User talk:Ray Trace



 ''' All messages regarding friend requests will be ignored. '''

 '''I don't have time day after day after day making edits to the wiki and uploading high quality screenshots and rips for this wiki. I have other stuff to do, such as making art, finding out how to make ragdolls for Garry's Mod, making Brawl mods, and, heck, even real life to attend to. So if you don't see me around making edits here, that's because I'm occupied with something else.'''

Rules
20:20, 4 February 2013 (EST)
 * 1) Please use common sense. If you think what you wrote in my talk page is inappropriate, chances are, it is.
 * 2) This also applies to courtesy. Please be courteous and kind at all times.
 * 3) I do not take any requests of any sort.
 * 4) THIS INCLUDES FRIEND REQUESTS. If you want to be my friend, talk to me and stuff like that. Friendship isn't a thing to be accepted or rejected, it's earned. Like trust.
 * 5) Think something I did is wrong and incorrect? It is fine to discuss it here in a peaceful manner. Insulting me or calling me out because I did something you don't like obviously violates a MarioWiki policy and you could get warned for it depending on the severity of it. Wouldn't it be just easier to just...discuss it? I won't bite if you don't provoke me.

Sorry for my seriousness. Now..., Vcreate a new header here V

WHPM66
I think giving a warning after I gave him one may have been a bit harsh, as he probably did not know about the FA nomination rule. If it was due to the warning policy though, it was the right thing to do because he already had a warning.

Oh, I guess I didn't read that policy hard enough, I just thought it was a rule where the user would get a reminder if there was another FA nomination.


 * Honestly, the user should've gotten an informal reminder. THEN, when it goes out of hand, you can give reminders. Really, I understand if people don't want to read through these boring, dry paragraphs. Obey the rules, but don't live by them. 15:28, 31 October 2013 (EDT)

Idea
Recently on the FA nomination for Super Mario 3D World there was a brief discussion on a way to improve the current FA nomination process, I think I have a good idea on my workpage, what is there is only the bare basics but do you think it's a good idea and other than detail any improvements to it. Thanks.
 * Sorry about the support votes I knew it was policy to remove fan votes, but I was uncertain whether it applied to support votes, thanks for clearing that up. As for the valid counter-argument I'd something along the lines of our opposition on the Kirby unfeaturing nomination as the reason for nominating it is because it isn't to do with the Mario series, however as that doesn't affect the quality of the article the point is invalid. Moving Tree has actually been created, but I asked Phoenix about it first as I saw it had been previously deleted and he said it is okay, though I feel it is valid as other obstacles that have pages in the Mario Kart series. And I withdrew the spelling proposal after Walkazo's oppose of allowing multiculturalism and the difficulties to adapting to new writing styles, however if you wish to re-propose it feel free to because although the wiki is fine without it it may be better with it.
 * What do you think then? Another possibility is a counter-argument, that that then cannot be countered, like for List of Paper Mario beta elements, as you said it works fine in the box, there's nothing I can say that can counter that.
 * Fair enough, and I don't think I explained it well, but by valid counter argument I mean one that can't be countered.
 * Well the FA process is about finding errors in the article, so they can be fixed and eventually featured. I'll probably provide a full draft over the weekend, and then we can iron out any creases in it.
 * It's more than likely that the error would be spotted during the nomination process, because it's not going to automatically fail the moment a counter-argument is brought up, but the mainspace talkpage is usually a place where certain errors in the article can be brought up.
 * I guess writing is a problem, but opposers may read through the article to try and find writing problems, I know you do, and I'd guess that more experienced editors on the wiki would probably do so.
 * Yeah, but usually someone eventually spots it proposes it for unfeaturing, and even so the process is generally a long one and writing is now being called up a bit more than it was in the earlier years. And I like your new sig.
 * Maybe it's time to resurrect it then, seems weird that something that would greatly improve the wiki would go dead.
 * The draft is up on my workpage, I believe it covers all the key points of the proposal, but if there are any improvements you can make that will be greatly appreciated.
 * Oops, thanks for pointing that out :-[

To add, do you think that nominations for fa/unfa articles that are heavily opposed like for SM3DW or for Kirby should be cancelled automatically if a certain number of people are opposing? Ztar Power (talk) 18:52, 3 November 2013 (EST)

Still, it annoys me when there are useless nominations that are obviously going to fail, the only ones worth looking at would be the ones with little to no opposers. Ztar Power (talk) 17:21, 4 November 2013 (EST)

Hey.
Maybe I overreacted. But info is false if it happened to me. Sorry.

23:03, 6 November 2013 (EST)

Donkey Dude
For not talking to me since forever, for archiving your page, you get an official Wario of the day.


 * If you accumulate 5 official Warios of the day, your Wario will be Luigi'd from editing for a Donkey Kong's tie amount of days. If you delete your official Wario of the day, you will get another one, plus an unofficial Wario of the week. Also, black holes are deliciously awesome if you refrigerate the allegro in their brutal desire to execute extremely lame oranges of the Manatee Nebula.

I hope you love your first Wario on this page!

Also, I'm thinking about Donkey Kong spam as well, you know what I mean? You're also a lazy dumbnut for letting ME do all the work when uploading those Super Mario-Kun images. You should be ashamed, man, ASHAMED!

< This person is a loser. - RIGHTY RED  LUIGI

For ignoring me once more, you get an official Wario of the day.


 * If you accumulate 5 official Warios of the day, your Wario will be Luigi'd from editing for a Donkey Kong's tie amount of days. If you delete your official Wario of the day, you will get another one, plus an unofficial Wario of the week. Also, black holes are deliciously awesome if you refrigerate the allegro in their brutal desire to execute extremely lame oranges of the Manatee Nebula.


 * So, watch it, pal. -Luigag Mugshot '98.gif]] RIGHTY  RED  LUIGI [[File:Luigi Face 7.png

Whaddya
mean Super Mario Galaxy 2 is bad? I like the game and have both titles, even the original Galaxy is VERY fun. So PLEASE say MG2 is fun! It is awesome!
 * No 18:58, 15 November 2013 (EST)

i am new to this
i have decided to only correct spelling issues if i see some and also i can remove templates that show upcoming or recently released once after the game or games come out?

i wont add information
instead i will correct spelling errors only

Hey!!!
I posted a glitch for PIT, and you questioned its existence. Maybe you should READ it. http://www.mariowiki.com/Talk:List_of_glitches_in_Mario_%26_Luigi:_Partners_in_Time

THROW THE BABIES!

IP editing
I don't know if it was you or LeftyGreenMario, but - if you have an account - please log in to edit, makes it easier for everyone. -- 23:00, 8 December 2013 (EST)
 * Alright, thanks. -- 14:32, 9 December 2013 (EST)

RE:Template
Thanks for telling me! I didn't know that they were talking about that. Hopefully I can be a huge help. 01:30, 11 December 2013 (EST)

Autopatrolled rank
The admins have decided to repurpose the autopatrolled rank to be for honouring and keeping track of former admins only, as its original purpose as a tool for streamlining patrolling duties for the admins has not worked out as we had hoped. The fact that your edits will no longer be automatically patrolled in no way reflects your trustworthiness, nor does it diminish your own contributions to the wiki. We hope you understand. Keep up the great work! - 19:51, 11 December 2013 (EST)


 * It was supposed to make it easier for the admins to zoom in on what edits needed to be manually patrolled, but it didn't really make much of a difference either way. We don't need red exclamation marks to let us know who we can trust to good work, and debating about who should get the rank is one less thing we have to do now. We didn't want to get rid of the rank entirely, however, as it is a handy way to keep track of the retired admins' accounts - and now that's it's only function. - 20:14, 11 December 2013 (EST)