User talk:InedibleHulk/Archive 4

Talking with myself

Oh oh. Just archived, feel free to mess this page back up! InedibleHulk (talk) 03:19, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited David Chackler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tales from the Crypt. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:12, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Jack Lindquist

Hey, your edits on Jack Lindquist are stomping on mine - please pay attention when Wikipedia tells you your edits conflict. I'm trying to clean up all the wildly broken CITE tags that are creating all sorts of red errors at the bottom of the article. --Krelnik (talk) 04:37, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

It was one edit, and promptly unstomped. Didn't get an edit conflict, just noticed a huge green number. I'm done for now. Have fun! InedibleHulk (talk) 04:43, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, me too - I think I got them all fixed. Cheers. --Krelnik (talk) 04:49, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

UFC division capitalization

Why do you think it should be your way of what's "right"? If the majority of them are one way and you edit just a few then it looks weird and I feel the need to edit them to look uniform. By the way last night I went through all the UFC cards and saw that only a few were different and was able to edit them accordingly in under an hour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elinus4 (talk • contribs) 18:22, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

It's not my way, it's the English way. If they're all done right by the Manuals of Style, you won't have a problem? Just the disparity that's weird? InedibleHulk (talk) 09:55, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Re: Draft: Justin Gaethje

I was under the impression that it was against safety guidelines, although I suppose a suspension for 'unsportsmanlike' behaviour wouldn't make sense if it was a violation of safety guidelines. You can revert my last edit if you want as I don't think it's worth arguing over, and since I think I made it largely because of being slightly angry at the flood of edits after Gaethje's win at WSOF 29. Sorry if I seemed to be intransigent. Zaostao (talk) 19:41, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

No worries. It was definitely intended for safety, but there's also a general old-school sporting mentality against showboating. Speaking of both, I just learned today that Darrion Caldwell not only moonsaulted a camerawoman in MMA, but also botched an early handspring in wrestling. If neither of us cares enough to argue, I guess I'll revert. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:47, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd imagine there is some rule against it somewhere, and even if not made by the athletic commission, I'd wonder why the organisation wouldn't prevent its athletes flipping from the cage and possibly injuring themselves. Hadn't seen that Caldwell had done it in his wrestling career also, I guess it's just another example of wrestling translating well to MMA. :) Zaostao (talk) 02:35, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Whenever you see a guy straddle the cage to raise his arms, you'll see the commission guys try to talk him down, tapping him on the legs and whatnot (no ten-count, though). It is sort of high, but it's hard to act too concerned with safety when the sport itself revolves around damage, and training has injured about as many as fighting has. The UFC has a morals clause in their talent contracts. Covers pretty much everything that could be seen as unsavory, from transgender slurs to hit-and-runs. Theoretically, climbing and flipping could be deemed monkey business, so the promoters could invoke that. Shouldn't, though. Flipping is fun for the whole family, not just the Wallendas. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:14, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Check out the VPP discussion on the usefulness of world leader response articles

Greetings, IncredibleHulk! With your kind encouragement, I have opened up a Village Pump Policy discussion on the usefulness of articles like Reactions to the 2016 Brussels bombings. If-- and no pressure, of course-- but if you could give it a once over and let me know if I've botched the formatting in anyway, that would be really cool. Tigercompanion25 (talk) 15:11, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Which wouldn't be impossible (that botching, I mean), given that I just botched the title of the blessed article in the message I just sent you. Tigercompanion25 (talk) 15:12, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Sigh, twice in fact. Tigercompanion25 (talk) 15:13, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

You're grrreat! And botching is fun. I didn't notice anything glaring there (well-written, actually), but gave my two cents. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:25, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

I can't believe I've made it this far in life without encountering botchamania. *shakes heads with shame*. Having said that, thank you for giving the proposal a looking over. :) Tigercompanion25 (talk) 22:27, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Spread the word! It's not just funny for wrestling fans. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:36, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Oppositeness in music

Hey, I liked your Doo-wop answer, and you're of course correct that many individual traits or aspects of music can be thought of as a linear scale or spectrum. Aren't you a musician of sorts? I've been trying to up my general music game recently whilst learning a few new instruments, thinking more about music theory, chord progressions, and yes, a little genre classification.

Anyway, here's what I have a hard time with regarding opposites. It is easy to say that "soft" is the opposite of "hard" as a single trait. But putting all traits in opposition doesn't necessarily make two things opposites. Say I have object A: it is small, soft, white, and light-weight. Maybe it's a rabbit's foot. Now consider object B: it is large, hard, black, and heavy. Maybe a granite slab. But is it fair to say those two are opposites? SemanticMantis (talk) 14:03, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

No, not fair at all. Once again, the simple answer doesn't quite stand up to scrutiny. Still, I'll stand by doo-wop. Plain old 4/4, AABA rock is pretty close, too, but generally comes up short on harmony.

I'm the sort of musician who is pretty clueless about theory. I mostly just play around on a keyboard, record to MIDI, have a listen/look on the computer and fiddle with the parts that suck till they don't anymore (to my ear). I can technically read sheet music, but not fast enough to do it while I'm playing. I've never actually written anything, in the traditional sense. The bubblegum hack sort, I guess. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:51, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Editing the Article on USAID

I have been working on the USAID article off and on for the last few years and I appreciate your inputs of March 7, 2016, thanks!

One of the changes you made has been under discussion recently with members of the USAID Alumni Association: the deletion of the "USAID Forward" section. When I found the article, I was dismayed by that section, which already had the "advertisement" warning. I didn't remove it, partly because I didn't want to be too controlling but also because I thought I could edit it down to be less objectionable. So I removed many references to the person who was USAID's Administrator at the time and took out many claims about the good results that "USAID Forward" would supposedly have. The version of the section that you saw on 3/07/2016 was (imho) much less objectionable than the version I inherited. But Wikipedia's "advertisement" warning stayed up.

Recently one other member of the USAID Alumni Association -- a senior and politically savvy person -- had suggested that the section be removed. I agreed, partly because I think the "advertisement" warning lessened the credibility of the page as a whole. I was about to propose the deletion to the Association's members (via their website) and then go ahead with the deletion unless there were objections. What I'll do now is note your deletion, cite the old text, and invite comments. I doubt there will be any objection.

Jsryanjr (talk) 14:53, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Right on. Took me a while to even remember I'd touched that. Must've been incidental to something I'd linked on a desk. Advertising always lessens encyclopedic credibility, tagging just highlights the problem. Cool of you to try to water it down, but nine times out of ten, it's best to just burn these things. I've taken the liberty of deleting this from my User page and moving it to Talk, where I'll be more likely to see it. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:18, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm still learning and am unclear about the difference between User pages and Talk pages, but anyway I'm glad you found my note. Jsryanjr (talk) 19:05, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

User pages are like our storefronts. Just a general idea of who's inside and what we do. Talk pages are like our offices, where we deal with our fellow knowledge merchants. Our sandboxes are our laboratories, and our archives are just our archives, I suppose. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:51, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

How to report a sockpuppet

Hello. I'm not sure if you know the answer to this question; I just decided to ask you first out of all the users I know. How do you report a WP:SOCK account? I believe I may have come across one and have tried to report it, but I think stating the account's IP address is required and I'm not sure how to find it, or if it's actually legal to do so. Could you help me out here? Thanks. Parsley Man (talk) 23:36, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations seems the place to start. You don't need to uncover the IP, just present a convincing case for suspicious behaviour. Admins will check the IP, if warranted. Revealing it yourself might be seen as "outing", and that's frowned upon. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:55, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. :) Parsley Man (talk) 23:32, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Amusingly, Parsely appears to be a sockpuppet, that is, an experienced editor resurrected about a year ago under a new name.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:20, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Natalya Neidhart

Hey there! There's a current discussion on Natalya (wrestler) that you may be interested in.

Please participate in the following move discussion on Natalya (wrestler).

• Natalya (wrestler) → Natalya Neidhart

Sekyaw (talk) 19:06, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Reply

First off I didn't say she mightve died Sunday, the coroner gave his date of death estimate, which I noted in my edit summary. She was active on social media at 11:44 PM on April 17, and at 10:39 AM on April 18. So if the coroner is given an date of death at least 2 days from body's discovery, that makes it the 18th since she was alive that morning. Rusted AutoParts 17:26, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Celebrities don't always run their own social media. She has a "Team Chyna", who obviously have her Twitter password, since it announced her death. Facebook's no different. You should probably leave the deduction to the actual authorities. Original research, otherwise. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:29, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Seems full control only went to "Team Chyna" after her death, judging by this post. And besides, "Team Chyna" still have to be approved by Chyna herself before they post anything to Chyna's Facebook page. Rusted AutoParts 17:32, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Why? InedibleHulk (talk) 17:33, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Hypothetical: You are a celebrity who hires a PR team to run your social media (not saying she didn't run her own. Going through posts, she ran it herself). They are posting stuff on your behalf. Do you want to be seeing stuff you didn't want posted to it you didn't say or didn't want to post? No. Trump stated in an interview that though he has people run his Twitter, he has them post what he wants them to post. They're representing you, so if they're intending to post something you don't believe, subscribe to or want posted, you'd 9 times out of 10 want to be consulted. It's why i'm figuring nothing got posted on April 19th, as either she was no longer alive to post it herself, or the PR team she may or may not have had couldn't get ahold of her to see what she wanted posted to her page. Rusted AutoParts 17:37, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

You hire people who never intend to post contrary stuff. Part of the job is knowing the brand. If you have to check your e-mail to approve a proof of everything, you'd waste less time posting it yourself. And if you had time for that, you wouldn't have hired people.

I appreciate the brainwork here, but Wikipedia isn't a detective agency. We should stick to what readers can easily verify, without needing a lengthy explanation from an editor. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:56, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Your opinion on UFC 200

Hello, InedibleHulk. You have new messages at Talk:UFC 200.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

No thanks. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:52, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Notability

Check your username at mailinator.com for the article I'm thinking of. I don't want to get sucked into the whole controversy surrounding it, which is why I'm being so cloak and dagger about it. Hope you understand. Elisfkc (talk) 05:23, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I understand mystery in general, but this one's perplexing. Why should I want to know the article you're thinking of? If it's not vital, I'll pass on this mailinator deal, but thanks for the tip. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:29, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Wasn't sure. Figured I'd suggest it if you wanted to know. --Elisfkc (talk) 05:37, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Some things are best left cloaked. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:40, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016

Your recent editing history at 2016 Orlando nightclub shooting shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 15:25, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't see it. Specify? InedibleHulk (talk) 15:27, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi, InedibleHulk. This is like revert edit #10. Well past 3RR. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 16:45, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Sure, but they're about various things. Never re-added or re-deleted anything in particular. That's what I consider an edit war. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:49, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi, InedibleHulk. You are only allowed to do three revert edits per page on a 3RR page before you cross the bright line rule. You have done over 10 edit reverts. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 16:54, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Cheers! InedibleHulk (talk) 17:01, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	for all the articles you start, expand, tirelessly improve E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:17, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:03, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

More BS (BarnStar)

		The Anti-Flame Barnstar
		Long overdue, but I'm trying to give more of these. The Hulk has an extremely rare talent for short-circuiting potentially heated exchanges by keeping his cool and using a bit of good-natured humor. ―Mandruss ☎ 07:17, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

I've started my share, too, but thanks. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:08, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Nobody goes for the atmosphere

What, now you're an expert on why people go to hospitals?? :D ―Mandruss ☎ 07:08, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

I once had the best cream corn I've ever had in a hospital. I guess some go for that. But the lighting is always all wrong. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:36, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Factual description of foreign travel by Omar Mateen

Regarding your accusation on the Pulse shooting attack Talk page Casting the umrah in a poor light? that the suggestion to include a factual description of Mateen's foreign travel be included in the article about the Pulse shooting attack was racist paranoia, do you know that by intentionally making such a generalisation, you are shutting down any rigorous discussion about Mateen's foreign travel, particularly in the face of other editors having duly noted facts that possibly merit mention on the Pulse shooting attack article ? I'd like to know more about your reasoning to shut down discussion by each of intimidating people with your accusation and removing factual reference to the travel from the article ? Maslowsneeds (talk) 11:34, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

If I wanted to shut down discussion, I wouldn't have mentioned it. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:15, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

I've seen how gate-keeping editors operate here, and the making of accusations of racism or otherwise trashing someone's intentions about edits is how content is controlled. My only request was that the foreign travel be factually described. If you are admitting you know how to gate-keep what material facts get included in an article, I guess you have said so, yourself. Maslowsneeds (talk) 22:57, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

@Maslowsneeds: Are you referring to WP:OWN? If you're going to make an accusation, it helps to use the right terms. Anyway, as you're the only one making the accusation, all of the others present must be complicit in the gate-keeping, no? Or are they just stupid? I see two or three fairly experienced editors in that discussion, so the latter doesn't seem likely. ―Mandruss ☎ 01:32, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Katie^talk 23:36, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Fatality

Re: [1]

Actually there's M-W's definition, sense 5b, but I'll give you this one. It's a minor sense. ―Mandruss ☎ 00:54, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Also reminds people of Mortal Kombat, to a degree. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:03, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for List of sons of King Abdulaziz ibn Saud by seniority

An article that you have been involved in editing—List of sons of King Abdulaziz ibn Saud by seniority—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. 62.64.152.154 (talk) 14:19, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Writing styles

Your statement: "If Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy and Omar Mateen's articles can handle the truth, so can this one." Ianmacm's corresponding statement: "As pointed out above, it isn't considered necessary to say that Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gacy are 'American-born'." He understood your meaning, but I didn't. My way of saying that (after I understood what you were saying) was: "No need to state that he was 'American-born' any more than we would for any other American." To my simple mind, your meaning was hidden in your creative writing style. It occurs to me that this style difference caused the whole dispute, if you want to call it that, beginning with the first edit. Just an interesting observation, I'm certainly not asking you to change your style for me. ―Mandruss ☎ 07:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm a bit weird. But you understood me soon enough that I don't feel completely insane yet. That edit summary meant what you thought it did, I think. I just happened to take a whole new angle on Talk, which wasn't even between the lines in the summary. Don't feel simple for missing anything there. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:25, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

SAP SE Exec Board

Hi Inedible Hulk, since you've had an interest in the Bill McDermott page, I was wondering if you might consider reviewing my request for an edit on the Organization section of the main SAP SE article. The members of the SAP Executive Board are not all named. In addition, Luka Mucic is the CFO, not CFO and COO. I would certainly appreciate it if you could have a look and let me know your thoughts. I've posted my request for an edit to the talk page of SAP SE. Thank you! Harper70 (talk) 14:33, 21 June 2016 (UTC)Harper70

No real thoughts on it, except you're right. Thanks for pointing it out. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:11, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

"widely denounced" vs. "widely called"

Dear InedibleHulk, good afternoon! I now see from your edit summary that you changed "denounced" to "called" because of what I wrote. Thanks! I'm curious, though, in your opinion, how does "denounced" violate NPOV? Is it because it sorta makes the narrator of the article seem to side with the opinion expressed? Omphaloscope talk 18:17, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Good afternoon to you. To denounce is to publicly call something wrong or evil. For Wikipedia to publicly call it "widely denounced" echoes that sentiment, and also mischaracterizes the sources out there that simply say it was a terrorist act or a hate crime. When we're not specifically attributing this to anyone, "called" is more inclusive. If we were saying Senator Johnny Johnson denounced it (presuming he did and exists), that would be OK. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:25, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Seems he does (and did) exist. No offense, guys. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:32, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ferguson, British Columbia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saanich. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:WWF Light Heavyweight belt.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WWF Light Heavyweight belt.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:08, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Just senseless vandalism, apparently. Thanks for the tip, B-bot. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:14, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

July 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Brock Lesnar may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:59, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Brock Lesnar may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:39, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Brock Lesnar may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:19, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Shooting motive section

InedibleHulk, I am talking about a motive for the shooting. That's exactly why I created that subsection, because the material in there talks about a potential motive for the shooting. I don't understand what else you would be thinking I'm talking about... Parsley Man (talk) 21:39, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

I think my last edit summary made it crystal clear. If you still insist, go for it, but it looks stupid. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:41, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, we need to make it clear... Parsley Man (talk) 21:41, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Philadelphia Police Department, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page C-4. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:02, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Not to put too fine a point on it

The edit warring doesn't bother me - Unclear whether you understood this, but I was defending the project, not you—per WP:Process is important. Defense of process is far more meaningful when coming from an uninvolved party, as it's then more about principle than combat. And it's unuseful to say that some degree of edit warring is ok, since we'll always disagree on what that degree is. This is the idea behind BRD, and it's a good one. In my opinion. ―Mandruss ☎ 10:03, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I almost said something about how my opinion on whether I feel victimized won't matter, but then I thought it might invoke domestic violence and rape thoughts. When in doubt, replace those suggestions with Muppet connotations, I say. Nobody hates Muppets. Edit warring is a huge problem, though. Sorry to appear to treat it lightly. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:09, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Your signature

Just wanted to note that using a different date format like you do in your signature might confuse archiving bots (i.e. they won't recognize the date format and skip archiving those sections). nyuszika7h (talk) 08:35, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Only when nobody replies. It's rare, but when it happens, I just delete the section after a while. Nobody misses it. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:44, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, nobody loves Hulk. :'(. CrashUnderride 01:00, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

My mom thought I was cool (for a while). InedibleHulk (talk) 01:31, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Your mom was wrong and should be ashamed. :D CrashUnderride 02:05, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Hey

Do you need a refresher course on the Preview button. lmao Going through you edits on the WP Pro Wrestling talk page, that was HILARIOUS!!!!! CrashUnderride 00:58, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

I still don't get what broke your signature. But yeah, I'm always fucking up my indentation and missing a word here and there. Maybe I'll start clicking Preview one of these days. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:29, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Your opinion on UFC 200

Hello, InedibleHulk. You have new messages at Talk:UFC 200.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

See you there

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		This was as close to a "You're a terrible person headed straight to hell" barnstar as I could find. TimothyJosephWood 13:51, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I did laugh a little at your joke, but didn't want to admit it. So I was forced to ask a serious question to cover it up. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:55, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Don't ask me why, but...

Hold up, playa! I see "radio" in your edit summary. I couldn't imagine that you were referring to me, but who knows. Anyway, if you thought things couldn't get any worse, #ILoveThe70s!!! Really, there was tons of cheesy shit on the radio back then. Whodathunk that "I'm Easy", just another disposable piece of my third-grade year, would years later be revealed to me in the context of one of several pinnacles of only like one of the greatest films ever.

And wouldn't you know that I missed UFC 200 and Brock Fucking Lesnar was there. The Radio Station (capitalization intended, that's their branding) was begging to give tickets away, at the same location where I had the aforementioned little misadventure and got to see Rousey-Tate in the process. I'm just getting too fucking old anymore to hang around places where drunk military guys wind up doing something which brings the police around. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 14:06, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Wasn't trying to summon you, but hello. UFC 200 didn't quite live up to the hype, but not a bad show at all. I won't click that YouTube link, but thanks for sharing it. Per usual, I haven't even heard of that film, but if you say it's good, I'll least consider looking into it. If you want some weird MMA that'll make you feel out of touch with kids these days, check this shit out. A bit funny, but a bit sad. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:23, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Not sure about the links you offered, either, especially since a lot of what I've seen on GoFundMe can literally bring a tear to a glass eye (at least literally in the Jimmy Hart/Jim Cornette promo sense). The first folks I saw who looked like Pokemon Go players were wandering through a strip mall parking lot well after everything was closed. It also looked like they were walking right into a drug deal involving a couple of bikers, but I wasn't exactly sticking around to confirm that this was the case. The YouTube link is for the smash hit single "Inoki Bom-Ba-Ye". Of course, there's far riper fruit than that, but I felt it was worth a laugh. I thought I already pointed out that too much of NJPW's music from that era sounds like Maynard Ferguson, even though that one wasn't him.

Oh yeah, we're supposed to focus on encyclopedic tasks or whatever, right? Some of this stuff I see coming through the pipe lately, particularly in deletion processes and sometimes in AFC, makes me want to create a humor article about an upcoming wrestling event. It doesn't matter how far in the future the event or any matches will be so long as the participants haven't died yet. Stuff like inducting Ronda Shear and Herb from Burger King into the celebrity wing of the WWE Hall of Fame, with WrestleMania featuring the WCW (Walkers, Canes and Wheelchairs) match. When I have these discussions in certain circles, the running joke is generally "Will WM actually get to that point by 40 or 50?". Or perhaps a WCW match combined with the ropes outfitted with every WWC/FMW/CZW-style gimmick imaginable, wherein Abdullah the Butcher repeatedly jabs his international object into Carlitos' colon (capitalization also intended). The dude on another local radio station, who isn't the least bit entertaining but likes to ramble on about WWE a lot at times, suggested Hogan versus Sting for the WCW match. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 14:39, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

That is a good tune. Should've clicked it after all. Apparently Herb was in an episode of Nashville. Small world. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:46, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

This breaking news just in – Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead! – er, ah, "A pro wrestling-style entrance from Donald Trump" says Faux News ("We Exhort, You Deride"). RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 15:22, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

When I hear Trump, pro wrestling and still dead, I think WrestleMania V. Greg Valentine will still look the same (as himself and as Trump) at WrestleMania 50, and The Powers of Pain just lost to the Rock n' Roll Express this April. I'd always supposed Rush Limbaugh was all the radio Fox needed. Greedy bastards. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:28, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Whoa. They weren't exaggerating this time. Thanks for the tip. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:36, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm sure I previously hinted that I did paying work in politics in years past and have known many personalities. The Republican state convention was held here this year. Many I talked to, including higher-level folks, dropped their smiley face and well-oiled spiel when it came to talking about Trump. The ones not on the right felt the same way about Ted Cruz. Speaking of Cruz and something which has been on my mind, GaryColemanFan brought up AFC again. Their WP:BITE/WP:OWN complexes are becoming more obvious/problematic, and their acceptance/rejection standards show disregard for much of WP:GNG and some of WP:N. Multiple RFC commenters have expressed views on how this subset of editors are angling for more power to decide on behalf of the rest of us what is and isn't notable, to the point of making "enduring notability" and "inherent notability" out to be more rah-rah sloganeering used to score brownie points is some particular discussion somewhere else. Tomorrow marks ten years since I started this account. In the end, all the process/script editing fails I see constantly, particularly from AFC but from plenty other corners of the encyclopedia, may very well make "editor retention" out to be more such sloganeering. AFC's various tone-deaf-to-the-world mantras/propaganda doesn't take into account the publishing opportunities existant in the world today. The primary advantage to Wikipedia as a publishing platform is the heightened exposure provided by Google and the like, because we're certainly getting farther away from the notion of "wiki" meaning "easy".

WP:PW's content has been subject to double standards by AFC and by others in the community, but that would require another wall of text to spell out/make clear. Maybe I'll make it to the RFC before it closes. Back to Cruz, the lead of his article doesn't contain "Canadian-born American", presumably because his birthplace was a public issue for more than two or three cups of coffee (but not quite like Obama's was). This guy is someone I would feel comfortable about calling "Canadian-born American"; he was born in Blackfalds, Alberta to American parents, but lived in Alberta until age six, when his family returned to the United States. IMO, there's nothing inherently harmful about "Canadian-born American" or "Canadian-American", but I half wonder if another double standard applies by giving that kind of weight so front and center in Tully Blanchard and Lanny Poffo. If they were born in Calgary because their fathers were doing short hitches in the CFL and/or Canadian territories, that's different from a longer-term residency such as Brewer or Cruz. What I said before about the Von Erichs' birthplaces applies here, too.

I can revisit Alaskan politicians for better examples of this. Ken Fanning isn't "from" Tampa, Florida — he was born to a military family who moved all over before settling in Denver, Colorado. Loren Leman isn't "from" Pomona, California — in 1950, Nick and Marion Leman were residents of Ninilchik, Alaska, a settlement with a long history yet to become just another stop along the Sterling Highway. In other words, as the Sterling hadn't been completed, Ninilchik had no permanent surface connection to the outside world. Therefore, it would have been just as practical for his mother to travel "Outside" to the "big city" for the birth than to anywhere else in Alaska which actually had a hospital. This was a halfway common practice in Alaska through the 1950s, when the population influx due to the Cold War and the adoption of a tax structure which wasn't a half century out of date led to a certain "modernization". Around the Cold War years, Ricky Steamboat lived in Alaska with his military family, but we're not trying to claim that he's "from" or associated with Alaska in any way. However, Jackson Browne has stated in a press interview that he was conceived in Alaska while his parents were stationed here (he was born at another military installation in West Germany). The brief Alaska residencies of George W. Bush and Courtney Love have received sufficient attention from reliable sources. Since they were young adults doing nothing important and stories of their time here tend to be borderline BLP issues, it's reasonable not to give that a lot of weight. Anyway, before this goes on forever like that road; I've been going back and forth with various editors for years about the WP:UNDUE aspects of birthplaces, but I would like to hear more opinions on the matter. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 05:10, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Even judging whether reading this closely will make my brain hurt makes my brain hurt. I'll get back to you. Happy anniversary for now! InedibleHulk (talk) 05:23, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

WWE roster

Hi. Can you help us? Since the Draft, Vjmlhds and I have different opinions (again) about the WWE Roster article. He want to change the format, I prefer to use the old one. Can you give us your opinion at the talk page? --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 15:24, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, I was going to watch Dink and Pink wrestle Sleazy and Cheesy. But I guess that can wait. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:53, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

The only thing I can see you arguing about is whether to split the roster. I'd already said I liked splitting it like we used to. Still do. I should probably start watching WWE again soon. But first, clowns and kings. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Significance of Normandy attack

Hi! I think stating the scope of previous attacks adds to the idea of this one being a first. I think it is important to put it into context. Cato censor (talk) 14:10, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't about what any of us think. If a reliable source makes the comparison, then it can go in. If sources just say something else happened, then we add our own extrapolation, conclusion or comparison, that's synthesis. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:14, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

You are right. What I was trying to add is not an extrapolation, conclusion or comparison: just writing in the same line of the text by citing different sources. I removed the reference to the Daily Mail: I'm sorry, as a foreigner to the UK, I am just not familiar to that specific journal's reputation. Thanks! Cato censor (talk) 14:23, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

You compared this attack to previous attacks (or attempted attacks) using sources which don't mention this one, to draw the conclusion that this wasn't the first. And you stated your intent to draw this conclusion on the talk page, where you were warned it wasn't cool before you did it. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:29, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

I have renamed the section "Context". Also rephrased some of the awkward wording.Zigzig20s (talk) 14:35, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

That didn't turn an unsourced argument into a sourced one. This conversation should probably continue at the article's talk page, not mine. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:40, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm really sorry (I mean it!). Which argument do you say is still unsourced? Cato censor (talk) 14:43, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

The one that it's not quite a first, as far as planning goes. Continue at the talk page. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:45, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you. Maybe my English is being an obstacle here. What I intend to do is to say it is a first (just as the first quote of The Vatican Insider says), and add a clarification on to which extent it actually is, based on additional sources. I understand I was warned that not citing sources or concluding this first by myself (which I don't intend to do in the text at all) was not cool.Cato censor (talk) 14:37, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Clarification is fine, if a reliable source makes it. Our clarifications are our own ideas. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:40, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Mohammad Daleel

An article that you have been involved in editing—2016 Ansbach bombing—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. —SomeoneNamedDerek (talk) 16:23, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Mia Bloom

There's no mention of her in the Nice attack article is there? So I guess for all intents and purposes I won ;) El cid, el campeador (talk) 13:19, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

That battle, anyway. She's still in thirteen other articles, if you're aiming for total victory. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:03, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:WWF Light Heavyweight belt.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WWF Light Heavyweight belt.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:01, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

It's me again...

Loved that comment in the Jeri-KO AFD or whatever it was. Personally, I'd find it worth watching if they put Jericho in a program where he didn't wash his scrotum for months at a time and caused his opponents to submit to The Balls of Jericho. While I'm on such a roll, every time I see or hear "Intercontinental Championship", I get this vision of an "Incontinence Championship", with the titleholder wearing an adult diaper instead of a strap. Maybe if anyone takes my suggestion of a WCW match seriously, that could wind up being the prize.

Okay, I'll stop. Seriously, do you know anything about copyright for U.S works? I remember you letting on that you're Canadian, and from what I've seen, Crown Copyright and the like is a whole different animal. I scanned thirteen photos taken at or associated with wrestling shows at the Fur Rendezvous Festival between 1956 and 1960. Most of these can be used to replace FU images, or in the case of Ed Carpentier, replace an inferior free image. The devil in the details is this: there are no visible copyright notices, only generic third-party photo credits. However, most of these third-party credits are to established commercial photographers whose collections are currently held by professional archives which take matters like copyright seriously. Therefore, I would tend to believe that they may wish to assert copyright if it is an image in their archive, despite the fact that "published in the United States between 1923 and 1977 and without a copyright notice" seems pretty straightforward to me. The actual wording of Title 17 of USC is far from straightforward, however, and various conversations I've had with folks about copyright law leaves lots of doubt about "the straight scoop ". RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 07:45, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Far from an expert, but I'm pretty sure Canadian and US copyright law is generally the same, and a photographer doesn't need to include a copyright notice to hold the right, even before 1977. I am an expert on crass humour, though, and anything stinky old man balls touch generally turns to gold, by those unwritten laws. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:14, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

"A single lightning strike killed 323 reindeer in Norway". A lot more interesting than hearing about Fuji-san, especially considering how ill he looked for so many years beforehand. Perhaps not as interesting as Gene Wilder's passing, which is flashing across the ether as I write this. I thought Wilder already died, but it was just my fractured memory again, as Wilder was seemingly everwhere in the news when Richard Pryor died. Maybe I'll play Primus's cover of "The Candy Man" in his memory. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 05:50, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

And now Mel Brooks is likewise reminding me he's not dead, either. I didn't see much of those reindeer's work, but that one still hit me hardest, I think. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:36, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

the reds

special:diff/737314235 is a lot of great ideas to redirect too, I was tempted to create them but they were your ideas and would have better chances of survival if you made them instead of me since you don't have people stalking your edits looking for stuff to pick at. Ranze (talk) 01:02, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

But if they're watching you, they'll be watching this and suspicious of that. We'll need a distraction first. Oh look, a bear! And now we wait. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:32, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

WP:VPP discussion about terrorism

There is a VPP discussion about distinguishing between terrorist attacks and non-terrorist attacks, if you would like to participate. Parsley Man (talk) 04:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Sounds like a delightful time. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:19, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm glad you agree. :) Parsley Man (talk) 17:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Golden Age of Comic Books

Your recent editing history at Golden Age of Comic Books shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.--Tenebrae (talk) 16:45, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

The first time I replaced Captain America with The Human Torch. You objected, so I said fine, and just moved the name next to Captain Marvel's, for alliteration's sake. Two completely unrelated edits, in spirit. Not a war. If you want the Captains spread out, that's fine, too. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:13, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Not exactly alliteration, but the first three ended in "man" and the next two started in "Captain". Seemed smoother to me. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:15, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Your opinion on UFC 205

Hello, InedibleHulk. You have new messages at Talk:UFC 205.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, InedibleHulk. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

WWE Hall of Fame Celebrity Wing

Hello Hulk I am writing to you because I know youre a WWE Fan and we had a discussion about the Warrior award long ago. LM 2000 has put the day jobs into the celebrity wing and an occupation section next to the inductors. I reverted his edit and he is the only one doing it, because day jobs should not be included into the WWE Hall of Fame. I guess he created that section because Donald Trump is President of the United States. The page was great all these years until now I have also explained that the celebrity status gives them enough nobility and everyone knows who they are. Celebrities were inducted based on WWE contributions and wrestling in general. I am asking for your help to keep the day jobs out of it. some guy also tagged that we are in an edit war and that for me is simply not true as I have already stated my case. Thank you. --47.202.17.249 (talk) 22:41, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Haven't seen you in awhile Hulk. Hope all is well.LM2000 (talk) 00:44, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

All is calm, all is bright. I don't particularly love or hate the new field, but it's OK. Not everyone knows these celebrities, not even all Americans or wrestling fans. They could click the Wikilink, but that's extra work. With the actual wrestlers, it does go without saying.

The biggest problem I see is Refrigerator Perry's lack of a photo, and even that's not so terrible. Just a bit conspicuous. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:09, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

• Good to know I am sorry to have written you on your time off and I pop in and out once in awhile and yes someone should add a photo next to the fridge have a good one. 47.202.17.249 (talk) 23:58, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Tyrus

I saw this gem and had to laugh. This is from early 2016: ""Tyrus" isn't a wrestler, he's a character, and he'll be extinct in six months (just my hunch, but still true). He'll take a third name in Japan (or give up), and by that time..." Well, looks like it's past six months and he's still in TNA. lol ^{(talk page stalker)} CrashUnderride 18:02, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Like they say, even a perfectly fine clock is wrong twice a day. Keep on trucking, TNA! InedibleHulk (talk) 04:08, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

For the record, TNA isn't as bad as people say it is. The Broken Hardy's while over the top is quiet entertaining. ^{(talk page stalker)} CrashUnderride 05:31, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I watched those, because the Internet demanded it. Good stuff. Not exactly pro wrestling, though. Even if the booking's gotten better since 2011, I'd still have to learn who 90% of the roster is. That's tough sometimes. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:25, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Invitation for comment

As someone who deals with current event articles, I am soliciting comments from you on my first attempt at a Wikipedia essay: WP:DJTG/WP:HOLDYOURHORSES. I've started a section on the talk page of the essay for comments (or you can just edit the article). Having worked on current event articles and terrorism lists, I thought this essay might be useful when addressing editors who add content prematurely (e.g., labeling an even as Islamist terrorism before RS proclaim it to be so). If you have the time and energy, feel free to comment or edit on it. Cheers! EvergreenFir (talk) 04:21, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Jo Cox...

...was murdered in Yorkshire, not London. The wording here is fine with me either way, but just so you're aware for the future. All the best, The Bounder (talk) 20:43, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Having never been to England, it sometimes blurs into one Greater London Area for me. Except Manchester. I always remember that's a distinct place, for some reason or another. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:55, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Ah well, Yorkshire is about the same distance from London as Manchester - about 200 miles or so. Cheers. - The Bounder (talk) 21:03, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

That might help me keep it straight (though I'm still British enough to think in kilometres). InedibleHulk (talk) 21:27, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Smashing Pumpkins!

Now where's my damned points!?? TimothyJosephWood 16:13, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Ah, the resolute urgency of now. They're in the place that you were born. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:22, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Brazo de Oro

Hi there. So I see that you decided that Wrestling Data was a more reliable source than the various obituaries published by various news sources in regards to the age & birth year of Brazo de Oro (wrestler). There is one source mentioning 1959, while there are a large number of sources stating 1950 - including ESPN and other news organizations with an established editorial process that falls squarely in the Reliable Source category.  MPJ-DK  03:25, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't know how reliable La Opinion can be with the sort of math it presents. If he was born in 1950 and debuted at 16, he'd have debuted in 1966 or 1967, not 1975. What likely happened here was that sources checked Wikipedia, which itself claimed 1959 in the lead from 2008 till 2015, when this happened.

As for the infobox, you changed it yourself in 2008, so only you know whether this was a typo or something based on a source. Seeing as you also used a 9 instead of a 10 for the month, I'm leaning toward typo. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:57, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

• ESPN. mediotiempo SuperLuchas and on and on and on stated "Age 66".  MPJ-DK  12:01, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

What's important is whether you changed the date in 2008 because of something you knew or because of a mistake. If it was something you knew, it'd be understandable that these sources knew it, too. But if you accidentally changed it and it later proved to be true, that'd be almost too crazy a coincidence. So what happened? InedibleHulk (talk) 14:53, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Ewww

Just sayin'.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:53, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Erzan (talk) 10:51, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

List of WWE Pay-Per-View events

Please check out the talk page of this WP article. We have someone who is making threats to have the entire page removed. OldSkool01 (talk) 10:09, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Well, somebody hates the phrase "holds the distinction"

Keep going. A quick search reveals there's only about a 1,000 articles to go. Heh. --Jtalledo (talk) 09:46, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

That's pretty discouraging, for something encouraging. At least I haven't run into any reverters yet. I've also "MMA fighter" and "unfortunately" on my chore list. Someone (probably) has to do it. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Billy Joe Walker Jr.

See [2] for a different slant on his age at death. Cheers, - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 22:20, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Dumb question

What is a "Boxer's day aunt"? Call me dunce, but have never heard this expression. I feel like it was essential to the story. My apologies in advance, and feel free to ignore, if that was too dumb of a question. I just get too curious for my own good sometimes.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 10:13, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

A Boxing Day aunt is one you only see on Boxing Day, the day after Christmas in Canada and the like. Christmas was usually for my mom's side of the family, which were more local. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:33, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Oh, well that wasn't inappropriate compared to the comment that was right below yours. I wish I understood what the story was about but at least I learned something new today.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 01:39, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Appreciating "at least" is exactly what the story's about. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:16, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Civics Lesson: US and State Representation

I know you are Canadian and this is foreign for you, but I have noticed you are confused on a point of US Civics. In the United States, we have 3 classes of government working from small to large. Class 1 is called local. Typically this is City Councils and County Governments that govern a local region (there are few hybrids like Nashville, TN that combine those and in Louisiana they follow the French form of government).

Class 2 are what are called State Governments. This would be like a Province in Canada. They have all 3 branches of the English type of government (Court, Executive and Legislative). The Executive branch is led by the Governor. And the Legislative Branch is a combination of 2 Assemblies...one called the House of Representatives (Some states use House Assembly or even House of Delegates) and the other called the Senate.

Where this gets confusing for those outside of the US is Class 3. Just like Class 2, they have the Legislative branch using the same names for things. So in the Congress of the US...it is the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate. The reason why we say a guy is a US Senator instead of just a regular State Senator (ie New York Senator) or even the generic Senator is that there is a very different job description and population base difference. You guys have a different system using MLA and MP which is a lot less confusing (except for the wackos in Ontario and Quebec, but i digress). But we dont.

Anyhoo that is why so many different people are changing your edits on this.

Sunnydoo (talk) 03:58, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm a wacko from Ontario and Quebec, so this isn't particularly confusing. Just figured saying "Senator from/for New Mexico" is clearly enough not "New Mexico Senator" or "member of the New Mexico Senate", even without the Wikilinks. With the Wikilinks, it's even clearer, and specifying further than that is too clear (i.e. redundant). But if that's just me, and the extra "U.S." is helping someone else understand, I suppose I shouldn't fight to keep them in the dark. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:22, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Your opinion/s would be welcome here

[3] Reaper7 (talk) 12:18, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Serial killer

The shooting in Las Vegas really doesn't qualify here. It's a classic mass murder and not a spree killing either. While there is some leeway in the definitions, an event at a single time and place should not be described as a serial killing. As the article says, "Serial killing is not the same as mass murdering (killing numerous people in a given incident); nor is it spree killing (in which murders are committed in two or more locations, in a short time)."--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:50, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're not seeing in the box, but here's what I see: "This article is part of the Serial Killer Task Force, a work group of WikiProject Crime. It is an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide on serial killers, mass murders, spree killers and related topics on Wikipedia."

See? InedibleHulk (talk) 06:00, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I'm tired and I get things wrong. However, it is important to make a distinction between the different types of killing.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:02, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

I agree. They're all listed separately in the Task Force's giant list of unnatural death. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:05, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Decease/dead

Hi, saw your change to MOS. I do think that "deceased" is more appropriate here. A little more formal, and lacks the dull thud of "dead". Also, "subjects" was/is ambiguous in both versions. "Deceased people" would be better, in my view. Tony (talk) 12:24, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

The Manual of Style used to say "Writing should be clear and concise. Plain English works best." I still think like that, and MOS:EUPHEMISM says "died" is neutral and accurate. It is a bit boring and mundane, compared to more pretentious and softer "deceased", but I see that as a good thing. I won't argue it, though. I did it once a few years ago, and it lasted for months. Too old for that scuttlebutt now. Do as you want. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:39, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Sig nit

On the outside chance that you are unaware and care, the linked date in your sigs defeats the user pref at Preferences->Gadgets->Appearance->Change UTC-based times and dates, such as those used in signatures, to be relative to local time for your signatures. ―Mandruss ☎ 00:27, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I've given it a lot of thought over the years. I do care, in that I appreciate the problem, but don't, in that I found it a small problem. Worse for me to be bothered by a signature I see everytime I use it than for a few to be bothered only now and then. I don't care about the bots at all, and they don't care about me. I take care when starting RfCs and such to timestamp, and that's about as far as I'll bend. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:40, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Dark undertones in Toad Patrol ?

Our article says it contains these. Do you recall any examples ? They might be good to add to that article. StuRat (talk) 03:07, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

It's been a while, and "dark" is a subjective term, so can't really guess at what Wikipedia might mean. It's a serious journey they're on, though, and the dangers are played up as credible threats, with potentially major consequences. It's not like these toads can just kick the shit of their problems, like Spiderman or Porky Pig. They need teamwork and logic to survive. One false move and they're dinner. That's probably the "darkest" part, just being set in a realistic natural environment, rather than some good vs evil scenario where the good guys have to win.

The Raccoons has something of the same vibe, I find. And certain episodes of Fraggle Rock. Animals discovering their humanity under the shadow of looming ecological disaster is money. Can't forget Watership Down.

But no, I'll explain nothing of the sort in article space today. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:37, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Did any toads actually die ? (Even Bambi contained hunters, deadly fires, and parental death.) StuRat (talk) 15:49, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, Bambi set the bar for this sort of thing. Unless the murdered mom from The Land Before Time comes first, retroactively. I don't remember any main toads dying, but they're constantly almost dead (or turned into toadstools). InedibleHulk (talk) 21:41, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Gord Downie "Canadian dates" format

I am not sure where you came to the notion that "Canadian" date formatting is June 6, 2014 (as an example). That formatting hasn't routinely been used in Canada since...well, it was being phased out in the 1970s, and is considered very old-fashioned. The current formatting of dates in Canada is either 6 June 2014 or (if all numeric) 2014-06-06. I know you did a lot of work to change everything to the other format, and I am certain it was with completely good intentions. However, it will be changed back (perhaps not right away, but in the course of time), and I don't want to wind up in an editing war over this. So perhaps discussion first? Risker (talk) 05:36, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

You may be right about a phaseout in certain business sectors, but it's clearly alive and well in writing and speech. Just click any news source in Downie's references for proof. In my 40ish years as a semi-social and somewhat-studious Anglo-Ontarian, I can't recall backward style ever coming close to common use. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:33, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Heh, the funny thing is that (as an even older Ontarian) I can remember being docked marks if I used the "American" style in dates as far back as Grade 3, even before the metric system was adopted. Newspapers perversely continue to use the US style, although "scholarly" works have been using the D-M-Y or even the Y-M-D format standardly since at least the turn of the century, and many as far back as the 1980s. I recall The Toronto Star did use the DD-Month-YYYY format for a period, but it seems to have reverted. I guess it all comes down to what one reads, whether by need or choice. Risker (talk) 18:11, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I suppose it does. As Downie's a modern pop culture figure, it seems more appropriate to treat him in the style of newspapers and magazines than journals and binders. Though even Albertosaurus uses the forward style, so it may boil down to today's Canadians simply generally preferring it. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:58, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

For what it's worth, the Hip's own official online tour date log speaks not of 2 FEB. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:06, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Sutherland Springs church shooting

Hello! Its not old news that he's only been unofficially ID'd. The wording in the source you've used is missing out that this was not an official announced from the Sherriff's Office etc but law enforcement agents speaking on the quite to the press. Please revert it back to the "unofficially" wording. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 00:34, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

See here or [here https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2017/nov/06/texas-church-shooting-sutherland-springs-live-updates]: He wasn't ID's in the official press conference only described as white and maybe in his 20s. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 00:36, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

It's standard practice for American police to divulge these things through the press anonymously before a conference. As long as the press is citing a "law enforcement official" rather than a "law enforcement source", it's just as good. Exact same police department. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:41, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello from another Anglo-Ontarian

I hail from the Niagara Region (though I've been out of the country for a decade). Nice work keeping the peace over at the Sutherland Springs shooting article, and thanks for your work on Gord Downie. A year ago I started pushing (as an IP editor) to have the WP:ITN/DC rules changed, partly because when Gord passed I expected the consensus to be "yawn, some Canadian musician I never heard of". Anyway, thanks again and have a good one! --CosmicAdventure (talk) 03:05, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Cheers, buddy! InedibleHulk (talk) 03:08, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Alan Sinfield

I am looking for an RS, but in the mean time this is as good as it gets.Zigzig20s (talk) 12:49, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

"Better than nothing" is better than nothing, but often falls short of "good enough". Tagged the tweet as an exceptional claim, for now. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:54, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

I've just sent a "news tip" to a couple of newspapers...Zigzig20s (talk) 07:13, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

That's the spirit. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:51, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

The Guardian e-mailed me back today, "We'll certainly have a look at the possibility". But I don't see an obituary on their website yet... The funeral is on 18 December. Meanwhile there is this, but it's arguably not third party...Zigzig20s (talk) 18:36, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Primary or not, it's better than the blog we're currently using. Good find. Strange that a funeral would take so long. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:44, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Feel free to update the article.Zigzig20s (talk) 18:50, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

The Guardian finally published an obituary...Zigzig20s (talk) 13:57, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Good work, Zig. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:31, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

From the AfD

You may be interested to know that despite what Lady Gaga says, Grand Central Station is neither grand nor central nor station. Nor does it mean "grand central station". It's not grand if you've seen DC's station, it's not near the center of the central business district nor Manhattan and the official name's Grand Central Terminal because a dead end is technically not a station. Also it's named for a company that hasn't existed in a half century (the New York Central Railroad) who's centrality has nothing to do with anything closer than 200 kilometers from NYC (it was named in 1853 for whatever kind of centralness comes from going from Buffalo to Albany). Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 08:31, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Good to know, even though I didn't know I wanted to know it. My hometown's train station is about 200 square feet and hasn't seen a train stop there since the early '70s. The door is locked, but it doesn't latch. You'd think they've had torn it down decades ago to prevent wanderers from falling through the floor, but it's just so uninteresting that even doe-eyed children and red-eyed teens just walk on by with nary a "whoa". No homeless people in there, either, because they stopped stopping here when the train did.

Perhaps it's because of this railway isolation that I've just heard three or four Lady Gaga tunes, and only remember how the good one goes. But I once rode to Buffalo in a Crown Victoria, so I'm still cultured enough. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:58, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

I once tried to find a train station that closed less than 20 years before and didn't see anything. Not even a rusty sign a demolisher threw in the bushes or any other clue like one rod in the ground. Is your hometown station in Ontario? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19:44, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Yep. Lots of forgotten places here. I'm proud to say my town's doing better than Chippeweska, Nickleton or Murphy's Corners! InedibleHulk (talk) 19:51, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

So many Anglophones live in Ontario it's a good guess haha. Such a big country and you're still settling like it's 1799. (yes I know the Canadian Shield, Vancouver-constricting mountains and prairie winters don't give much choice) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:33, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Hey, my train station's on that Shield! But I guess that proves your point. You want grapes, oats and the likelihood of meeting new people, the South is the place to be. The water tastes like crap, though. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:52, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

★Trekker (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Merry Christmas, hope you're having a relaxing time during this period and that next year will be even better for us all here.★Trekker (talk) 13:13, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Have a good one yourself! InedibleHulk (talk) 22:11, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Removal of James Levine on the Weinstein Effect page!!

WHAT THE HELL is wrong with you on the removal of James Levine on the Weinstein effect page? He was one of the latest figures to be affected for sexually harassing young men dating back several decades!!--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 04:37, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, but does it have anything to do with Weinstein? Lots of older people have been harassing lots of younger people for decades. This article needs to stay on topic, and that topic seems to be accusations resulting from Weinstein's scandal, not just every single incident from here to eternity. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:51, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

@InedibleHulk: Some people really make me wonder. The lynch mob on WP... Herbmuell (talk) 09:55, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

They only started when the mass media told them it was cool. Deep down, it's a well-meaning mob. They all are. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:47, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Santa Claus gender

There you go, thinking outside the box again! See if I care. Sometimes I feel like a real turkey *sob* Martinevans123 (talk) 17:30, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Fun Fact: If Jenny Agutter were a turkey in the '70s instead of a finely-furred fox, she'd be called a jenny. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:05, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Festive Quote: "I don’t understand how you’re asked to believe things that are absurd. It’s like Father Christmas. It doesn’t make sense.” InedibleHulk (talk) 19:31, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

New Japan Rumble

I don't know where you got the logic of being on the apron is being in the match. Or where you heard that for that matter. No battle royal has ever operated like that. If they are on the apron, how can they be eliminated when they have to be tossed over the top rope? Logic trumps all. You have to be in the ring to be officially in the match. Or so logic would dictate. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 04:47, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Rumbles aren't always logical. Just yesterday, in 2008, I saw Finlay get disqualified before he entered and Hornswoggle eliminated without going over, but not disqualified for interfering against The Miz. George Steele somehow lost at WrestleMania IV. Gedo and Jado are a bit less insane than McMahon and Patterson, but still, wrestling rules are meant to be bent. A referee will sometimes break a countout on the apron, sometimes need a roll-under. While I generally agree with you on fully entering before it counts, it's the sort of thing that's muddy enough to require a source on Wikipedia. And timing the interim on the entrance ramp is even trickier. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:02, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Diva Dirt - Is It Reliable?

There is a discussion currently ongoing in which we are trying to reach a consensus if Diva Dirt is reliable. You can view the discussion here. There has only been a couple of people who have responded. We need a wider input from more people. You're response is needed and appreciated. Thanks. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 21:10, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Fake News Awards

An article that you have been involved in editing—Fake News Awards—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. DARTHBOTTO _talk•cont 23:05, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Somewhat interested, somewhat feigning it. Thanks for the heads-up. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:41, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Alert

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 all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, 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.

— Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 02:08, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks? InedibleHulk (talk) 02:39, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Patrick Mazimhaka

Under LATER ACTIVITY, why is location and title of wife's doctoral thesis relevant on his page?72.129.236.87 (talk) 05:45, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't think it is. Didn't put it there, either, so wondering why you ask. Do you want me to delete it, and note he was survived by her and their daughters under "Death"? If you'd rather do that instead, I'd support your decision, but really have nothing to do with the man or his article. Just dropped by to clean up some pronouns and whatnot. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:59, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Being a new editor, I'm squeamish about deletions for fear of being labeled a vandal. I mainly stick to small clean-ups. I wrote to you because you were the last editor who visited the page, and you have more experience in such matters.72.129.236.87 (talk) 08:45, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough. Moved to Death, dropped her thesis altogether. That's something for her article, should she get one. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:11, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Your edit summaries

They're fantastic and I love them intensely. I watch the List of incidents of cannibalism page and seeing your edit summaries today has kind of made my morning. Just wanted to say thanks! NekoKatsun (talk) 15:17, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Glad to brighten your day. About ten minutes before reading this, I accidentally set my beard on fire and your comment cancelled that negative energy right out. I may look a bit stupider than when I went to bed, but I don't feel it. Kumbaya! InedibleHulk (talk) 16:11, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Nothing like setting your beard on fire to focus someone. Who needs coffee. And yes, you have one of the best senses of humor and bursts of intelligence (except for the beard-fire thing) I've run across on Wikipedia. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:24, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Now I need to find something miserable to balance that out. Thanks a lot, Randy. Not even being sarcastic. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:52, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

"Truth needs no thanks" - Clarence Odbody c. 1832. Check out Poppy, see where things have landed. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:40, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

They've turned her into flowers! Ah well, she had a good run. Beats winding up a Pepsi spokesmodel. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:19, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Edit war

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Craig MacGregor. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. — Wyliepedia 01:00, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Snow close

Since this is a snow close anyway, probably at any moment, I don't think letting you know about this discussion which may be of interest would violate canvassing. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:54, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

I like Poppy, but putting her on the same level as the flower is a bit much. Thanks for letting me know, though. I'll sit this out. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:31, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

If you have a minute during your high school edits, check out the I'm Poppy talk page. One of those things. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I could stand to mix things up a bit. On my way. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:16, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

February 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:59, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

I don't know if this is a war or pure accident. I've asked buddy on his Talk Page (same time you did here), and put down my sword for now. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:00, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Suffixes

re special:diff/825767309 see wiktionary:adoptive example "My adoptive parents recently got to know my biological parents."

I think -ive/-ed have a subject/object relationship which is why I didn't put "adopted father" or "adopted mother". ScratchMarshall (talk) 08:43, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

But you put "After being adopted at birth, his father...". His (adoptive) father being the being. Removing the "adoptive" parts was just for redundancy; if we say Cruz was adopted immediately beforehand, readers should remember what kind of mother and father they were without two reminders. You're definitely right to not say "adopted". InedibleHulk (talk) 08:57, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Provided very important information. Drogge (talk) 21:27, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

I didn't mean to, I swear! InedibleHulk (talk) 21:33, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Akka (spirit), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Opposite (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Long time no see, bot. Keeping busy? InedibleHulk (talk) 01:22, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Suicide

Suicide requires a method (-ing) or action/process (-tion) not a subject phrase in the past perfect tense. You could say "slitting" but that really isnt Queen's English either. I changed it although I still think the original wording was better as that will be on the Death Certificate and not this way, but its ok.Sunnydoo (talk) 02:11, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

"Slit throat" is as noun as "gunshot" to me. I've amended your "cutting of the throat" to "throat cutting". Does that sound fine? InedibleHulk (talk) 02:14, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Thats fine. Its the suicide part in front of it that changes it...you dont say suicide by poisoned. Gunshot is a fine example because it is an action word that didnt fit my original criteria (ie -ing, -tion). It means the firing of a gun, so suicide by gunshot would be perfectly acceptable.Sunnydoo (talk) 02:29, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

No, I'd say suicide by poison (not poisoning). I'd consider "shooting" a verb meaning the firing of a gun, but a "gunshot" as the noun that firing creates (which in turn creates a gunshot wound). But however we get there, if we're fine, we're fine. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:33, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Human rights in Guatemala

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Human rights in Guatemala requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. — Smjg (talk) 13:30, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Lead detail

I'll let (make) you sort it out, but you now have more detail re NRA lawsuit in the lead than in the body. I prefer less. ―Mandruss ☎ 17:08, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

I just trimmed the District part. Our great minds think alike now, you see. But the detail about which part (of a dozen) is the bad one seems pertinent. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:11, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Besides, when you factor in the chunk I took out, the lead's only up two bytes from where I found it. Two bytes! And four of them are just invisible brackets. By my terrible math, your preference is winning. As is mine. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:20, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Survivors

If you revert these articles again without a shred of attempt at gaining consensus, I'll open an ANI thread. Reliable sources treat people who were present at these shootings and escaped with their lives as survivors of the attack, just as we refer to survivors and victims of the RMS Titanic sinking. Your personal disagreement with these reliable sources is irrelevant. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 17:54, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

It's different in a sinking ship/burning building/earthquake. Everyone's threatened equally. In a shooting, some people are targeted and/or shot and most aren't. They "survive" like they survive every day, by not being directly affected. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:23, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

I survived the war in Vietnam by being offshore. Wayyyyy offshore. I'm assuming the topic here are students who are in another building on a campus when a shooting occurs. If I was one of those I'd actually correct people who called me a survivor, that name has to be earned by proximity. Randy Kryn (talk) 18:34, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Like Donald Trump, my father helped me survive that one. We didn't have much money, though, so he kept me hidden in his testicle. It wasn't easy, but I eventually pulled through. Much later, I learned I was Canadian, so could've avoided not being there entirely. Still, the whole scary experience brought us closer together. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:39, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

You know, the serious thing about that is that the odds of the one single sperm who turned into you surviving long enough to actually become a human being is astronomical. I mention that to depressed people sometimes (a very high percentage of depressed people are, by the way, dehydrated) in that they are so lucky to be alive at longer odds than winning the biggest lottery in history. Randy Kryn (talk) 18:45, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, buddy. Come to think of it, I could use a drink. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:51, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

March 2018

This is your only warning; if you add defamatory content to Wikipedia again, as you did at David Hogg (activist), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. False conspiracy theories are false. We are not in the business of giving credence to ludicrous nonsense about living people. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 19:10, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

What are you on about? You're the one removing his sourced denial of the claims, and calling them false despite the source not saying so. If anything, you're defaming the accusers and not helping the accused. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:15, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

WP:ANI

There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents which involves you. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 19:20, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Lot of good that does me, I can't respond there. Thanks for the heads-up, though. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:30, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

March 2018

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for violations of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy, as you did at David Hogg (activist). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:23, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

On reflection, 1 week was excessive. Brought down to 48 hours. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:32, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

That's a bit better, thanks. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:41, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

I said nothing defamatory, just that Hogg denied the allegations of being a crisis actor and considers himself a witness. It's right there in the source. Removing "falsely" was a reasonable edit, since the source used to call the claims false didn't call them false. I don't mean to knock the kid by not calling him a survivor, he just honestly did not survive being shot, like the people categorized as "American shooting survivors" did. Maybe a bit of an edit war, but with discussion and concessions toward something we can all be happy with. I'll be fine with a one-day block, but a week is too harsh. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:29, 12 March 2018 (UTC) 19:29, 12 March 2018 (UTC)}}

You don't get it. Those "allegations" are utter nonsense bollocks conspiracy nuttery and the article you yourself cited says this in unequivocal terms — but it has also made him the subject of smear campaigns and demonstrably false conspiracy theories and As the false theories continued circulating Tuesday both from this CNN article. Either one of two things is true: you did not even bother to read the source you cited, or you willfully chose to ignore the statements in the article. Either way, you've demonstrated that you're not competent to edit this topic area. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 19:33, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

I checked the citation beside your claim, and it didn't back it up. If you want to make things clear, cite them beside the claim. But yeah, now I see it in the citation about the denial. Didn't think to look there, because I put it there to support a different claim. What's the problem with acknowledging someone denied a claim? By my reading, omitting it makes them sound more guilty of whatever's alleged. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:38, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

This bit needs fixing if anybody's looking. Neither source mentions any form of "survive". Just "he was running", "you keep running" and "he ran and eventually jumped the fence". InedibleHulk (talk) 01:01, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

As for the ANI, you claim I replaced "survivor" with "crisis actor". That's untrue, or at least misleading. I replaced the uselessly implicit part about him being attacked as something (because everything he does and has done to him is as whatever he is) with something useful about the nature of the allegations. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:51, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

I'll take my licks edit warring or not looking deeply enough for a source with "false" in it, but BLP violation and pushing fringe conspiracy theories is baseless, beyond a misunderstanding, and unfairly tarnishes my reputation as a legitimate truthseeker. Is there a way to retroactively fix the charge in the block log and noticeboard, User:Ad Orientem or User:SarekOfVulcan?

I don't dispute the 48-hour sentence and don't want to overturn anyone's judgment, just want to go down in history as going down for something I did rather than something I didn't. Alternatively, a pardon after the fact would be nice, if possible. I'm not holding my breath, demanding anything, pretending to be an angel or calling administration the devil. Just saying it would be nice if we got on the same page about what actually happened here, eventually. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:45, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

I don't want a block review

I notice my deleting the bit of code here didn't erase it at the Requests for Unblock page. And why should it have? If someone could properly cancel it, that'd be great. I was against a week, I'm fine with two days. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:42, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

I do want a review of the blocking procedure, though. Not to toot my own horn, but I've been here twelve years and had only been blocked previously for under an hour, four years ago. I'm not a newborn SPA sockpuppet with a disgusting name. I'm an Illustrious Looshpah, and have the Book of All Knowledge to prove it. What does it all mean when it can't buy you five minutes of deliberation from complaint to conviction? I don't even think I got three today.

It was a complex case, that saw an upstanding citizen immediately, persistently and egregiously remove contentious (presumably unsourced) material from a BLP, before being blocked for violating the policy that told him to do it. Right in the middle of discussion that was already leading to the end of my presumption about which source Baranoff meant. The policy says I didn't have to discuss it, but I wanted to understand. We might've still argued about the "survivor" part, but it would've led to compromise sooner than this block will expire.

I'll live through this, of course, but I'll be looking over my shoulder every time I try to sort fact from fiction, just in case someone gets the wrong idea and throws up a sudden only warning. Before today, I figured people had to at least mention a defamation concern in an edit summary first, and thought I had to offend again after the warning. I don't think conceding his point and devalidating the theory was a bad thing, and don't think Baranoff does, either. But he was likely already assembling his complaint by then. We all need to slow the hell down, especially when we're angry or using a cell phone. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:34, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Speaking of BLP violations

I redacted a phrase from this comment. Drmies (talk) 18:03, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Why? Living one's gimmick is not an insult, just means they believe in what they're doing. And I said I think it's the case, not that it is. It might not be. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:06, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

"Gimmick". Look it up. And if it has some meaning that dumb old people like me can't understand, write it in English that we can understand. Finally, you restored that nonsense, and Jorm reverted you. You can refer to my warning you of a BLP violation as a "hypersensitive redaction" (nice little sneer) and tell Jorm "I don't mess with your words, people." Here's the thing: if your words are BLP violations, I and other admins will call you out on them. "Believe in what they're doing"--you mean "he believes he's a survivor of a mass murder". Cast doubt on that again in Wikipedia space, any space, and I'll ask for you to be topic banned from the article or from BLPs in general. Drmies (talk) 02:22, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

I respect dumb old people, but I won't cater to them in particular. Here's a primer. He was widely billed as a survivor and eventually called himself one, in the heat of a moment, after only calling himself a witness and a student previously. That's all. I don't need to "cast doubt" on the fact that somebody attempted to murder him, I can flatly deny it, based on what reliable sources say about where he was when the only accused murderer that day attempted to murder the only 17 people he's been charged with attempting to murder. But I wasn't trying to deny it in the redacted bit, only to say why I think he said it.

I didn't mean to sneer at you by calling your reaction hypersensitive, it just seems a very tiny thing to go "whoa" over (especially considering how many times I explicitly denied his survival in the same section). I generally like you and appreciate the work you do; if I ever have a beef with you, I'll be upfront about it, not snide or veiled. Same goes for the people in BLPs. Are you finally happy with the "believe in himself" wording? If so, I can live with it, too. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:04, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Suicide, Homicide and Accidental Death

I started a section on the Talk Page to comment on. Thx.Sunnydoo (talk) 20:42, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

So I just wasted my time on yours. All good. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:45, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Its Ok, I saw it. I meant the Death Talk page, but I understand your point. My point is that neck compression is usually an accidental cause of death particularly in traffic collisions. You also see it in both suicides and homicides. In cases where it can literally be any 2 or 3, shouldnt we list which it is to differentiate it for the reader? There are only a few types that can be 2 or 3 causes.Sunnydoo (talk) 20:50, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

I can't recall reading someone note a broken/torn neck in a car crash as a "compression", in plain talk or on a form, though I suppose it's technically true. If it were the case here, readers would naturally expect "broken neck" or "traffic collision" in its place. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:56, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Celebritynetworth.com as a source

Hi InedibleHulk. I removed your addition [4] of celebritynetworth.com and the accompanying information from George Foreman, given that RSN discussions have found it generally unreliable. I didn't look for replacements, and noticed that there is some similar material at Hulk Hogan that doesn't appear referenced. I'm happy to discuss this further if you like. --Ronz (talk) 16:06, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

All good. This claim is backed by better sources, too. I'll readd it with one of them later. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:22, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Flores

He didnt die at the track in the fall...like from a broken neck. He died because they couldnt stop the freakin brain swelling which was an injury that occurred in the fall. That is why he became brain dead which is why they took him off life support. This doesnt have to be difficult.Sunnydoo (talk) 01:45, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Why was his brain swollen? Because he fell on it. Neither source mentions an effort to fix it, just keeping him alive till his family could say goodbye. Talking at Death Talk, if you'd like. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:48, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes but he didnt die in the fall. He died because his brain swelled, which was a body response to the fall, not the fall itself. Its like when that actress died from the head injury at the ski resort. She didnt die because of the fall, she died because she had a contusion on her brain that popped, swelled and killed her. A fall is something you die from immediately...but if your body lives on, you die from something else...an infection, a body response, etc. I am not saying that the fall wasnt the trigger in the event (which is why it is in the CoD in the first place), just saying something else killed them.Sunnydoo (talk) 02:12, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

If it makes you feel better try this article out. This was the original article i posted and where the CoD came from.[5] But that article isnt as good as the other 2 that i posted that presented a better retrospective of his life. " A renowned jockey who was among the best in Pennsylvania history died Thursday of injuries suffered in a racing accident."Sunnydoo (talk) 02:27, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

I maybe feel a bit better, though can't find "swell", "swollen" or "sw" in any source, and no "edema", either. But even presuming that happened, every death is a bodily response to a traumatic event rather than the event itself. Buddy fell from a horse, hurt his head and neck and his body responded by dying, then doctors temporarily paused the process with life support. When they unpaused, his body went back to doing what it already started at the track. There was (apparently) no new deadly event (resultant or otherwise) in the meantime, as there is when an actress later bursts or gets infected. Temporal immediacy doesn't matter when the cause is immediate. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:40, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes temporal immediacy does matter. If he died at the track from a broken neck...that is a direct result of a vertebral fracture whether it cut off his oxygen, nerve impulse or circulatory system...doesnt matter...it is immediate and he is dead, he is brain dead and his body is dead. Dead as dead could be. But that didnt happen. He had brain activity and his body was alive when he was taken to the hospital. However his brain swelled which is a body response to the event. He lost brain function but his body was still alive on life support. They removed life support and he died. You are confusing consciousness in all of that and it doesnt matter. We are not going to get into a spiritual debate over when life begins and when it ends. It ended when they pulled the plug because his body had a response which killed his brain which was started by the fall.Sunnydoo (talk) 03:04, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

And I will give you another example of the opposite side. Flores made it 3 THREE days since his accident. The acrobat who died Saturday Jan Arnaud who fell from the ropes. He was taken to the hospital and was in surgery when he died. He didnt die from brain swelling or from something the doctors were doing. He died because of the injury from the fall and there was nothing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING they could have done to save him. That is a FALL DEATH.

It doesnt matter when he lost consciousness or what the doctors were trying to do to help him and his family.  In the end, the fall killed him and no one except God could have helped him.Sunnydoo (talk) 03:08, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Where do you see his brain swelling? I could care less about consciousness, I just know a body that ceases circulation and respiration when a machine stops forcing it to is already as good as dead. If you can point me to this supposed brain swell that didn't happen upon impact, I may reconsider. I'll let you have your way, regardless, but will quietly insist (in my own brain) you're mistaken and he's exactly like the acrobat, as far as his own body "making it" goes. You can hook most any mostly-dead person to a machine indefinitely, some just choose not to. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:13, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

I promise you I am not making things up on this. It was probably in the earlier revision of the USA Today article that I read it. If you look at the top under the by-lines you can see when the stories are changed. I hate this as newspapers do it all the time and it gets trouble like this started. Also causes confusion on the death page when they go back and change ages and other circumstances. I can assure you I read brain swelling earlier.Sunnydoo (talk) 03:20, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

I don't know you to lie, so believe you read it somewhere. But if you can't find it now, it was probably a mistake. I definitely know USA Today to make mistakes. I also don't believe you're convinced the acrobat was named Jan Arnaud, but you're not actively hoodwinking anyone. Such a spelling still remains in the Google blurb and caption of this article. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:24, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

I seem to recall you were anti-terminal event and pro-cause, though. While I still have you here (if I still have you here), can I ask what's up with that? InedibleHulk (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Seo Minwoo

The article about Seo Minwoo having a suspected overdose has been deleted. It was speculation with no evidence anyway. I think it should be changed back to cardiac arrest. Globgogabgalab (talk) 13:31, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Should just say nothing. Cardiac arrest is a symptom of death, not a cause, no matter how many newswriters are fooled. But do what you think is best. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:07, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Fyi

That the far-right and far-left have different views from the centre-right and centre-left on Assad is widely discussed. Example: [[6]][[7]].--Calthinus (talk) 23:13, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm admittedly bad at spotting the differences between left and right or knowing where to draw the centre line. These don't really change that inability or my stance about OAN's applicability to Douma, but were interesting. I don't have much hope for a far-left and far-right coalition, though. Even if not truly opposites or natural enemies, a content provider can't alienate the vast (real or perceived) middle. That's also true in a rich vs poor worldview; without hooking at least a substantial piece of the middle, the fringes are doomed to unmarketability. Long story short, I'd forget everything you read in those, if I were you. But I'm not, so I'll keep them in mind (for now). InedibleHulk (talk) 23:29, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Never mentioned any far-left/far-right coalition. --Calthinus (talk) 23:43, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Haaretz did. More or less. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:45, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

You are Most Welcome.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:49, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Looks delicious, thanks again! InedibleHulk (talk) 23:21, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

The boy

Just FYI: Pls read my postings here. In a nutshell, my point is that you are discussing the wrong issue: the report was not by RT, but by a TV channel (all refs had been deleted on the basis of "fringe theory") that is directly owned and run by the Russian state, which makes it not so much propaganda but rather an official position, irrespective of its veracity or lack thereof.Axxxion (talk) 20:55, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough. Still don't see it as a "wrong" issue, but one that's relatively buried. My attention on this tragedy has been usurped by crazy people in rented vans and waffle houses, though, so I'll leave this one to you (and others). InedibleHulk (talk) 23:19, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

June 2018

Hello, I'm Smjg. I noticed that you recently removed all content from Identity and change. Please do not do this. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. As a rule, if you discover a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If a page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you wish to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. — Smjg (talk) 09:28, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm going to nominate it for deletion instead. It's clearly an essay. I just tried this first, because I usually mess up an AfD step or two. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:09, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Roseanne/National Anthem

Just clear up any misunderstanding, from the Washington Post article, I was citing Bush’s quote about the performance being “disgraceful”. The incident is listed twice in the article. The other was Roseanne saying she believed he called her a disgrace. I assume you thought I was quoting Roseanne’s recollection. But, I was not. Thus, I didn’t change the wording, to say “Roseanne recalled being called disgraceful...” or similar.

MissTofATX (talk) 04:15, 3 June 2018 (UTC)MissTofATX

Orphaned non-free image File:Hogan passes torch.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hogan passes torch.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:22, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Harlan Ellison

The NYT also cited Ellison's publisher that Ellison died on Wednesday. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:48, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

That's the Associated Press, but fair enough. I won't stop you. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:56, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

I doubt many would think he was a regular writer. Piping it with the episode should at least indicate this was the one he wrote. As I said before tough one episode it was sill an episode of the show so it’s not incorrect to label it as Star Trek. Ultimately it’ll be on the reader to assume if Ellison was a regular writer. If so they’ll be told otherwise. Rusted AutoParts 03:25, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Only if they felt the need to click (or hover). Better to give them the episode name instead, then let them figure out it refers to a Star Trek episode. Fewer people recognize the specific episode title than the show's, so more people are likely drawn into learning the whole truth. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:01, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm afraid that's not the case.

As much as I honestly prefer your definition, a Huracanrana has that name because -rana is the lucha libre term for a double leg cradle (and it was innovated by Huracan Ramirez). Scott Steiner's original frankensteiner took forms as both a huracanrana and as a spike head scissors takedown, but these days a frankensteiner is for all intents and purposes a reverse victory roll headscissors without a rana cradle, wheras a hurracanrana is one with a direct pinfall transition. jcw91 2:19 UTC July 1st, 2018 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcw91 (talk • contribs) 14:21, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

You may be right, these days. Everybody plays safer with necks and heads now that everyone's worth money, and Michael Cole certainly plays looser with his commentary. Sometimes I think a wimpy huracanrana is just called a Frankensteiner to trigger nostalgia. Anyway, as a fan who's tried to argue the difference between a sidewalk slam and a side suplex with other fans online, I know it's virtually impossible to change a mind that's made up, so keep on thinking what you do. I don't hold it against you. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:56, 4 July 2018 (UTC)