User talk:LaprasBoi

Welcome

Welcome to Bulbapedia, LaprasBoi!

As a new user, you may wish to learn a few things that will be useful in your editing:

For a basic overview of wiki code, see this page.
The manual of style is very important. Make sure to read it. It outlines all official policies of Bulbapedia.
The word Pokémon is spelled with a capital P and an accented é. The P, of course, is accessed easily by holding Shift and pressing the P key, while the é can be accessed using Alt + 130 or Alt + 0233 on a Windows computer, and Option + e, then e again on a Mac. Otherwise, you can click it in the character palette below the editbox.
On talk pages, please sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
The use of link templates is official policy. For an explanation on their use, see the page on shortlinks.
If you happen to spot a vandal in the recent changes that has not been dealt with, please see this page for how to deal with it.
A list of pages that are linked to, but have not been created, can be found at this page. A list of short articles that may require more information can be found here, while a list of articles that need improvement can be found here.
A list of the admins that you can contact if there is a problem can be found here.

Thank you, and have a good time editing here! -WikidSmaht 14:07, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Scathing

Scathing. Try to be a little bit, er, nicer... T T Echidna 04:04, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Be Nicer.

Please stop deleting items for no reason. Additionally, please stop putting meaningless comments when deleting, I am referring to the,"This is not frickin’ TV Tropes. AN ARTICLE IS NOTAN ARGUMENT." Thank you. -MasterKenobi 01:22, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Talk Page Comments

Please don't erase talk page comments for no reason. Trust me, you do NOT want to end up like Big Johnno, who got into an edit war with a sysop over comments the former had erased and was trying to keep erased. That user ended up blocked and subsequently had every erased comment restored. --0 ° 01:43, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

You are totally right: I honestly don’t wish to be contentious or erase commentary. I only erased the welcome template, I did NOT erase the comments that Obi made at the same time - and it wasn’t for no reason. As I noted in the edit summary, I erased the welcome template because while it was a nice thought, it was not relevant - I am not a new user, I am familiar with the items linked from the template, and I have actually been here longer than Obi( who originally tried to add the template, Kenji-girl merely corrected his improper use of it).

Plain an simply, everyone gets the welcome. You're not an exception just because you have been here since 2007. Stop removing it. - Kogoro | Talk to me - 02:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh, honestly! What a perfectly ludicrous thing to insist on or have an edit war over! The template did not even EXIST when I joined, other users from that time don’t have it. But fine, I have no intention of wasting more time on this right now. It can stay for the moment. Also, 2006. --LaprasBoi 02:15, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Name change

Seeking a bit of advice: how does one get a name change here, I noticed you’ve had two? I tried looking through all the Bulbapedia policies and pages but I can’t seem to find it. Thanks for your help! --LaprasBoi on 0 Degrees’s talk page 18:26, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

You can go to TTEchidna for a name change. --^Psychic _Rider^☮ 19:26, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Young One...

Your signature no matter what must link to either your talk page or userpage. Thanks. ^ht 14 20:13, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I don’t mind joking around, but please make sure it’s appropriate. I’ve been on Bulbapedia longer than you and a lot of the other users, though not especially active, and I’m also older than a lot of users including you( and, yikes! While fact-checking that, I realized I have been online for longer than you’ve been alive. Scary).

Also, can you link to the policy that says signatures have to have a link? Honestly I don’t think I ever created a signature on Bulbapedia, I think the unlinked name is just the default. I’m not trying to make an argument out of this, I just want to review the policy. I wonder why the names aren’t links by default? --LaprasBoi 21:28, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

The Signature Policy states that,"By default, a user's signature will link back to their user page and user talk page. If a user desires, the signature can be customized, but it is required that you keep within the following guidelines and common sense when customizing your signature." Maybe you should really look back through the rules and policies... -MasterKenobi 21:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps. The signature policy page was not there when I joined and I did look it over and see the part you quoted, as well as the sentence “A link to the user page, at minimum, and a link to the user talk page is recommended.”, but I didn’t read the full text under the latter and therefore misinterpreted it. In any case, I wasn’t doubting that a policy existed, I just think it’s polite to link a policy when telling someone he is in violation. --LaprasBoi 02:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

There ya go.

Now relink accounts by logging in on Archives and News. AND LINK THE SIG. TTEchidna 07:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

On, it, boss. I was waiting to link to the new name. --LaprasBoi 16:30, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Concering this

Please, use the preview button rather than making several consecutive edits. --エルレイド 21:33, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I do use previews, and also view changes, before submitting( the only time I didn’t recently, due to the fucking session amnesia, it bit me in the ass), so most of my edits are done in one big leap, as you could easily see by viewing my contributions. In this particular case, I chose to edit in stages to make it a little more clear what I’d done when somebody views the changes. I did end up with 4 edits instead of the two I had intended, but that arose from edit conflicts and human error, not a lack of previewing - nobody’s perfect. --LaprasBoi 21:44, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

No need to jump down the guy's throat, Galladeon. It's not like he's doing it on multiple pages. TTEchidna 21:56, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Concerning this

See Pokémon League entrance exam instructor...it's still not that repetitive. You should clearly define what YOU mean by repetitive. The articles are fine. ^ht 14 11:44, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Blue (Special)

_{"The articles redirect, talk pages should too for now, especially since the move messed up a bunch of talk page links. When those are sorted out you could delete it again, though I don’t see why."}

Did you check the WhatLinksHere page for the article? They changed all the links on every page. So nothing links to that page. _Blake ^Talk·Edits 17:07, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

As I was looking around, I noticed several instances of Talk:Blue (Special) had been changed to [[Talk:Blue (Adventures)|Talk:Blue (Special)]], where clearly [[Talk:Green (Adventures)|Talk:Blue (Special)]] was intended, and instances of [[Talk:Blue (Special)|[other alternate text]]] are now [[Talk:Blue (Adventures)|[other alternate text]]], also wrong. Given that talk page links are clearly NOT settled yet, and that anyone unused to the change may still type in the old names, it seems prudent to keep those redirects there at least until some time passes and all the links are fixed. --LaprasBoi 17:21, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Electric Tale of Pikachu

I noticed what you did earlier today. You don't just start moving pages without the consent of an Administrator or the Project Leader of Project Manga. As for volumes, for the sake of consistency, don't move them at all. Some of the other mangas may not have a title like Electric Tale but for consistency reasons, it says where it currently is. So next time try to ask or start a discussion (or continue an old discussion) the next time you want to move something. --☆Coolピカチュウ! 00:00, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Did you also notice that after I was reverted and told to wait for a decision, I not only did so, but apologized and started/continued those very discussions in two places? So far, everyone who has chimed in is still in favor of “The”. Are you against it, and if you have no opinion, how long do we wait for opposition before we can move it again? --LaprasBoi 13:03, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Edit warring on Ethan

Stop it. You've been here long enough, you should know to not get into edit wars.--Pokélova! 12:27, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

You’re right, I have been here long enough. Longer than you( in fact, I have depressingly been using the Internet for longer than you, like a good number of editors, have been alive), so please do give me a little bit of credit. I wouldn’t call that an edit war at that stage. I undid an edit that served only to create ambiguity in the text, and in the spirit of limiting the number of edits, I rolled a bit of copyediting in with that. That was reverted, but the reasons cited in the edit summary did not stand up to scrutiny, so I put back my edits, along with a few additional fixes. Had it been reverted again, I would have gone to the talk page to make an appeal. --LaprasBoi 03:55, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

^ this response is rude and uncalled for. Particularly the bit in the brackets. Stay within the code of conduct, please. —darklordtrom 02:16, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I don’t think it’s rude to ask that a little credit and good faith be given to someone whom Pokélova himself described as having been here long enough to be knowledgeable and experience - and since he did so in a rather patronizing tone, I think a reply was indeed called for. If the way I said what I said was rude, then he was just as rude – but frankly, I don’t believe either of us was really particularly uncivil. As for the part in parentheses, I was making a self-deprecating jab at my advanced age, not at his youth – I am quite unhappy these days about the proximity of 30. I have now rephrased that part to better convey my intention so others will not misinterpret it as you apparently did. --LaprasBoi 11:05, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

More edit warring

Also. Gender can be used to specify whether something is male or female. As stated in the first section of the Wikipedia article on gender (the one you linked me too), it says that gender is another word for sex. Yes, I know that scientists usually define them as separate terms, but gender can be defined as sex. Additionally, it's an in-game term. They could have called it "banana muffin" for all we care. It's not used incorrectly and yes you were edit warring. Two reverts is an edit war. —darklordtrom 02:16, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

O.K., first of all, forgive me if I’m mistaken, but you seem to be under the impression that I created that trivium about incorrect usage. I did not, I only added the Wikipedia links and a little bit about terminology. So you might want to make your argument to the person who did create it. Second, I didn’t revert twice. I reverted once, then when that was reverted again by an admin I added a better targeted link. Then I decided that the new link was too similar( in being on the same page, despite being directed at a very different and more relevant section) so rather than wait to be accused of multiple reversions, I undid my own edit for the sake of cooperative spirit and added other, less controversial links. --LaprasBoi 11:05, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Yellow's uncle

Wilton IS Yellow's uncle. While it's true that "Ojiisan" is a non literal honorary form most of the time, this is not the case here. He's clearly mentioned as being Yellow's uncle in Yellow's profile page in Volume 25 (under "family", go figure). Also, Netkun website often refers to him as "Yellow no Ojiisan". In this context, it's IMPOSSIBLE for "Ojiisan" to be a honorary term. --Maxim 13:43, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

...huh. O.K., I have not seen volume 25, sorry. It sure makes the VIZ translation awkward, though. Perhaps they made the same mistake I did.

What is Netkun? It doesn’t have an article here or on Wikipedia either. --LaprasBoi 14:02, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Netkun is the official website for this series Ataro 14:07, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

That really seems like it should have an article then, or at least a significant section on the series page. --LaprasBoi 14:19, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Talk page converations

Please can you always add comments to the end of the section, rather than inserting it in the middle - it's likely that it'll get overlooked if it's put in the middle. Werdnae (talk) 07:41, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Code of conduct

Please note that an edit summary such as the one you did here is completely unacceptable. Calling another user stupid is against the Code of conduct and should not be done for any reason. Do not do it again. --It's Funktastic~!_{話してください} 22:41, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Talk page etiquette

Moved from the Talk:Gender talk page, where it was removed by Pokemaster97.

Talk page ettiquette

LaprasBoi, please never edit one of my comments or anyone else's again. I understand that you wanted to address my points separately, but it is highly against the rules to edit other people's comments, even if only to add spacing. I am extremely offended by your audacity. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 02:28, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Says the person who had the audacity to move/reorder my comments( which is exactly why I did it, ftr: to demonstrate for you the rudeness of your own actions). Forget rudeness, hypocrisy is worse than anything.( I’ve restored your comment to its original structure to avoid further offense.) --LaprasBoi (talk) 02:41, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Let me quote the talk page policy at you, since you don't seem to have read it. New comments in a section must always go at the bottom of the section, regardless of where the comment being replied to is in the discussion; this helps keep comments in order and prevents confusion as to what had been discussed prior to specific comments. Thus, I was merely enforcing policy. You, on the other hand, deliberately changed my policy-complying comment to be against policy. It's not hypocrisy, it's bureaucracy. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 02:57, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

I read it... albeit a few years ago. ^_^; However; all my comments WERE, in fact, added to the bottom of the section already; your claim that you needed to rearrange them to achieve that is BS. I shouldn’t have edited spacing, it seems that is true; but you did NOT have a valid reason to rearrange my comments, either. --LaprasBoi (talk) 03:12, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Every time I corrected the order of your comments, it was because you added a comment in this fashion (times are made-up for explanatory purposes):

someone's comment (2:00 p.m.)

your comment (5:00 p.m.)

another person's comment (3:00 p.m.)

When the talk page policy says the bottom of the section, it means the bottom of the entire section, not just a further-indented level of comments directly below whomever you're answering. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 03:21, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

That is simply not true: All my comments, despite indents, were at the bottom of the section( diff:[1])( that also shows admittedly inappropriate re-spacing of earlier comments; I have already conceded that point), when you first made a revision( [2]) which rearranged comments made by me, but there were NO COMMENTS BY ANYONE ELSE anywhere in between. --LaprasBoi (talk) 03:47, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if the comments are by someone else or your own; putting a new comment anywhere above an old comment (you can tell by looking at the timestamps) is against policy. Your examples are misleading because they involve you re-adding comments that had previously been removed, but as you can see from the timestamps, your first example is breaking the rules and your second is me fixing it. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 04:00, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Can you at least not sound so rude? This was really uncalled for. If an article is poorly worded, then fix the article, there's no need to attack others by calling them "children". I suggest you read and review the Code of Conduct before making another edit.--Force Fire 16:41, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Touchy, much? I wasn’t saying “children” as a disparaging epithet, I meant literal children. If the adults on this wiki are that ignorant, we have bigger problems than editors you perceive as rude. LaprasBoi (talk) 22:58, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

I know what you meant by "children", and it's still rude. Regardless if the user you're referring to is a child. You don't just go around calling people names, if you don't have anything nice to say, then don't say it.--Force Fire 04:10, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

What “names”? Clearly, you DON’T know what I mean by “children”; or else you don’t know what “disparaging” & “epithet” mean. Unless you’re accusing me of lying( when I said I didn’t mean it that way)? That would be pretty rude yourself. LaprasBoi (talk) 16:28, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Calling others "children" is calling them names. And I said regardless if you're calling other users children or referring to an actual child, you can't just go around calling other users children. It's plain and simple, rude. I have noted throughout your talk page that your attitude has been a major problem in the past, I suggest you fix it. You say you are 30, then act 30.--Force Fire 16:46, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

So... calling children children is “rude”, but it's O.K. to call a 30-year-old out as a 30-year-old? Hypocrisy makes a minimal impression on me, so maybe you should stop & think before you speak. I almost always do, & what I say is quite intentional. I DO have a history, one which stretches back somewhat further than yours even if it’s not quite as illustrious. What you call an attitude problem dates back to the old days, when I considered it saying what the editors in charge knew they had a moral responsibility not to. My obligation in that regard, as defined by the CoC, is significant but considerably less than that. ^_^ LaprasBoi (talk) 00:44, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm telling you to act your age. Calling other users "children who have yet to learn grammar or have a vocabulary" is very immature for a 30 year old. What you say is intentional? so you intentionally want to make others feel bad? Again, very immature for a 30 year old. You still have an attitude problem, it doesn't just date back to 2006, it dates back as recently as last year (the section above this one). You still act very aggressively to others, even if you think it isn't as bad as it was before, it's still in breach of the code of conduct.--Force Fire 04:03, 19 September 2015 (UTC)