User talk:VorangorTheDemon

Archives

Old Discussions #1 Old Discussions #2.

Leave me a messege

--CyberGhostface (talk) 16:16, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to have separate sections for manga and anime only transformations simply because the differences between the manga and the anime have already been noted in the sections above, not to mention the

Just read your comments on Goku's talk page. I know you are upset and frustrated, but this is not the solution. I know you worked pretty hard on this project and especially on Goku. We can still work out this issue. Please reconsider. UzEE!! 22:14, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly Majin, you can't let a dude like him to get to you like this. Just shrug it off and move on. --

3:16 23:40, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

In reply to your response in UzEE's talk page, I think that if you really feel the need for a wikibreak, I suggest you take it. UzEE and I can keep an eye on the pages while you're gone. --

3:16 07:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Ditto. I agree with you on the policy thing. It kinda pi**es me off too. But whats worse is that we cant do anything about it. Everyday I revert tons of good edits because of the policies that are otherwise worth keeping. We get huge doses of Cruft daily, and its sad that sometimes it comes from within the project. But then I think about is that we are trying for a common goal, so lets just move on and try to reach a consensus or negotiate on the matter. I think after all you have done for the project, you deserve a break. Go ahead and relax yourself for a couple of days. Hopefully things would still be as they are. With the revision of

WP:EPISODE, there might be a few changes.  UzEE  21:23, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I have noticed that you often edit without an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. An edit summary is even more important if you delete any text; otherwise, people may think you're being sneaky. Also, mentioning one change but not another one can be misleading to someone who finds the other one more important; add "and misc." to cover the other change(s). Thanks! Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:20, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the warning Sesshomarou. :D --VorangorTheDemon (talk) 11:42, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. What exactly is jumbled in the opening paragraph? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 15:00, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone keeps adding that in the Vegeta article without sources. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:54, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, what chapter was that in? It would be good to

cite in both Vegeta and Bulma. If you know, would you like to do the honours? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 16:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for making those inclusions to

Yamucha), I'd like to change "Pu'ar" to "Pu-erh", per the Japanese-language English subtitled DB/DBZ anime from the DVDs. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:35, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I saw your reply back on Goku. Now I'd like to see an answer on your talk page concerning the Pu'ar Vs. Pu-erh case. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really haven't decided on it yet. But I will say that I am totally for the manga names, and I think that Pu'ar is the manga name, so I think I'll go with that. Was Pu-erh the Simmons' spelling? --VorangorTheDemon (talk) 05:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, I'm an idiot, you already said that Pu-erh is he Simmons' spelling. I just figure if we use the manga as our primary source, we should use the manga names to be consistent.--VorangorTheDemon (talk) 05:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) - Yes, "Pu'ar" is the Viz manga name but I'm 100% sure that Simmons' used the other variant (pun on

Pu-erh tea). I might still be able to take screenshots for proof. Or look for a video on YouTube confirming, but the latter will be more challenging. Which do you prefer? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

It just doesn't make sense (to me) that we use a manga spelling for one name but a Simmons' spelling for another. Can't we just go along with Simmons on this one? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, now you edit conflicted me, we're even. On the subject, it actually doesn't matter to me, but I also want consistency with name spellings. If you want to use the Simmons spellings than I say go for it. And you seem to know what you're talking about. If Pu-erh is the actual spelling of the tea, then it'll make the article more reliable, same with Yamuca, stuff like that. --VorangorTheDemon (talk) 05:54, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Kayla. I'll get the job done! {^_^} Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 06:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to say that I am pretty sure "Pu'ar " is the way they write it in the manga (Viz manga ). Just incase you weren't sure on that ^.^ - Prede (talk) 03:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, we mentioned that ;) Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kayla, think you could help us find an answer to this? What name do Funi's English subs for the Japanese DBZ/GT anime give for "Uub"? If you're unsure, could you ask on Daizenshuu ex? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have an answer? You can also reply

here. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:25, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

--CyberGhostface (talk) 20:52, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 19:27, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "

ZooFari 04:56, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Saw

Hello there, I noticed you are a member of the

WP:FLC page. Happy edits, GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 05:41, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Proposed deletion of List of minor characters in the Hannibal series

The article List of minor characters in the Hannibal series has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is not a true list (none of the characters have articles even) and is an

WP:OR from several movies and books (e.g.,Hannibal (novel)

).

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be

deleted for any of several reasons

.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{

dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page

.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{

dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Novaseminary (talk) 14:22, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Disney/Quasimodo listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Disney/Quasimodo. Since you had some involvement with the Disney/Quasimodo redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 21:27, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]