Talk:Sorcerer-contractor

Sorcer vs Sorcerer
In the TV-broadcast-to-vhs-to-avi version of this episode that I had when I originally wrote this article, the audio quality is poor and it is not possible to hear the last "er", but it is clearly there in the DVD. I have checked two different TV ripped versions and both are missing the "er", so it is possible that the DVD audio folks restored something that was never audible in any previous broadcast. Anyway, "sorcerer-contractor" is right, but it's completely understandable where "sorcer-contractor" might come from. You don't have to f-bomb us in the edit comments. --Bp 16:40, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I have the old North American VHS tape of this episode's release, and it is very clearly only "SOR-CER" on that one. I don't have the DVD release, but it sounds like the sound has been corrected.  As such, I've made a note on the article about the difference from VHS to DVD releases. -- Sulfur 17:51, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * First of all, I wouldn't have moved the page in the first place if I didn't have an . Also, I don't appreciate the constant, and unsupported assholery involved in reverting edits without stopping for a goddamn minute to acknowledge the situation first; my move/corrections did not fall under the criteria set forth in the cases for reversion. Seeing as Sulfur has reverted similar actions in the past, you'd think the second time might warrant a discussion. --Alan 04:29, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Assholery? heh -- Renegade54 14:15, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Seeing that the last time I "reverted" it was because an IP made that move and that was his first (and at the time) only edit? I don't think that discussion is warranted there.  We've all done the same thing and more along the way.  And as noted above, I was going based on the edition of it that I had available.  Now that a newer one's been released I'm more than content to go with that one.  Which is why I made a point of noting the correction in the article itself. -- sulfur 15:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It shouldn't matter anyway, there is no reason to use that kind of language in the edit summary even if you do have a problem with another editor, especially a fellow admin. Alan, you had just as much ability to start a talk page rather than run your mouth as Sulfur did. --OuroborosCobra talk 16:00, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * So what you're saying that there is a reason for using this language only when it involves an admin that isn't me? Wow, ok, can you say, 'biased'? And yeah, I could have started a talk page, but that really wasn't my responibility to start with, and that 12+ hour absense I had after the 'WTF?'-revert kind of kept me from making a prompt response to the discussion that didn't exist. --Alan 16:47, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't want either of you pulling this crap. You are both acting like 5 year olds, and being a disgrace to Memory Alpha. That unbiased enough for you? You are both a disgrace to your title as admins. Now both of you go sit in a corner and learn your lesson, and stop pulling a "well he did worse" to try and justify your own actions. --OuroborosCobra talk 17:52, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * At least I provided audio evidence, so nay! :P --Alan 18:00, 3 November 2008 (UTC)