User talk:Magic9mushroom - Revision history

Boromonokli at 07:28, 31 July 2025

2025-07-31T07:28:35Z

Magic9mushroom: /* i have OA backups */

2025-04-18T07:08:38Z

i have OA backups

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:08, 18 April 2025
Line 183:		Line 183:

	i have backups .. maybe i can try setup it on some host... Makus		i have backups .. maybe i can try setup it on some host... Makus

			:Keep me posted. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 07:08, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

	== also spoiler code question ==		== also spoiler code question ==

Magic9mushroom: /* also spoiler code question */

2025-04-18T07:06:36Z

also spoiler code question

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:06, 18 April 2025
Line 187:		Line 187:

	ufopaedia have spoiler code ? build in or custom? pls post this code here if so		ufopaedia have spoiler code ? build in or custom? pls post this code here if so

			:I don't know of any. Also, please sign talk-page posts with four tildes (~). [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 07:06, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Makus at 13:08, 17 April 2025

2025-04-17T13:08:24Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:08, 17 April 2025
Line 180:		Line 180:
	HOLY SHIT! I just looked up "Magic9mushroom" in google... your an adult and your into that asian pedophilic cartoons? 'Aminmey' or something? ... your a borderline pedo mate. FUCK OFF and don't message me again... and ban me if you want, I'm nevercoming back if this place is associated with filthy degenerates like you.		HOLY SHIT! I just looked up "Magic9mushroom" in google... your an adult and your into that asian pedophilic cartoons? 'Aminmey' or something? ... your a borderline pedo mate. FUCK OFF and don't message me again... and ban me if you want, I'm nevercoming back if this place is associated with filthy degenerates like you.

	== i have backups ==		== i have OA backups ==

	i have backups .. maybe i can try setup it on some host... Makus		i have backups .. maybe i can try setup it on some host... Makus

	== also question ==		== also spoiler code question ==

	ufopaedia have spoiler code ? build in or custom? pls post this code here if so		ufopaedia have spoiler code ? build in or custom? pls post this code here if so

Makus: /* also question */ new section

2025-04-17T13:05:27Z

also question: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:05, 17 April 2025
Line 183:		Line 183:

	i have backups .. maybe i can try setup it on some host... Makus		i have backups .. maybe i can try setup it on some host... Makus

			== also question ==

			ufopaedia have spoiler code ? build in or custom? pls post this code here if so

Makus at 13:01, 17 April 2025

2025-04-17T13:01:58Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:01, 17 April 2025
Line 182:		Line 182:
	== i have backups ==		== i have backups ==

	i have backups .. maybe i can try setup it on some host... ~~makus~~		i have backups .. maybe i can try setup it on some host... Makus

Makus at 13:01, 17 April 2025

2025-04-17T13:01:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:01, 17 April 2025
Line 182:		Line 182:
	== i have backups ==		== i have backups ==

	i have backups .. maybe i can try setup it on some host...		i have backups .. maybe i can try setup it on some host... makus

Makus: /* i have backups */ new section

2025-04-17T13:01:11Z

i have backups: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:01, 17 April 2025
Line 179:		Line 179:

	HOLY SHIT! I just looked up "Magic9mushroom" in google... your an adult and your into that asian pedophilic cartoons? 'Aminmey' or something? ... your a borderline pedo mate. FUCK OFF and don't message me again... and ban me if you want, I'm nevercoming back if this place is associated with filthy degenerates like you.		HOLY SHIT! I just looked up "Magic9mushroom" in google... your an adult and your into that asian pedophilic cartoons? 'Aminmey' or something? ... your a borderline pedo mate. FUCK OFF and don't message me again... and ban me if you want, I'm nevercoming back if this place is associated with filthy degenerates like you.

			== i have backups ==

			i have backups .. maybe i can try setup it on some host...

EsTeR: I AM OUT OF HERE PERMANENTLY

2025-04-14T06:35:17Z

I AM OUT OF HERE PERMANENTLY

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:35, 14 April 2025
Line 162:		Line 162:
	:I rolled back Lawpistol because you removed the UFOpaedia entry for its clip and because you put in nonsense advice (it is one-handed, so it should always be dual-wielded). I rolled back Chrysalis because you changed all the plurals to "Chrysalises" rather than the correct "Chrysalides", and because you bizarrely removed the infobox formatting. I did actually miss that I'd removed the battlescape images of Chrysalides; thanks and I'll re-add those.		:I rolled back Lawpistol because you removed the UFOpaedia entry for its clip and because you put in nonsense advice (it is one-handed, so it should always be dual-wielded). I rolled back Chrysalis because you changed all the plurals to "Chrysalises" rather than the correct "Chrysalides", and because you bizarrely removed the infobox formatting. I did actually miss that I'd removed the battlescape images of Chrysalides; thanks and I'll re-add those.
	:I do understand the value of uniformity. I'm going to edit ''all'' of the weapon and alien pages back to use infoboxes and (for weapons) the old, cleaner Battlescape images. I'm just not as fast as you, so it's not done yet. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 22:33, 13 April 2025 (UTC)		:I do understand the value of uniformity. I'm going to edit ''all'' of the weapon and alien pages back to use infoboxes and (for weapons) the old, cleaner Battlescape images. I'm just not as fast as you, so it's not done yet. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 22:33, 13 April 2025 (UTC)


			Wrong. the plural is "The plural of chrysalis is chrysalises. Find more words at wordhippo.com".

			Gamer500018 was a (ex)user on here that made a throwaway account just so they could call me a troll.

			Now your nitpicking:

			"it is one-handed, so it should always be dual-wielded" Read what the official blurb is. Dual handed? Yeah one could, but be prepared to a backpack full of ammo and playing like that won't last long since stock levels are low for ammo. Essentially what i wrote. The official wording suggests that it is a back-up weapon, so that wht was I impled in the text.

			the "ammunition for law pistol clip", "the ammuntion for..." etc. etc. official blurb were left out because they are not necessary. It doesn't add usefulness to the page.

			The info-box become large and take up alot of space if you resize the pic to bigger than a postage stamp. The article then has a lot of empty space which is not necessary and a waste of space... and it looks stupid and ametuerish.

			I don't know why you are doing it? The Apoc section has only garnered positive comments from /v/ about the layout after I asked people to look at it by using history for each page they look at. Does it cut your soo deep that I didn't conform to the hivemind and because I didn't ask everyone. Are you a....

			HOLY SHIT! I just looked up "Magic9mushroom" in google... your an adult and your into that asian pedophilic cartoons? 'Aminmey' or something? ... your a borderline pedo mate. FUCK OFF and don't message me again... and ban me if you want, I'm nevercoming back if this place is associated with filthy degenerates like you.

Magic9mushroom: /* STOP */

2025-04-13T22:33:24Z

STOP

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:33, 13 April 2025
Line 159:		Line 159:
	4. I don't ram things through, I constructively edited (the numbered points above) the whole Apoc section. How can one get concensus of all involved when most are AWOL or disinterested? So without mass approval or agreement nothing gets done! ...and eventually half-arsed repetative articles appear throughout Apoc section without organisation. The -number one- reason did it so for OPENAPOC.		4. I don't ram things through, I constructively edited (the numbered points above) the whole Apoc section. How can one get concensus of all involved when most are AWOL or disinterested? So without mass approval or agreement nothing gets done! ...and eventually half-arsed repetative articles appear throughout Apoc section without organisation. The -number one- reason did it so for OPENAPOC.
	5. Change the articles as you seem fit to do so but don't destroy information. Build the pages to be better. [[User:EsTeR\|EsTeR]] ([[User talk:EsTeR\|talk]])		5. Change the articles as you seem fit to do so but don't destroy information. Build the pages to be better. [[User:EsTeR\|EsTeR]] ([[User talk:EsTeR\|talk]])
			:"The only to two so that have objections are you and Darkpast because I edited the pages with last edits by you or Darkpast." - you're forgetting Gamer500018.
			:I rolled back Lawpistol because you removed the UFOpaedia entry for its clip and because you put in nonsense advice (it is one-handed, so it should always be dual-wielded). I rolled back Chrysalis because you changed all the plurals to "Chrysalises" rather than the correct "Chrysalides", and because you bizarrely removed the infobox formatting. I did actually miss that I'd removed the battlescape images of Chrysalides; thanks and I'll re-add those.
			:I do understand the value of uniformity. I'm going to edit ''all'' of the weapon and alien pages back to use infoboxes and (for weapons) the old, cleaner Battlescape images. I'm just not as fast as you, so it's not done yet. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 22:33, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:28, 31 July 2025
Line 155:		Line 155:

	::1. The only people I have interacted with since the Apoc section revamp are Magic9mushroom (conflict), Darkpast (conflict), Bard (one revert on the cheats page), Jasonred (banter), Hobbes (praise). And no one else. To claim that quite a few editors have had objections is FALSE. The only to two so that have objections are you and Darkpast because I edited the pages with last edits by you or Darkpast. ...so your are a proven LIAR.		::1. The only people I have interacted with since the Apoc section revamp are Magic9mushroom (conflict), Darkpast (conflict), Bard (one revert on the cheats page), Jasonred (banter), Hobbes (praise). And no one else. To claim that quite a few editors have had objections is FALSE. The only to two so that have objections are you and Darkpast because I edited the pages with last edits by you or Darkpast. ...so your are a proven LIAR.
	2. Consensus is why nothing got done. Mainstream wikipedia is now a sad joke of an encylopedia because consensus is preferred over truth. If all the lefty admins agree on something, then thats the 'truth'. What happens when their little circle agrees on something even though it is false. ...because consensus makes them feel like they are right. ie: "too many cooks in the kitchen". This place apoc was templated by me to be (1) uniform, (2) easy to read without novelisation (terse wording and bullet points), (3) removal of vast amounts of repetativeness on multiple pages, (4) removal of simplistic grasp on the english language, (5) massive amount of input with new data and uniform pics.		::2. Consensus is why nothing got done. Mainstream wikipedia is now a sad joke of an encylopedia because consensus is preferred over truth. If all the lefty admins agree on something, then thats the 'truth'. What happens when their little circle agrees on something even though it is false. ...because consensus makes them feel like they are right. ie: "too many cooks in the kitchen". This place apoc was templated by me to be (1) uniform, (2) easy to read without novelisation (terse wording and bullet points), (3) removal of vast amounts of repetativeness on multiple pages, (4) removal of simplistic grasp on the english language, (5) massive amount of input with new data and uniform pics.
	3. Like I mentioned. The only two that have had conflict are you and Darkpast because I changed the pages which either of you 'last edited by' in the history list. IT IS OBVIOUS without a doubt that you have a had a dummy-spit because you think those pages are the be-end-all-end of finality ...that is why you changed Law Pistol and Chrysalis (and others) back to those last users and destroyed(ing) the flow and uniformness and other aspects as mentioned in the numbered points above. There is nothing wrong with either of those pages, so why did you change them? You haven't added anything constructive to it but just blantant rollback. eg: on the Chrysalis roll back there is no pics of what the thing looks like on the battlescape? ...so you made the page worse. I don't own the pages and neither do you - if you change them, ADD information to it to make it better for everyone and don't just roll back pages, it makes you look petty and gives me concrete proof that you are vandalising the apoc wiki.		::3. Like I mentioned. The only two that have had conflict are you and Darkpast because I changed the pages which either of you 'last edited by' in the history list. IT IS OBVIOUS without a doubt that you have a had a dummy-spit because you think those pages are the be-end-all-end of finality ...that is why you changed Law Pistol and Chrysalis (and others) back to those last users and destroyed(ing) the flow and uniformness and other aspects as mentioned in the numbered points above. There is nothing wrong with either of those pages, so why did you change them? You haven't added anything constructive to it but just blantant rollback. eg: on the Chrysalis roll back there is no pics of what the thing looks like on the battlescape? ...so you made the page worse. I don't own the pages and neither do you - if you change them, ADD information to it to make it better for everyone and don't just roll back pages, it makes you look petty and gives me concrete proof that you are vandalising the apoc wiki.
	4. I don't ram things through, I constructively edited (the numbered points above) the whole Apoc section. How can one get concensus of all involved when most are AWOL or disinterested? So without mass approval or agreement nothing gets done! ...and eventually half-arsed repetative articles appear throughout Apoc section without organisation. The -number one- reason did it so for OPENAPOC.		::4. I don't ram things through, I constructively edited (the numbered points above) the whole Apoc section. How can one get concensus of all involved when most are AWOL or disinterested? So without mass approval or agreement nothing gets done! ...and eventually half-arsed repetative articles appear throughout Apoc section without organisation. The -number one- reason did it so for OPENAPOC.
	5. Change the articles as you seem fit to do so but don't destroy information. Build the pages to be better. [[User:EsTeR\|EsTeR]] ([[User talk:EsTeR\|talk]])		::5. Change the articles as you seem fit to do so but don't destroy information. Build the pages to be better. [[User:EsTeR\|EsTeR]] ([[User talk:EsTeR\|talk]])
	:"The only to two so that have objections are you and Darkpast because I edited the pages with last edits by you or Darkpast." - you're forgetting Gamer500018.		:::"The only to two so that have objections are you and Darkpast because I edited the pages with last edits by you or Darkpast." - you're forgetting Gamer500018.
	:I rolled back Lawpistol because you removed the UFOpaedia entry for its clip and because you put in nonsense advice (it is one-handed, so it should always be dual-wielded). I rolled back Chrysalis because you changed all the plurals to "Chrysalises" rather than the correct "Chrysalides", and because you bizarrely removed the infobox formatting. I did actually miss that I'd removed the battlescape images of Chrysalides; thanks and I'll re-add those.		:::I rolled back Lawpistol because you removed the UFOpaedia entry for its clip and because you put in nonsense advice (it is one-handed, so it should always be dual-wielded). I rolled back Chrysalis because you changed all the plurals to "Chrysalises" rather than the correct "Chrysalides", and because you bizarrely removed the infobox formatting. I did actually miss that I'd removed the battlescape images of Chrysalides; thanks and I'll re-add those.
	:I do understand the value of uniformity. I'm going to edit ''all'' of the weapon and alien pages back to use infoboxes and (for weapons) the old, cleaner Battlescape images. I'm just not as fast as you, so it's not done yet. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 22:33, 13 April 2025 (UTC)		:::I do understand the value of uniformity. I'm going to edit ''all'' of the weapon and alien pages back to use infoboxes and (for weapons) the old, cleaner Battlescape images. I'm just not as fast as you, so it's not done yet. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 22:33, 13 April 2025 (UTC)


Line 179:		Line 179:

	HOLY SHIT! I just looked up "Magic9mushroom" in google... your an adult and your into that asian pedophilic cartoons? 'Aminmey' or something? ... your a borderline pedo mate. FUCK OFF and don't message me again... and ban me if you want, I'm nevercoming back if this place is associated with filthy degenerates like you.		HOLY SHIT! I just looked up "Magic9mushroom" in google... your an adult and your into that asian pedophilic cartoons? 'Aminmey' or something? ... your a borderline pedo mate. FUCK OFF and don't message me again... and ban me if you want, I'm nevercoming back if this place is associated with filthy degenerates like you.

			:now that this ... lovely gentleman is gone, should Apoc get back it's original, somewhat informal and also infobox-using pages that have characterized this wiki for most of it's existence? Also find out more at wordhippo... That's sad.
			:Anyways, should the alien craft pages also get their invasion force/crew info part back? --[[User:Boromonokli\|Boromonokli]] ([[User talk:Boromonokli\|talk]]) 07:28, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

	== i have OA backups ==		== i have OA backups ==