended.

      The discussions you were having are merely symptomatic of your refusal to accept the judgments of the members and administrators of this community.

        Loading editor
    • No it's trying to prove my point using logic based arguments.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Back from an extended absence again, a month this time, and right back to it.

    Nice to see you've tried to stop just hunting extra spaces. Good on you for that. However...

    • You are still going after "errors" that are not errors. Jut valid punctuations you have issues with.
    • In your zeal to remove commas, some of your edits leave behind sentences that are either still in bad grammatical shape or, as in the case of Alexander Luthor, Sr. (Earth-Three), worse shape. If you are so focused on "grammar", actually make it right the first time with your edit. Half-assing it and leaving damaged content behind is a for vandalism, all be it unintentional. When you've been called on it, as 'you have, multiple time it is very hard to take it as "unintentional". It shows you do not care.
    • Infobox fields with lists use, or should use, semi-colons and leave out "and". This is general practice here. More widely, it is also an acceptable way to handle these types of lists. That said, striking commas from "later, whatever" is valid. And avoiding dueling "formerly" and "later" notes in the same field is preferable. In such cases the leading item(s) should be without a qualifier to avoid giving the impression that the qualifier covers all the listed items. Oh, and colons are never used in those lists.
    • Baiting admins by reverting them as you seem want to do with Tupka is a bad idea. Worse you are still edit warring just to get you grammatically incorrect word choice.
      Loading editor
    • View all 26 replies
    • You're got to build up credit. Do useful things for the wiki. Byfield's not an admin, but he's done a lot of important work, so he's got cred. Even Sean Wheeler has some credit. You... are nothing but trouble. If you ever gained some credit, it's dwarfed by the debet you caused us in edit wars, reverts and wasted hours trying to talk sense into you.

        Loading editor
    • So until I've built up credit in your eyes, everything I do is wrong? "You... are nothing but trouble": because I disagree with you and others on certain matters. "If you ever gained some credit, it's dwarfed by the debet you caused us in edit wars, reverts and wasted hours trying to talk sense into you.": "...wasted hours trying to talk sense into you.", I could say the same about you guys.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I see you're back to trolling after your 2 week "break".

    Please stop.

      Loading editor
    • View all 23 replies
    • What I am saying it that you can't say that I was wrong in every case that I corrected the grammar! "You were asked to stop doing this multiple times, and you were blocked for it multiple times. Take that hint.": I was unreasonably demanded and unfairly blocked. The one who "asked" and blocked me would only either accept their way or the highway. Weren't willing to accept another opinion besides their one. Hardly fair.

        Loading editor
    • Unfair or not (answer: absolutely not), it still means: if you were admonished and blocked for doing something multiple times, don't do that again, whether you agree with it or not.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • See [1] and [2] for definitions.

    Bottom line: It is a valid variation of use. In most cases it is preferred to make sure the last two items in a list are not assumed to be one item.

    Leave it stand instead of enforcing your preferences.

    And if you are going to use it as an excuse to hunt extra space. Don't. Just don't.

      Loading editor
    • View all 8 replies
    • Jdongo, I'm tire of this. Right now an Admin has blocked on this site for how you're editing. And I see you've been blocked on other wiki's for similar thick-headedness. So, this is starting to feel like trolling on your part.

      Reasons and off-site sources have been provided to you. I am not your English teacher or tutor. No one on this site is. Having to play that that every time you tear into an article is a flat out waste of time others voluntarily put into this project. So is fixing the disruption you're creating.

      Take the rest of your 2 weeks try actually reading those links you were provided. Step all the way away from this while you do. And when you come back to editing here, maybe try working on adding content instead of practicing your skills copy editor.

        Loading editor
    • "Jdongo, I'm tire[D] of this. Right now an Admin has blocked on this site for how you're editing. And I see you've been blocked on other wiki's for similar thick-headedness. So, this is starting to feel like trolling on your part.": "And I see you've been blocked on other wikis for similar thick-headedness.": What are you talking about? "Reasons and off-site sources have been provided to you. I am not your English teacher or tutor. No one on this site is. Having to play that that every time you tear into an article is a flat out waste of time others voluntarily put into this project. So is fixing the disruption you're creating.": Well if the reasons given were incontrovertible, this would have been resolved before now. I am aware that none of you are my English teacher or tutor. I am not expecting any of you to be. I am not trying to create any disruption. I am trying to fix an error even if I am the only one that can see it.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Using "Grammar" as an edit summary implies you are fixing an error in grammar. Things like punctuation, verb tense, verb-noun agreement, run-on sentences, sentence fragments, etc.

    Changing "and" to "as well as" is not correcting grammar. You are replacing a perfectly valid word with a phrase you like better for little to no improvement to the article.

    And editing to remove extra spaces - and that is all I can assume you did in 4 of your 5 edits so far today - is in no way a grammar correction. It's, at best, code clean up since the added spaces don't even show in the page, just when you edit it. That's a nul edit - no change, no value, and given your comments from February, no reason other than to pad you edit count and badge hunt.

      Loading editor
    • View all 21 replies
    • Since you seem to need a primer on writing, the rules of grammar, and the rules of punctuation, here one good site. There are others.

      Here's the rule in question:

      "Use the semicolon if you have two independent clauses connected without a conjunction."

      That line in the Stealth article is two independent clauses in one sentence that are linked without a conjunction. Period.

      Are we done now?

        Loading editor
    • Fine.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • One word: PREVIEW.

      Loading editor
  • I believe you that they are real, I'm just curious about those Falcone extended family names because I don't recognize them. Where are you getting that information from, out of curiosity?

      Loading editor
See archived talk page
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.