Ice Vision

Your comment

Ice Vision; We may well have a minor difference of opinion regarding the suitability of certain pseudonyms for Heroes characters. However, that does not in any way justify the comment you left at Ando Masahashi. I, for one, would appreciate it if you could keep this in mind before hitting "SAVE". Thank you. --Ckatz^chat_spy 18:18, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Heroes s01 e03.jpg

Hello, Ice Vision. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Heroes s01 e03.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Ice Vision/ha. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 07:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

The Urine Monster

Welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome your help to create new content, but your recent additions (such as The Urine Monster) are considered nonsense. Please refrain from creating nonsense articles. If you want to test things out, edit the sandbox instead. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Vgranucci 02:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• People here have no variety.--Ice Vision 02:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I just read The Urine Monster to my friend on the phone and we found it hilarious. Send me a link if you write anything else like that; that was great. Joie de Vivre 03:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

You may want to consider including this article in the less serious Uncyclopedia - The Content Free Encyclopedia, if you haven't already. ~QuasiAbstract (talk/contrib) 09:47, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Virginia Gray.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Virginia Gray.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Shanti Suresh.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Shanti Suresh.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Your comment, once again

Ice, seeing as how this is the second time I've had to ask you to be civil, what's up? There was no reason for the snarky comment at the Heroes article, especially since your assertion was wrong. The text did refer to a solar eclipse in the preceding sentence. The text I reverted, however, dealt specifically with a terrestrial eclipse - and as such "Moon" is incorrect. Look, I certainly don't mind being corrected if I make a mistake - but I really object to a bad-faith, insulting comment when you've not even got the facts straight. --Ckatz^chat_spy 08:34, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

• Okay, then that was my fault. However, I've checked your contributions and virtually all of your edits are "revert this, and undo that." You constantly revert beneficial trivia and notes without a specified reason. I just found it hard to believe that you were actually serious. But, I should have read more carefully. I apologize.--Ice Vision (talk) 16:51, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Why is "spinach" so important to you?

I'm watching the interaction and, other than a reason to annoy Ckatz, I don't see what "spinach" adds to the Sylar article. Can you help me out here? If he had used his TK to move a tomato juice can would we have a different outlook on the situation? I'm failing to see why anyone cares what type of can was used to portray the event. If I'm missing something please let me know. Padillah (talk) 18:11, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

• Why is that such a big deal? I just added the word "spinach". Ckatz continuously reverts edits (although most are reasonable, some are not). Don't we strive for accuracy on Wikipedia? "Spinach" describes the can, and may be connected to the widely-accepted Popeye reference. I think you should think this through.--Ice Vision (talk) 20:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually using "spinach" to describe the can is superfluous. It's not needed and only adds words to the article. What is this "widely-accepted Popeye reference"? Are some people equating Sylar to Popeye? If they are using the can as a reference then they are misusing the episode. The can didn't give him his power back (nor, more in-line with Popeye, increase his power) so to hinge an arguably obscure fan speculation on this point is unstable at best. There is no inaccuracy in describing the item as a can so your "accuracy" argument is shaky. And describing it as a "psinach can" affords no better understanding nor insight into the event than simply stating it's a can. If there were reason to believe the material make-up of the can were significant than "tin can" would be appropriate... but there's not. We are not just adding words to articles because they are there. We add facts to articles to expound on the subject. The former contents of the can are of little to no consequence to Sylar. In point of fact the can itself is of little consequence, simply the act of using his powers was what the scene was meant to portray. You have now had this particular edit reverted by at least three other editors, let it drop please. Now you're starting to get EditWar notices. Unless you REALLY love this word, I'd drop it. Padillah (talk) 21:15, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Unbelievable. Simply unbelievable. You are making such a big deal of another user's addition of one simple word, "spinach". I thought it was rude and inconsiderate that an innocent and accurate edit was reverted. That's why I reverted those edits. And, no I am not equating Sylar to Popeye. In fact, I couldn't care less about Popeye. I only mentioned it because I needed an excuse for making the change (forget I ever mentioned Popeye). Why? Because you can't seem to accept the adding of the word "spinach". I don't know why you are behaving this way. If I incited this behavior, then I apologize. I am truly sorry. One last thing, I really like the word. Although spinach isn't the most delicious food, the word "spinach" just sounds so cool. Might I ask again why we are arguing over something so trivial? Will it make that big of a deal if the word "spinach" was in the article (not to mention, the can is indeed a spinach can). Well, that's the end of my rant. --Ice Vision (talk) 21:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

First off, I'd like to clarify, I am not the one that fought so hard to blow this out of proportion. That was you and Ckatz. I only stepped in after it got out of hand to avert an edit war I saw coming. If you are a fan of the word then "more power to ya" but you must also remember that Wikipedia is a forum for different minds and not all of those minds are alike. So you made a suggestion, a perfectly rational, fact-based suggestion. Someone else saw it and had another side to their story. It then falls to you to look at that side and determine which argument is more valid. If you think you are being slighted then call for a consensus vote. What you don't do is get into an edit war over it and get yourself or someone else banned. It's not your love of the word "spinach" but your refusal to see the other side of an argument that may well lead you to get banned from WP permanently. I've warned you, others have warned you. I've called for a consensus vote and will abide by whatever the consensus says. Now the next step is to drop it and walk away. For what it's worth, you have a perfectly valid argument and I hope you win. Padillah (talk) 12:54, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

December 2007

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Sylar. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Jmjanssen (talk) 21:12, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know

My comment wasn't necessarily directed at you. While I did sense that soon after you found dissidence to your descriptor, you had a slight personal relationship with the edit, I didn't feel that that was your only reason for the adjective. However, there have been other edits by other editors that did feel that the only reason for the additions were for personal self-esteem. PureSoldier (talk) 20:19, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

• Okay, I understand. --Ice Vision (talk) 20:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Sylar + spinach

Just wanted you to know that I'm reviving the Sylar-spinach connection as relevent. Peace + Spinach, --Pgagnon999 (talk) 02:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Bob Bishop

I'm not removing your edit because I agree that it is Bob and I think the other guy is acting out of hand, but where has it been confirmed besides the comic itself?--CyberGhostface (talk) 23:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it is "confirmed" anywhere else, but it doesn't need to be. The graphic novel confirms it, basically. --Ice Vision (talk) 03:06, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

The graphic novel doesn't confirm that it is him. May look similar to him, may have the same ability, but the Golden Goose character was not named. QuasiAbstract (talk) 08:33, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

So, you think it's a new character, huh? Why are you ignoring logic and common sense? --Ice Vision (talk) 23:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I realize that this is from almost a month ago, but just to clarify. "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. "Verifiable" in this context means that readers should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed." The character was not explicitly stated as anyone, so not verified. Using logic, would be using original research to use clues to reach a result. I did not do this, as it would not have been verifiable. Now, the material is verified, and I have no problem with it. I hope this clears up what my problem had been. ~QuasiAbstract (talk/contrib) 09:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

peer review

I was wondering if you could take some time out of your schedule to head over to the Heroes (TV series) talkpage and give us an honest peer review. The page has gone through some major changes in the last few months, and it would be fantastic if a prominent editor/contributor like yourself, could head over and give us at the Heroes Wikiproject some sound opinion and ideas on improvements for the page. We have all worked very hard at improving the page, and we need great outside, reliable and trustworthy users to come over and help us improve. I you are interested in joining the peer review discussion with other prominent users/contributors, much like yourself, please follow the link. Thank you very much for your help and your continued effort to improve Wikipedia and its quality! Wikipedia:Peer review/Heroes (TV series)/archive2--Chrisisinchrist (talk) 05:58, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Blogs

• Hey, this is Mr. Bennet. Are you one of the Burnt Toast Members? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.17.91.85 (talk) 18:36, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Yes, but I don't post their anymore. --Ice Vision (talk) 21:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Oh. What happened? Who were you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.17.91.85 (talk) 21:44, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
      • I got bored. I was Mistah Esock. --Ice Vision (talk) 22:02, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to User talk:Djfspence, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Naohiro19 revertvandal (talk) 03:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Ice Vision/Pee

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as User:Ice Vision/Pee, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Joe Chill (talk) 14:39, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Ice Vision/Urine Monster

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as User:Ice Vision/Urine Monster, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Joe Chill (talk) 14:40, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Ice Vision/Super Pee

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as User:Ice Vision/Super Pee, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Joe Chill (talk) 14:40, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)