Victrix

It is suspected that this user might be a sock puppet or impersonator of DreamGuy. Please refer to Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/DreamGuy for evidence. See block log.

Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia , I hope you will like it here and decide to stay.

You may want to take a look at the welcome page, tutorial, and stylebook, avoiding common mistakes and Wikipedia is not pages.

Here are some links I've found useful:

• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Wikipedia:Manual of Style
• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• Wikipedia:Merge
• New user log
• Be Bold
• Don't let grumpy users scare you off
• Wikipedia:Wikiquette
• Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia
• Wikipedia:User page
• How to upload files
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Also: To sign comments on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your username and the time after your comments. Signing with three tildes ~~~ will just sign your username.

I hope to see you around Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page!

Johann Wolfgang [ T ...C ]

04:00, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. That's a lot to read. I will try to learn the rules here.

The four tildes things is pretty cool.

Victrix 04:29, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Lightbringer

If you come accross a sockpuppet of his, make sure to put a tag {{Sockpuppet|username}} on the user page of that sockpuppet. --File:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 17:11, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Welcome aboard mate.

You might want to throw up a user info page, you're looking mighty naked in red in the history lists. Welcome aboard regardless, I'm not sure of your Wikipedian past or experience, but if you ever need assistance with anything, I am more than happy to help. :) 211.30.72.208 04:03, 18 October 2005 (UTC) (aka: Jachin)

Jack the Ripper

I'll take you on your word that Ripper Notes content was used to source much of the article, so I've moved it to References, as you suggest. It would be a lot better if specific articles were cited, rather than the journal as a whole. That could, of course, include articles that aren't offered as online samples as well.

As far as external links to commercial sites go - use common sense. If the site is largely an advertising venue rather than a content repository, then the link shouldn't be there. In my judgment, the RipperNotes site — no matter how prestigious the journal itself — failed that test. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:54, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Bathory, Jakubisko

I realy don't understand what is your problem with movies in production. Your reverting is close to becoming arogant. I have read WP:NOT and I supplyed also the source of info, but there was no meaningful reply from you. If IMDB is not enough authoritative for you then check any famous actor on wikipedia. Nicolas Cage (the first I tryed) has four 2007 movies in his filmography. Try to remove them to see the reaction of wikimates if you are so convinced of being right. Jurohi 16:16, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Spring Heeled Jack

Hi... I see you have made good edits getting rid of nonnotable fiction junk and POV-pushing on Jack the Ripper and some other articles I've run across. Was wondering if you could look into the article mentioned above, where an abusive editor is making blind reverts with the sole reason given that I am allegedly making deceptive edit comments and being abusive, but with no justification at all (and there can be none) for the version he is reverting to. Thanks. DreamGuy 12:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Looks like your strange little stalker is after me now too. Thanks a lot.  ;-) Victrix 00:18, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

3RR on Spring Heeled Jack

Hi! I have blocked you for 24 hours for 3 reverts to the Spring Heeled Jack article. When the block expires, please use the talk page of this article to reach consensus rather than engaging in an edit war. JeremyA 13:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

It's pretty unfortunate that someone with the ability to block people doesn't even know the actual policies that he is allegedly trying to enforce. Go read the actual policy and you would see that the policy is against having MORE THAN three reverts, not three reverts. It is clear that there is a handful of people here out to harass people for merely following policies and improving the encyclopedia if doing so steps on their toes. It's people like you and the strange group of people constantly vandalizing my talk and user pages who drive good editors away so that only the least capable people are left. Victrix 21:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

This is exactly the kind of rant DreamGuy would have said, oh wait you are DreamGuy...Englishrose 21:59, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Go read the rules. He even gives the link to the policy. It's right there. He broke the rules he's supposed to be enforcing. What the fuck is wrong with people here? Uh, yeah, this person shows up and agrees with some edits that another editor makes, so they must be the same person, and let's just harass them both... Let me guess, you got beat up a lot as a kid. Victrix 06:44, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I read the policy like you suggested, Victrix, and it says in the very first paragraph, "This does not imply that reverting three times or fewer is acceptable. In excessive cases, people can be blocked for edit warring or disruption even if they do not revert more than three times per day." So he didn't actually break any rule. Let's also not forget WP:Bold and WP:Civil. - Zepheus (ツィフィアス) 19:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Of course! How silly of me! It's the rest of the world that's out of step, not Victrix / DreamGuy ! An update to the article on Bedlam may be in order. --Centauri 22:29, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

In the real world people have to follow the rules instead of harassing the people who do. It's clear you have no idea of what the real world is like. You can make up all the lies you want, try to bully people, but in the end you will still be the same pathetic loser that you obviously are. Victrix 06:44, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Just for the record DreamGuy, you have actually been found out. You edit the same articles, have the same edit summaries, have been away for the same periods of time and returned at almost the same day (apart from this time, when u were found out) and were found "likely" on the sock-puppet check. Englishrose 09:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Victrix, when you make personal attacks while insisting on rules, it actually indicates that you might possibly be guilty of the rules you're citing! Good for you DREAMGUY. Signed by my IP#. --71.134.53.218 14:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

WP:SOCK Template

You have this on both of your pages. Should I contact a Admin for assisstance ? Martial Law 18:52, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

New Project

Hello! Recently I've started a project WP:CRIMINAL that aims to improve articles relating to criminals, including serial killers and others, particularly their biographies. If you are interested please join this project and help! Thank you! Wooyi 04:05, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Would you be interested in joining the Wikipedia Crime Project?

I have seen that you like to contribute to serial killer articles I am trying to organize a task force on this subject under Wikipedia:WikiProject Criminal Biography. If you would be interested in joining contact me. Thanks, Jmm6f488 19:33, 19 July 2007 (UTC)