User talk:Looneyman

/Archive 1

Previous discussions Archived

All my previous discussions have now been Arcihved. The talk page is now open for fresh discussions. Looneyman (talk) 21:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Cluebot clumsiness

Ah yes, I remember that mistake: I was attempting to block someone that Cluebot had reverted, but didn't realize I had clicked on Cluebot instead of the other account. I realized almost as soon as I hit the button, but alas it was too late and --for a few seconds-- Cluebot had been banished. --Bobak (talk) 21:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Everyone makes mistakes. At least this one didn't crash WIkipedia's servers. Looneyman (talk) 09:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Frontier Economics article

Firstly, just to alert you, I am new to Wikipedia, so apologies in advance if I'm in breach of any etiquette. I believe that you removed my article on Frontier Economics yesterday. I was therefore wondering if you could offer me some guidance as to why this was and more specifically, what edits you'd suggest making in order for the article to be acceptable? I have read the first article guidance on Wikipedia and thought I'd complied with this. I'd therefore be very grateful for any specific advice on edits you might provide. For example, were there particular phrases in the article that were deemed promotional? Note my intention is absolutely not to advertise or promote, but rather, provide only a factual description of the organisation Frontier Economics, which has a high profile in the UK. Thanks in advance for your suggestions. (Samwilliams Frontier (talk) 08:58, 23 September 2008 (UTC))

Replied to on user's talk page. Looneyman (talk) 13:13, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Well Done

Well done in organising the Top Gear criticism section. The article will benefit from that change no end! TopGearFreak ^Talk 20:50, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Looneyman (talk) 12:06, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Looneyman. You have new messages at TopGearFreak's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Stig/Schumacher

Looneyman I'll have to look at the discussion you've referred me to before I can answer, but do know I have a real issue with this use of lame that will color my opinion. I'll get back to you shortly. Drmargi (talk) 17:08, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, I took a look. I wouldn't bother. We're nowhere near there yet. Maybe Top Gear Dog and Sabine Schmidt, although that's one part edit war and one part nutty sockpuppet case, but not Stig/Schumacher, at least until it settles down and we see the final pattern. Drmargi (talk) 17:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

HGSS

*cough*--99.181.164.155 (talk) 16:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

If you read that article carefully, it says that the information has not yet been confirmed as true, so it cannot be counted on as reliable. In addition, the original source is an online retailer, which are never reliable sources for DVD/video game release dates. Looneyman (talk) 18:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Correct. However, that retailer is quite trusted, and has posted the correct date weeks before the announcement. Maybe a possible release date notice?--Mew a.k.a. Immewnity 19:06, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I still say we wait for an official announcement from nintendo before we add a release date to the article (which so far is spring 2010). Looneyman (talk) 19:59, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good.--Mew a.k.a. Immewnity 20:05, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

The Stig

Are you sure it's a joke. scope_creep (talk) 19:52, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Read both the article and the discussion page carefully. It has been discussed at great length and the BBC has even admitted that it was a joke. Looneyman (talk) 19:54, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I see. Thats a pity. I was really sure I was on to summat. scope_creep (talk) 21:16, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

You should've seen the article when the episode first aired in the UK. it was chaos trying to keep order. Looneyman (talk) 21:35, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

The Stig is not a real person

It's a joke. You've seen the show right? Everyone knows he's not a real person, just whomever they hired to drive that week. Why would you block edits that make that clear? It's insane. Are you being intentionally destructive? 169.233.38.156 (talk) 02:55, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm not being disruptive in my edits. It's already mentioned in the article and your edits are making the point more long-winded than it need to be. And be try to be civil about this instead of calling everyone else vandals. Looneyman (talk) 09:20, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm being extremely civil, but it's hard for me to understand why you want the article to not be factual. The most important facts about the Stig are completely buried, instead of being in the lead paragraph like they should be. I haven't gotten any explanation for this, even though no reasonable person would dispute it. Therefore you are being destructive. As I've pointed out, the purpose of Wikipedia is not to maintain the show's in-jokes. I retired from wikipedia because I was sick of fighting editors who acted contrary to the aims of wikipedia, and it was a mistake to think this would be any different. It's really sad. If you ever decide you'd like to help improve wikipedia rather than destroying it, let me know as I'd love to fix up this article. That's the difference between someone like me and someone like you - I take pride in helping fulfill wikipedia's mission, whereas you regard it all as a playground to fill up with nonsense for your personal amusement. 169.233.38.156 (talk) 04:07, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually, you're not being civil by assuming bad faith of other editors. My standing on the situation is that it's already mentioned (and I think it's mentioned clearly enough) so it doesn't warrant another mention. Looneyman (talk) 09:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

New sockpuppet

Hey, Looneyman! I thought I'd give you a heads up. It appears Davesmith is back with a new sockpuppet, User:Looneymann. He's done a couple edits to the Top Gear article, including adding, you guessed it, Top Gear Dog. I left a message on the talk page of the admin who handled the original sockpuppet blocks, but you might want to nip this in the bud. Drmargi (talk) 19:37, 19 July 2010 (UTC)