User talk:ThomasNealy

Don't change anothers message on a talkpage
Don't change anothers message on a talkpage, that is not acceptable and can get you blocked. Zane T 69 (talk) 23:24, May 7, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Death
I am going by what Billie specifically said "Kill one incarnation of Death like you did, the next reaper to die takes "his" place". Her saying "his" as opposed to "their" is important as distinguishes from fact and speculation. "His" is clearly in reference to Death himself, whereas your suggestion Billie meant plural is speculative because you are interpreting what she meant by "his". Finally, be more respectful to other users as "or did that fact excape you?" is very rude which is not welcomed on the wiki. 70.93.90.147 23:07, November 15, 2017 (UTC)

Dean
It was stated by Dean in Fan Fiction that he was a Knight of Hell, and Robbie Thompson called Dean a Knight of Hell at LeakyCon, between S9 and S10.

Besides, Cain became the original Knight by being resurrected as one by the Mark of Cain (how the other Knights came to be is unknown, but the show has a tendency to leave such things unanswered, rather frustratingly). It makes absolutely no sense to assume or believe that it wouldn't have done the same with any other bearer, such as Dean.

If the Mark made Cain a knight, then it would've done the same to Dean. (Before you refute, Cain directly called himself a Knight in his first appearance)

Gabriel456 (talk) 02:11, November 16, 2017 (UTC)

Re
First, I am an Admin. Second, it was agreed at some point in the past that he didn't fit Primordials. I originally put him there myself but it was undone ultimately through consensus basically. Third, learn how to spell. You misspelled at least a few things on my talk page. That includes the word edits. Its spelled like that, not edites.--WarGrowlmon18 (talk) 05:09, November 16, 2017 (UTC)

The discussion Wargrowlmon18 is referring to is Age of the Entity on The Cosmic Entity talk page, but there was no agreement nor was a consensus involved despite what he says, it was actually decided on by Admin SeraphLucifer on his own. I was confused myself when I was directed to the same discussion by Blaziken rjcf as to why he undid my own edit to include an image of the Cosmic Entity on the Primordial Entities page. Like you, I had no idea what discussion he meant and once I figured it out, I pointed out to SearphLucifer that at no point in the discussion is there a denouncement nor questioning of the Cosmic Entity as a primordial entity, only a debate on his age. This is SeraphLucifer's response, "Hey, I know there wasn't an exact agreement about Cosmic Entities status but since there was nothing certain about him, it was my duty to remove unconfirmed information. If you have questions or suggestions, you can write on talk page and we'll discuss about it. Thanks." To be honest, I am very displeased by the whole satiation for both the lack of clarification and for how SeaphLucifer went about his decision that had nothing to do with topic of discussion. I hope I was of help to you. 70.93.90.147 06:28, November 16, 2017 (UTC)

First, let me state that speaking good of ImperiexSeed is a bad idea. He is widely disliked and you just claimed to admire him, while we won't enforce such silence, not saying that might help you make friends here. Now, you won't be banned for speaking against Admins and you are entitled to your opinion and you are encouraged to discuss things. But you are causing some difficulty for us... This is a very small community and the users you want to occupy in conversation are generally our most devoted editers and give us the bulk of our new content.

We (Seraph, WG18, and myself) have taken over from a previous admin team, a team that didn't manage the wiki well and was inactive, didn't punish rule-breakers, and didn't clean up messes before they got out of hand. We have been trying to clean up such messes, in addition to planning several other projects and adding things to our "to-do list". With you raising several issues, you are delaying that and dividing our attention further.

I seem to have gotten off track with my explanation of why we won't be able to respond to every talkpage or concern and have forgotten what I came to say. Anyway, please exercise patience and we will try our best. When I remember what else I was going to say, I will post on your wall. Zane T 69 (talk) 16:15, November 16, 2017 (UTC)

Demon page edit
you're welcome. Gabriel456 (talk) 16:58, November 16, 2017 (UTC)

Troubles editing on the Jack page
First thing to get the hang of: proper punctuation.--WarGrowlmon18 (talk) 09:11, November 19, 2017 (UTC)

Help with edit war
I actually agree with you on that one but again, your spelling and punctuation make it really hard to understand your messages.--WarGrowlmon18 (talk) 23:20, November 26, 2017 (UTC)

The Empty
Maybe and likely he didn’t bother adding Amara in his statement for that reason. And that is enough to prove my case, to put only God out of the two can’t revive someone from the void. As what if they say Amara CAN, than a lot of re-edits. Blaze has changed it back to only put God, and even other Admins. So please leave it ambiguous. Saying it’s unknown if Amara can’t or can is policy on such a statement. You saying she “can’t” is your opinion and while well founded you can’t saying with 100% say she can’t. Because look at Jack, his power while not reviving Castiel was great enough to reach him in the void, which should have been impossible based on the Entity’s statement.

And not even the Entity could figure out why he woke up. If the Entity had simply said No one but me has any pull here. Than you leave it based on his statement. But as he gave examples, we have to leave ambiguous without siding on either choice. Remember Amara is stronger than God, and because the Entity stopped at God in his list we don’t know about Amara. Amara is superior in power to God. And such he stopped at God we can’t know for sure if she could or couldn’t revive from the void as she wasn’t directly listed.&#91;&#91;User:Twilight Despair 5&#124;&#93;&#93; (&#91;&#91;The God of Creation&#93;&#93;) (talk) 01:38, December 2, 2017 (UTC)

Logic not with standing, remember Amara is the strongest being to date in Supernatural. The Entity’s list stopped at God, so logically anything below him wouldn’t be able to take someone out of the void. But that doesn’t apply to beings stronger that was listed. Even if your 99% percent right, that 1% percent makes it speculative as even with his quote. You can’t say empirically that Amara or even Jack for that matter has no power in the void. It’s policy to only put information that is canon or that can’t be interpreted. The Entity’s statement can be interpreted, when he added a specific list to when he said No One but him has any pull in the void.&#91;&#91;User:Twilight Despair 5&#124;&#93;&#93; (&#91;&#91;The God of Creation&#93;&#93;) (talk) 12:15, December 2, 2017 (UTC)

Edit message question Re:
User placed the Cosmic Entity there again, so I protected it to prevent similar such edits. It should not effect you, it limited new and unregistered users. Zane T 69 (talk) 20:11, December 3, 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that is what it means. Unregistered and new users cannot edit or move the page now. Zane T 69 (talk) 20:46, December 3, 2017 (UTC)

What is a monster
Monsters are defined as the descendants of Eve and as a result; the Alphas. Zane T 69 (talk) 02:06, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

Of course. Zane T 69 (talk) 02:31, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

adding a category?
The category already exists, and yes you can use it. Zane T 69 (talk) 14:54, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I just re-read your post on my wall (I haven't full woken up yet), and never mind about using the animals category for the Lochness Monster or Griffin. I did not mean to waste your time, sorry. Zane T 69 (talk) 15:30, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

What would go into this category? I'm reluctant to say yes to a category for two pages. Zane T 69 (talk) 15:44, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

Okay, you can do it. Just remember to create it as, the long form might get changed by others. To be clear, you mean an actual category and not a page titled: Supernatural Animals, right? Because the list looks like it's for a page. Zane T 69 (talk) 16:07, December 9, 2017 (UTC) had to edit your post since it added it to the category page. --ThomasNealy (talk) 16:13, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

Okay, that'll work, and thanks for all your hard work.Zane T 69 (talk) 16:16, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

The first post on your wall was NOT an official warning, it was a suggestion to avoid having to give you an official warning. As such, I removed the warning, so that others wouldn't mistaken block you in the future. Zane T 69 (talk) 17:19, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

RE: Monster
The first time, you added the category Monsters, rather than Monster. The first one is for individuals, the second is for species. You can check your edit yourself: http://supernatural.wikia.com/wiki/Pishtaco?diff=prev&oldid=261681

Orion ( T - B -C) 14:12, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

Banshee
There was a bit of an edit war on that last week or something. Dtol (talk) 15:16, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

Vampire page
Thank you for letting me know. I have reversed the edits and blocked the user for three days for vandalizim. I'm going to put a lock on that page for users without an actual account to prevent him from trying that from somewhere else.--WarGrowlmon18 (talk) 18:59, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Message Box
Well I have two different ones--in my Profile and my Talk Page. Both say different things. Both use quotes from the show but the statements that follow are my own phrasing and wordplay. I don't mind really but it would be much appreciated if you can modify your message a bit. FTWinchester (talk) 20:33, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

No problem. I'm a bit touchy over these info boxes because I pioneered the use of many of these templates here. Hope you have a good time here in the wiki! FTWinchester (talk) 20:44, December 9, 2017 (UTC)