User talk:WILSON2bGg

From BetaArchive Wiki
Revision as of 08:19, 3 May 2019 by MCpillager (talk | contribs) (→‎about build 2000.3: remove swearing, this wiki uses the same rules as the forums (correct me if I'm wrong))

Mover

To help you in moving pages into the correct naming scheme, I've added the mover right to your account. This means that while moving, you should have an additional option to move without redirect which you must select. This saves me time as I don't have to delete the old redirect all the time. Thanks. X010 (talk) 17:55, 6 April 2019 (BST)

about build 2000.3

I used to have an BetaWiki account called Longhorn5219, but I abandoned it.--MCpillager - remember, a build list is just a lot of numbers. 17:51, 22 April 2019 (BST)

What are you trying to tell me? I deleted it since you clearly plagiarized the images and we can’t have that crap on the wiki. WILSON2bGg (talk) 18:01, 22 April 2019 (BST)
@MCpillager The image can be restored. Rob, see this log. X010 (talk) 13:31, 25 April 2019 (BST)
Then look at the images, and notice that most of them aren't good hence the little box that says why. --LilShootDawg (talk) 10:56, 26 April 2019 (BST)
@LilShootDawg I randomly looked at some of the images, and can't find anything against them. Could you link to some which are bad under your definition? MCpillager, should I restore the images which were deleted earlier? X010 (talk) 11:30, 26 April 2019 (BST)
@X010 yes please.--MCpillager - remember, a build list is just a lot of numbers. 12:09, 26 April 2019 (BST)
@MCpillager Yes check.svg.png Done. However, please mention on the file description page that you previously uploaded it on BetaWiki under a different name; after all, the concern Rob raised was valid (through incorrect in this case). X010 (talk) 16:48, 26 April 2019 (BST)
Also, @MCpillager, couldn't you have redone the screenshots so they aren't registered to BetaWiki.Net. That was my other gripe about them. WILSON2bGg (talk) 21:03, 26 April 2019 (BST)
@X010 https://betawiki.net/wiki/File:Windows98-4.10.1666-Demo.png Isn't cropped. https://betawiki.net/wiki/File:Windows98-4.10.1666-MyComputer.png Isn't cropped. https://betawiki.net/wiki/File:Windows98-4.10.1666-FirstBoot.png Not highest resolution. https://betawiki.net/wiki/File:Windows98-4.10.1666-FirstBoot.png Not highest res. https://betawiki.net/wiki/File:Windows98_4.10.1666.png Red outline. https://betawiki.net/wiki/File:WindowsVista-6.0.5203-InternetExplorer.jpg jpg https://betawiki.net/wiki/File:WindowsVista-6.0.5203-Desktop.jpg jpg https://betawiki.net/wiki/File:WindowsVista-6.0.5734-ControlPanel.jpg jpg etc. etc. etc. You get the idea. —  Preceding unsigned comment added by LilShootDawg (talkcontribs)
@LilShootDawg Maybe my standards are low, but none of them are that bad for you to be cribbing like this (it's hardly unusable, and the red outline can be fixed). Sure, they are nowhere the best images that you could make. But why don't you improve on them? X010 (talk) 17:43, 27 April 2019 (BST)
@X010 It would just be easier to make new ones and delete these. He has a legitimate gripe about these; 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. WILSON2bGg (talk) 21:50, 27 April 2019 (BST)
@X010 Why would I waste time working on trashy screenshots. It's not like the guidelines weren't there. --LilShootDawg (talk) 22:15, 27 April 2019 (BST)
@LilShootDawg Those JPGS are unleaked screenies. It is normal for first boots to be in low-res, and Windows98 4.10.1666.png was NOT uploaded by me.--MCpillager - remember, a build list is just a lot of numbers. 08:25, 28 April 2019 (BST)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── If they were really unleaked MCpillager, then I would expect a note to that effect to be included in the image, and some proof that the build existed as per the wiki guidelines.
WILSON2bGg Might be missing something, but what are you trying to show with these links? X010 (talk) 11:27, 28 April 2019 (BST)

I’m showing you bad screenshots @X010. WILSON2bGg (talk) 17:30, 28 April 2019 (BST)