User talk:Nero210/Archive

Welcome to Memory Alpha, Nero210! I've noticed that you've already made some contributions to our database – thanks for your edit to the User talk:70.176.184.44 page! We all hope that you'll enjoy our activities here and decide to join our community.

If you'd like to learn more about working with the nuts and bolts of Memory Alpha, I have a few links that you might want to check out:


 * Our policies and guidelines provides links to inform you on what is appropriate for Memory Alpha and what is not. Particular items of note are the and  policies, the editing guidelines, our point of view, copyrights and guidelines for proper etiquette.
 * How to edit a page includes a basic tutorial about how to use our special wikitext code here on Memory Alpha.
 * Naming conventions provides guidelines on how to name a new page that you may want to create.
 * The Manual of Style is an overview of the basic guidelines for how to format and style your articles.
 * How to write a great article is a list of suggestions that can help you put together an article that might end up on our Featured Articles list someday.
 * See the user projects page for current projects of our archivists, or help us to reduce the number of stubs.
 * Look up past changes you have made in your contributions log.
 * Keep track of your favorite Memory Alpha articles through your very own watchlist.
 * Create your own user page and be contacted on this page, your talk page.

One other suggestion: if you're going to make comments on talk pages or make other sorts of comments, please be sure to sign them with four tildes (~) to paste in your user name and the date/time of the comment.

If you have any questions, please feel free to post them in our Ten Forward community page. Thanks, and once again, welcome to Memory Alpha! -- Renegade54 (Talk) 20:14, 2009 October 19


 * The above named user is the most currently available administrator to contribute to Memory Alpha; their signature was automatically added by User:Wikia. If you have any immediate questions or concerns, you may contact that user through their talk page.

One item of note
Just to clear up something. I don't really care what year an episode happens in. In my opinion it just isn't that important. The reason I brought it up, however, is that whenever there are major changes made to memory alpha I think they should be discussed with the community beforehand. Just to make sure everyone is on the same page and understands why such a major change is being made. &mdash; Morder (talk) 22:07, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

Removing text
If you remove information from an article, it is strongly recommended - particularly when the information removed is of significant length - that it be posted to the talk page of the article with an explanation as to why it was removed. As it stands, anyone coming across your large-scale removal of text from USS Voyager will not be able to find a reason as to why those changes were made, and why it was felt that information no longer belonged on the page when it seems perfectly relevant. -- Michael Warren | Talk 07:35, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * If you actually read the article, you'll notice I only removed duplicates. --Nero210 20:15, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

Date changes
Hi, Nero. Just letting you know that you need to stop making changes to the dates until a consensus is reached in the discussion. The edits that are being discussed need to stop while the discussion is still going. So if you could please not change any more date info it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. --From Andoria with Love 21:42, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * Woah calm down there! It was one CORRECTION, correcting Author, Author's time frame, you had it listed as after Friendship One, it's before. Please don't jump on me. --Nero210 21:44, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

Heh, wasn't jumping on you, mate, it just seemed like you were still changing the dates, which would not be a good thing to do at this time. My bad. Anyways... carry on. :) --From Andoria with Love 21:51, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

Re:Forum apology
Hey, Nero. Just wanted to tell you there's no need to apologize about changing the date system. The way we have it relies mostly on speculation anyway so I think it was in need of a change. Basically, you brought an issue that needs to be dealt with to our attention. Also, please don't feel like you shouldn't have edited at all; we do have a "be bold" guideline, it's just that all the changes you made impacted many pages on Memory Alpha and thus were in need of further discussion. I know you're upset that many of your changes were reverted or undone, but that is to maintain a consistency across the site; if the community agrees with the changes you suggest, then your edits can be easily reapplied. If they do not agree with the changes, however, then that's just the way the ball bounces, I'm afraid. We have all had edits which were reverted, especially when we were first starting out; it's all part and parcel of learning the ways of the wiki and those of Memory Alpha. :) --From Andoria with Love 18:09, October 23, 2009 (UTC)

Cross-post from your IP user talk
Apparently, you're still editing logged out part of the time. Regarding the new date changes of 2378/2379, please see and join the discussion at Forum:2370s date changes, before doing any more changes. There needs to be some discussion-based consensus for a change, not unilateral action. Not even giving an edit summary while moving some event from one year to another doesn't really help. Thanks. -- Cid Highwind 10:07, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

StarTrek.com
Startrek.com is non-canon and can't be used as a source for the dates. &mdash; Morder (talk) 00:55, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

I struck out those items as they're speculation and should be undone only when shown with facts. &mdash; Morder (talk) 00:56, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

Still speculation. Please don't unstrike them until it's no longer speculation. &mdash; Morder (talk) 00:58, October 27, 2009 (UTC)


 * I unstruck them because those items are essential to the project. I'm presenting evidence and from where I'm standing it looks like your censoring it. With that in mind I will continue to unstrike them. StarTrek.com may not necessarily be canon but it is an "official source". Even so Tom's statement about his daughters birth is worth listing, along with the fact that it takes place after Human Error and I have the evidence listed on the page for that episode. --Nero210 01:01, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

Censoring would be removing them. Striking them keeps them until proper information can be cited which those notes fail to do. Either way I did it differently to stop this little edit war. Tom's statement must be taken alone and not in conjunction with StarTrek.com as it has no bearing on the actual year. &mdash; Morder (talk) 01:03, October 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * The italicized notes are acceptable, striking them makes them hard to read and thats where I'm coming from saying that you were "censoring" my evidence. --Nero210 01:06, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

As for StarTrek.com being an "official source" it's only an official source for background information only and not in-universe material which you're attempting to create. So no, StarTrek.com is an invalid resource for this project and will not be accepted for any date. All information must come from the show only. &mdash; Morder (talk) 01:07, October 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter regardless there's enough evidence from the show itself to not change anything. --Nero210 01:08, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

That may be, but it can't be used so it should be removed as your source. Anyway, just remember that we don't have to have dates for everything so please don't speculate on this project. &mdash; Morder (talk) 01:10, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

Timeline project
Please note the requirement on the timeline project to indicate where, when, and who stated the date, year, or stardate. Just marking down the numbers doesn't help at all. The assumption is that they're somewhere in the episode, but the whole point of indicating when in the episode they arise is so that we don't have to go searching again for confirmations. -- sulfur 19:44, October 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * You go ahead and do that. I'm done with this project, as its turning into to much of a hassle and nobody cares to listen to anything I bring up anyways. --Nero210 20:23, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

Date changes
Hey, Nero. Sulfur has already stated there were to be no more date changes of any kind until the timeline project is complete. We are now going through and reverting any date changes made until that time, so please stop changing dates around until we get everything sorted out. It would be much easier that way. Thanks. --From Andoria with Love 04:35, October 30, 2009 (UTC)
 * What the hell are you talking about? I didn't make any date changes.--Nero210 06:10, October 30, 2009 (UTC)

This and this, to name some. And yes, I realize you may see those as corrections, but it was asked that you hold off on making those changes until we get the timeline project in order. --From Andoria with Love 13:59, October 30, 2009 (UTC)

OK
No one wishes you to stop editing or that everything you are doing is wrong. But large scale changes or additions need to be discussed as a community. This is the case with any person who takes a large scale unilateral action, not just you. I realize you may feel like you are being targeted but this is not the case. As a canon wiki we need to use only what was depicted in canon. That's the point that's trying to be made about your Kazon article(no one referred to such a name) and your timeline changes(trying to figure out what is actually canon) No one is necessarily saying that your information should all be deleted- but the right place for it needs to be found. That is all that we are doing.--31dot 21:04, October 30, 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see Help:Talk pages for information regarding what can be removed. Thanks. &mdash; Morder (talk) 21:14, October 30, 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you telling me I can't control what is on MY OWN talk page? --Nero210 21:16, October 30, 2009 (UTC)

You can control what is on your userpage, but user talk pages exist as a means to communicate with others, and such pages need to be either kept or archived so others know what is being said and others can reference it if necessary.--31dot 21:22, October 30, 2009 (UTC)

Torres
We have discussed this issue before, and came to a consensus that there is no evidence of what her middle name, if any, was. The L could just as easily stand for the second syllable of her name. B ' Lanna Torres. If you wish to reopen this issue, please go to the talk page.--31dot 18:52, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow you people can be ignorant, but whatever screw it. --Nero210 18:53, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

How is that ignorant? What facts are we ignoring? --31dot 18:54, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * Umm...the episode her initial was given in, and the idea of the L standing for the second syllable of her first name is purely speculation. --Nero210 18:57, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

It is also speculation to say that it stands for her middle name. If such a name was mentioned in any other episode, this wouldn't be an issue. Given that there is a prominent L sound in her name, it is just as reasonable that is what the L in BLT stands for. As such, that is why we mention this in the article (under Relationships) in the correct context.--31dot 18:58, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree but there's not a whole lot I can do about, so continue with the "selective canon" process here. --Nero210 18:59, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

What canon information do you have to suggest it is her middle name? I don't think there is any, so there is no canon to "select".--31dot 19:00, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

To quote what was done: "Until we can verify one way or another how the line was meant to be taken (L meaning "Lanna" or an unknown middle name), we cannot state in the article, for a fact, that her middle initial is "L". I have thus removed the middle initial and reworded the background info to allow for either possibility." Since there is no way to verify anything, that's the solution until such time.--31dot 19:03, November 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * Nero, a warning, we do not tolerate personal attacks here. Just because you do not agree with our viewpoint does not mean we are ignorant or that you are more intelligent. We work with what is clearly canon here, not with what you think is canon or should be canon. Please remember this in the future, thanks. --From Andoria with Love 20:14, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * It wasn't meant as a personal attack, and I'm not trying to change this place to "my idea of canon" if that's what you're getting at. Either way it doesn't matter so end of story. --Nero210 20:16, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * I wasn't "getting at" anything; please do not misconstrue my words. I do not believe you are intentionally trying to change the information to match your idea of canon, but you clearly take issue with people who have different viewpoints than your own, to the point where you find them to be "ignorant." And even though you may not have meant that as a personal attack (I'm not sure what you meant it as, considering it was an insult directed at 31dot and unnamed others), it still was, and I am asking you to please keep your comments in check in the future. This is a community project, and as such there are going to be times when each of us will disagree with one another. I know this can be trying and even a bit nerve-wracking at times, but that's just how a wiki operates. You will have to get used to that. --From Andoria with Love 06:55, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Image citation
Please take a look at the image description page and add the appropriate information to your recent image uploads, as all image in the database need this information for copyright reasons. - 00:54, April 14, 2010 (UTC)

If you could add the appropriate image licensing template to images you have uploaded, along with a category and citation, it would be a big help. With all the information added, it should look something like this. Two images you have uploaded are currently up for deletion due to lack of citation and copyright info. - 02:42, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * I was under the impression that typing "fair use" would be adequate but was obviously mistaken. I have added the template with the appropriate information to the images you mentioned. I do not expect to hear any more on this and am now archiving this discussion. --Nero210 18:53, May 5, 2010 (UTC)

Images - redux
Hey Nero. So that you know, you still didn't use the proper image cite format. Take a look at the corrections Sulfur made, that should be a good guide on how to do it. I'd also take a look at the Help:Image description page, where it says to use the rather than just "fair use." This standardizes how we claim fair use for all of the screencap images, and makes sure the citation is done correctly.

As an aside...I might suggest not archiving discussions as they are happening. You archived the previous one very fast, saying that you didn't "expect to hear anything else on this." That assumes a number of things you can't really assume, like that you received and understood the message correctly, or that others have nothing else to say. Might I suggest taking a bit more time on it? It isn't like you are being harmed by having a message here. My general rule of thumb is to archive discussions at the end of the month, and not put anything in the archive from the current calender month. You don't have to do it this way, but it might make you come off a bit better in your interactions with others... --OuroborosCobra talk 19:05, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay these templates are way too confusing. I understand the need for copyright information but you guys really need to make these templates easier to use. Not everyone is proficient in HTML or whatever this site uses. So I'm sorry but as I'm unfamiliar with how to use that template properly someone else will have to complete them properly. I'm not trying to be lazy, it's just too confusing for me. --Nero210 19:16, May 5, 2010 (UTC)

I'll try to simplify it then. There are really only two templates you need to know for making images, the episode citation template, and the licensing template. As for wiki code being hard, well, that's what you have to work with if you are going to edit here. I'm willing to help you out, I'm sure others are too. --OuroborosCobra talk 19:30, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * The episode citation template can differ from what series you are doing. Basically, it is . Series acronyms are TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY, and ENT. Pretty simple there. Then you separate it with a "|" and put in the episode title. So, if the picture is from "Yesterday's Enterprise," the template is
 * The image licensing template is even easier. If you are uploading a screencap from Star Trek, from any series, movie, anything, the template is always . That's it. No fields to remember or anything, just that template. Easier to use than the fair use template.
 * I'm familiar with the first one you mentioned (regarding episode abbreviation, the | etc. The image paramount should be helpful, thank you for pointing that out. I'm still confused because I DID put the template on those images after Archduk's message, I actually put the one that he gave me in that conversation and it looked proper based on the example provided, but yet you're still saying that it was wrong. Obviously one of you is mistaken and I'm not going to play with those templates until I know which one is. --Nero210 19:39, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, the template you added was correct enough. It's just easier to use and the description then to cite it twice, and that adds CBS just to be safe. Either way, as long as a image has a copyright template on it and a cite, any minor style changes are easier to do then finding out where a image came from. :) -  19:45, May 5, 2010 (UTC)


 * The imagelicensing template is the general catchall. If you read the documentation, you'll see that there are a whole bunch of short-form versions, dependent on the type of image.  image paramount (for example) is for screen shots from the episodes or films (and only those).  Another template, image fairuse cover is for cover art (whether from a book, comic, DVD, etc).  And so forth. -- sulfur 19:46, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clearing that up Archduk. And I see what you're talking about Sulfur, cool I'll keep that one in mind. Thanks. --Nero210 19:48, May 5, 2010 (UTC)

Voyager edits
I have rearranged the paragraphs so that they actually make some sense chronologically and contents wise. Usually, things like technical data and specifications should come at the beginning and something like the return home more towards the end rather than at the beginning. The same goes for things like "Voyager's Journey" - their encounters with various species and contact with Starfleet etc all fall under Voyager's Journey - so I created sub-paragraphs. Something like "Beginnings in the Delta Quadrant" should come at first as well (with the Kazon as subsection) since in its beginning, by far one of Voyager's biggest adversaries were the Kazon (although you can add the Vidians 9spelling) if you want). I did not ruin anything, I just merely put everything in an order that makes sense. The way you made it, it is all scrambled and mixed together without any particular order that can be discerned. You should take a closer look. – Distantlycharmed 21:48, June 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Since this has gone back and forth with huge edits, I've temporarily protected the article in question. Please take the discussion to the talk page and discuss the changes there instead of just reverting edits. -- sulfur 23:28, June 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * see talk page then. – Distantlycharmed 23:55, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

Stop
Stop the name-calling. Now. Read the message I posted on DC's talk page, as it goes for you too.--31dot 22:21, June 27, 2010 (UTC)

Archiving
A suggestion on archiving messages, especially those from administrators. Don't do it immediately. First off, you don't necessarily know if whatever discussion going on is in fact over, and putting it in the archive makes it hard to continue it. Second off, it makes it look like you are just trying to "get rid of it" rather than learning from it. My rule of thumb is to leave things up for at least a week after there is no conversation activity, or to not archive things until we've hit the next calender month. As for your recent message to 31dot about not "messaging you again," he didn't. Morder, a different administrator, reverted your removing the message. Probably because he felt you hadn't learned from it, you even put "got rid of crap" in the edit summary, which does not exactly inspire confidence that you took the message seriously. --OuroborosCobra talk 02:42, June 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * OurobrorosCobra, I don't mean any disrespect towards you since you haven't been in this whole debate so please don't take this message as such: I'll decide on when to archive my messages, I believe that right is mine. As for the "got rid of crap" in summary, that was for an earlier edit to my talk page (that I did last night) when I got rid of the "Welcome to Memory Alpha" message that pops up on every new members talk page. I did understand 31dots message and I just like to archive my messages to keep my talk page clean. I was not trying to "get rid of it" in any way. The decision to keep my talk page clean is my own and one I don't intend to change. Thank you for your suggestion but I have my own system :) --Nero210 02:47, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I'd tell you this, your "user talk" page isn't exactly "your's." It is here for others to communicate with you, and for administrators to communicate with you. It isn't your "user page," and if your light trigger archiving disrupts that, well, you've got a problem. As for your "whole debate," I've been staying mostly out of it, but both of you have been behaving very badly. Hell, after 31dot sent both of you warnings, you responded to that warning by going and accusing DC of "showing no respect" and being "unwilling to compromise," discussing the person, not the article. That's directly showing you hadn't bothered to heed what the administrator was trying to tell you. --OuroborosCobra talk 02:52, June 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * I did heed what 31dot was telling me, and I decided to archive his post according to my own personal standards for my talk page. I don't see me archiving at my own discretion in the way you do and I'm sorry if it comes off otherwise. Like I said, I'm not trying to come off as disrespectful towards you; you've been pretty cool to me in the few times you've posted on my page and I intend to show you the same courtesy, but I don't plan on changing the way I manage my own space on this site based on your opinion. I realize both me and Distantlycharmed have been behaving badly but he's hitting on some nerves and, well quite frankly sorry for being Human. --Nero210 03:07, June 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Just so we get something clear, you archived it just a few minutes after 31dot posted it and didn't post that you were archiving - which is why I reverted. Had you posted that you were going to archive it I would have left it alone. Anyway, It's just not a good idea to archive a message so soon after it was posted because it doesn't give others a chance to respond or what not. &mdash; Morder (talk) 03:18, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for speaking up Morder. But like I said, I stand by my own personal talk page policies of archiving at my discretion. I'd like to apologize to 31dot for jumping on him without all the facts, hopefully no hard feelings (but understand if otherwise). --Nero210 03:35, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

That's it
For your "Get bent" comment as well as past insults, which I warned you against, I have given you a 3 day block. In that time try to learn to discuss the issue without insults.--31dot 00:04, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * So someone talks to me disrespectfully and I'm the jerk? What the hell is wrong with you I'll bet you're not going to tell Distantlycharmed anything - he's been behaving just as badly but I'm taking all the heat for it and thats quite frankly BS. --Nero210 00:07, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

I saw no personal attacks, which is what you engaged in with your name calling, from her since my last warning. I also saw no personal attacks in her paragraph that you responded to.--31dot 00:11, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I made a two sentence suggestion for a minor edit and DC responded by saying "I believe I was talking to Archduk" and going into a paragraph long rant about how he can't understand why the Equinox section is where it is. Like I said I know I haven't been a "model community member" but that doesn't give you or anyone else the right to treat me unfairly. --Nero210 00:15, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

So it is disrespectful to you to inform you whom her comment was intended for? I think you are taking things a bit too seriously. She was only stating who her comment was intended for, nothing more, nothing less. That doesn't mean you can't respond, but it also doesn't mean any sleight was intended.--31dot 00:20, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * But she doesn't need to go into a paragraph long rant after I voice my opinion about something that I wasn't even talking about now does she? She was looking to provoke me right there, she's been behaving just as badly as I have and you have done NOTHING to reprimand her, only just me. I really don't think you have the objectivity and fairness to do your job here (that's only a candid opinion of how you do your job and NOT a personal attack, by the way). --Nero210 00:23, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * What do you think she said that was on par with your "get bent" comment? --OuroborosCobra talk 00:27, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Her need to rant about something I wasn't even talking about I wasn't even talking about just to get her opinion across to me yet again - like I said I wasn't even talking about the organization, I suggested a name change for a section and she had to complain about that and the Equinox. Now I'm the asshole again. BS dude. --Nero210 00:31, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I blocked you for a specific action, not the pattern of behavior which you and her have been engaged in. The warning I posted on her talk page applied to the both of you. I don't recall seeing any personal attacks from her like the one that provoked my warning to you specifically.

If you (or anyone) can show me or any admin where she called you a name or used an insult since my last warning, I will treat her the same way as I treated you. I'm not talking about percieved disrespect or "looking to provoke me"- you don't know what's in her head. If you knew she was trying to "provoke you", why did you respond? Bad behavior does not excuse more bad behavior. If you are correct, you should be the bigger person.--31dot 00:32, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Again, what specific comment is equal to you telling her to "get bent?" That's what it comes down to. DC's long rants are damned annoying (which she has been told about many times, including in this very debate), but they do not break policy, nor does the length of a rant make it into a personal attack. If you are going to call her actions "the same" as yours, needing the same disciplinary result, then you are going to have to come up with what she did that was equal to your telling her to "get bent." Or you could come to realize that you've crossed the line, and need to cool down. As it is, the administrators are forcing your hand on that. --OuroborosCobra talk 00:34, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Fine - you guys go back to taking one side and not being objective or fair. I've tried to move on from this debate but once again because someone was a jerk to me and I responded I'm the asshole. --Nero210 00:37, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I've said it before and I'll say it again: Text on a screen is the lowest form of communication. I can't speak on what anyone elses intentions are when they write something, since I can only really add my own inflections and tone when reading it (unless someone has really gone nuts with italics/bold/caps), and I know I've written things here that could, and maybe were, taken the wrong way; but the line is drawn at name calling and direct insults, and that's why you were blocked. You can rant and rave about the unfairness of it all, and I'm not suggesting it is fair, but if DC had directly insulted you, she would have been blocked as well. - 00:40, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

signing into user account/sockpuppeting
Please sign in when you post/edit. It doesnt help your cause or edits if you "bump up" an issue by using two separate accounts (one anon with IP 70.176.184.44 and one as Nero210), to support yourself in edits. You dont ID yourself as Nero210 when you edit as anon (hence Cleanse being confused about your identity and asking you to sign in). You have done that several times now and sockpuppeting is not allowed on MA. Now intentional or not, but this way of you doing things (i.e. use Nero 210 and then anon account a few days later to support yourself) gives the impression that the anon is a third party who is not affiliated with you or acting under your control for your benefit, which is not true, because it is you. If you are not doing this on purpose, then I suggest signing in, as Cleanse mentioned to you in the Benjamin Sisko FA removal page. – Distantlycharmed 20:52, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Umm excuse me DC? Are you an admin? No? Then please do not tell me what to do. Now, not that YOU should be talking to me about this, but I'm human, I forget to log in sometimes, so excuse the hell out of me if that pisses you off (despite the fact that I don't care if it does or not). Don't take a simple mistake as some kind of intent of "disguising my identity." --Nero210 03:26, November 2, 2010 (UTC)

First of all, I dont need to be an admin to ask that you sign in when you post. That's why people register. By not signing in and posting as an anon you create a lot of confusion which can be misleading. I believe Cleanse also asked you to sign in on the Ben Sisko FA removal page. And, since you are supposedly not hiding anything around here, asking you to sing in when editing/posting shouldnt be riling you up like that. The fact that you do not sign in and edit alternately under your registered name and then under your anon - especially when it comes to making controversial edits - gives the impression that you are in fact trying to make it look like the anon is a different user than you. To avoid that, you need to sign in or at the least make it known that the anon user is you and vice versa. – Distantlycharmed 03:49, November 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * You know what DC, I'm done talking to you. You're obviously not interested in what my real intentions were, nor in the truth that I'm not trying to pose as two different people, nor ever have. The admins know whats up, I've chimed in on Archduk's page about this as well. So please just leave me alone, I'm not interested in debating with you any further. --Nero210 03:53, November 2, 2010 (UTC)