Wikia

Harry Potter Wiki

Cubs Fan2007

Admin
9,176 Edits since joining this wiki
July 27, 2007
  • I live in California, USA
  • I was born on October 26
  • My occupation is Custodian
  • I am Male
Archives

ON the wiki about James Potter, it says he was a chaser.  It needs to be corrected.  He was actually a seeker. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blu589 (talkcontribs).

Death Eaters

User:Jdogno7 is once again inflicting 'as well as' in numerous places where it doesn't belong. Please can you or one of the Admins have a word? Thanks, {{SUBST:User:Jiskran/Signature}} 23:56, September 28, 2014 (UTC)

I am just trying to understand what is User:Jiskran's problem with my most recent edits on the Death Eaters article page. It doesn't seem to come across as merely a grammar dispute as he has reverted other changes I made as well that aren't grammar related.
Jdogno7 (talk) 08:03, October 1, 2014 (UTC)
Cubs Fan, I freely admit my unfriendly reactions toward Mr. Jdogno7 and that they have gotten the best of me; I will not be surprised if you or any admin will decide otherwise for this reason.
I fail to understand why he behaves this way, whether for kicks or because he's unable to do otherwise, but it seems fairly clearly established that a month-long protection of the pages he's edited does not faze him, nor does a three-month block have any effect on him. In any case, this situation cannot continue any longer, so I'll recommend Jdogno7 to be blocked if not infinitely, at least a couple of years - he may perhaps find an other, hopefully quieter and less damaging, outlet for whatever motivations that make him go on.
He's not the only disruptive (though not as obnoxious) person I've met editing on a wiki, and they invariably wound up with a multi-year-to-infinite block.
Regards, MinorStoop 10:55, October 1, 2014 (UTC)
No, I am not doing this for kicks. I am doing this because I have a differing opinion. I hope that is not a crime.
Jdogno7 (talk) 22:32, October 1, 2014 (UTC)
Ah, the age-old "everyone's entitled to their opinion" fallacy. The truth is that nobody is entitled to an opinion which they are not competent to hold, and your opinions as to what is "good grammar" (especially misusing "as well as" for "and") have proved to be this over and over again. — RobertATfm (talk) 23:01, October 1, 2014 (UTC)
"The truth is that nobody is entitled to an opinion which they are not competent to hold, and your opinions as to what is "good grammar" (especially misusing "as well as" for "and") have proved to be this over and over again.": Maybe you are not competent to hold your own opinion on this matter. Ever consider that? Jdogno7 (talk) 00:53, October 2, 2014 (UTC)
Once again, on the Death Eaters page, Jdogno7 has been using "as well as" instead of "and" in ways I find ungrammatical; in some cases either could fit, in which cases "and" is preferable as the simpler and clearer term, whilst in others "and" is the only term that fits. Since Jdogno7 cannot control this verbal/typographical tic of his, and since it's blighting the pages he edits, I too feel that another block is in order.
He has also been deleting (not just removing for archival) threads from his talk page. I thought that was forbidden by this wiki's policies? — RobertATfm (talk) 12:38, October 1, 2014 (UTC)
How is what I've done "ungrammatical"? In which cases would either fit? In which cases does and only fit?
Jdogno7 (talk) 22:32, October 1, 2014 (UTC)
As I explained above, one of the (many) ways in which "as well as" can be ungrammatical is that if either it or "and" would work, "and" is preferable as being the simpler and clearer form. And since you evidently cannot understand this even after having it explained to you at least twice (now three times), that just goes to prove that your grasp of grammar is woefully inadequate and that you are thus not competent to be a wiki editor. — RobertATfm (talk) 23:01, October 1, 2014 (UTC)
"And since you evidently cannot understand this even after having it explained to you at least twice (now three times), that just goes to prove that your grasp of grammar is woefully inadequate and that you are thus not competent to be a wiki editor.": I understand. I just disagree over the instances where both "and" or "as well as" would both work. Maybe your grasp of grammar is woefully inadequate and you are thus not competent to be a wiki editor. Did you ever consider that?
Jdogno7 (talk) 00:53, October 2, 2014 (UTC)
As an add-on, at least one edit I noticed resulted in the poorly phrased "as well as even". As mentioned above, in such an instant, "and" is much more preferable. Cubs Fan (Talk to me) 23:44, October 1, 2014 (UTC)
I removed them because I felt it was unfair that people should edit my talk page during a period when I could not myself. I would recommend that be a policy: When someone is banned even from editing their own talk page, no one else should either. It's only fair.
Jdogno7 (talk) 22:32, October 1, 2014 (UTC)

(indentation reset) Not only does Jdogno7 clearly not belong on wikis (he claims to "understand" the proper use of "as well as", but his persistent abuse of it says otherwise, and this can be seen from many comments (not just here) that this is not just my opinion alone), he is now resorting to ad hominem attacks. These are nearly always a sign that the one using them has lost the debate, knows he has, and is getting desperate. Case closed, I think. — RobertATfm (talk) 00:46, October 2, 2014 (UTC)

"Not only does Jdogno7 clearly not belong on wikis": I resent that statement. "(he claims to "understand" the proper use of "as well as", but his persistent abuse of it says otherwise, and this can be seen from many comments (not just here) that this is not just my opinion alone)": The majority are not always right about everything. "he is now resorting to ad hominem attacks": No. I am merely pointing out that you act with such certainty that you are right without giving a full explanation for your position. I always give an explanation for my edits as a rule. That way people know what my logic is based on.

Jdogno7 (talk) 01:07, October 2, 2014 (UTC)

"The majority are not always right about everything"; true enough (the belief that they are is the fallacy of Appeal To Popularity, aka Safety In Numbers), but there is such a thing as "balance of probability"; any number of people you care to name can very easily be wrong, but if all those people state one thing and one lone voice (what George Orwell sarcastically called a "majority of one") states the opposite, it is nearly always the case that the majority is right. Of course, Jdogno7 clearly believes (see the above reply of his) that he alone of all the editors on this wiki is right about his "grammatical" (ha ha) usages. — RobertATfm (talk) 05:13, October 2, 2014 (UTC)

"Of course, Jdogno7 clearly believes (see the above reply of his) that he alone of all the editors on this wiki is right about his "grammatical" (ha ha) usages.": Yes, I believe I am in the right. You believe the same about yourself I am highly certain. Not saying that makes either of us right or wrong, just that we hold different opinions. But what I am trying to ask, which is yet to be answered is: Besides Grammar, what was wrong with the recent edits I made on the Death Eaters article?

Jdogno7 (talk) 11:53, October 2, 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Sorry but I want to know if you guys have an article on this person? Sources say she is Pansy Parkinson. She is from the first Harry Potter film. Whats the character's and actresse's name?http://www.fanpop.com/clubs/pansy-parkinson/images/22405320/title/pansy-parkinson-photo

Thanks Kabilan29 (talk) 14:28, November 12, 2014 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki