User talk:GSK

  1. Home
  2. Wiki


Home • Talk • Edits • Awards • Aliases • CSD • PROD



The Amazing Digital Circus

[edit]

I read your reason on why you reverted my changes.

I honestly didn't mean any trouble with those changes.

I apologize for causing any inconvenience. 5UP3RN0V42015 (talk) 21:47, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No apologies necessary! I'm not mad, and you didn't cause any trouble. To be honest, I didn't even know it had been covered on the talk page until I went looking for it. It's all good. GSK (talk • edits) 21:56, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Crossed actions

[edit]

Sorry, we crossed actions. Do you want me to undo and we proceed with the prod? I have no strong opinions of how the page is dealt with. I just know the page isn't ready for mainspace as is, and I question what purpose the page serves. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:52, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, it's all good. I forget that WP:DRAFTIFY is a thing. As for the purpose, I agree with you there. I think the article's creator is attempting to transfer articles (and templates) from Logopedia, for some reason. GSK (talk • edits) 00:58, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. I've gotten bitten a few times in the past nominating for deletion some junky "mainspace draft" pages that others viewed as "premature articles" so I tend to WP:DRAFTIFY on the more edge cases. But now that they've crossed into copyvio delete territory, choice of actions is a bit moot. Thanks for finding and taking action on that. Hope you are having a nice weekend. Zinnober9 (talk) 01:20, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's been a calm weekend so far. I hope you're doing well too. GSK (talk • edits) 01:21, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello, I recently attempted to edit the Dreamcast logo on the wiki because it appears that the version currently used is inaccurate. Last year, I started a Talk article on it here. Despite others agreeing that the current logo is inaccurate, no change was made, so I decided to take action. The comment in the article requested not to change it to the PAL or US versions of the logo. Since I wasn't changing to the PAL logo, and the US logo is apparently a work of fiction, I figured such a comment did not apply.

I created a revised version of the logo (with colors sourced from Sega's Dreamcast website) and uploaded with a new filename, as "NTSC-U Japan" is inaccurate as well (it is used in all non-PAL regions). It was my first Wikipedia edit containing new media, so it seems that I messed up the copyright contribution, so I hope you understand the mistake. If you review the information and agree that the logo color should be changed, I would appreciate help in resolving this issue.


Here is a link to the new logo that I believe to be a more accurate recreation (the currently used files are also recreations): https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dreamcast_logo_NTSC.svg DMonitor (talk) 01:32, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Apple

[edit]

Thank you for your explanation. I am still learning. You wrote " Here's an explanation: "Bad Apple" is not referred to once anywhere else in this article."

Please open this webpage https://www.epi.org/blog/apple-factories-labor-practices/#:~:text=The%20Fair%20Labor%20Association's%20Executive,t%20part%20of%20Monday's%20announcement and read the title of this article: "Bad Apple labor practices." It is a pun: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pun . "Bad" refers to "practices" and to "Apple".

On this webpage: https://www.raconteur.net/global-business/apple-trademark-apples there is a similar pun : Bad Apple: why is the tech giant trying to trademark a fruit? The word "fruit" emphasizes the pun.

Here: https://oxfordtax.sbs.ox.ac.uk/article/bad-apple-ruling </ref> <ref>https://www.crn.com/news/mobility/300078386/bad-apple-an-inside-look-at-the-rotting-relationship-between-apple-and-its-partners is also a pun: Bad Apple: An Inside look At The Rotting Relationship Between Apple And Its Partners. The word "rotten" emphasizes the pun.

If you disagree with my arguments, please provide detailed arguments with references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ApoieRacional (talk • contribs) 23:59, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really care if it's mentioned in your references or if it's a pun (how is this relevant?). It's not referred to anywhere else in the article itself. If "Bad Apple" was a popular and more frequently used term to refer specifically to Apple, Inc., I could see the reason for adding it to the article, but as it stands, I don't think it needs to be included just because it exists out in the world. I also mentioned this on the article's talk page at Talk:Criticism of Apple Inc.. GSK (talk • edits) 00:01, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply. It seems, that our dispute is simply a difference in opinions, as your "I don't think it needs to be included just because it exists out in the world" statement, unsupported by independent references implies. For this reason, I feel that your removal my edit has not been properly justified. I also want to note, that you changed your argument from "Bad Apple" is not referred to once anywhere else in this article" to "I could see the reason for adding it to the article, but as it stands, I don't think it needs to be included just because it exists out in the world." I feel, that we should keep working in this direction.
I believe, that that are mechanisms for dispute resolutions in Wikipedia. You may be more experienced in this, than I am. Would you like to take it to the next level? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ApoieRacional (talk • contribs) 01:48, 12 September 2025 (UTC)ApoieRacional (talk) 02:06, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm choosing not to waste my time with this or you any further, especially since you prefer to continue edit warring than actually engage in dispute resolution. Maybe you should go back to your mentor and explain to them how you are continuing to edit war on the article despite my attempts to engage in conversation with you here and on Talk:Criticism of Apple Inc.. Regardless, whatever you choose to do from here, please do not contact me again as I have no interest in continuing to coddle you through how dispute resolution is supposed to work. Frankly, your edit summary comment that I identified as harassment has really discouraged me from pursuing any interaction with you further. I get that you're new, but you have a lot to learn about Wikipedia, and I'm not going to be the one to teach you. GSK (talk • edits) 02:12, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, you should be aware of the WP:3RR policy, because if you revert on an article more than three times in a 24 hour period, you are liable to be blocked for edit warring. GSK (talk • edits) 02:14, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Message From Neoogai

[edit]

Hello, This Is Neoogai, I Had Believed The Michael Jackson thing, But it was wrong, I was just 17 at the time and not matured enough and believed in some stuff, Truly Yours, Neoogai (talk) 21:48, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what you're talking about. GSK (talk • edits) 22:34, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
19 Febuary 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michael_Jackson&oldid=1276486958 Neoogai (talk) 01:26, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay? GSK (talk • edits) 01:28, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mkay, I was the guy who added the alleged resurrection, I was dumb as hell at the time in my opinion Neoogai (talk) 03:10, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A problem

[edit]

Hello, dear friend. I'm glad to know and see that you have a conciliatory spirit, and I noticed this in the Spider-Man 2 article. However, there's a real wacko who vandalized the article in your last edition, and also that of a great legend of Italian cinema. You'll decide or know what to do in these circumstances. 2800:484:7384:73F0:984F:B3FF:36C0:609E (talk) 17:10, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd recommend not responding to this. It's from a sockpuppet of a blocked user. Barry Wom (talk) 17:15, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]