User talk:Diabolik.kant

Hello Diabolik.kant, greetings and welcome to the Narutopedia! Thanks for your edit to the Rogue Ninja's Past page.

We do hope that you will stay for a long time. Enjoy your stay as we work to become the best Naruto info site out there. BELIEVE IT!

If you're looking for something to do why not look over the Forums or more specifically Narutopedia Collaboration for a list of projects we're working on. And the Community portal has a lot of recent discussions and places to go listed on it.

Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- ShounenSuki (Talk) 18:49, 2010 February 16

Talkpages
You should read the timestamp of previous comments to determine which discussions are closed, stuff that is over 3 months old is likely a closed discussion. Simant (talk) 20:27, February 16, 2010 (UTC)

Re: Zabuza
Zabuza is as powerful as a jōnin, but the only rank we were ever given of him was ANBU.

Re: Jōnin Requirements
As far as I know, there have never been any requirements mentioned. --ShounenSuki (talk 18:22, February 18, 2010 (UTC)

Re: Kakashi's classification
There is no doubt about Kakashi's classification. He is a true jōnin and a former ANBU. Yamato isn't a jōnin at all, he's just an ANBU. --ShounenSuki (talk 00:08, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

thanks for the correction Diabolik.kant (talk) 00:19, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

Personal Opinions
Please refrain from adding your personal opinions to articles.  ¥ S uper N ovice ↔ T alk 2 M e  ¥ 21:59, March 14, 2010 (UTC)

Userpage
Please read the userpage policy. This is why I nominated your userpage for deletion. I put that tag on all the recently created userpages with under 100 edits. This has nothing to do with you personally.  ¥ S uper N ovice ↔ T alk 2 M e  ¥ 21:03, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

Administrator alert
I want to alert naruto wikia administrators, for random actions of user SuperN, against me, who clearly violates my profile, WITHOUT clear violation of rules of Narutopedia, and without clear permission from me. I want to officially complaint agains him and ask for neccesery actions to keep him from further violations. Even if my profile is in a kind of violation i want to clearly see which which rules are violated by my profile, and i want to clearly see how the rule is violated. Diabolik.kant (talk) 21:09, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

Re: you are going too far, i will not tolerate it.
Hi. The thing is that SuperN is simply following the userpage policy, which he linked you to in the deletion suggestion. I have looked at your contributions. I can see that you have made a lot of talk page edits - which doesn't count (see: the policy), aswell as those edits on Tenten's and Rock Lee's pages. Now, personally I wouldn't be so hard on these edits, but SuperN is right when he calls them personal opinion, which we don't really want on Narutopedia. I have to ask the boss about that whole 'not enough edit' thing. I'm just saying that SuperN is probably not after you personally, he's just interpretating the policy. I, or ze boss will come back to you :) ~Hakinu (talk 21:10, March 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * Not enough edits ~Hakinu (talk 21:17, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

Rock Lee's edit is not my persoal opinion. It is something mighto guy said, in one of the episodes i heared clearly mighto guy telling kakashi about rock lee's reaction to alcohol, and guy explaining how he misled rock lee to think this is medicine, while actually being sake.

I still do not understand how personal profile is linked to main article pages or disscussion pages. Diabolik.kant (talk) 21:49, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

The short version of the long story is we've had a lot of issue in the past with users that don't contribute to the wiki, non-wiki relevant discussions, and user profiles made by users who aren't contributing to the wiki. It's not that they're linked, it's that if a user isn't contributing properly to the wiki they don't belong on the wiki, and if they don't belong on the wiki then a userpage shouldn't exist for them, if that weren't the case the User: namespace would be overflowing with junk pages. Ignoring the userpage there are some issues with your editing history: Side note, but there probably is no point to adding welcome messages to user's talkpages after they've already been welcomed by the welcome bot. ~ NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) Mar 17, 2010 @ 23:14 (UTC)
 * Please don't reply to comments on talkpages that are over a month old. Old sections should be left alone, not responded to, they are stale, the user that started them isn't paying attention. It appears Simant has already noted this to you, but you have not paid attention.
 * This wiki isn't here for discussions. If it's not a discussion on improvements to the article, it doesn't belong on a talkpage. this doesn't quite belong here.
 * Literacy is a big issue. All of your edits so far have had very bad grammar and spelling mistakes. Trying to improve the wiki is nice, but if all your edits need to be followed up by another editor to clean them up, it's not really helpful to the wiki. It's understandable if your first language is not English, but it doesn't do anything to the issue. I suggest discussing improvements on the article talkpages, and asking other users to proofread your edits before you make them.
 * this is a problem. That comment borders on hostile, no matter what the situation there is never a reason to send a message like that. And even more than that, you were overreacting. Getting annoyed with a user because they replaced your userpage with profanity is one thing, but getting annoyed with them because they tagged the page believing it violated a wiki policy is completely overboard. Besides that userpages belong to the wiki, and they are just pages on the internet, that kind of reaction to something intangible is too much. It's the kind of response that acts as a catalyst to hostile arguments, rather than something being resolved easily by calm discussion.

Ok i give up. Do whatever you want, delete whatever you want, by any reason you want, i do not care anymore what happens to my account or profile. It is very good for you to want good articles, and i endlessly respect Narutopedia for it, but disscussions are also usefull, for novices. Let me give you an example of what is in my mind. This is a randomly selected question and character, just to illustrate what is in my mind. English is not naitive for basically the whole world, except for a few coutries. The MOST of the people, adopting english as secondary language, may not fully understand an article or part of it, because of language barrier, and have questions to ask to get the full picture. It is normal for these people not to fully understand something and to need some additional explanaition, because of the language barrier. Since it is not written in her article that her skills, make her a good spy, novice one asks a question in the disscussion page a question: what is best application of Ino Yamanaka's skills? Answer from someone that says: Ino's best application of skills is to be a good spy, is not a personal opinion, it is just weightning of her skills, and where her skills apply best, and answer novice one question. In time novice two has the same question but the answer exists in ino's disscussion page, and novice two gets more information, in the discussion, hence more usefull disscussion. As personal opinion, i stated that ino looks better than sakura in part one, and she looks worse than sakura in part two because she is more fat and has bad haircut. As Personal opinion someone might say the opposite for sakura and ino. Diabolik.kant (talk) 17:01, March 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with your opinion. As I said earlier, I wouldn't be so hard on your edits that has the nature you mention here. In my RL academic (archaeological) work, using artifacts we are served for reasoned opinions is the entire job. I would like it if the wiki was a little less bound to uttered facts, but this isn't really the case, I'm afraid. :\ ~Hakinu (talk 18:16, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

Hakinu, i'm glad you can see from my eyes. When i make an edit to an article, i made it more neutral, to avoid personalization. When i said tenten is good type for ambush missions, this is not my opinion, this fits her skills and profile, as tactical and strategical unit in a squad. All my edits are of this nature, i do not put personal opinion in main article, but i share a lot of my opinions in disscussion pages. i do not know what they accept as personal opinion and what they do not, but to analize someone's skills to put him into correct task and squad, is not personal opinion, this is just character analisys. it is true that my comments and edit have some of me, my style, but whom's comment or edition do not have such influence?
 * Indeed. The goal is yet still to keep it as objective as possible, following only the obvious from the manga and anime. I can see the debate from both sides; an encyclopedia is a "bank" of data, and isn't really the place to be making your own conclusions. And then we have the opinion we both share; it's obvious if you sum up the facts. Sigh. But as you can see, Dantman seems to think otherwise. ~Hakinu (talk 23:37, March 18, 2010 (UTC)