Account request

[Redstar]

I was blocked for a month just now. I'd actually prefer my wiki account deleted, if that's not so much to ask.

 

[TTEchidna]

Wiki accounts don't get deleted.

I mean, seriously, though. Arguing about the danged Pokégods? C'mon, that's like arguing about the various crap glitches that were in Gen I, or arguing why we don't have a separate article for the truck.

Don't freakin' worry about it. A month is nothing. You'll be back sooner than you think. At least it's not like this creepy kid we had to keep blocking because of his constant edit wars and disturbing talk page comments...

 

[Umeko]

If you no longer wish to be part of the Bulbapedia community, then simply don't come back after your block is up. It's as simple as that.

I believe Deth did request that you come back and let him know whether or not his sysop powers are still working though. Or can you confirm that now instead?

 

[Redstar]

I never said MAGNEDETH's powers didn't work, nor imply anything of the sort. He's simply taking things too far. I wanted my account deleted before this anyhow, and, yes, they do get deleted.

 

[Umeko]

Do I really have to explain this? The block reason he gave was a joke, referring to your claim that you were performing a "test" on us. So when he blocked you, he, in turn, said that by blocking you he was performing a "test."

It really loses some of the humor when it has to be explained.

The real reason, I believe, was insubordination, but I'm not even an admin so don't take my word for that.


Also no, accounts cannot get deleted. I would think that our Editor-in-Chief would know.

 

[Archaic]

I wanted my account deleted before this anyhow, and, yes, they do get deleted.

The person who told you they don't get deleted is the E-i-C of Bulbapedia. I think he knows what he's talking about. We have a long standing policy to not delete any account.

 

[Redstar]

That's not a joke, that's being a dick. An admin shouldn't be letting their emotions get involved when they perform administratorial-tasks. His block actually holds no ground, because in what way was I "insubordinate"? Arguing about the content of an article on my own userpage, with no action taken despite all the evidence supporting what I'm saying? He blocked me to shut me off, simple as that.

The person who told you they don't get deleted is the E-i-C of Bulbapedia. I think he knows what he's talking about. We have a long standing policy to not delete any account.

I was referring to wikis in general. Wikis in general do delete accounts, especially if you ask for it. I'm asking for it to be done, so my request shouldn't be ignored. Simply "leaving" doesn't remove the records my E-mail has of the account, nor what Google turns up when searching for my information.

 

[MAGNEDETH]

That's not a joke, that's being a dick.

look whos talking.

a number of your comments during the debate/argument were uncalled for and some people were wondering why i didnt block you sooner, but i figured i would see where you were going with all of your pointless bickering. we got to the end of it and you simply said: "just testing you guys." it wasnt as much of a test as it was wasting our time. i dont appreciate it when people purposely waste my time.

 

[Redstar]

a number of your comments during the debate/argument were uncalled for and some people were wondering why i didnt block you sooner, but i figured i would see where you were going with all of your pointless bickering. we got to the end of it and you simply said: "just testing you guys." it wasnt as much of a test as it was wasting our time. i dont appreciate it when people purposely waste my time.

Uhh... "Purposely wasting [your] time"? It was a discussion on my own userpage; you had no reason to continue the discussion except by your own choosing. You actually said you were "done" at least once, but you kept coming back.

I'm sorry you feel that I was arguing something trivial, but the fact of the matter is that that page doesn't get enough accurate and insightful coverage. It's riddled with incorrect information and edited by people who've admitted as much that they dislike the subject. If Bulbapedia is to document the subject they advertise, then they should do it fully.

 

[Umeko]

It's riddled with incorrect information and edited by people who've admitted as much that they dislike the subject.

1) Yes, it's riddled with incorrect information, it's about POKEGODS.

2) I never admitted that I dislike the subject. I said that it's all bullshit, because that is, in fact, what it is: lies and bullshit. I don't dislike the PokeGod phenomenon, I find it amusing. I'd love to get myself a Magifart if it were real. Or Starlite or whatever that crossdressing one was named.

 

[Redstar]

1) Yes, it's riddled with incorrect information, it's about POKEGODS.

2) I never admitted that I dislike the subject. I said that it's all bullshit, because that is, in fact, what it is: lies and bullshit. I don't dislike the PokeGod phenomenon, I find it amusing. I'd love to get myself a Magifart if it were real. Or Starlite or whatever that crossdressing one was named.

You're demonstrating right there why you're unfit to contribute to that article. "Lies and bullshit"? Except for the fact that 80% or more of the PokeGods and the rumors spread at the time have their origin in official sources. Including, perhaps most importantly, Pikablu, whom had the name PIKABLU emblazoned many times on official trading cards.

As for those two Pokemon you're mentioning as "PokeGods": again, those were Pokemon Factory creations, which were never advertised as PokeGods nor intended to fool anyone. They were simply fake Pokemon.

 

[MAGNEDETH]

Uhh... "Purposely wasting [your] time"? It was a discussion on my own userpage; you had no reason to continue the discussion except by your own choosing. You actually said you were "done" at least once, but you kept coming back.

actually, you continually asked me to cite sources and define seemingly everything i said, so yea, YOU wasted MY time. and hell, you also wasted Umeko's time. if you hadnt been pointlessly arguing about it, perhaps she would have had the article looking like a featured article at this point, but thanks to you, we dont know that. also, as a staff member, if anyone has a question/comment/complaint about anything on the site, its my business.

 

[Redstar]

actually, you continually asked me to cite sources and define seemingly everything i said, so yea, YOU wasted MY time. and hell, you also wasted Umeko's time. if you hadnt been pointlessly arguing about it, perhaps she would have had the article looking like a featured article at this point, but thanks to you, we dont know that. also, as a staff member, if anyone has a question/comment/complaint about anything on the site, its my business.

Yes, I asked you to cite sources... After YOU messaged my userpage first about the issue. After the sources were cited, and I pointed out why they weren't valid, you said you were done. But you kept coming back after that.

As for Umeko, she chose of her own will to come onto my userpage and join the discussion. I didn't ask her or anything. If either of your time was wasted, it's squarely on both of you because you're both the ones that initiated the discussion.

 

[Umeko]

which were never advertised as PokeGods nor intended to fool anyone. They were simply fake Pokemon.

And yet people did latch on to them and repost those images on their own eye-blinding websites, claiming they were Pokegods! So yes, they did end up being touted as Pokegods (though those two are not among the most (in)famous).

Just because a fake Pokemon wasn't initially intended to be labelled as a Pokegod doesn't mean stupid kids didn't take those fake Pokemon and ran with them. You yourself claim that Yoshi was considered a Pokegod, and yet, iirc, Yoshi as a Pokemon originated from a joke in Nintendo Power or something similar. I'm positive that NP didn't post a column saying "OMG THIS IS A POKEGOD GUYZ!!!!1"

A lot of the Pokegods originated from official concept art, yes. But not nearly 80% of them. And even if they did come from official sources, that doesn't mean the fandom's insistance that these were OMFG SPECIAL POKEGODZ TTLY AVAILABLE IN RED/BLUE TALK TO THE PSYCHIC GUY WITH THESE POKEMON IN THIS ORDER HE'LL TELL YOU ABOUT THEM!!!! and not utter bullshit.

 

[Redstar]

And yet people did latch on to them and repost those images on their own eye-blinding websites, claiming they were Pokegods! So yes, they did end up being touted as Pokegods (though those two are not among the most (in)famous).

I have found absolutely zero evidence of anyone reposting a Pokemon Factory sprite as a PokeGod, and this is after going through literally hundreds of sites (most of which are not "eye-blinding") over the last few months.

Just because a fake Pokemon wasn't initially intended to be labelled as a Pokegod doesn't mean stupid kids didn't take those fake Pokemon and ran with them. You yourself claim that Yoshi was considered a Pokegod, and yet, iirc, Yoshi as a Pokemon originated from a joke in Nintendo Power or something similar. I'm positive that NP didn't post a column saying "OMG THIS IS A POKEGOD GUYZ!!!!1"

Yoshi was first publicized as a PokeGod in issue #57 of Expert Gamer magazine under the "Tips and Tricks" section, with a complete code alongside it as well as a custom sprite that was far better than most people see even today. So, yes, it was pushed as a PokeGod from the get-go; in an official magazine, no less.

A lot of the Pokegods originated from official concept art, yes. But not nearly 80% of them. And even if they did come from official sources, that doesn't mean the fandom's insistance that these were OMFG SPECIAL POKEGODZ TTLY AVAILABLE IN RED/BLUE TALK TO THE PSYCHIC GUY WITH THESE POKEMON IN THIS ORDER HE'LL TELL YOU ABOUT THEM!!!! and not utter bullshit.

Nearly 80%, if not more. I've yet to find a single code where I haven't been able to trace it's origin to something official.

 

[Umeko]

I have found absolutely zero evidence of anyone reposting a Pokemon Factory sprite as a PokeGod, and this is after going through literally hundreds of sites (most of which are not "eye-blinding") over the last few months.

I have found plenty in my bookmarks on my personal computer. Unfortunately I'm on a school computer at the moment so I will not be able to share these links with you until after I'm out of work this evening. I will be more than happy to do so then, however. (And yes, there is one that I am thinking of in particular which uses yellow font on a red background.)

Yoshi was first publicized as a PokeGod in issue #57 of Expert Gamer magazine under the "Tips and Tricks" section, with a complete code alongside it as well as a custom sprite that was far better than most people see even today. So, yes, it was pushed as a PokeGod from the get-go; in an official magazine, no less.

Not only was that apparently an April Fool's issue, I am told that Expert Gamer was a third-party gaming magazine, not an official one.

Nearly 80%, if not more. I've yet to find a single code where I haven't been able to trace it's origin to something official.

I would - and I'm being absolutely sincere here - love to hear the results of your research! I'm sure it will bring about some interesting information to add to the PokeGods page.

 

[Redstar]

I have found plenty in my bookmarks on my personal computer. Unfortunately I'm on a school computer at the moment so I will not be able to share these links with you until after I'm out of work this evening. I will be more than happy to do so then, however. (And yes, there is one that I am thinking of in particular which uses yellow font on a red background.)

You're welcome to provide such pages. While the Pokemon Factory sprites may have found their way onto a page or two labeled PokeGods, I'm sure you're probably referring to the non-Pokemon Factory sprites.

Not only was that apparently an April Fool's issue, I am told that Expert Gamer was a third-party gaming magazine, not an official one.

To a kid, any magazine is an "official" source. In actuality, any printed media is "official", though of course not "Nintendo Official". It's just fallacy to claim kids made this up out of stupidity or lies when someone "up there" did it.

 

[Umeko]

You're welcome to provide such pages. While the Pokemon Factory sprites may have found their way onto a page or two labeled PokeGods, I'm sure you're probably referring to the non-Pokemon Factory sprites.

Please, don't insult my intelligence like that. I know what I saw, and they were most certainly Pokemon Factory sprites (with the url on the bottom and everything).

To a kid, any magazine is an "official" source. In actuality, any printed media is "official", though of course not "Nintendo Official". It's just fallacy to claim kids made this up out of stupidity or lies when someone "up there" did it.

The fact that "kids consider it official" is NOT grounds to claim that they originate from official sources. I've worked extensively with children, from ages 3 to 12, and they simply do not think through these sorts of things. Before a certain age, they don't even have the cognitive ability to consider things like that. There is no reason to stoop to the level of a child's perception of "official" for our articles.

 

[Redstar]

Please, don't insult my intelligence like that. I know what I saw, and they were most certainly Pokemon Factory sprites (with the url on the bottom and everything).

I wasn't insulting your intelligence. It's just simple fact that the majority of the time the Pokemon Factory sprites were never spread and specified to be PokeGods. Non-Pokemon Factory sprites did, and in fact other sites with urls at the bottom did, but those weren't Pokemon Factory.

The fact that "kids consider it official" is NOT grounds to claim that they originate from official sources. I've worked extensively with children, from ages 3 to 12, and they simply do not think through these sorts of things. Before a certain age, they don't even have the cognitive ability to consider things like that. There is no reason to stoop to the level of a child's perception of "official" for our articles.

You clearly haven't dealt with children before if you underestimate them so much. I know full-well that children do think in those terms... Haven't you ever seen the "I don't know what a lie is" phase?

 

[Archaic]

I was referring to wikis in general. Wikis in general do delete accounts, especially if you ask for it. I'm asking for it to be done, so my request shouldn't be ignored. Simply "leaving" doesn't remove the records my E-mail has of the account, nor what Google turns up when searching for my information.

And as already stated, our longstanding policy is to never delete accounts, even on request of the member themselves, so your request can, should and will be ignored by all staff. If you don't like that...frankly, that's your problem, not ours.