Talk: -bleep196-

Archives: #1, #2, #3

Promotional crossover content

Hello, Bleep196. Can you please look at this forum topic? Your opinion would be highly appreciated. veryblackraven 07:29, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

CJBeatty

I think you've been looking at the chatbans. Three times, but two were chatlag issues I think (see block and deblock time, a few minutes). So effectively one chatban on no blocks at all before this one (see his block log). So a month's too much in my opionion. A week tops I'd say for a first non-chat related offense, for not following directions of an administrator. Not more. Jspoel 19:27, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

Abominations

Sorry bleep, but everything looks clear on my end. Could you specify what field you're having troubles in? Is it the infobox at the top of the 6 infoboxes below the Statistics subheading? --Kastera ^(talk) 15:58, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Wow, I don't even know what the problem is and I fix it. I didn't know I was that good :P. --Kastera ^(talk) 16:03, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

E-mail

Please e-mail me at pawel.dembowski@gmail.com. Thanks! Ausir^(talk) 18:44, November 5, 2011 (UTC)

Are you staying?

Just wondering if you'll be staying on this wiki, or if you'll be moving to the "new" Vault. Grammarlad^(talk) 12:43, November 27, 2011 (UTC)

Possible virus on site?

Hello. I am a new user to this site. I, and a couple of other people online have noticed we are getting viruses from this very wiki. If you could work to resolving this, or to shuffle up your chain of command on this site to alleviate this issue, it would be appreciated. Thank you. DeathclawProHunter 15:37, February 2, 2012 (UTC)

Just to inform you that Bleep is no longer active here, your best bet is to ask either Jspoel, Scarface, Kas or Kingclyde.

TheNemesisx 15:44, February 2, 2012 (UTC)

Page moving

Hi there. If I remember correctly we name FO and FO2 pages with just "(Fallout)"? I believe it was Jspoel who notified me of that. I think it's easier that way and will not make all those links redirect again. --Skire (talk) 20:31, May 28, 2012 (UTC)

And welcome back, BTW. You were one of those admins before my time. I look forward to working with you =) --Skire (talk) 20:32, May 28, 2012 (UTC)

Are you referring to this? --Skire (talk) 20:40, May 28, 2012 (UTC)

I think it means unique weapon names such as Perforator or Blackhawk etc. should be capitalised. I will agree that the guidelines are very poorly worded and perhaps you could revise them, if it is in your interest? --Skire (talk) 20:47, May 28, 2012 (UTC)

Project

Ok. I'm on board. Questions:

Have you made the categories yet?
Do you want any kind of progress tables?

The Gunny 14:46, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I'm not very sure who to contact about this, but there are errors on one of your pages. http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fort_Constantine Here's a short sample of it: {{#vardefine:ibImgMain3|

That mumbo jumbo spans over the entire page.

Thank you.

Anon message

The message you gave the anon was correct for logged users. It is possible for the anon to have his IP cycled. Just a reminder. Energy X 14:36, July 1, 2012 (UTC)

I see and understand. Sometimes I make a wrong link then see it in wanted pages list, makes things seem... unchecked. Energy X 14:45, July 1, 2012 (UTC)

Saw the awards you gave. That's great, but the thing is... the place is Nukapedia, not The Vault. Energy X 15:19, July 1, 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, and right back at ya.

Nukapedia Project Medal

You have been awarded the Nukapedia Project Medal for your efforts within the Unique_Weapons/Armors_Re-categorization_Project.

For leading the charge to move a previously uncatalogued group of items into a category that properly fits their functions. -- The Gunny

15:23, July 1, 2012 (UTC)

Verify

Although it is uncommon to see a verify template in a forum, I gotta say this - the future bureaucrat GhostAvatar added it. How's that for ~~enginuity~~ shocking ~~folks~~? Energy X ∞ 15:11, July 5, 2012 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with who put it there - those verify tags are to gain verification for current problems with the MediaWiki upgrade. Nowhere does it say they are only to be used in articles. --Skire (talk) 16:01, July 5, 2012 (UTC)

Hey i was wondering if you could help, i just recently got banned from the "Open Chat" because i said something i wasnt supposed to once and i was wondering if i could get back in. i really meant no harm to the chat at all.

Sincerely,

mrbluedinousaur ````

Bug verification

As per the discussion here, bugs shouldn't be continued treated the way they are now. This means a few things:

They shouldn't be removed just because they are in Category:Verification overdue
They should only be removed if tested to be false
They should only be marked for verification if they are found to be dubious, as per policy

I won't revert the ones you did just now but please keep this in mind for the future. --Skire (talk) 00:30, July 23, 2012 (UTC)

Inactivity

I see you aren't here much. When will you come back? Energy X ∞ 15:11, August 13, 2012 (UTC)

OK, just wondering. Energy X ∞ 08:34, August 17, 2012 (UTC)

hi ummm i am a big fan of fallout and fallout wiki i havent been on as much as i could have been because my laptop broke on me.But me i am now back with a new laptop and i dont brake rules and i see alot of bad comments on some of the pages and i was hopping to maybe become a Chat moderator thank you for you time...And please message me back thanks

Hi. I have moved you to the inactive administrators list. If you object to this, please notify me so I can change it back, or you may change it back yourself when you feel like you are active enough again. Thanks and take care. --Skire (talk) 01:52, August 30, 2012 (UTC)

Re:Blackhawk

I understand the rules, but it seems to me that there are quite a few similarities (both .44 magnum revolvers with the same exact name), too much so for mere coincidence, I think. There are other similar cases around the wiki too. I think we need to decide whether or not we risk losing this very likely true information for the sake of obtaining actual confirmation, which may not happen very soon. --Skire (talk) 23:15, November 17, 2012 (UTC)

Well we can ask a bureaucrat what they think of this. Otherwise you can remove the note again since you are by all means correct with respect to written policies. --Skire (talk) 23:25, November 17, 2012 (UTC)

All right then, perhaps you can message one of the bureaucrats about this? I'm a little busy right now actually XD --Skire (talk) 23:30, November 17, 2012 (UTC)

Black and Red Hawks

I've left a note on the talk page about that Blackhawk edit. Frankly, I don't think the edit has merit more because the weapon looks nothing like a Blackhawk, rather than the RWWR policy. I'm not against looking at RWWR to determine if we are using that policy in the best way possible, but in this case, that info is just extraneous. That emblem sure does look like a Ruger Eagle, doesn't it? The Gunny 01:06, November 18, 2012 (UTC)

RWWR

Just thinking out loud here: First, the easiest answer is to keep the policy as is. A simple line in the sand is probably the easiest to follow for editors and enforce for admins. It's very clear: either there's a direct connection by quote or name, or it's not that weapon.

Secondly, we all know that the .22 smg is an American 180. There are no other weapons like it. So what happens if we broaden the policy? If it's too broad, then we get all kinds of folks saying their favorite version of an AR-15 is the model for the service rifle. That's not gonna work. Where is the middle ground here?

What about weapons that are clearly "close" to something but not implicit? Take that service rifle. It's obviously an AR series styled rifle, but it's not exactly like any specific one. In this case, we can't say it's an H&K416, but can we say "This weapon design is closely related to real world AR-15 platform rifles"? One of the problems I see is determining what real world weapons actually exist in the FO world. Anything before ~1950ish is pretty well established, but what about those developed after? That American 180 was developed after the split. There will be some folks that say we can't be sure that it was even developed in the FO world, so how can we reference it?

I'd say it's safe to say things like the automatic rifle design is closely related to the Browning M1918, and the battle rifle is closely related to the M1 Garand, but what about the 12.7mm smg? It looks like it's loosely based on the TDI Vector, but the Vector was developed too late.

Just spitballing here, so let me know your take on this. The Gunny 17:35, November 22, 2012 (UTC)

In an effort to try to put some of this in context, I went ahead and made a list of all the FNV weapons what might have RWWR. Most of the obvious references are already on pages. The question to me is, even if some of the other weapon references are fairly obvious, how does that really relate to our remit of cataloging game related info? We obviously don't want to be wikipedia, but how much relevancy does the relationship of an in-game weapon to a RWW have, unless it's somehow stated in the game or by a dev? Not, sure, interested in your views. The Gunny

18:58, November 23, 2012 (UTC)

Guns and Bullets

Hi! Please, recheck your reverts on the Guns and Bullets (Fallout). Seems to me than anon was trying to remove duplicates. --Theodorico (talk) 23:53, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

He was, I checked that. He did us a favor with that. Good thing you didn't block him right :) Jspoel

00:03, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

Raider lieutenant

I remember that one. I with checking autocomplete of the Desert Eagle Mark XIX .44 (Fallout Tactics) (long one isn't it) as well and forgot to remove it afterwards. Jspoel 17:07, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

sentence

The reason i removed that particular sentence was because it seemed out of place in that paragraph. It would seem more appropriate in a trivia section instead. (Nemerian (talk) 22:06, December 14, 2012 (UTC))

Lyons Quote

Wow, you found that really fast. Thanks for checking. Paladin117^{>>iff bored;} 15:34, December 17, 2012 (UTC)

RE:Board meeting

Hey. Thanks for the offer but I have a previously-assembled randomly-selected back-up list. JASPER was #1 on that list, and TwoBears #2. So per the policy I set for myself in organising this, I have sent him in invitation in place of Vic. But I want to thank you for your help tonight, it was all very productive. I will keep you in mind in case we need any last second backups, as long as you are available in the chat. Thanks again! --Skire (talk) 03:32, December 18, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I thought he meant my strategy was bad. I didn't realize he meant not to post strategy. Will remember that in the future... Despara (talk) 03:41, December 18, 2012 (UTC)

Fine you made your point

Thank you for the info if I get any trouble from a certain self-centered mod/admin jerk, I'll take it up with you or another admin and will sort this out like civilized people and come up with a fair solution.

FOT

Hi! Category FOT sp. enc. contains 31 articles. Two of them do not have an templ. {{FOT}}. Why? --FunGorn (talk) 02:06, December 20, 2012 (UTC)

Hello, -bleep196-. You have new messages at Limmiegirl's talk page.
Message added 20:18, December 20, 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Email me or discuss on the Page

I would like to discuss my edit to the Fast Shot page, to understand how I could better word it, sorry for anything.SniperGuy1 (talk) 19:44, December 22, 2012 (UTC)

Glowhouse

Remember to add this to the house pages

BTW, Stop spending the entire budget, we had to get tennants in to help pay for your upgrades.

Thank you

Thank you, and I'm sorry about the trouble, I'll definitely correct any oppurtinites for statistics.O, How do I count the shots? (talk) 17:09, December 23, 2012 (UTC)

Happy holidays

Happy Holidays

Happy Holidays!

You have been given a bug squashing robot, named Frank.

Your efforts and diligence have not gone unnoticed, and you have been given a small token of appreciation.

Every bug squashing techie needs one of these! Merry Christmas/Happy Holidays Bleep! --

^{"Those Old World Relics still stand..."} 22:45, December 23, 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year -bleep196-! Yours Always; -- ^{"Those Old World Relics still stand..."} 22:45, December 23, 2012 (UTC)

New Guy in Town

Hmm. Guess I'll have a look, then. Thanks for pointing that out. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 00:13, December 24, 2012 (UTC)

His writing patterns are significantly different from Dweller's - proper capitalisation, punctuation, etc. Let's ask one of the check users if you still have suspicions. --Skire (talk) 00:27, December 24, 2012 (UTC)

For the Coolest Admin there is

Now before that coolest admin title bruises some egos:

You have been given a CryoMine.

Your efforts and diligence have not gone unnoticed, and you have been given a small token of appreciation.

If you ever feel like saving Articuno for later, you can always just throw this on that ground... or at hostilities... whichever seems more... cool at the time! --The Ever Ruler (talk) 03:37, December 25, 2012 (UTC)

My ego is bruised. Bleep-firmation!

^{Some Assembly Required!} 03:40, December 25, 2012 (UTC)

I haven't been this bruised since my Dad lived with me.--TwoBearsHigh-Fiving

03:58, December 25, 2012 (UTC)

Christmas! Christmas! AHAHAHAHHAHHAHAH

For -bleep196-, From Agent C

You have been given a Christmas Gift

Unwrap!

Merry Christmas!

You have been given A Sonic Screwdriver.

Your efforts and diligence have not gone unnoticed, and you have been given a small token of appreciation.

To help you better fix things around here. Agent c (talk) 01:34, December 25, 2012 (UTC)

Section needed template

{{Section}} has been upgraded to include a game parameter, e.g. {{Section|FNV}} so it will separate the categories and generally make it more organised. --Skire (talk) 19:11, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

NP. And a quick question: Where exactly does it say we don't allow promotion of other wikis? --Skire (talk) 19:13, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I don't mean to be a bother but I recall one time when Clyde asked for some help on his Vietnam War wiki. They're all run by Wikia so I can see no real problem with it. --Skire (talk) 19:18, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good. And there is some found in the user conduct guideline at the bottom. Blogs are like user pages and so their policies should be about the same. Maybe there are a few discrepancies that could be sorted out... --Skire (talk) 19:27, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

Platforms tags

That's what I've been doing for months. Thanks for the friendly reminder. ~ Toci ~ ^{Go ahead, make my day.} 03:58, December 31, 2012 (UTC)

Bugs

So, I've been working on some of those PS3 bugs and I have two questions: if I check a bug without the verify tag and find it to be incorrect, do I remove the bug or do I add the verify tag? And, if I verify a bug that already had the tag, do I remove the verify notice or do I leave it so that people know to check it on other consoles? 23:19, December 31, 2012 (UTC)

Board award

Hi -bleep196-! Since you are pretty much a full-time board member =P I want to thank you for your time in serving on the 2012 NoTY board. Your efforts have played a great part in making it such a success. As such, I would like to give you a little award:

You have been given a Nukapedian of the Year board award.

Your efforts and diligence have not gone unnoticed, and you have been given a small token of appreciation.

For serving on the 2012 Nukapedian of the Year Board! --Skire (talk)

Happy New Year! --Skire (talk) 16:22, January 1, 2013 (UTC)

Where can you find the armored vault 21 jumpsuit in Fallout: New Vegas Ultimate Edition (WITHOUT JSawyer mod)? --190.111.233.133 21:26, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

Vera's Outfit

Thanks for the correction there. I had looked an the Anon's removal of the bug, and asked a couple of people in chat, Neko and Relics about whether to revert it or not and then followed their advice regarding adding the verify tag. Richie9999 (talk) 00:54, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

Charts

Hi! I've seen your comment about charts. :) Take a look at this: User:Theodorico/sandbox08, hope it'll help. If not, just drop me a line and i'll fix it. --Theodorico (talk) 01:57, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

I'm glad you liked it. Sure, I'll do that, no problems. --Theodorico (talk) 03:35, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Here's what i got: User:Theodorico/sandbox08. "Bugs Present" column is fully bot-generated - not 100% trustworthy, but gives some insights. So, if everything is OK, drop me a line and i'll start building real tables. --Theodorico (talk) 07:23, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Check this out: User:User:Theodorico/sandbox08 - things are getting out of control. I just got to the items and the page already takes forever to load. Maybe we should drop all entries with red crosses? Yes, there's a hypotetical chance that the bot will miss some bugs due to misspelled/mis-formated section, but does it worth keeping thousands of empty links? Let me know. --Theodorico (talk) 09:17, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

OK, I got your point, let's go with full listings. Just don't put them on the single page, OK? ;) As for automatic updates - the whole process is far from being fully automatic and is quite time consuming and tedious, even with the help from the bot. I can't vouch that I'll do that again in the foreseen future. :) --Theodorico (talk) 12:57, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

Question

Hey bleep, could you pop into chat, I got a question for you regarding a "bug". Richie9999 (talk) 16:52, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

You still up?

Hey Bleep, could ya pop into chat for a moment? Richie9999 (talk) 04:51, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

Project tags

You know, a bot could/should be doing that. It'll be a lot less work and will go faster. --Skire (talk) 01:04, January 19, 2013 (UTC)

I can ask User:Tocinoman to commission his bot to do it. I don't even think a template for this kind of project is necessary, but if so there are far too many pages for a regular user to be adding the templates. --Skire (talk) 01:07, January 19, 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good. It's nice to have the bugs sections improved. A lot of anons and regular users alike post often in bugs, so the quality may deteriorate slightly over time without constant checking. Good work! --Skire (talk) 01:16, January 19, 2013 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I've noticed significant progress in their quality over the last few months. I remember also that I had tried a little reform of the system, resulting in different practices and creation of {{Platforms needed}}. If you need any help, feel free to call me up. --Skire (talk) 01:22, January 19, 2013 (UTC)