|Jeangabin666's Talk Archive|
|Archive 1: April, 2010 - February, 2011|
|Archive 2: February, 2011 - May, 2011|
|Archive 3: May, 2011 - July, 2011|
|Archive 4: July, 2011 - November, 2011|
|Archive 5: November, 2011 - December, 2011|
|Archive 6: December, 2011 - April, 2012|
|Archive 7: April, 2012 - October, 2012|
|Archive 8: October, 2012 - April, 2013|
|Archive 9: April, 2013 - December, 2013|
|Archive 10: December, 2013 - June, 2014|
Can you look over an edit?
Hi Jeangabin666, seems to me i'm little concerned about the past tense woes. We may have to talk about this on right here. However, the movie release in North America is still ongoing and you may want to read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction
Thank you!23:18, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
- That's not an American movie, and no new material will be added to it. It'll just be dubbed, and in fact, it was already dubbed, it was just not screened yet in North America. 00:02, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
"Dragon Fist Kamehameha"
- Even if it looks like, it's better not to speculate anything. 00:30, July 4, 2014 (UTC)
- I'm not really following why. It's easy to see why, the only thing that keeps it from flat out saying it's a Super Kamehameha is the fact it doesn't say it. It's the same beam with the same special effect as the others, performed by the same guy, the only thing that doesn't flat out say it's a Super Kamehameha is the fact it doesn't flat out say it's a Super Kamehameha. — A (t • c) 00:40, July 4, 2014 (UTC)
Location of Android 19 vs. Goku fight
Heyo Jean, haven't spoken to you for awhile. I hope you're doing well! I have a question, do you know the name of the location (wilderness/desert) where Android 19 and Goku had their battle? I know many of the deserts in the DB Universe actually have names, and I was keen on finding out that location's name for editing and personal purposes. Thanks! Hope to speak more often!
23:07, July 8, 2014 (UTC)
- Earth#Key locations, C2-2: it's some place on the Southern Continent without further name. 00:30, July 9, 2014 (UTC)
- I already have the book at home. 16:09, July 9, 2014 (UTC)
- All of them?Neffyarious (talk) 16:10, July 9, 2014 (UTC)
RE:Viz chapter numbering
I've been removing the Dragon Ball Z chapter numbers because it feels rather redundant to add them. In the manga, it's all Dragon Ball. Other than the first chapter of the Saiyan Saga, I don't think its necessary to add the Viz chapter numbering, which isn't even represented in the chapter number section of the infobox. — N (t • c) 22:09, July 9, 2014 (UTC)
Actually, that page for "last Hero Standing" was from the Fusion Saga, not the Majin Buu Saga.—This unsigned comment was made by Squid Lords (talk • contribs) Please sign your posts with ~~~~ next time!
- Only the main arcs are mentioned on the manga volume pages (Saiyans, Androids, Majin Buu). 11:53, July 10, 2014 (UTC)
Vegito's predominant personality isn't Vegeta!
You do realize that the part about vegito saying "Kakarot" in the japanese version doesnt make his predominant base vegeta right? That last line is pure speculation and should be changed as it is untrue and based on little to no evidence. Its the same as if vegeta had an alternate name which goku used and Vegio called him by that, it wouldn't mea anything towards his predominant personality and there are countless actions and prsonalities displayed by him which vegeta would never do, so either we remove that bit completely or change it.
- You're misunderstanding what they're saying. 16:28, July 10, 2014 (UTC)
- I dont see how... I mean he says it in the context of before fusion, and he speaks of multiple Super Saiyan 3.Neffyarious (talk) 16:33, July 10, 2014 (UTC)
- Stop with the Ultimate Gohan thing as well. He's in base form, he isn't even fighting. 16:45, July 10, 2014 (UTC)
- The Ultimate form has always been similar to his base form. 16:49, July 10, 2014 (UTC)
- But not exact, here it is exact.Neffyarious (talk) 16:50, July 10, 2014 (UTC)
- He's the same as always. 17:10, July 10, 2014 (UTC)
- No he is'nt, there is a difference, the hair lock - which is not present in base GT Gohan, and his clothes even lose the symbol.Neffyarious (talk) 17:12, July 10, 2014 (UTC)
- The hairstyle isn't reliable to distinguish forms, especially such minor changes... which is why the articles on this wiki don't include any "bang" description. 17:15, July 10, 2014 (UTC)
Appearances in games
Are you sure you prefer "Appearances in games" over "Appearances in video games"? The latter seems more complete and I don't want to restart the bot and fill the page a bunch more unnessacary edits. — A (t • c) 13:48, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
- The articles which have "Appearances in games" rather than "Appearances in video games" actually have appearances in card games. 13:50, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
- This title was only for pages which actually have appearances in games which aren't video games, not for every pages. But I don't care if they stay like this, now that you've changed all of them... 15:39, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
Also, you sure you're alright there? You're giving off a annoyed vibe right now, but I can understand. Before I go, would you think "Beam attacks" and "Energy Sphere attacks" would be better off renamed to "Energy Wave/Ball attacks", or make it simply "Energy Waves / Balls". — A (t • c) 15:51, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
- I don't know, ask User:10X_Kamehameha if you want. 15:56, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
- In fact it bother me to have "Appearances in games" as a title when there's only appearances in video games in the section. The point is not to have the same titles for the article, it's to have titles which are adapted to each article and sections. 22:47, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
- It might be a better to leave as is, as you said video games isn't entirely accurate but having them uniform means no one will wonder why certain article's sections are titled differently if they're including the same thing. — A (t • c) 23:06, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
This is your last warning. If you alter the gallery pixel ratio from 120 on all the corresponding articles one more time, you will be blocked. Please refrain from doing so. - 21:31, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
- Which is very severe for such minor changes. I won't change it again, but really your reaction isn't adapted. I see users who constantly vandalize the wiki and mess up pages, and they're never blocked. 00:30, July 16, 2014 (UTC)
- Those users are always banned eventually, at least as far as I see. Anything higher than 120 could horribly break pages on his side and I wouldn't risk that over easier to see images. — A (t • c) 00:46, July 16, 2014 (UTC)
- I'm really shocked by this message because even if I changed gallery PX, it was before the community had decided anything regarding this. I don't think it is fair threaten me that way. 00:50, July 16, 2014 (UTC)
- Take User:GodOfDestructionBills for example. He regularly vandalizes pages, and vandalized the Raditz article yesterday. Is he blocked?! No. He didn't even received any warning messages. 01:18, July 16, 2014 (UTC)
- I didn't even see that. I guess you could say you're good, huh? I'm sure he didn't mean it that aggressively. — A (t • c) 01:25, July 16, 2014 (UTC)
Bad news guys, some of our fellow users have become corrupted and are now messing up with the Wiki pages, the GodOfDestructionBills user is one of the corrupted ones... Steve9021
- I am warning for the last time; I've temp-blocked you for reverting the gallery sections in some articles; I told you to leave the gallery sections as is for the formatting. Even if they have around 20 images, you don't need to remove the gallery sections as they are all formatted the same way with the proper px ratio. Such removal of the sections was evident on the Vinegar, Cymbal, Sky Dragon, etc. articles. Do not tamper or alter any of the formatting on the articles without first advising an admin. Your block will expire in one day. If you decide to continue such behavior, you will receive a more lengthy block. - 22:43, July 16, 2014 (UTC)
Jean asked me to review his edits; I found that he made no gallery edits after your last warning to him. I fully support your warning and a block if he ignores you as an admin, but this time he is okay. I'll unblock him since he has cooperated with you. -- 10X.Ka.me.ha.me.ha.....talk.....contrib. 01:12, July 17, 2014 (UTC)
- Actually x10 he did, check Zarbon's contributions. Sorry about this Jean. — A (t • c) 01:57, July 17, 2014 (UTC)
- My warning was a final one; the temp-block was necessary for his previous reverting. The block will be lengthened the next time Jean continues to revert any actions we as admins are to take. If we have a formatting centralized in congruence with all the articles, there is no need to remove such sections and parameters of these designated articles. We want to do our best to maintain a systematic unison basis of formatting of all the articles. We can't allow some to have gallery sections and others not to based on the merit that one has less images than another. This is why gallery sections are formatted as such in order to avoid clutter or any other problems that may stem from such future altering or changes. We need to maintain the gallery sections appended as such and the pixel ratio attached to them as well. Let this be the last time Jean reverts an administrator's actions without first bringing it up. - 06:14, July 18, 2014 (UTC)
Jean, you alright?
I'm sorry about all this because I'm legally a third at fault. You are editing 100x less than usual... And I think I know why. Either when you got banned and wikia glitched again you're still banned somehow, or you're having "that feeling". I know that feeling. I've had a horrible case of that feeling once, and even though you've been around long enough to have seen something x10 worse, please come back. Things are sort of dull without you, editing has lost half of its pressure, you're a version of that nagging parent no one likes to get the stern talks, but life without them is less than... "fun". You're a pretty neat guy, I'd hate to have this lousy scuffle make you throw in the towel. — A (t • c) 20:35, July 21, 2014 (UTC)
- I feel the same way Jean, you've made what seem like billions of great edits. I hope you come back : ) -- 10X.Ka.me.ha.me.ha.....talk.....contrib. 21:19, August 10, 2014 (UTC)
Jeangabin666 block Cancellation too
Dis, serais-tu disposé à vendre le guide de Dragon Ball Online? Je sais, je sais, c'est une question folle parce que le livre est méga rare, mais je n'arrive pas à le trouver aucune autre part...
Tu serais prêt à le vendre pour quel prix?
Sinon, as-tu une idée d'oú je pourrais le trouver?
Merci, si tu veux, on continue cette conversation par mail... voici le mien
Salut Jeangabin. La dernière fois qu'on s'est parlé, je t'avais dit que Kuriza Final Form n'était pas jouable dans Ultimate Mission 2 (seulement sa forme de base), et tu m'avais soutenu que sa première apparence sous cette forme était dans JM3 en m'envoyant ce lien : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1g-Q6KlKAKY
Ce que j'avais soupçonné, et dont j'ai maintenant confirmation, c'est que cette video montre un combat de super boss. Kuriza est dans l'équipe adverse, et est donc un boss. Il n'est pas JOUABLE, hors tu l'as listé dans la liste des persos jouables. De plus, comme je l'ai déjà dit quarante millions de fois, la SEULE carte existente permettant de jouer Kuriza Final Form est la HJ4-61. Hors, maintenant que j'ai le jeu, je peux t'affirmer que les deux seules HJ4 disponibles dans le jeu sont la HJ4-55 et la HJ4-SEC2. Il est donc impossible, comme je m'en doutais il y a déjà des mois, que Kuriza Final Form soit jouable.
Si tu pouvais rectifier ça sur la page wiki de Dragon Ball Heroes Ultimate Mission 2 et ainsi éviter de faire à d'autres la même fausse joie qu'à moi, merci d'avance. —This unsigned comment was made by Grahf999 (talk • contribs) on 16:15, September 8, 2014 Please sign your posts with ~~~~ next time!
Salut Jeangabin, c'est encore moi, et en me relisant je m'apperçoit que j'ai peut être été un peu trop agressif dans le dernier message (concernant Final Form Kuriza dans Dragon Ball Heroes Ultimate Mission 2). Je m'en excuse, c'est la déception et la frustration (d'avoir fait remarqué une erreur il y a des mois tout en espérant me tromper) qui à parlé. Encore désolé donc. Si tu pouvais néanmoins corriger l'info,
JEAN PLZ COME BACK
plz man come back wiki miss you it's full of noobs and they're all messing with your pages21:34, September 26, 2014 (UTC)
- For some weird reason even I agree, editing is way too easy without you around.Neffyarious (talk) 03:41, September 27, 2014 (UTC)
- HOORAY! 23:46, October 11, 2014 (UTC)