User talk:FTWinchester

Nightmares start here
Hi, welcome to Supernatural Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the User blog:RiderJones/Aliens in Supernatural page.

Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Thesilentpoethosea (Talk) 16:00, October 14, 2012

Can you meet me on chat? -- ImperiexSeed, 6:06 PM, October 23rd 2012

Re: Hey!
Yes, I'm back. :D For a while now, I hope, since I'm officially out of school.

I'll check your proposal on the tense/grammar guide out ASAP!

-Sybil (Blessed Be, Sybil 05:03, June 21, 2013 (UTC))

Back me up
Hello FTWinchester. I need some backing up. Maybe you've noticed, maybe you haven't, but there has a debate going on between me and different users about the word "master" on Metatron's page. I say that it needs to be "Master", since it is in reference to God. However other users are adamant that it be "master", which incorrect. I made section in the talk page for Metatron, which is where I need your backing. I appreciate your help.

SilverRain (talk) 01:29, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree that the proper nouns you speak of, like "He", "Him", or "Master", can be capitalized even in-between a sentence, as it's referencing God. But I wouldn't say it's strictly grammatically incorrect if you don't, I mean, I myself mostly just use lowercase lettering even when talking about God, although I do capitalize "God", "Lord", "Jesus". -- ImperiexSeed, 8:38 PM, November 29th 2012


 * On a personal note, I prefer using capitalized pronouns and such, because 1) I am a Catholic, and 2) the show features the Judeo-Christian God as the Supreme Being, anyway. However, as we are a community with different beliefs, I would not want to impose such things on others. I raised this concern a few weeks ago, but I garnered no response at all. Why don't we just put the matter to vote. Majority wins. FTWinchester (talk) 05:19, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, that is not how community decisions are made on wikis, FTWinchester. According to Calebchiam, there must be a general consensus among users, regardless of a majority vote. 108.247.158.158 06:21, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * Forgive me, but could you define what makes a 'general consensus' different from a majority vote? As far as I know, a consensus is reached by a mutual agreement among the population--although a majority vote is not necessary, it more or less shows the prevailing opinion on all the members of the wiki. Of course some discussion has to follow, but when you have most of the wiki agreeing on one thing, isn't that basically a consensus? FTWinchester (talk) 13:47, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * No, general consesus means everyone involved in the discussion must be in full agreement. According to Calebchiam, wikis do not operate on majority votes and when there is a lack of consesnus in a discussion than the status quo is kept. You can read what he said about making community decisions with general consensus over a majority vote on the Talk:Wincest page in the Deletion? discussion. 107.201.16.199 20:30, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * Consensus could differ from a majority vote, I guess. Realistically, the wiki completely isn't going to agree on something no matter the topic - there's always going to unreasonably disagreeable users, so to me, a majority vote makes more sense and is achievable. -- ImperiexSeed, 7:27 PM, November 30th 2012


 * That may be so, ImperiexSeed, but as I said wikis do not operate by such methods of community decision-making and we must abide by that policy as is our obligation as users . We both know Calebchiam well enough that strives to uphold the Wikia policies, so it's unlikely he will overlook users settling a debate not by the book as he will undoubtfully view the Metatron and his Master discussion as a lack of consensus and decree that the page remain as is in order to keeper the status quo, regardless how many users are opposed. 107.201.16.199 00:48, December 1, 2012 (UTC)


 * I kindly disagree. Ah, well this policy regulation is like the following analogy. It could resemble asking a group of people of varying religions to agree on a God -- philosophically, it's an expectation doomed to fail. There's no way 100% of the contributors here are going to agree on something. My perception remains the same, it'd make more sense if it were a majority vote. I'm in no way obstructing or defiling this wiki's policies, I'm just giving an alternative that makes more more sense. -- ImperiexSeed, 7:57 PM, November 30th 2012


 * ImperiexSeed, I understand what you are saying and do I agree that a majority vote is more practical, but we can not go with such an alternative simply because we disagree with a general Wikia policy. As an admin, you do not even have the authority to call for a vote to settle a debate. Please do not say you do as I learned that from Caleb himself who is far more versed in Wikia's policies than either us. 107.201.16.199 01:25, December 1, 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, some consensus operate on having a super majority vote (65%, 80%, etc.), but anyway. In a consensus, while not all may agree, those with disagreement may give consent to the majority if it is overwhelming. But I digress. As of now we are locked in this issue, with only maybe 5 users actively participating. That is hardly a consensus, meaning status quo should remain. But what is our status quo? FTWinchester (talk) 03:58, December 1, 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, I looked into the Metatron page's edit history and 'master" in sentence was initially with a lowercase lettering when a unregistered user had changed it to such from "father", than SilverRain himself capitalized it afterwards. So I would assume the word uncapitalized would be the status quo as that is how it was originally typed on the page. In addition, regarding how the consensus operates on wikis, from what I can gather is it must be overall agreement as Calebchiam stated even if there were 4 users who believed a page should be deleted and 3 who disagreed, than the page would not be deleted as there is no consensus. Although I believe you may be correct in regards to those who disagree giving consent to the majority (or even minority).107.201.16.199 04:27, December 1, 2012 (UTC)

Yo! I'd like to talk to you on chat. It'll take only a minute. -- ImperiexSeed, 7:30 PM, December 1st 2012

Regarding the policy on consensus, to clarify, it is not a majority vote, meaning that we do not move forward with a certain action because 60% of users agree, and 40% disagree. That being said, it does not mean that 100% of users have to agree either. The idea of consensus is that we seek to address as many concerns as possible. If valid and undeniable points are brought up by the 40%, we do not ignore them, but seek compromises so that we can move forward. The policy on consensus can be found here.

As stated on that page:

"Consensus is not what everyone agrees to, nor is it the preference of the majority. Consensus results in the best solution that the group can achieve at the time. Remember, the root of "consensus" is "consent". This means that even if parties disagree, there is still overall consent to move forward in order to settle the issue."

So, when we say 'general consensus', we are talking about this overall consent. Overall consent is not reached if there are significant points brought up by either group that aren't addressed sufficiently. In addition, it does not require the participation of all users in the Wiki, merely those involved in the discussion, however, this should still be a substantial group of participants. Larger policy changes require a greater amount of participation in the discussion from the community. Hope this clears things up, cheers. Calebchiam Talk 08:39, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Awesome. Cheers. FTWinchester (talk) 13:34, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I would've, yes. But, the photo linings seem to have been deleted. Go to the links, and you'll see. So, how are you liking Season 8 so far.... Definitely not as good as Season 5, but sill one of the best. -- ImperiexSeed, 12:58 PM, February 7th 2013

Re:Narrative articles
Hey, sorry for the late reply, I was busy for the past few dates. Anyway, regarding your question, both systems do work, but they have their pros and cons. A season-based narrative might make more sense to readers since events are revealed according to the sequence of the episode releases. For example, a chronological narrative would have mentioned the YED feeding Sam demon blood early on in the article (which would make little sense to the uninitiated) while the season-based narrative would set the stage for this important reveal. The season-based narrative is also easier to create, maintain and organise since the information has a clear sorting. That being said, a chronological narrative is much more professional, and allows the segments of the narrative to be sorted into major arcs/storylines rather than episode numbers. It's largely the preference of the Wiki that decides which system to use, although I do lean towards the latter. If you're willing to embark on the task of making the articles on this Wiki consistent with the latter format, be my guest. :) Calebchiam Talk 13:43, February 15, 2013 (UTC)

Hi. FTWinchester, I'm only going to say this once, so listen up. You, at every turn, pounce on every presentable chance to prove me wrong, and I'm getting sick of it. So, stop! You're a self-proclaimed knowitall, nothing more. I like being you friend, but when you're trying to prove me wrong, I get irresistibly irritable. -- ImperiexSeed, 4:09 PM, February 28th 2013


 * Did you read my message fully--well, did you? It would seem that you didn't, seeing as you accused me of at least two things I didn't do.

1) I never told you to stop editing, in my post- I said, "stop" antagonistically pinning and attacking my posts. Whatever - have a different opinion - I don't care. But it's when you say the exact opposite of what I'm saying that gets me. 2) I needn't look it (the meaning of the phrase, "Self-proclaimed Know-it-all") up - I know very well what it means. It means, you THINK, from your lens, that you you're a better and smarter editor than everybody else.

You're a fine editor, and have much potential here, editing the Supernatural wiki. Keep up the good work. :)

-- ImperiexSeed, 9:27 PM, March 1st 2013

Hi. I thought we got passed this, but, on the blog, you started your instigation again. The term 'Archangel' was first used first used in "Houses of Holy", yes, and an Archangel physically appeared in "Tall Tales", but, in "Free To Be You And Me", is the first time it's called an Archangel and appeared. -- ImperiexSeed, 1:24 PM, March 22nd 2013


 * Ok? You're right, in "Tall Tales", an Archangel appeared 'physically', in a vessel. And, yes, Archangels are first mentioned in "Houses of Holy." But, "Free To Be You And Me" is the first episode where an Archangel physically appears and is confirmed. -- ImperiexSeed, 10:14 PM, March 22nd 2013

Yes, you're welcome. Your templates - man, did they come out splendidly! The utilization of those on the compatible pages enthralls me. -- ImperiexSeed, 12:25 PM, March 23rd 2013

Hey, would you, at a time that's convenient, mind doing a total revamp on the Seraph page? It needs a ton of work done, regarding grammar, punctuation, word usage, etc. Because, honestly, it looks awful right now. Thanks. -- ImperiexSeed, 3:15 PM, March 30th 2013

re:template proposal
Hey FTWinchester. Haha yeah, these templates are pretty sick, nice work. I think you can go ahead and edit the templates as necessary.

On a side note though, we have to be careful about where we use the second template. Just with reference to the examples you mentioned, since the content you mentioned is probably explicitly stated as conjecture/speculation or inductive logic in general, use of that template would not be applicable since it's meant for canonical information that has been seemingly contradicted in later episodes.

Perhaps another idea for a template might be to have one stating that the following article/section of the article contains conjecture or speculation? Just a thought.

Cheers! :) Calebchiam Talk 15:31, March 22, 2013 (UTC)

Hi, FTWinchester, I just wanted to let you know I am definitely liking the templates you have created so far. If I may, I suggest updating the spoiler template as it's format differs from the one your using. Keep up the good work! 108.247.151.147 04:14, March 23, 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your support, Wiki Contributor. I'll try to take a look into your suggestion, and if Calebchiam and the community will allow me to do so. FTWinchester (talk) 05:30, March 23, 2013 (UTC)

I think this is where you reply to your template proposal, I would to say they all look great, and I really think you should create them, and I hope you are able to. I just have two disagreements: the first is your "Retcon/Conflict in Canon" template, I don't think thats ones necessary, as as far as I know there has been no true example of reconing, for examples, firstly at no point did anyone say there was only four archangels, that was simply the number that appeared in season five. Secondly its entirely possible he could have a step-father who, considering his orginal one abbandoned him, he took as his real father. My point is there has been no complete recon's yet, so including it would mearly cause disputes over wether it was a recon or not.

Second is your bias template, I can see that being abused, as I personally have been involved in a number of whats bias whats fact debates, with other users, many of which only got resolved because one side gave up, so I would recomend agaist creating that template, as I can only see it being abused. Those are my only two disagreements, and that is simply my advice. Appart from that I'm behind you 100%. General MGD 109 (talk) 21:55, March 23, 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, General's right - in the show, it's never said that there's only 4 Archangels, it's just the number of them that appeared. ImperiexSeed, 6:02 PM, March 23rd 2013
 * General, what about the offscreen retcon of Chuck being God? Shortly after "Swan Song" there were confirmations from both Rob Benedict and Eric Kripke that it was true, but than after Sera Gamble became showrunner, it had reportedly been stated as otherwise. So I would say there is indeed a pontential use for the "Retcon/Conflict in Canon" template. 107.194.22.242 01:41, March 24, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for all your input, guys and/or gals. Correct me if I'm wrong, but so far, the only problematic templates we have are for the 'Retcon/Conflict in Canon' and 'Bias', but everyone who has provided feedback so far agree to the creation of the rest? May I ask your opinion on which template for 'Disambiguation' do you prefer? The Misha or the Balthazar template? I will try to wait for maybe another day before I start creating the other templates, just to give a bit more time for other contributors to weigh in on the subject. FTWinchester (talk) 02:24, March 24, 2013 (UTC)

Hey FTWinchester. Yep, glad you could get it to work. It's pretty much just creating the template page with an appropriate name, posting the html code, and then using on pages as necessary. There's also the issue of template documentation, which details whether there are parameters that need to be filled and how the template should be used but we can always work on it later on since it's quite secondary. And yes, you understood correctly what I said about the second template.

As for which template to use...I personally find the 'Misha' one more humourous, although technically, disambiguation pages are for different subjects with the same name, and the Misha example in the show is really the same subject but with a different name (or different subjects with different names, depending on how you want to argue it). So it might be less appropriate, but this is nitpicking somewhat. The Balthazar one is still good though. Cheers. Calebchiam Talk 10:08, March 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * Articles are supposed to be completely neutral, so to have a template for bias would imply that we actually condone it in articles. The retcon template is alright in theory, whether or not there are any examples of retconning in the series is another thing, but it certainly doesn't hurt to have the template. Calebchiam Talk 12:08, March 24, 2013 (UTC)

I have watched buffy and watched some of Angel. Personally, I think Buffy is an average show. I dont like it as much as supernatural, vampire diaries, being human UK, or true blood. I think Buffy was very butt kicking show, but I didnt like the storylines, didnt like most of the characters, I didnt like them introducing all these demons and not sticking to vampires and introducing greater vampire threats. The only characters I happened to like on buffy were Spike, Faith, Turok Han Vampire and Caleb. Adam was cool too, with his gun hand. Im sticking to the winchesters for slaying

ThomasAtticusSilas2013+ (talk) 20:29, March 24, 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd prefer this Wiki use the Misha one for our disambiguation, because, well, the appearance of Misha - it invokes Castiel. -- ImperiexSeed, 3:12 PM, March 30th 2013

Sorry about deleting a section in th Hunter page. I was trying to add some hunters that were missing, and accidentlly deleted a portion. Sorry for the mess!

No, problem man! I actually had the same issue when I first began adding gifs myself. For the gif to work you need to add |frame| instead of |thumb|, for example instead of File:Angelsfalling.gif|thumb|right| it would be File:Angelsfalling.gif|frame|right|. Bkshadows (talk) 03:07, May 20, 2013 (UTC)Bkshadows

I just saw your edit on Prometheus's page about Chronos...As far as I know, the Chronos shown on the show was the god who could control time and not the Titan Kronos/Cronus..Generally people confuse them due to similar sounding names, but they are said to be different...ME$$AIAH 05:21, May 20, 2013 (UTC)RaghavD

I personally think your exagerating, but I do see your point about the same thing be repeated. However as the information is generally presented in different ways, I don't really see the need to remove it. General MGD 109 (talk) 19:43, May 25, 2013 (UTC)

Okay, maybe your not exagerating, but I carefully read the page over, from top to bottom and I can say that it seems okay now. All in I think its okay leaving it now. General MGD 109 (talk) 17:51, May 26, 2013 (UTC)

Using Past Tense
While it's true that using past tense in canon is better to read, but have you truly seen the number of pages that have to be modified, buddy? I did edit the Harvelle's Roadhouse and Ash pages into past tense, but we need to start right from Season 1's Pilot episode. Do we start editing or we leave the pages like that and make sure that newly created pages are written in past tense? RaghavD  The One and Only  16:46, June 4, 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry to, say, butt in, but yes, I do think we need to weld them into PAST TENSE if needed. -- ImperiexSeed, 12:48 PM, June 4th 2013
 * Well then we better start right away, afterall there is no use waiting, while doing something good(It's a saying in my native tongue) :P RaghavD   The One and Only  16:54, June 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well then we better start right away, afterall there is no use waiting, while doing something good(It's a saying in my native tongue) :P RaghavD   The One and Only  16:54, June 4, 2013 (UTC)


 * Time's a-wasting, currently. Get a move on it! ha ha -- ImperiexSeed, 12:57 PM, June 4th 2013


 * I edited the Wendigo episode. I'm not 100% happy as some sentences didn't quite sit together. But it'll do for the moment. RaghavD  The One and Only  17:09, June 4, 2013 (UTC)


 * I have been advocating this for months now and nobody is listening to me, which is why I put emphasis. Nobody even responded to this forum that it's bsolutely frustrating. It's not like the community won't benefit, I just don't know why people won't show support. FTWinchester (talk) 17:34, June 4, 2013 (UTC)


 * And I am well aware of the number of articles that need to be rewritten, but I can't do it all. Everybody needs to follow guidelines. Unfortunately, the guidelines I proposed haven't garnered any solid support to turn them into actual policies. FTWinchester (talk) 17:37, June 4, 2013 (UTC)


 * In this, I support you fully, bro! Just, tell me how I can help. -- ImperiexSeed, 1:38 PM, June 4th 2013


 * Thanks. If you agree to the proposal, two things need to be done--the first being disseminating information about the proper tense usage, and the second being adhering to the guidelines. Again, thank you very much. FTWinchester (talk) 17:41, June 4, 2013 (UTC)


 * Hmm, maybe we could assemble a team of selective users who go around fixing the tense usage in adherence to its guidelines? -- ImperiexSeed, 1:48 PM, June 4th 2013


 * That would actually be great, but seeing as I had very little to no success in the matter, I suppose an admin like you would have more success. FTWinchester (talk) 01:53, June 5, 2013 (UTC)


 * Don't be ridiculous. Let's make it happen! Enlist users like General MGD 109, Twilight Despair 5, and MisterRandom. Hang a message on all of their talk pages, stating what needs to be done. I PAST TENSED some info on the soul page. -- ImperiexSeed, 12:17 PM, June 5th 2013


 * Alright, thanks, man. FTWinchester (talk) 02:21, June 6, 2013 (UTC)


 * Yep, yep. Let's do this thang. ha ha -- ImperiexSeed, 12:12 PM, June 6th 2013


 * Sure I'll joint you, I agree the pages should be in past tense. Thanks for inviting me. General MGD 109 (talk) 21:21, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Just let me know what and where you want me to do. General MGD 109 (talk) 21:33, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * What about me? Self-Declared God of Supreme Conduits (talk) 21:43, June 6, 2013 (UTC) Kesslerbeast


 * Sure, man. It wasn't my intention to leave you out, I was just quite preoccupied in the Buffy wikia, so I wasn't able to ask everyone currently active in joining. Thanks for your support! FTWinchester (talk) 21:51, June 6, 2013 (UTC)

re: Rising Son talk
It's cool, man. It just boiled down to fanwank, anyway.--50.89.225.132 19:35, June 8, 2013 (UTC)

re: Lust+Chastity
It's fine, dude. We all usually miss something when we're adding something. And I really enjoy the irony of the same actress playing Lust and "Chastity"--didn't even realize that until you posted it.--50.89.225.132 15:35, June 9, 2013 (UTC)

Give me five minutes. General MGD 109 (talk) 20:46, June 9, 2013 (UTC)

Done, I hope its up to standard. General MGD 109 (talk) 21:05, June 9, 2013 (UTC)

Chat?
If you have time, care to get on the chat?&#91;&#91;User:Twilight Despair 5&#124;&#93;&#93; (&#91;&#91;The God of Creation&#93;&#93;) (talk) 16:55, June 11, 2013 (UTC)

Re:Affiliates
Well, this is up for discussion. But frankly, from experience, affiliations don't do very much for raising our page views & site visits, rather, SEO (search-engine optimisation) and appearing 1st in Google search results is what gets people visiting our site. So I don't really see much point in affiliation, unless it's for another Supernatural Wiki (e.g. Supernatural Fan Fiction), because then in a sense, we are from the same community of editors. Whereas in the case of BTVS and Charmed, there is virtually no link between the two apart from the fact that the shows are of the supernatural genre.

So yeah, it doesn't do much for us nor is it a particularly meaningful affiliation. Good point about the links to other CW wikis though, those aren't official affiliates, it's just Wikia arbitrarily sneaking in links to other Wikis so as to prove Wikia's overall search ranking (because people spending more time on Wikis is a plus for them). I would go ahead and remove them, but something tells me you'll want to push for affiliation with Buffyverse anyway? Calebchiam Talk 04:18, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep, of course, it's always open for discussion. But it's one thing to visit another Wiki to learn from them, it's another to start becoming an active editor there. Perhaps more would visit (though personally, I never click on affiliate links) but I think you'll agree that it's unlikely editors of another Wiki would suddenly decide to become active editors on this Wiki unless they were already interested in the show. (And if they already were, they would have found this Wiki already.)


 * Just to clarify though, there is no precedent for this. The decision to not affiliate was my own, so we are following it only by silent consensus, so if you want to change it, be my guest. Calebchiam Talk 04:50, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * It's no biggie and thanks dude :) and sorry if you got too many notifications on your talk page. For some reason, my message kept appearing before Calebchiam's last message.  RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  04:56, June 19, 2013 (UTC)

Why is every user on this wiki just ignoring everything I have to say, on talk pages or blog posts? Take your response on to the "fighting" topic, I sent in a response, so did General, and immediately, in the opening, you just addressed General even though I also left a comment. -- ImperiexSeed, 1:51 PM, June 26th 2013

Ok, well....if that truly is the case, I have no problem with that. Oh, I'm sooo looking forward to Season 9, but I'm really curious as to what it's going to be about. -- ImperiexSeed, 12:11 PM, June 27th 2013

Re:Redirects
Yes, go right ahead. They don't count in the list of article pages anyway, assuming you create them correctly. I've done it here, which would give you this when you search for it. Calebchiam Talk 02:50, June 25, 2013 (UTC)

Infobox
Hey, I was hoping if you have the time to help me out with an Infobox for a wiki I'm editing. RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  12:50, June 28, 2013 (UTC)

Here's the link to the wiki I've told you about.

http://coupling.wikia.com/wiki/Steve_Taylor.

See the infobox for the character. I've got the basic template from Community Central. I had to fill up the required details like Ex Partner, Present Partner etc. I did not like the end product of it. I mean the background color of the wiki does not match with the infobox's colors and the color is too light to read. Could you design a template with suitable colors? I mean it's possible to change the colors in the infobox, right? Also I have no idea why is there space between each line. I'm just asking if it's possible for you or not. I would appreciate any help. :) RaghavD   Taking the ROAD less travelled  15:25, June 28, 2013 (UTC)

What you have done so far is good. Only one thing left is the width of the infobox. Can that be trimmed? RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  05:01, June 29, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot dude :) I'll let you know if I have any trouble. RaghavD   Taking the ROAD less travelled  05:10, June 29, 2013 (UTC)

Eve on the main page
Just thought I'd let you know that I added Eve to the main page under Deities. Do you think Lucifer should be added to in the same category as he was the creator of the demons? RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  13:13, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah. I was talking about the Top of The Main Page. Pardon the turn of phrase :) RaghavD   Taking the ROAD less travelled  13:13, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

Alright. I'll think of a way to do that. RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  13:18, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

Done. btw, on the main page there is a slider which consists of 4 images. One of them says that S9 premiere is on Oct 3rd. Anyway to edit that?. I think one has to search for the Slider template of the Supernatural Wiki to edit that. RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  14:48, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

I had to dig a little. But I finished editing it. RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  15:25, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

I don't think the Browse and Slider sections are restricted only to admins. I just searched for the respective templates and edited them. In any case I never really tinkered with templates as a regular user, so I don't know whether anyone can edit them or not. RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  13:39, July 4, 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I took care of it. RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  04:33, July 5, 2013 (UTC)

Re:Pages
Hi FTWinchester, the Wiki term for what you are describing is granularity, and for Wikis, the policy we follow is that we create individual pages for all the things within a certain category. It's more practical too, because one isn't going to be able to find what he wants within a page which is a huge long list. At the same time though, the category namesake (e.g. Rituals) will be a general pages that will describe the different types of rituals (Summoning, Warding, etc).

IMO, everything within Supernatural canon is worthy of documentation, even if they appear briefly or in only one episode. More information is always a good thing, after all. Hope this helps. Calebchiam Talk 03:58, July 8, 2013 (UTC)

Great that you noticed it (the Slider thing). I fixed it now. RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  11:35, July 8, 2013 (UTC)

Dude I totally wasn't going to argue with you, just wanted to know. Go ahead and change it back, I was only curious but the first title is absolutely fine :)

Gurgatory (talk) 16:45, July 10, 2013 (UTC)

New Pages
If you'd like, you can give me a list of pages you want to create. I would try to collect as much info as I can. I'm a bit free these days, so I took on the task of filling info on the Anime series. RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  05:49, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

For rituals like summoning of Zeus, should there be a separate page like Special Summonings or something like that? or just a separate section in the Summoning page? RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  06:01, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

Wow, that's a lot of rituals for one show. Anyway it is actually a good way to organise the page. On, the other hand, Zeus wasn't the only pagan summoned. I know that novels aren't considered canon, but even Hel was summoned in the latest novel. I was thinking of a page like "Summoning Gods" and add info on both these gods. RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  06:20, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, for Hel and all the characters/creatures from the novels. I knew that you created new templates, but I might have missed out on some, because I wasn't aware of the MixedCanon template until now. It actually makes sense, rather than saying that they are outright Non-Canon. The reason is that some of the novels were from Kripke's assistant herself. That is like almost Canon. RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  06:33, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry. I'm guessing you were just talking about Hel's section on the Summoning Gods page. RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  06:41, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

You are right. I think this warrants for a Summoning Gods page. I will re-watch those episodes and add info accordingly. RaghavD  Taking the ROAD less travelled  04:37, July 18, 2013 (UTC)

Seraph Talk Page
Why did you remove your comment from the talk page? There was nothing wrong with what you said. RaghavD  Born Sinner, the opposite of a Winner  05:34, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

That's true too and I understand your plight very well. RaghavD  Born Sinner, the opposite of a Winner  06:07, August 7, 2013 (UTC)

Re: X or Y?
Maybe both, I don't know cause they don't come out until October 12, so maybe Christmas? Why are you asking? Pokemonfan201 (talk) 18:32, September 13, 2013 (UTC)

New Spell
Hey I re-watched the Taxi Driver episode this afternoon. I noticed that Sam uses an incantation to release Bobby's soul to Heaven. Do you think a page is required? Soul Release Spell sounds a li'l lame. RaghavD All I need is ONE life, ONE try, ONE breath, I'm ONE man  13:19, September 15, 2013 (UTC)

It's a different one from when Dean released Benny to resurrect him, right? I think it could have its own page (just basing my answer on Caleb's). I'll try to think of something, and I'll tell you if i got a name. I think for now you could start doing the body of the article? FTWinchester (talk) 13:27, September 15, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a different incantation. I think I'll do it tomorrow morning and drop me a name by then. Or you're welcome to do it. RaghavD All I need is ONE life, ONE try, ONE breath, I'm ONE man  13:33, September 15, 2013 (UTC)

Sure. Take your time. RaghavD All I need is ONE life, ONE try, ONE breath, I'm ONE man  13:55, September 15, 2013 (UTC)

Can we talk please, its about your new higher-tier angels catagory, I think you might have been a bit lenient with the description, higher-tier. So why you have the time, I would to chat. General MGD 109 (talk) 17:20, September 21, 2013 (UTC)

How are Esper, Ion, Nathaniel, Virgil higher tier angels? RaghavD All I need is ONE life, ONE try, ONE breath, I'm ONE man  17:35, September 21, 2013 (UTC)

Seems fair enough. And, good thinking on the Battles category. RaghavD All I need is ONE life, ONE try, ONE breath, I'm ONE man  05:32, September 22, 2013 (UTC)

It's not a problem. RaghavD All I need is ONE life, ONE try, ONE breath, I'm ONE man  13:38, September 22, 2013 (UTC)

It's been quite awhile since we last talked, here, on the Supernatural wiki. Relating mostly to the fact that I no longer own my own laptop, so I have to use other resources, like library or my Wii U pad. While excited, I don't understand how it can be beneficial to the story for Lucifer to return, without him extinguishing humans, demons, Angels, etc. There would literally be no story. You take care, bro. -- ImperiexSeed, 12:54 PM, September 23rd 2013


 * I enjoy the series' Archangels. But, yeah, the Archangels, in who they are, languish everything around them to dust. Speaking on a contextual basis, like I said, there'd be no story with them in it. They bash down any character (besides God and Death) that crosses their path; Angels, demons, Deities, spirits, monsters and humans. -- ImperiexSeed, 10:47 AM, September 26th 2013

Template: Alias
I happened to see your message for David. The templates are sysop editable only. For Crowley, you mean that you also want King of Hell to appear? Is that it? RaghavD All I need is ONE life, ONE try, ONE breath, I'm ONE man  16:22, September 25, 2013 (UTC)

I added it to the Recurring and Minor Characters template. RaghavD All I need is ONE life, ONE try, ONE breath, I'm ONE man  16:27, September 25, 2013 (UTC)

I was unaware I had, I must have accidentally deleted it when I was clearing up the link problem, sorry. General MGD 109 (talk) 17:08, September 26, 2013 (UTC)

Beast of burden with a beastly question?
hay man beast of burden hear just wanna know if there are any pages (apart from kesslerBeast's one) where i can talk to people about future series ideas like possible creatures/Big Bads/plots and other such things if u could let me know that would be realy helpful thanx BTW i have a blog post about the Beast of Revolations (an idea of mine) would u like to check it out up to u lol.

05:36, September 30, 2013 (UTC)

REPLY
thanx for the reply mate didnt think u would lol and dont worry about the long reply its cool lol and i agree with you the shows creatures are kinda bland im actuely sick of angels and demons bring in the ancent things man i liked the leviathens but they ould of been cooler. anyway if u have any ideas for the show and u wanna share them my page is open and if u wanna hear my ideas i think maby we can bounce off each others brainstome :) cool and once agane thanx for replying.

agreed Abbadon and the knights of hell are cool but this guy dosent realy push his ideas dose he lol well hears hopeing :) PLEASE SOMETING NEW!

16:54, October 9, 2013 (UTC)

Re: Title Card
Yeah, I was trying out the same. I reverted it back. Apparently, I'm not very clear on the exact dimensions of the pic. I'll ask Thesilentpoethosea (previous admin who re-did the theme) for help. RaghavD All I need is ONE life, ONE try, ONE breath, I'm ONE man  13:59, October 9, 2013 (UTC)

Dude, there nothing to apologize for. RaghavD All I need is ONE life, ONE try, ONE breath, I'm ONE man  14:08, October 9, 2013 (UTC)

Is it better now? If not, tell me. Should I increase or decrease the transparency? Coz, I can view the pages without any diffivulty, but you never know. RaghavD All I need is ONE life, ONE try, ONE breath, I'm ONE man  16:49, October 9, 2013 (UTC)

Hyper Links
Which color do you think would work for the hyper-links? RaghavD All I need is ONE life, ONE try, ONE breath, I'm ONE man  15:14, October 10, 2013 (UTC)

I'll use it and let you see for yourself. RaghavD All I need is ONE life, ONE try, ONE breath, I'm ONE man  04:08, October 11, 2013 (UTC)

I do not know it. Guess you'll have to check it on the internet for the nearest approximation. RaghavD All I need is ONE life, ONE try, ONE breath, I'm ONE man  12:35, October 16, 2013 (UTC)

Re: Lilith as Big Bad
Don't sweat it, dude. Happens to everyone. By the way, what'd you think of the last episode?--NaiflidG (talk) 16:39, October 18, 2013 (UTC)

I thought it was much better, too (probably 'cause it had way more action than the premiere--I loved Abaddon equipping her demons with guns, that was so cool). Yeah, the wings thing didn't make much sense, but I'm willing to gloss over that because the skeletal burnt wing shot looked badass. My problems with the episode are with Abaddon. Like you said, she was scared of facing one fallen angel, and also A.) why did she torture the hunters for information when she can read minds, and B.) doesn't she know where the bunker is, since she was in the room when Larry gave Sam the coordinates and she could have looked at them when Sam was unconscious? Even though she had no way of knowing Crowley was there, she could have gone and tried to either break in or launch some kind of attack on Sam and Dean. But, all in all, I did like the episode. Hope we get more awesome moments like it.--NaiflidG (talk) 17:19, October 18, 2013 (UTC)

It could also have been that Abaddon had time to kill and decided to spend it by torturing the information out of hunters (which would also have the bonus of making them feel guilty after they break), so she could have just been in a sadistic mood. Or she was testing her new soldiers' interrogation skills. Good point with the bunker, but since the Titan and his kid and Castiel got in last year, and they had already brought Crowley in, I wasn't sure if the writers remembered that it's supposed to be warded. If there's no follow-up to either point for the rest of the season, I'll assume that the writers forget or just found it easier to write the story a particular way.--NaiflidG (talk) 17:53, October 18, 2013 (UTC)

Re:Query
Hey, yeah I'm still active in there, just not editing that much anymore Damon-Balthazar-Salvatore (talk) 16:47, October 18, 2013 (UTC)

My apoligizes friend, I've been on what you might call an EXTENDED vacation but Ive recently returned to this wiki when i received your message from July. I assume all is taken care of now? also I see there have been MANY changes around here lol.(talk)--Bkshadows

Not a big deal friend, if it means that much to you ill undo your creations when i have a chance. That was just to get rid of those black borders dont know why there's so many? but there was nothing "wrong" with your photos dont take it personal. and no there is no standard size for a wiki picture. because I'm in film school I love paying such attention to detail such as the props they use and the Computer Generated Effects. When I first started here it drove me INSANE to try and view a picture with small dimensions, too many pixels or just low quality. I then took it upon myself to replace these with higher quality ones just to give the viewer a better picture. Its just a small habit Ive kept up around here as you can see. (talk)--Bkshadows

May we all not be scorched. ha ha
Many characters say, in Season 5, that together, Michael and Lucifer would devastate a third of the Earth. However, Zachariah says that if Lucifer goes on check, he'll roast every single human to 'flakes of oblivion.' I was wondering, do you think I should post this on pyrokinesis's page or no? Is this assertion enough evidence. I, personally, believe that the Devil is powerful enough to tear apart continents. Catch you around, bud. -- ImperiexSeed, 11:54 PM, October 30th 2013

My goodness, that section on God's page really has gotten bigger, ornated into the form of a mashed block. I'll read it and when I have time, I'll fix it. -- ImperiexSeed, 3:25 PM, November 22nd 2013

I hear what your saying
I hear what your saying, but still he had clearly gone somewhere of the deep end, somewhere along the road he went from eating dead animal parts as part of a spell, to being willing to murder when he didn't need to, to being willing to outright murder and eat a person, I wouldn't say he was really that sane. Still your right, it did make him more predatory, its just in human terms that sort of predatory is closer to a psychopath. General MGD 109 (talk) 22:43, November 6, 2013 (UTC)

Template:D deletion
I really didn't check it before deleting. It wasn't appropriately named and thought that it was one of those templates that were unused. From now on, I'll check twice before going on a deleting spree. RaghavD '"I'm beginning to feel like a Rap God"  09:40, November 8, 2013 (UTC)

A Quick Question
That kind of thought never even crossed my mind, buddy. Don't even think about it anymore. RaghavD '"I'm beginning to feel like a Rap God"  15:45, November 27, 2013 (UTC)

Did Sam have super-strength?
I think Sam had a discrete level of super-strength, at times, while he was on demon blood - given the implications through a quote by Dean, when he said, "You're not hopped up on demon blood this time" when they were about to physically fight. Just something to think about. -- ImperiexSeed, 9:00 PM, November 27th 2013

Yes, I think he did. I remember that my brother and I kept a close tab on the fights of Sam and Dean, and Sam usually won especially around season 4, when he was high with demon blood. FTWinchester (talk) 06:08, November 28, 2013 (UTC)


 * Please go to blog The oldest being, archangel or leviathan? and read and respond to my latest comment. I can't believe how anyone, from any standpoint, can think Leviathans stand even a remote chance to the power of archangels. One archangel could take 100 "gods," 5 Leviathans and dragons in an instant. Leviathans, in some form or another, require a level of sustenance while archangels can survive indefinitely without touching food. Archangels can create blizzards, heat waves, tornadoes, tsunamis, etc. Lucifer dug 600 ft to the core of the Earth without breaking a sweat, he annihilated ancient "gods" effortlessly, and they can resurrect another being again and again till the end, while simultaneously doing other things. Imagine that; resurrecting the dead endlessly while also teleporting, talking, etc. They have no equal in the show besides God and Death. -- ImperiexSeed, 6:47 PM, December 1st 2013


 * So, what do you think? Please, respond to my message above. There really should be NO controversy regarding archangels and every other character/creature, but God and Death. They win decillions times over. -- ImperiexSeed, 12:24 PM, December 9th 2013


 * Proof? Seriously?! Isn't archangels' appearances enough? My most wildest imaginations couldn't conjure a scenario where a Leviathan could defeat an archangel. An archangel blade, you say? Ok, first off, they'd never get the chance to effectively use it. Before the armed Leviathan could even move, the blade would be as ash at their feet. What, from their side, could Leviathans possibly do to in any way to deter an archangel? With a flick of the wrist, an archangel could hurl a Leviathan to a storm of cosmic butterflies, completely incinerating both the vessel and the Leviathan. They could smother one to death in a mountain of sneakers. The archangel could strike them with lightning for 9 hours till the Leviathan's a sizzling corpse. -- ImperiexSeed, December 12th 2013


 * Really? So is believing a shapeshifter who hasn't appeared yet can shapeshift (without actually seeing it specifically do it) headcanon? But thanks for all your opinions and feedback. -- ImperiexSeed, 11:47 PM, December 13th 2013

Hey, would it be safe to say that with multiple angels, it's possible to tear into supernatural dimensions (seen with Purgatory)? On a totally different note, do you think that we'll get to see some archangels (Lucifer and or Gabriel)? I love archangels but, with them, there's no story. Dean, Sam, Castiel, Bobby, Ellen and Jo couldn't hurt, affect or touch Lucifer for practically the whole season. This is an inevitability that can't be altered when concerning archangels. Anyway, catch you around, buddy. ImperiexSeed, 11:02 PM, December 15th 2013

Hey. Are you done talking to me, or are you just busy? I'd appreciate some kind of response to the above message. Alright, hope to catch you around. -- ImperiexSeed, 1:14 PM, December 17th 2013

I know, but you must realize, eventually, doing nine seasons (and probably a tenth), they're going to run out of avenues, leading to an unavoidable halt. I myself am enjoying this season. Again, with a totally different note, why do users call God the creator of 'the universe?' He's clearly not in Supernatural; he didn't create Death, Famine, War, Pestilence, "gods", and probably not reapers (who were presumably created by Death). -- ImperiexSeed, 6:02 PM, December 17th 2013


 * They've managed to keep this story from crumbling so far, even with some things that don't make sense to me. I can't begin to list reasons why having an angel (now seraph) close friend puts entire arcs at disadvantages and skews logic. Take every time someone's died, for example. I don't know why Dean, Sam and even Bobby haven't used Castiel to do so much good. He could resurrect John, Mary, Karen, Ellen, Jo, Rufus, Will, Charlie's mom, etc. Not to mention every single hunt they go on; they'd save a lot of time and lives by asking Castiel to take care the evils (ghouls, vampires, wendigos, werewolves, maybe wiping out thousands of demons at a time) in Supernatural. And yet, they're still kickin' evil's gnarly ass. ImperiexSeed, 7:55 PM, December 17th 2013


 * I personally like season 9, probably for reasons you don't. I attest, Castiel intervening every time would wrinkle the story to the point of futility, but it'll never chuck the fact of strict cogency, where it makes no sense that these characters wouldn't use Castiel to do all those good things I mentioned. You can't be serious about angels always being epitomized as bright gleams? How can that work with multiple angels being demonstrated, like in "Holy Terror?" I'd be bemused if they tried to demonstrate multiple angels at once with bright gleams. So, they chose the grace to typify the angels' presences. -- ImperiexSeed, 3:37 PM, December 19th 2013


 * I guess it could work if they showed light spraying from multiple vantage points. -- ImperiexSeed, 3:06 PM, December 20th 2013

Michael Photo
Sure, I'll try Gabriel456 (talk) 23:58, December 15, 2013 (UTC)

Huh. Tried increasing the photo's size abit, but the preview still showed Michael/John being weird compared to Michael/Adam. This may be because they're both in the same photo. I guess I'll have to post two seperate pictures, see if that works Gabriel456 (talk) 00:04, December 16, 2013 (UTC)

How's that, any better? Gabriel456 (talk) 00:07, December 16, 2013 (UTC)

nah, don't worry about it, it's not a bother Gabriel456 (talk) 00:13, December 16, 2013 (UTC)

Re:Orphan Pages and Dead ends
Dead-end pages simply mean that they don't link to any other articles - which is not great since all the articles in the Wiki ought to be connected such that it's literally impossible to reach a dead end. Orphan pages have no pages linking to them, which means they can only be found by the search bar - again, not great. There are no official policies since there don't really need to be; we just ought to avoid such pages by creating more links between articles.

Granularity again, I'm quite for it since by having more articles, it makes it more likely that others will expand said articles. That being said, the argument from the other side that some topics have so little information that it only makes sense to group them together is logical as well. So..the former might be preferable, but the latter is sometimes necessary. You will have to use your discretion on this. Cheers! Calebchiam Talk 15:59, December 17, 2013 (UTC)

Bye?
You said you might be leaving depending on where the rest of season 9 goes. Um, a friend's coming to pick me up, like now, but I'd really like to talk with you about this. Not to try an change your mind, that's not my place at all, but maybe meet you on chat when we're both on. But, if and when you do leave, I'll miss you a lot. Catch you later, buddy. -- ImperiexSeed, 1:51 PM, December 27th 2013


 * I started watching the show back in 2008, with "The Rapture," and immediately I was hooked. I caught up quickly after that, to where I've seen every episode of every season. I, to date, really enjoy their incorporation of angel/demon lore, no matter where it goes (archangels, Rit Zien, especially the cupid), but I do care about the story. Like I said in a different message, if they branch out, and lather other lore into the story, it will eventually stop making sense (such as the Castiel thing I mentioned). Sera's Bigger and Bad(der) thing can only hold for so long till it becomes impossibly unfair for the boys. Ok, my question to you is, where should they go? They only have so many arteries. -- ImperiexSeed, 4:18 PM, December 29th 2013

The Horsemen's rings?
Who/what forged the four Horsemen rings? The better questions is, who would create such objects? I know this wasn't dabbed at in the show, but I'd like to hear some of your thoughts. Did they just appear when the Horsemen took on form? Were they forged in the supernatural fires of hell? Were they just Earthly rings, maybe like Death's cane and Famine's wheelchair, which changed on contact with the Horsemen?

About the last message...
I'm sorry for making you going crazy...I am new here and what I wrote on your page yesterday, well, it seemed to be holy crap. So I removed it :D My English is pretty horrible and the structure of this wiki is different from the German one...

But I think it although would be funny to "talk" to you guys here :) so forget about that, please.

C U Jo ;D

See? I forgot My sign. (Joanna Beth Harvelle (talk) 14:29, January 2, 2014 (UTC))

Just a few things.
I can easily assume that Crowley's going to use the angel exorcising spell, you know, the one not seen since frickin' four! Or, he might just torture the angel out of him. Why didn't Alastair unleash Death and use him to bend practically everything in the powers of hell favor? Such power would've allowed them to win the war a hundred times over. Death, now operating under the whim of crazy Al, could've slaughtered every opposing angel, raised every deceased demon (even ones from the primeval age), snatch his master (Lucifer) out of the cage without having to go through the seals. Then again, Alastair would probably find that immensely boring and not as satisfying as maiming and torturing everyone he can with his own vessel's hands. Also, why didn't Lucifer use the four Horsemen rings during the apocalypse? He could worn them on his vessel's fingers, and bear the power to manipulate the very aspects of war, famine, pestilence and death. He would've been more powerful than even Castiel when he had all of Purgatory's souls. -- ImperiexSeed, 1:49 PM, January 2nd 2014


 * Well, actually, Death has the power to raise anything organic, living, or active back to a state of consciousness. Because he's Death. So, he can raise deceased demons, because according to Cas and Crowley, archangels can raise deceased demons. -- ImperiexSeed, 6:38 PM, January 3rd 2014


 * Cite them? Are you serious? Fine. There was an episode, in season six, where Castiel says, "We'll [angels and demons] die again and again till the end of time." This means archangels can resurrect deceased angels and demons. Also, Rapahel said Lucifer could resurrect deceased angels. Crowley makes a similar remark in "The Devil You Know." So, if archangels can, Death can too. -- ImperiexSeed, 11:19 PM, January 3rd 2014


 * After Lucifer dug the hole, he started changing and then, Death manifested himself in front of Lucifer. And so, I thought if they (Castiel and Lucifer) used the same words, then it is, in fact, a manifestations spell. -- ImperiexSeed, 12:02 AM, January 4th 2014

Manifestation spell
Can I add a page regarding the manifestation spell Castiel used to make the cupid find form, which actually, could be the same spell used by Lucifer on Death. - ImperiexSeed, 10:22 PM, January 3rd 2014

Hey, is something going on with you and I? I feel drowned in silence. Are you, in any way, mad at me? We've been a good streak for a while now. If not, I see no point in ruffling anything any further. Anyway, if anything, I softly correlated spells used by Castiel and Lucifer in those two instances. Thought something was there, however they could just as easily possess no correlation in relation to the result of the spell. A Horseman's ring, worn, is shown to operate in such a way that the wearer is endowed with infinite dominance over the said attribute. But, anyway, I'll catch you later. -- ImperiexSeed, 9:13 PM, January 11th 2014


 * Thank you, bro, for getting back to me. Please understand if this message is sloppy, it's late and I'm beat. I was referring to what they said in Latin - and if it matched up. And, if they did, then both would be a type of manifestation spell. -- ImperiexSeed, 12:10 AM, January 12th 2014

I'm really offended that you're not responding to any of my comments on talk pages. I need you to level with me on this one. Especially the one you requested that I commented on. What's going on here, man? And not seeing the feed isn't really an excuse, seeing as you can just scroll down. Alright, have a good one, buddy. -- ImperiexSeed, 6:04 PM, January 12th 2014

That makes sense. I'll try to keep that in mind. Alright, so that depends on how you define focus. In the show, it appeared to more regulate their powers than anything else, and Dean was able to access pretty much every power and ability in Death's arsenal (death tap, teleportation, etc). So, I'd say, theoretically, if Dean tried on War's ring, he'd get all of the Horseman's power. -- ImperiexSeed, 6:41 PM, January 12th 2013

Hello again :D
So, if I got that right, English isn't your native language? Well, maybe you agree in that point when I say it's almost demanding to communicate in another language ^^

I noticed the popularity of this wiki and I'm confused about all the extra stuff you've got here! But i like the German wiki better, cuz it's German xD in the rankings there I'm the 9th place! but I think it's much smaller than "yours". i mean, we've got about 500 articles and here are more than 1.500!

key, I'm getting out know (Joanna Beth Harvelle (talk) 21:45, January 5, 2014 (UTC))

Re: Apocrypha
'Kay. Forgive me for pestering you about this, but what is your stance on the canonicity of the guides? It seemed like you supported them as canon (so long as there aren't any glaring contradictions) due to the Astaroth thing, but you also said that the TV show should be our only standard for canon. Should I count you as being for or against their being included as canon (or neutral)? In the meantime, thanks for a lively and thought-provoking debate (and for being the only person so far to give their thoughts on the matter). Peace out.--NaiflidG (talk) 00:52, January 10, 2014 (UTC)

Hey, good for you, man! I'm glad it brightened your day. Did you find anything particularly interesting so far? Also, unless you have other Companion Guides, I think that this means we both have the Season 7 Companion and The Essential Supernatural (I've also got three of the novels and the first issue of one of the comics--I should probably add information on them, but that sounds like more of a project for when we're on hellatus and now it's only a couple days 'till the current one is over--maybe over the summer). When opportunity arises to get another, I think I'll get the fourth season guide, just because it's supposed to have something in it comparing the general power levels between white-eyed and yellow-eyed demons (and because Season 4 was probably my favorite season and had some of my favorite supporting characters in it, so it might have some really interesting stuff). Which one do you think you want next?--NaiflidG (talk) 05:38, January 12, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd love to Season 3 and Season 6 Guides, too. Come to think of it, the Season 8 Companion might also be super-interesting, especially if it has information about the Knights of Hell and the revised hierarchy of Hell (that is, with the Knights of Hell having been created) as of the end of Season 8. It might be easier just to say that it'd be neat to have all the Guides. The novels are kind of crappy in my opinion; of the three I have, I like Night Terror the best because it's got some carnage and chaos on an epic scale they'd never manage on TV (like, there's this scene where a guy gets trapped in the sidewalk or something and a gigantic spider half-melts him with acid and eats his head), but it seemed like there were too many side-characters and not enough focus on the Winchesters themselves. Coyote's Kiss would've been really cool except it focused too much on this OC character and her relationship with Dean with Sam kind of just standing there, and One Year Gone also would've been pretty cool (and offered some background on the Campbell family being at Salem and Soulless Sam's time with the Campbells and stuff) but was just kind of clumsily-executed and had these spelling errors that shouldn't have been there that detracted from my enjoyment of it. And the Aswang sound cool as hell from their page on this wiki; now I kind of want the book, too. Anything interesting from John Winchester's Journal and Bobby Singer's Guide to Hunting? I like the reveal that Ruby was a double-agent because I prefer demons to be pure evil and scheme-y rather than having any speck of good in them, but she was killed off way too soon--she should've stuck around at least through Season 5, just to see her working against the Winchesters and how they react to each other now that the fact she's been tricking them is out in the open (plus, maybe she could've worked with Meg and that would've been fun to see). And we should have gotten the Harvelles in Seasons 3 and 4 (even if it was just to make us get more attached to them so that their deaths in "Abandon All Hope..." would be all the more shocking). Don't even get me started on Anna; I'm still annoyed that the Winchesters apparently never wondered where their other angel ally was for most of Season 5 and that she's villified for trying to save the world after months of non-stop torture and brainwashing (even though Dean tortured other souls in Hell because he'd been tortured himself for so long and Castiel slaughtered thousands and brought the leviathan onto Earth to stop the Apocalypse and killed Samandiriel under brainwashing, yet there's no question of forgiving them) while Gabriel did far worse for much less noble reasons but he is seen as a good guy and mourned and is now apparently coming back to life. /rant--NaiflidG (talk) 19:27, January 12, 2014 (UTC)

Dunno if you've been on lately, dude, but it looks like we finally got our answer for the great Azazel vs. Lilith debate. Hope that you are doing well.--NaiflidG (talk) 18:21, September 1, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Deal
Oh, cool. I think there is a difference with regards to proper deals and simple agreements (like the difference between Dean selling his soul to get Sam back and his agreeing to hand Henry and the box over to Abaddon to get Sam back). Proper deals have to be sealed in some way to ensure that neither party go back on their word, whereas you're operating purely on trust with just agreements. The thing that confuses me is what the repercussion of breaking a proper deal is, what keeps a demon from just going against their word in the first place--are they just magically forced to obey their deal or is there something negative that happens to them as a result of going against their deals? It seems that the crossroads demons are just afraid of Crowley punishing them for potentially costing them more souls if word gets out that they're double-crossing clients and you're fully capable of breaking deals if you like and you have the contract in-hand, but I kind of got the impression when Castiel double-crossed Crowley that you're just plain not supposed to go against your deal ("Even I don't break a deal like this" or something) and what's the point of having a magically-binding contract in the first place if you can just break it on a whim?--NaiflidG (talk) 18:53, January 12, 2014 (UTC)

Leviathans....eating in....Heaven?
I really can't understand the end part of this sentence, which is located on the Angels' page: ''Sometime after God and Death's existence, God creates Heaven. He later creates the first beasts, the Leviathans, and let them roam Heaven, eating and devouring everything in their path.'' What, exactly, were Leviathans eating in heaven? Nothing existed at this time besides God and Death (who, obviously, weren't being munched on by Leviathan). Were they plowing through each other and caused so much damage to both themselves and heaven, that God had no choice but to lock them somewhere to ensure the safety of the universe at large? Unless furthered and revealed in a future episode, it stands to be inevitably impossible for there to be any other explanation than the one I just gave. Literally, nothing existed at that time besides God and Death, which it shouldn't even be said that God and Death couldn't be at all scathed by them because of how obvious it is.-- ImperiexSeed, 8:31 PM, January 13th 2014


 * That still doesn't answer what they could've been eating in heaven, but that's alright I guess. It's really important to look at how Death phrased his question of, Why do you think he created Purgatory? To keep those poisonous things out. Notice he didn't say "Why do you think God changed Purgatory" (which, no offense, automatically destroys the idea that God created Purgatory anyway besides the way it looked when he imprisoned them there) or "To keep them in." (which means he sent them there and that they weren't living there and he just changed it) -- ImperiexSeed, 3:09 PM, January 14th 2014


 * I don't understand how it could be different than God created it. I'm going off what Death say and going from there. I really appreciate your trying to help me here with all theses ideas, but I am looking at this simplistically, and not jump to all these hazy assumptions that could possibly be true in a certain light under certain circumstances. You know? This 'new Earth' concept has never been dabbed at anywhere in what we know as canon, but yours ideas could be potentially possible, which I find highly complicated next to Death's simple question and statement regarding this. -- ImperiexSeed, 3:23 PM, January 14th 2014

Can Leviathan actually mimic the physiologies of other beings?
In "There Will Be Blood," a Leviathan touches a vampire's arm and bears the fangs of a vampire. It seems inarguable that this means they can mimic or copy other beings' physiologies and theoretically gain their abilities. Or can they simply mimic the appearance of any given physical being? What did you think it meant when this happened? If true, this would then make them the most dangerous threat the Winchesters have ever faced. -- ImperiexSeed, 10:38 PM, January 14th 2014


 * Really? What scene are you on, then? The scene I'm talking about is where Edgar touches a vampire and takes his form then bears the fangs of a vampire. -- ImperiexSeed, 11:13 PM, January 14th 2014


 * I'm talking about mimicking abilities not skills. I've now come to recognize that we view things differently because, again, I'm looking at actions or comments at face value, instead of complicating things by, for instance, limiting an ability (shapeshifting by contact) that has been established to work one way variably regarding several points. In other words, they, on at least two occasions, have been able to mimic the physicality of any creature that they've touched. To say they can do this with angels, is technically unproven or even hinted at. But speculatively, it can be argued that when Edgar killed the two angels by contact, he didn't have any need to mimic the angels' powers. I hope you enjoyed "Road Trip" and that maybe somehow you're going to stick it out. See ya, buddy. -- ImperiexSeed, 11:39 PM, January 14th 2014


 * This is where it gets a little mucky. The timing to take things at face value and not fluctuate greatly. You did there, yes, but archangels have proven to be exceptionally strong for beings angels, especially in a comparison between Leviathan. Castiel repeatedly spoke of the sheer impossibility of the task of killing Lucifer was, for it only became possible if Michael stepped in. The only way he was defeated without any action from Michael, was because they teased his pride by giving him Sam as a vessel. Now, no one can cite where it's said in the series that archangels can kill/beat Leviathan or vice-versa. And depending on whether or not Leviathan can mimic angels, I hold inscrutable amount of confidence that Leviathan can't beat archangels. I'll try an stop dumping all my ideas or questions on you and give you some time to edit and have fun. But, later, I will send you messages when I have something I'd like to discuss. -- ImperiexSeed, 12:25 AM, 15th 2014


 * It depends on how you're looking at this. Although, point of view is rightly disposed of in comparison to facts. I'll use an example of a subject we're already talking about. One can say, Leviathan can kill archangels, which is baseless where there's insurmountable hints pointing the contrary. Archangels can destroy Leviathan in an instant from a long distance. You're right, the bone weapon is the only know conventional way to kill Leviathan, but that's nothing impressive when archangels can only be killed conventionally with a certain weapon. Like I said in the previous message, Lucifer was unbeatable unless Michael stepped in, and was only defeated without action from Michael because they teased his pride by giving him Sam as a vessel. While it hasn't been seen on the show, it's damn frickin' obvious whatever Leviathan touch they can mimic their physicality and, by turn, their abilities. The abilities part is more a theory, I'll admit, but it seems like they can mimic their abilities based on what is seen in "There Will Be Blood." Now, the writers could've messed up what they were trying represent in this scene. But, generally, whatever the writers say, in regards to the show, is canon unless it's in direct contradiction with other information. Um, I'll concede it's what you call a no-win relating to Leviathan capability of mimicking angel physiologies. -- ImperiexSeed, 6:07 PM, January 15th 2014


 * It's stilling. There won't ever be any form of confirmation or be dabbled in the show between archangels and Leviathan. But, anyway. It's been dropped. Take care, buddy. -- ImperiexSeed, 10:25 PM, January 15th 2014

Archangels require conventional means to kill the Knights of Hell? What???
That is the farthest stretch I think I've ever seen any of the writers take. Archangels need a weapon to kill the Knights of Hell (a type of demon, mind you) and not bypass such a parameter with simple evisceration?! It's like saying archangels would require a machete to kill vampires. I could, and should, go on and on about this one but, for your sake and sanity, I won't. ;) That probably wouldn't have settled well with Kripke, I would assume. Besides that, "First Born" was an amazing episode. -- ImperiexSeed, 10:30 PM, January 21st 2014

Yeah, I think it's probably more the fact that Cain decided to kill the Knights himself before archangels decided to do it themselves. FTWinchester (talk) 03:39, January 22, 2014 (UTC)

Can we, please, lock the Colt page for a while? I just reverted an edit that didn't possess a tad bit of relevance to what's been revealed in canon. The user said archangels, Horsemen, Leviathans/Eve, Cain and deities were the five things Lucifer was talking about. No character has been revealed, besides Lucifer, to possess immunity to the Colt. So, to name off characters other than him is dishonest. Just to give you a level of absurdity of their claims. They also said that only God and possibly Death's Scythe can kill Horsemen. I doubt God could kill the Horsemen apart from wiping out their attributes. Even God, with unlimited power, can't kill Horsemen while their attributes still exist. It's impossible. I've been weirdly patience on this, it's time to lock it until users stop drenching the page in speculation. -- ImperiexSeed, 6:39 PM, January 22nd 2014

It's me again
Yeah, I'm still alive! Haha, sry. Well... after all the time i've got a question, or more...

If you know how to summon a demon, why don't ya say it?

I mean, I would catch the demon in a devils trap. (of course) Then I would make him weak with holy water. I'd ask him questions about all the supernatural creatures on earth. If he could destroy everything what kills innocent people, wouldn't you sell you're soul?

If he cannot, i would sent him back to hell. No prob ;)

What would you do, if you're albe to summon a demon?

And please keep in mind: it's just imagination.

CU Jo ;D -> Joanna Beth Harvelle (talk) 15:06, January 25, 2014 (UTC)

Plagarism
Copying text word for word is plagarism. The entries I commented on we made by me on the Supernaturalwiki.com, and i certainly didn't post them here, someone else cut and paste them. I would suggest this site needs to remind contributers that plagasim is wrong. Missyjack (talk) 00:02, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Need policing
I guess that this issue's resolved. If you haven't noticed already, I'm not active as I've got exams and would probably not check the site for about 2 weeks. So contact Imperiex for any problem. Cheerio! RaghavD '"Look into my eyes. It’s where my demons hide"  11:19, January 28, 2014 (UTC)

I do not wish to see a demon, they could be much more strong than I think, but

I still remember, that Supernatural could be just the idea... so it isn't bad to have fun with friends. Don'tya think it's part of it that you vie with your friends who does know the most and strangest things from spn? :D haha, yeah, I know... I'm a little bit strange :)

And please answer my questions?! xD Seeya ;D Joanna Beth Harvelle (talk) 16:41, January 28, 2014 (UTC)

Maybe he/she likes that picture with Castiel and Uriel in vessels, but regardless, we're finally given an infinitesimal snapshot of their wings in season nine. Which, though wobbly, is better than using vessels now that we can use the other one. Plus, there are plenty of places where their picture can fit, like you pointed out. Thanks for contacting me, I did what I can. I couldn't bring myself to just come in and whack them with a block, so I saddled the problem with respect, giving them one last reminder to either stop or that I'll be forced to block them. -- ImperiexSeed, 3:44 PM, January 28th 2014

no idea how to do the things "i plan" for?

i do not plan it, my dear! its just imagination like: what would happen if...

well, forget about that. you're filipino and live... um, where? america i think ^^ hm, how many episodes of spn did you watched? :D i'm a miserable spn fan... just season 1 and about seven episodes season 7! :O i have to learn much more about this world ;D Joanna Beth Harvelle (talk) 16:05, January 29, 2014 (UTC)

The Colt page is now locked. If you want to do something to the page, contact me, and I'll momentarily unlock it for you to do your edit and get out. Because there is no character, besides Lucifer, that anyone could name that is not, at this time, speculative. God and Death aren't apart of creation and Death is invincible or regenerative to such a degree that the Colt is just as effective as being jabbed with a grain of sand, and God is incontrovertibly unaffected by the Colt. -- ImperiexSeed, 3:57 PM, January 29th 2014

Do you think Lucifer will really be returning this season? It'd be really cool, but I doubt it. Archangel appearances, in any quantity, practically make it impossible for the arc or story to finagle around them. I'm not really getting any impression that Lucifer will be returning, or am I missing something? How could he get out of the cage, is the first question? Outside from any outer inference, it's impossible, am I wrong? I'm also bewildered how there would be any story left if he did return. -- ImperiexSeed, 10:39 PM, January 29th 2014

I guess the writers could goes against everything on Kripke's cage and make a way for Metatron to open the cage, without the Horsemen rings. There could be something regarding the workings of the "gogs" of the cage on the Angel tablet, I suppose. -- ImperiexSeed, 10:52 PM, January 29th 2014

Last time I forgot the title ^^
So, Canada? Tell me! Weather, your family, school... TV! xD haha sry

Is the show you recommended quite great as supernatural? Well, i'll try to watch it after i've done spn. but i guess i won't find any episodes in germany so it'll be hard for me to understand.

Do ya want to know something about Germany and the German people?

I'm a little bit afraid... on the next thursday i've got oral exams for English! I think my English is pretty bad, but let's see... There's a chance not to fail! :D haha key bye Joanna Beth Harvelle (talk) 21:06, January 30, 2014 (UTC)

Hey
Been awhile. How you doing? Also when you have the time, can you help to with the blog. If your confused about it the tread comments between General and Imperiex and me explain it better. Thanks.00:45, February 1, 2014 (UTC)&#91;&#91;User:Twilight Despair 5&#124;&#93;&#93; (&#91;&#91;The God of Creation&#93;&#93;) (talk)

Td5 on mobile. I was wondering if you saw the reply, on the blog on our tread? I am still going to type this story up. Just waiting for all the pieces to match.75.65.115.83 23:34, February 19, 2014 (UTC)

Very interesting!
Okay I think that about my English was a compliment, if not: i don't care ;D

Yeah, the last winter was also in Germany a torture. First snow in November, cold temperatures, snow and ice until April?! That was CREEPY!

But today I'm pretty cool about the oral exams next week. Well, my vocabulary isn't that big but it's enough for school ^^ hope i'll learn a little bit more in our conversation :D

So many shows! Wow, I've got lots of work to do xD

What for music do you listen to? I love some bands like Linkin Park, One Republic, Coldplay and so on. Ariana Grande, Macklemore...

There are so many more artists i love! Lindsey Stirling is cool because she unites classic and the charts <3 i love that! But i also listen to piano (versions). Do you like Pirates of the Caribbean? I love the score :D and the movie... xD

Oh my Gee, could write the whole day! But i think it's best for me to stop now. I'm meeting a friend in 30 minutes, so at 15 ó clock xD is that right? ó clock? i've learned that in the primary school; so long ago ^^

Do you know how the school running looks like in germany? I could try to explain but if you already know i can leave that out :D

have to go, seeya Joanna Beth Harvelle (talk) 13:33, February 1, 2014 (UTC)

== 11 ó clock and I had no breakfast yet. WTH? ==  Buffy the vampire slayer, right? You seem to want me watch that. Key, I'm working on it :D (<- Deans quote xD)

 We've got a primary school with four years. Then you got something like a assessment or a recommendation (= eine Empfehlung ). Because there are more types of schools and the teachers decide, what would be the best for you.

 Hauptschule  - For fools;  Realschule  - not that stupid, but no genius;  Gymnasium - quite intelligent :D;  Gemeinschaftsschule  - something between  Realschule  and  Gymnasium 

 I learned in school that gymnasium or gym means a sports hall, funny!? ^^

 After the  Grundschule  = Primary school you go on counting with year 5! I think my school goes until year 13, so I am 8 years at a '' Gymnasium. That is called  G8 , so eight years on the  Gymnasium ''.

 What nobody needs: The years on the  Gymnasium  are counted in the Latin way but in the other way around?!

 Year 5: VI = Sexta

 6: V = Quinta

 7: IV = Quarta

 8: (now it gets difficult!) U III = Unter (/ Under-)tertia

 9: O III = Ober(/ Upper-)tertia

 10: U II = Untersecunda

 11: O II =Obersecunda - and I'm not sure how it goes on, but it's strange, isn't it?

Okey, I guess you're a little bit confused now, but i hope it doesn't sound so complicated. CU Joanna Beth Harvelle (talk) 11:57, February 2, 2014 (UTC)

oh, now it's 12:57...

Angel feathers can be tangibly handled by man?
Wow, I guess even the writers can mess with the impossible and somehow make it possible in the show. I didn't know anyone could assort such a plain impossibility, like ever. "As Times Goes By," we see Henry sorting through some items, one being feathers of some type of angel. Correct if I'm wrong, but being physical creatures, it's impossible for humans to handle the spiritual in any sense. By definition, anything spiritual is beyond the realm of physical contact. Every time an angel dies in a vessel on a surface, it leaves physical remnants of the ashes of their wings. Do your ol' buddy a favor, and clear this up for me. I would monumentously appreciate any kind of direction on this one. -- ImperiexSeed, 6:28 PM, February 4th 2014

That line of logic is like saying it's in any way possible to make an ear not an ear. -- ImperiexSeed, 6:54 PM, February 4th 2014

The tender brotherhood between Dean and Sam.
I could spend days explaining the love held by Dean and Sam, but I'll just give you a mini snippet. Every animal in the world, combined, pails in comparison to the magnitude of Dean and Sam's relationship. At least through, I'd say, season six, Dean would lunge at death to save Sam, as would Sam for Dean. Now, as of season nine, as revealed in "The Purge," Sam has admitted that he wouldn't try an reverse, undo, or change Dean's death if he died. In a way, this shows that Sam has learned that doing absolutely anything to cheat death is dangerous and racks up a ton of casualties. But this also made me cry, because it shows just how much their relationship has changed. Without the relationship between Dean and Sam, this show would lose all sense of meaning and heart. Your thoughts? -- ImperiexSeed, 12:14 AM, February 5th 2014

Oh, you didn't miss much, believe me. It was probably the most bizarre episode I've ever seen in any episode in supernatural, and a waste of my time besides the the brothers pepping each other at the end, quite frankly. I'd, on my end, say no. If we left it at "Swan Song," Bobby would be dead, Sam would be imprisoned in the cage theoretically forever, and Castiel would be dead as well. -- ImperiexSeed, 10:45 AM, February 7th 2014

I haven't seen the episode in a while and got a lot of it mixed up, so forgive me if you can. And one could say Sam being soulless is retecon compensation for the next idea of the next season. -- ImperiexSeed, 9:29 PM, February 8th 2014

Sorry for answering that late :/
I don't know why, but there wasn't any sign that you answered...

I think i could do research about the latin numbers in school... cuz it's really strange and now i want to know why!

Yeah, Schule means school. And I think some german words are holy shit. I'm sorry for that, but... oh! There are videos made about that, so you can watch them. but some of them are parody, then please do not think we are that rude, okey?

Just the word Deutschland sounds so ugly! Our ancestors were called Die Germanen and i wonder how it became die Deutschen in Deutschland?!

Well, you can change the school if your school report is good enough for a better one! But if you are on a Gymnasium [ güm na si um not Jimnäisium ;)] and you are too bad for it, you repeat the year or worse: you go on a Gemeinschafts- or Realschule. It's not like you are all the time on the same school. Optimally you are, but you have not to stay.

If you're supposed to go on a Hauptschule and you want to go on a Gymnasium, i think they wouldn't let you in. :D

Have to do homework, bye! Joanna Beth Harvelle (talk) 16:49, February 8, 2014 (UTC)

Ok, now I'm going to get involved. Sorry man for interrupting, but this user has needs to understand something. Now while you're not disrespecting or anything like that, and I'm not admonishing you (well, not yet), but talk pages (as far as I'm concerned) are not for a user to dump atmospherically on them message after message, and you've reached that point. If you have questions or concerns, or even curious or confused about something, leave as many messages as it takes until it's achieved. Whatever you're after, Google it or whatever search engine you want, but please stop volleying him about this. What is it that you want to know, maybe I can answer it, but please, lighten up on FTWinchester on this. Alright, I'm butting out now. -- ImperiexSeed, 11:10 PM, February 8th 2014

I don't mind it, really. She only messages me about once every three to five days. FTWinchester (talk) 13:27, February 10, 2014 (UTC)

I hope you read the latest comment that I wrote on the Devil's Trident talk page. I despisingly disagree that Castiel's Trench Coat and Dean's Amulet are merited on the same credentials. I can't understand, why does the Devil's Trident warrant page creation instead of just doing mentions of it around the wiki? -- ImperiexSeed, 2:43 PM, February 11th 2014

I'll start off by lightly getting into the conversation by directing you to Castiel's page under his personality. Even loopy Castiel still wore the trench coat, clearly notating just how important the coat really is to Castiel. It's unfair for you to try an compare the VARIOUS plaid over-shirts that the brothers wear to Castiel's trench coat, that only just recently, of eight seasons, was replaced with a different, but similar, trench coat. And also, I'm starting to get anger that people think the mentioning of a character should be included in their appearance list. I was scrolling down on Lucifer's page and his appearance section has been stacked with a ton of mentioned only's. What's your thoughts on this, man? Hey, are we still tight, or are you mad about the Devil's Trident thing?-- ImperiexSeed, 6:48 PM, February 11th 2014

Do you view me as your friend? I hope so cause, really, I look at you as a brother. I'd just like to know how you view me. Anyway, you seemed to have forgotten to give me your thoughts on whether mentioned only's should be crammed into a section on, for lack of a better word, what viewers know as some type of bodied manifestation. There's a difference between us seeing Crowley and having him simply mentioned, therefore they shouldn't be paired as it they're the same. Noting every single time Lucifer is mentioned, for example, in the appearance section is ill fitted. It is scrupulously unnecessary. -- ImperiexSeed, 9:18 PM, February 12th 2014

Depending on how technical you want to be. If you're brutally technical, then the mention of the character should, under any circumstance, not bear any type of mention under the appearance section. I'm not sure if I should go that far, given that there are, in fact, episodes where characters have not actually appeared but been strongly emphasized. In order for it to even seem, in any way, acceptable, the mentioning of the character has to be prudent and strong in the way that they're being mentioned. So, yes, in some cases, Eve would qualify, and so does Lucifer, along with Crowley, etc. -- ImperiexSeed, 9:38 PM, February 12th 2014

Do you mind trimming down any appearance section to only actual appearances, unless, like I said, they're prudent and strong? I'll help with it from time to time. -- ImperiexSeed, 7:06 PM, February 16th 2014

Sadly, it may be late in to undo all of them, I'm sorry to say. Really any main character, like Eve, Lucifer, Crowley, etc. But, like, on a character like Erica Cartwright's appearance section, there should only be episodes there that she appeared in. That's how I part between the two. I'd say suggestively that you slap messages down on the regular editors' talk pages, like General and RaghavD, and see what they think. -- ImperiexSeed, 11:26 PM, February 17th 2014

As I told you in my last message, I think we're so far in, that it's not possible to sufficiently achieve this unless we employ a group of users and bots. Can't say that's true, unfortunately, with how users edit these days. No matter who the character, if they're not prudently and strongly mentioned, they bear no place in the appearance section at all. -- ImperiexSeed, 5:18 PM, February 17th 2014

What, if any, of the books pertaining to the show should be considered canon?
I'll leave this alone if you want, but I'd appreciate it if you tried to cue me in on this, for it would dramatically change many things on this wiki. Did you or NailflidG determine whether any of the books should be considered canon? And methodologically how did you determine that? I'll stick with what I said, where for any of any of the books content to be considered, it can't just be relatively in conjunction with the show. One's preferences or wishes should never be a factor, in any way, to how you're going to accept something. And even a minor "oopsie" in them would make that content unreliable and not canon. Even though I don't own any of the books or read a word in any of them, one could say, yes, I cherry-picked where it positions Gabriel as younger than Raphael, something that was curiously brimmed over. I'm furiously agitated that they left this be. Now, even though I'd have a terrible time doing it, if it turns out that there's a contradiction in that book, then the whole thing must be deemed untrustworthy. Now I understand that the writers can't cover everything they want to in one episode, but some of the things in the books should've been aggravated in the show. Sorry if you did, in fact, cover what I've asked, but this issue must be put to rest. -- ImperiexSeed, 9:43 PM, February 19th 2014

In your opinion, is Jesus the creator or a man?
Oh man, this'll most likely spread out pretty fast and you're the first person I've told over wikia, but I'm no longer a Christian--I believe there's no evidence for the existence of any divine hand in any form. I hold a lack of belief based on no evidence. One of my reasons for this change, is how can a God who's all-loving, with omnipotence, sit idly by while rape is going on, or amputees who've done more good than the supposed good Jesus? Both sin and "higher purposes" are unacceptable, no sadistic, reasons for not intervening. I hope this don't infringe upon our friendship. I know there's been nothing to suggest anything about Jesus other than that he was a man in the show, but what do you think Jesus was? A spokesman, some sort of ethereal ambassador that was the only direct creation of God (as either the Psalms or Proverbs indicate), or a representative of God? I dismiss any notion that Jesus was a 'selected' vessel God used; his body comprised everything of God in that form, but God wasn't possessing some man named Jesus. -- ImperiexSeed, 7:25 PM, February 20th 2014


 * It seems like this is going to radically affect our friendship. A shame, really. But.. Um, yeah, I'm talking about the Jesus in the show. Sorry me thinking for myself actually ended a good relationship, now what, mate? -- ImperiexSeed, 7:42 PM, February 20th 2014


 * I wouldn't ever pronounce or declare there is or isn't a 'divine guiding hand' to the universe, but I do not occlude the magnificence of the universe as evidence that there is. So, then, this loving God essentially watches?! Either he's omnipotent and watches or he's not omnipotent and can't do anything about it. I agree with all of what you said strictly regarding how we should act towards others, but I don't need a god to be caring and understanding. You forgot to give me your thoughts on what you think Jesus is in the show. -- ImperiexSeed, 10:08 PM, February 20th 2014


 * What Jesus is (man and or God) was left vague by the show. Seeing as he's not intervened but only on God's orders, where is Jesus and what is the height of his power? If Jesus is God's representative, he could annihilate everything to a crisp, which he actually wanted to do at one point in the Bible. -- ImperiexSeed, 5:51 PM, February 21st 2014


 * Ricks say Jesus's was a man but also the Son of God, to which Eve didn't agree or disagree. It could be very plausible that God has many 'Sons,' born of virgins, that he uses to convey messages to humanity, which he could use these Sons to purge his creation to purify and start again when it gets really bad. Maybe God authors multiple stories and redoes his creation over and over again until finally, it's the End and similarly to the cross, God dies and stays dead. This is a theory, but a very usable one. What do you think, and please actually answer; not just a small sentence. -- ImperiexSeed, 3:29 PM, February 22nd 2014


 * Fine, but what do you think of my theory? Just as credible, I think, as the theory of God coming from a species called Chuckians, possessing omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence. What they call 'Sons'--them being incarnated through virgins--are versions of themselves in our world as we perceive it. What does FTWinchester think about all this? C'mon, give me some perception or comments on this. -- ImperiexSeed, 7:50 PM, February 22nd 2014


 * I didn't even name it that, some other user did. But wow, that was very darkly aggressive: you're the first-grader if you think I write like a first-grader. Look, you've now instigated me. I've treated you like a brother for a while now, and you call me a first-grader. It seems my deconverting of Christianity has rattled our friendship, which makes me glumly irritated. I thought we were becoming bros. Be honest, this has changed your view of me. -- ImperiexSeed, 8:24 PM, February 22nd 2014


 * None of them are nice. Buds? He did imprison them, but he'll only annihilate everything with his Sons and start fresh at the end of each story. -- ImperiexSeed, 9:16 PM, February 22nd 2014

Some things....
Did you watch "Captives?" I have a few things to go over with you.

Who/what was Naomi? In one of the episodes, Castiel said something to the effect of he knows the name of every angel, and was really addled that he didn't know her; was this just cause she messed with his mind? Was she a new type of angel, one of Atropos' big sises, or what?

I know they did something similar with Lucifer possessing Sam's body (which I'll get back to in a second), but the 'angel expelling' thing introduced in season nine is really gall, because it was never pliable till now. Bobby evicting the demon was a lot better than an angel expulsion. Now, it makes sense in that circumstance that Sam wouldn't have wanted to expel Lucifer from him cause he wanted to imprison him. Due to this angel expulsion being an out, it makes you wonder what all angels do to their vessels to bind them from regaining control.

About Castiel's ability to overcome really any angel in an angel blade fight intrigues me. Every angel who's engaged in an angel blade fight Castiel's beaten. How is he this good, and this is so severe I even entertain the thought of could he potentially be able to beat even an archangel only in the context of blade fighting. -- ImperiexSeed, 1:44 PM, February 27th 2014


 * So, did you watch the episode or did you just snag that off of Bartholomew's page? I never said Castiel can outdo archangels in angel blade tussling, but I entertained the idea because of how good he is. Are we still amigos? -- ImperiexSeed, 3:28 PM, February 27th 2014

What first comes to mind when you think of Death's cell? Spout off anything and criticize about it, just not about me. I don't think it was ever stated or implied that it's a coffin, what the quote actually said was something to the effect of, They keep him chained in a box six feet under. Which, to me, brims over many things. Chains? Well.. what type of chains? Man-made chains used for this purpose? And could this "box" actually hold other beings, like archangels, or is it lathered in spell-work specifically for Death? And it also raises a question for users who believe that Death is stronger: how did Death get put here? Did he go willingly or was he brutally overpowered and imprisoned? And, to cover all bases, it's crazy to think he was just bond by naturalistic means not to mention impossible-normal chains couldn't exist at the core of the Earth. Give me something to work with. -- ImperiexSeed, 9:05 PM, February 27th 2014

No, I asked this yesterday before the topic was started where it is on Death's talk page. -- ImperiexSeed, 3:23 PM, February 28th 2014

Hey, man, did you watch "Thinman?" I purely only enjoyed the interactions the brothers/Ghostfacers had with each other. I know it's not my place, but I'd really recommend you watch it even for just one cause. I think I'm getting what you mean when you say like 'the show's going to Hell,' because there was one scene particularly where the brothers used one piece of evidence for the case-teleportation. Sam made the comment, "When I first think of teleporation, I think of Crossroads demon." I understand characters can have their own look at something but really, out of angels, Leprechauns, reapers, "gods," and Shojo, you think of that? Ok.. Hey, how can I assist in the timeline thing? Would you like me to watch certain episodes and pull out certain dates, or what? -- ImperiexSeed, 10:26 PM, March 4th 2014

I'm having archangel fetishes I can't contain, even despite the story discretion that almost always follows (unless your Kripke!). Gosh, they really do need to at least splash or even dip into other waters of the lore. That'd really help the story, especially seeing as we're probably gonna get a tenth season. As I said on the Chronology of Supernatural talk page, I know I'm not going to be good at this. Plus, I don't even know where to start. If you ever need something looked into, come and notify me and I'll do it. I can't picture myself in any manner researching and sitting through episodes that might not have any dates that we need. So, yeah, contact me if you need anything. -- ImperiexSeed, 10:58 PM, March 4th 2014

Re: Timeline
Sorry it took me so long to respond. I've been checking in on the wikia frequently, but haven't had the time to actually contribute anything, thanks to a hellacious amount of work. Anyway, I'll try to reply to your post on the Talk: Chronology page ASAP.--NaiflidG (talk) 21:33, March 4, 2014 (UTC)

You mean for the timeline project we were working on? Yeah, here on the Talk page for Chronology of Supernatural. I might have more information / speculation on dates that I haven't posted yet (I tend to save potential edits to a file and work them over for awhile before actually editing anything), but I haven't checked recently. I'll get back to you on that tomorrow or the next day, depending on how much free time I have -- am currently a little bogged down with work and my family is celebrating Thanksgiving this Sunday. Anyway, congratulations on being promoted to admin! I think you'll do an excellent job for however long you want to keep it. That said -- seeing as how you weren't exactly champing at the bit to get the position -- if you ever want to step down, for whatever reason, none of us would think any less of you, even if it were as soon as another user was made admin. Just do what makes you happy, okay? Okay, take care, bud.--NaiflidG (talk) 07:12, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

Can monsters and non-human creatures become ghosts?
Can monsters and non-human creatures become ghosts? I only ask this cause somewhere on this wiki, it says that reapers escort beings to Purgatory as well, so like humans, what if they refuse to go with the reaper? Or are reapers never involved in escorting monsters over and they go there instantly after death? It's pretty much just been assumed, as far as I can tell, that reapers escort every deceased being to whatever afterlife fits the type of being, even though only Heaven and Hell have been confirmed. Oh man, ghost monsters would pose a huge problem. Also, wouldn't you say that Ian and Paul were possessed by Sandover when they killed themselves, or were they just influenced by him? If they were possessed, they need to have the vessels category on their pages, which I'll take care of. -- ImperiexSeed, 1:33 PM, March 5th 2014

No, Ian and Paul where characters in "It's A Terrible Life." They offed themselves, because Sandover possessed them and made them or influenced them to. Seeing as both occur pretty quick in, mind watching for them and tell me what you think? -- ImperiexSeed, 9:39 PM, March 5th 2014

Gotten around to "Thinman" yet? Don't mean to bug or nag. The character interactions aside, it was a terrible episode. Ok, then why aren't every deceased monster still on Earth to continue to amok, I mean try an imagine the power variance a monster ghost could amount? My goodness, wow! So, anyway, why would a monster choose Purgatory over becoming a monster ghost? -- ImperiexSeed, 12:32 PM, March 6th 2014

I'm almost finished essentially frickin' recreating the Horsemen page, but I need your thoughts on something-when the Horsemen (but, not Death) are pealed from their rings, do their spirits stay stuck in their incapacitated bodies or do they leave behind their constructs on the Earthly, visible plain till the day that Death destroys everything? They probably amount countless bodies left over from age to age that Death will have to mop up. -- ImperiexSeed, 6:35 PM, March 8th 2014

I know it's hard to conceptualize the idea of Death predating/outlasting death, but such is the case in supernatural. And unlike any of the other Horsemen, Death, the being, and death aren't correlative where that death must exist for Death to. I know you don't want to tip your thinking-cap, but the show has made it so that Death will exist forever, regardless if it makes sense or not-just like them creating a hole where the Judeo/Abrahamic God can be killed. Eventually, you have to accept that they're ok with making no sense. It's a lot easier after accepting this. -- ImperiexSeed, 11:54 PM, March 9th 2014

Seconding that, I'm almost to the point of being infuriated of having to do everything myself concerning plot/story of an episode, character, weakness, etc. Eric did marvelously at being able to leave tiny crumbs that the watchers could piece together without ruining the episode right off the bat. -- ImperiexSeed, 11:53 PM, March 10th 2014

Horrifyingly BIG!
I think I can trash the asinine theory that only four angels have seen God. Anna hoisting such a bold, absolute statement had to have been a rumor. This had to have been an dissemination of some batty angel that she bought into-she must've been as crazy as our temporarily insane seraph, Castiel. ha ha Metatron met God, by "sitting his feet." Also, they've all at least heard God's voice when he demanded that they all 'kiss humanity's ass,' so I don't know how Uriel could say that there's no God. The only approach that would make sense is if a variety of four met him, which doesn't hold, being inconsistent with canon when it's clear that the archangels are the four Anna referred to. -- ImperiexSeed, 11:21 PM, March 14th 2014

Something new now!
What the Purgatory has become of this series?! LOL I wish I could know. Where do you want the series to go, if there's anywhere upwards to go? Their originality has largely slumped or sprinkled down by the 'only this can kill it' thing, with Leviathan and the Knights of Hell. You can still make a season interesting with creatures that can be killed/harmed by multiple means, even with the most basic enemies like werewolves. That exactly summarizes the goal of both entire seasons 7 and 9-find/create this one weapon that can kill it. That has become a very bald, lame shortcut for the writers to not have to think about anything. Wouldn't want to strain them too hard, would we? I think, for the survival of the series, they should dial way down on the antagonist side. Do an easy enemy with a big plan. Simplify the heck out of it and maybe it'll go somewhere, wherever there is to go. This would mean no archangels, top-level demons, essentially no angels, just Dean and Sam vs maybe a monster with a end game so big, it stretches to a season eleven or if they're not doing one, till the end of the tenth season. Now chucking angels out of the story would be really hard, mine as well (with "Blade Runners" since anything after season five) make up some farcical spell to get rid of them. This 'angel/heaven vs 'demon/Hell' thing is now stale and distasteful. Or maybe a cherub could be the main villain looking for Joseph's coat of many colors that can manipulate emotions to the point of potential revitalization of War, who and Dean, Sam and their "god," Artemis, confront him in the final battle of the series. I haven't even curbed with any of this. Maybe a psychotic reaper had escorted John Winchester to Purgatory this whole time and only his wedding ring, which Christ himself enchanted, can be what binds War and everything oppositional (Azazel, Lucifer, Leviathan, etc) since Gadreel's mistake to the judgement of God. Where maybe the resurrection of Zachariah's incinerated vessel (by Michael) is a component to a spell serving as a key to something Dean and Sam need, pedaling forward into the end of the series. And Dean and Sam drive off over asphalt with their father saying "Well done, boys" as the credits come on. They should listen to me, shouldn't they? Thoughts? -- ImperiexSeed, 1:16 PM, April 2nd 2014

You're kidding right? He's kidding, right? That wouldn't work! Not at all! Of course we need bigger villains! Except how about something that has no way to die? Like maybe a Pagan unlike any of those seen before. Daedric Prince of Awesomeness (talk) 22:04, April 3, 2014 (UTC)

I'm trying to talk to FTWinchester. You're perceptively lost if you think I'm kidding, Jyggalag Daedric Prince of Order. I don't want to call you a name but I will if you're this stupid again. A pagan deity as the main villain would only further the rut we're now in because of season seven and nine. -- ImperiexSeed, 6:12 PM, April 3rd 2014

You don't remember me do you? It's me, Kesslerbeast. Anywho.... It wouldn't further the rut because there is no rut. And I knew you were kidding. But being ImperiexSeed, you failed to realise I WAS kidding. I actually think it's a very good idea for a regular joe-blow monster to be the Big Bad. It's good to be back. Daedric Prince of Awesomeness (talk) 22:20, April 3, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with you that the show has gone stale. I watched the latest episode (was it the latest with the nuns, yes?--I don't even know) and while it was okay, it does not feel like Supernatural anymore. Sure, there are still demons, and we finally heard the exorcism again, but something still felt off. I am a bit confused with what you suggested, since this season is basically using low-key antagonists whose "end games" stretch on forever. Sure, Abaddon is a Knight of Hell, but they seem keen to tone down her strength so Dean and Crowley fighting her would seem credible. Metatron is really bland and tasteless and a mere scribe, and he is the main villain (I won't call them Big Bad--they don't deserve it, not really) whose lame plans stretch forever. Plus, don't take this in a bad way but you disliked the "find weapon to kill x" yet your suggestion includes a weapon that could control war? I'm really confused.

I don't even know what the show could use right now. They threw away so many characters and arcs with strong and fresh potential, and we are way past going back to them now. Carver got his wish of moving away from really old and powerful Big Bads, and he got his wish of stretching this damn uniniteresting, flat, repetitive and low-stakes arc all the way to his season 10. I find it hard to believe this show still won't die like its main characters, and I really find it impossible that it's gaining more viewers. If it does, I think these viewers are fresh blood, and those who supported the show from the early eras have left or are leaving.

In all honesty, it pains me that the show I would have defended to death is now a show I dislike (borderline utterly despise). It's nothing but fangirl pandering and supposed "character development" but nothing really is new anymore. Its plot makes absolute zero sense. Why is Dean suddenly going after Abaddon when it was Metatron who screwed them up actively several times over in more personal levels the first half of season 9 even more than Abaddon did? And why don't they just do away with both Crowley and Abaddon? I'm sick of Crowley's character. Even Dean, whom I held in high respect and whom I even used as a model in some aspects, completely irks me. The actors and actresses really do their job well but it's really the script and the story that sells the show to me, so to avoid hating on the show, I just try to avoid it whenever I can. I think I've made my points on why I don't like the show anymore so I really don't want to spread more negative vibes by listing each and everything I find wrong/annoying/stupid for this season. Oh and I wish them good luck on the spin-off. Kripke would be there so I am assuming he's stepping in to at least steer the spin-off to the right direction and somehow salvage his universe, but given all the crap that happened, he probably needs to sell his soul to actually pull it off. At this point, I prefer even the boring Season 7--at least it had a good direction and was cohesive, instead of mashing up all sorts of subplots that suddenly change directions without reason or rhyme (when was the last time they mentioned the words of God?). FTWinchester (talk) 03:32, April 5, 2014 (UTC)

Don't exactly recall when they were solely mentioned, however Words of God did appear in "Road Trip." The mere prospect of the Words of God in the series, like many others, is an out where they don't have to do much thinking: "Okami? Oh, the Word of God can take care of them. Ruguru? Once again, the Word of God can take care of them." By doing this, the writers don't have to actually think of a sensible and coherent weakness, they just throw the Word of God in place as a "cure-all." While aggravatingly ticked by what's become of Kripke's brilliance, I'll watch it to it's end regardless. While really good for season four and five, I sweetly say that this 'angel/heaven vs demon/Hell' shouldn't be put on a minimization, but be stowed away for pretty much the remainder of the series' span, seeing as we're most definitely ending with season ten. Be done with it considerably-no demons of any level, no angel (but maybe cupid) and make Castiel swing by rarely, here and there. Swivel something very low, like werewolf or even a Leprechaun, with an effective plan but, if a werewolf, be easily defeated once climatically found. Thoughts? -- ImperiexSeed, 2:01 PM, April 14th 2014

Though truly botched, I'll watch this series through it's end. Ok, who the Hell is God in the series? Chuck, Crowley or Metatron? I ask that rhetorically. I wanna gonk Carver over the head with Kripke's masterfully written script. ha ha I do see a bulging parallel between Eric Kripke, his avatar, and Carver's, Metatron. And to answer your question, he's no where near fuc**** entitled to attempt an lord over things like that. Granted, avatars could just be a way for the current writer of expressing himself or herself in the show, though only one true God can exist. Chuck could've easily really been God, because there wasn't much to him anyway that would dampen any possibility of him being God. I bill Chuck as the God of the series. Whereas Metatron is clearly an angel who's merely writing as though he is author, of something he's byproduct of. ha ha And just let me say, for kicks, that, though exponentially way more powerful with the demon and angel tablets, it's quite clear he's at least not omniscient-and, therefore, NOT God. -- ImperiexSeed, 6:54 PM, April 24th 2014

FC
No problem! Sorry to hear about your interest dying. Mine has been dying as well, this season doesn't look as good as the others, sort of on the bottom of my list of shows to watch at the moment. If you ever need series recommendations, I'm here to talk :P

I've added you, here's my FC: Sam, 4356-0526-8626! Thank you! Gurgatory (talk) 01:33, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

LMAO! I just got memed on. You just memed me.

I've been trying to get into GOT, I've heard good things, but I don't have HBO so I'll just have to either watch it online or buy the DVDs. Not sure about the other shows, I'll probably get into them as well later on. I finished the first season of Korra and haven't gotten around to the other seasons, I dunno, the ending was cheesy and I was annoyed how they all got their powers back.

Supernatural is one of my favorite TV shows (I'm sure this might be the same for you), so trust me on this one, I suggest Attack on Titan. Not sure if you're already into it due to Tumblr, but if you want that same Supernatural feel but worse (or better?), I suggest this. It's...something else. If you enjoy creepy villains, tear-wrenching love and bravery (offered similarly to us by Sam and Dean), groundbreaking action scenes, and overall awesomeness, I'd suggest it. If you do intend to watch it, go to Crunchyroll, the subtitles are the best available.

Gurgatory (talk) 22:41, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

Lol I never said they were bad! It's just that, I don't know, I never really took interest in Angel because it seemed more aimed towards girls (did you see Jensen's moves?) but I was planning on watching it later. Just give this a try, a Supernatural(ian? ist?) approves. *brofist* Gurgatory (talk) 22:41, April 9, 2014 (UTC)

Oh my god. I am so sorry. It glitched or something and I literally didn't see anything that you put before the Angel part, or something... Crap... Let me read over it again Gurgatory (talk) 02:29, April 10, 2014 (UTC)

Okay, here goes now - SORRY, I NEVER meant Angel, I meant to say Dark Angel. That's a show Jensen was in, and I'm sorry, but I can't take anything he's been in before SPN seriously. I think it got cancelled early as well. I'll definitely check out Korra now, that's good news. I like to hear that a fan knows the first season sucked, that means it gets better haha.

I've always been quite distrustful of shows at first, and I don't really take that guy (David) seriously after Bones, but I'll give it a chance. I don't think it could be better than Supernatural, this is Supernatural we're talking about.

AS FOR POKEMON :D - I haven't had time to play lately, but my team is so huge I can't even count ... most of them aren't IV trained so I keep them to keep them. My faves though are Grumpig, Reuniclus, Whimsicott, and a few others - I'm quite the Gen 4, Gen 5 fanboy. (Embarrassingly) I've actually forgotten my main team :S This is weird. What are your faves?

That's all I got! Gurgatory (talk) 02:41, April 10, 2014 (UTC)

Oh I see.. Can Buffy match the badass villains, the creepiness, the tear-jerking bond between the brothers, and more? I've been looking for new shows to watch and this is on Netflix so I'm pretty excited to check this out actually. Thanks for the recommendation!

I like those, minus the starters - I don't know why, I've never liked starters... UGH, Greninja with Protean is so annoying when I'm playing online. Gurgatory (talk) 02:59, April 10, 2014 (UTC)

Dang, that does sound interesting... The way you put it, with the equivalency and all, makes me even more curious. Those villains sound really good too. I'll probably hit Netflix on the weekend! I've heard the first season is slow but I'll pull through, like we all did with Supernatural haha.

I guess I just disliked them because I looked at them as legendaries - invalid and overpowered. Just recently I realized that probably isn't true.

It was good talking to you, I've got to hit the hay! Peace! Gurgatory (talk) 03:24, April 10, 2014 (UTC)

Whoa.. I didn't know that!!

COUGHS LOUDLY There are faithful manga readers that will tell you to read it first because they changed lots of things in the latest episodes, but I say skip to the anime first. Definitely. Well, goodnight! Stay awesome as well Gurgatory (talk) 03:34, April 10, 2014 (UTC)

Oh that's good. I've seen flashes on clips, and I always assumed that they made her a weak protagonist, and I'm glad that's different haha. Man, that quote makes it sound like Supernatural is but a slight rip-off. I can't wait to watch the show on Netflix now.

I remember James Marsters was in both Buffy and SPN, and they did some sort of reunion, I forgot. That's funny. I'm glad Singer is still on the show.

Quite different, but the anime is much better. Not only is the art not amazing in the first few volumes (even the manga readers admit this), but the anime transforms this series into something that, if you have never seen anything like it, you'll be pleasantly horrified. They just bring it to life, is what I'm trying to say. Gurgatory (talk) 16:06, April 10, 2014 (UTC)

That's so true, I've heard lots of fans say Supernatural was at least partly influenced by Buffy.

That's good! Just make sure you don't trip over spoilers... They are so easy to find... Also, at all costs, if you're doing anything related to the show on Youtube, avoid the comments, there are manga supremacists who spoiler for fun. They're basically the genwunners of the show. Gurgatory (talk) 19:08, April 11, 2014 (UTC)

Ayeee thanks!! Yeah, it's a shame, but I don't blame them. You guys have helped transform this wikia into something so amazing and huge, but the show plot-wise is going downhill and lots of loyal fans aren't going out of their way to watch it anymore. D: Gurgatory (talk) 07:28, April 20, 2014 (UTC)

Sorry missed that, will do :) Gurgatory (talk) 04:54, April 24, 2014 (UTC)

Hey!! Congrats on adminship. I've always wondered why you never were one, as you have a superb sense of judgment and majestic editing-skills. Can't wait to see you help the wiki for the better.

Anyway, yeah, I don't get Omega Ruby until Friday. ;n; And I live in the US, too. It's because Target shipping is much slower than what I projected. I just wanted to pre-order early (August) but now I regret that. I should have bought it in the store days ago if I had kept my money. Oh well. How about you? Gourgeist (talk) 17:13, November 25, 2014 (UTC)

Oh no, I'm not lying. Unbias, to the point well-intended editing. The Citations principal is the best community-based decision I've ever seen on the wiki. So much counterproductive edits (often even originating from previous admins) that end up having articles look like an unfinished sandwich, lol. Just opinion but, I've really not liked the way things have been around here, it's all subjective child's play and no real will or want to actually benefit the encyclopedia this wiki intends to be. For example, ignoring the need for citations and instead focusing on which character did what when. Sorry, I'm sounding mean-spirited, but I hope you understand. My point is though, that I've always noticed you actually want it to expand positively.

That's sad. There's always online and internet communities (Tumblr, Reddit, etc for example and even in-game online) eager to play the game with you. From what I've seen it's a great game. Still waiting for it to hopefully arrive tomorrow because if it doesn't, Thanksgiving will push it even further away from me.

Yep, haven't finished it though! Watching Walking Dead as well (though I prefer Buffy of course), but it's quite the weird show. Both are HAHA. But I love Buffy a lot, you wouldn't expect the characters to grow on you but they really do. I should thank you for introducing me as well. Gourgeist (talk) 06:05, November 26, 2014 (UTC)

So sorry for the late reply, Thanksgiving has been really busy today. I agree, those were good times. And I admire that dying fire analogy for some reason xD But to the point, I very much hope it does as well! ^___^ You can expect me to be using it for now on, though hopefully I won't forget.

It is a tough call! Whichever villainous team you prefer, I suppose.

DEFINITELY. I should have watched this first before Supernatural, not that one is necessarily better than the other, but it feels like I'm watching history (like Neon Genesis Evangelion to the anime industry -- first of its own). Regardless, enjoy your holidays ^__^ Gourgeist (talk) 20:41, November 27, 2014 (UTC)

Yep, and of course, Maggie and Don Stark lol Gourgeist (talk) 19:01, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

I THOUGHT SOMETHING LIKE THAT TOO LOL. Sorta satisfied with what we got, though, because I never expected fanservice in the first place. Gourgeist (talk) 16:34, December 1, 2014 (UTC)

Agree. And always happy to help. Gourgeist (talk) 03:27, December 2, 2014 (UTC)

Hey, could you delete the Duane Tanner redirect? It conflicts with me trying to rename Dwayne Tanner to Duane Tanner (as he is credited on IMDB). Much thanks. Gourgeist (talk) 06:48, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

Anon vandals
Blocked both users for a week. -- ImperiexSeed, 6:44 PM, April 9th 2014

What the....
How was Castiel able to grow a beard? I thought such things for an occupied vessel (peeing, pooping, coughing, burping, sneezing, farting, etc) is quashed, or disallowed. Do archangels face any type of damage after a Fall? Lucifer didn't convey to be at all lower in strength because of the Fall. Lucifer (obviously not counting God or Death) was unsurpassable, even in a Plan B vessel, until late in the last episode where he confronted Michael. So if that was Lucifer weakened from the Fall, of my fuc**** goodness, I can't imagine what he'd look like at full power. However, the illusion of Gabriel that Metatron used in "Meta Fiction" implied that Falling does dimple their powers to an unspecified degree. Do you think Jesse could've opened the cage by telling it to open if he wanted? And although Ruby's knife can hurt him, I mean, he could accomplish virtually any feat just by speaking. And, Jesse says, "Let there not be light" and the whole Earth goes dark. ha ha Anyway, how you doing man? We still bros, I hope. -- ImperiexSeed, 7:30 PM, April 28th 2014

In the trailer of the upcoming episode, it's said by Dean that the First Blade can kill anything. Really! Since when can this blade kill fuc**** everything? They're definitely remaking this series and it's really starting to bug me. I mean, the writers could use what Kripke already established angels blades and use one on Metatron instead of splurging the show with inconsistencies. Anyway, how you doing? Are we still bros? -- ImperiexSeed, 11:05 PM, May 10th 2014

See you on chat for a little bit? -- ImperiexSeed, 9:35 PM, May 14th 2014

Why did you leave me on chat without at least just saying a simple "have to go" or something? It's not Carver doesn't know how to write it's there comes a point with anything in the field of writing when there's nothing left to write about that would promote it any further, without tarnishing it. Eventually a point is reached where there's nothing left to write about, no matter how clever or good of a writer you are. Keeping it going to another season worked for a little bit but we, the fans, have tumbled off a precipice with where this series has gone. Whether Carver is obliviously or willfully unhinging Kripke's work for his own is up for debate. It was a mistake to continuate the series after "Swan Song" but they did and so they have to see it through. You can even see it with angel blades where they don't kill a couple species the same way, but pretty much everything. And, so, they can't think of unique methods of killing, for example, reapers and actually make it interesting they just slap on angel blade as a weakness and, to make it worse, they look the same as angels while dying. It was sorta a smidgen cool how the bone weapon was the only conventional method of killing Leviathan, but now, we have that, the archangel blade, and the First Blade. Making it terribly bland. What are your true feelings on this topic? -- ImperiexSeed, 11:51 PM, May 14th 2014

It was faintly and dimly suggested at in season six that there was another possible way, besides the Horsemen rings, to open Lucifer's cage, what do you think it was? I acknowledge that retecon is a burly problem, which is the answer to a lot of the "what-the's" in the show mostly, but let's try an do some thinking here. Also, Dean gave the heavy impression that no weapon of any make could kill Castiel while he housed all of Purgatory's souls, however Death's little doodad could easily kill him. Did he not even think of it as an option because, being in Death's possession, it would be impossible to even an attempt to get it from him? Sorry it took my a while, but I've come to the realization a little while ago that seasons 1-5 is THE story Supernatural. It's absolutely masterful. I irresolute and find it tricky to assess anything after "Swan Song" to cohere with Kripke's work, especially the pile of shi* Carver made with season nine. Soooooooooooo many overlaps and contradictions. I still watch the show, though irksomely. What do you miss most of the good ol' days (Kripke's seasons)? -- ImperiexSeed, 8:44 PM, May 24th 2014

Is what Dean said to Tess really indisputable? I mean, he could've been talking about her looks or something. I know Carver's blighted the essence of Supernatural, but I don't think even Carver would contradict that badly by calling a whole species something else, cause it'd be like calling archangels frogs. Reapers are not angels created by God, they were created by Death to help him maintain the Natural Order. ''Where art tho, Supernatural? What has become of thee? Baby come back, you can blame it all on Carver.'' hehe >:) -- ImperiexSeed, 6:04 PM, May 30th 2014

Alright, get back to me when you watch the episode. No, Death was called "the angel of death." But he really should've clarified if that's what he meant. And how would Azazel die if he possessed Tessa if she was an angel? Why, because the angel's energy would obliterate it? If that's what you're getting at, you're demonstrably wrong, as demons can possess vessels angels are using with absolutely no harm to themselves, as shown with Crowley in "Road Trip." No I really don't think Carver would contradict that bad. Hey, where do you think they're going to go with season ten? -- ImperiexSeed, 7:38 PM, May 31st 2014

Mind doing me a favor and comment on whether or not Heaven's dungeon should be a page on its talk page? "Dean.wincherstor.54," the user who created it, would really like your opinion on it. Thanks, man. -- ImperiexSeed, 1:17 AM, June 3rd 2014

Tonight's episode
So I decided to keep watching Doctor Who with my brother instead of watching tonight's episode. What happened? Anything good happen? Or the usual Carver bull?--NaiflidG (talk) 02:07, May 14, 2014 (UTC)

Nah, it's cool. I'll go look up some episode summaries and maybe catch it if they air it as a rerun during the summer hiatus. To be honest, last week's episode--the way they killed Abaddon off with so little build-up, in such a stupid way, when she was really one of the last things left on the show that was still cool--that was kind of the last straw for me. Early Supernatural is still my favorite show, but it's been infuriating for me to keep watching the show turn so bad under these lazy hack-writers. I'm still sticking around for the end, whenever it comes, and I'll still be around on this wikia to hopefully complete some of my projects, but... Yeah. Show sucks ass now. It's better to start getting into new things to hold your interest. Are you planning to watch NBC's TV adaptation of Constantine, by the way? The trailer for it looks pretty cool.--NaiflidG (talk) 05:20, May 14, 2014 (UTC)

Strength-scale.
God>Death>Michael>Lucifer>Castiel w/ all of Purgatory's souls>Gabriel>Raphael>Leviathan>Jesse Turner>Eve>Zachariah (seraphs)>Lilith>Cain>Azazel>Uriel>Virgil>Alastair>Reapers>Ghosts>monsters. Do you agree with this scale? -- ImperiexSeed, 1:24 AM, May 22nd 2014

You're very welcome, man. How you been? -- ImperiexSeed, 10:28 PM, June 9th 2014

Are you sure we're cool? You don't seem to talk to me as much anymore, or, if you do, you just send one line. -- ImperiexSeed, 10:41 PM, June 9th 2014

You're probably right, it's not as linear as that when taking into account all those things you mentioned. -- ImperiexSeed, 2:45 PM, June 10th 2014

Hey FTWinchester, how have you been doing? If you don't mind, could you put your opinion on my Strength Scale blog? Thanks a bunch! :) EmpyreanSmoke (talk) 18:09, August 11, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for putting your opinion on my strength scale blog. I found your picture interesting, and love the different dynamics to it. As there are many different dynamics to power, you can't exactly make a list. However, what I meant is more like, "make a list of who would beat who". Like since Leviathan beat Archangels, it would be "Leviathan>archangel". Please put that kind of list on my blog, if you have the time. Thanks EmpyreanSmoke (talk) 00:37, September 2, 2014 (UTC)

Castiel could've raised Death used him during the events of season five to stop and kill Lucifer
Why didn't Castiel just preform the ritual Lucifer did on the grounds of an environment that strained serious carnage and use him to stop and kill Lucifer. Nothing on that list wouldn't made him hesitate, as he really doesn't seem to mind killing vessels that are possessed by demons ("Heaven and Hell," The Rapture," "Abandon All Hope...," "The Man Who Would Be King" and "The Man Who Knew Too Much," etc) well at least wouldn't have before season nine and "First Born." So he could've apported the specific vessels and requirements needed for the ritual and sacrifice them, cause he's shown in the episodes I listed that he doesn't hesitate to kill demons because they're in a vessel. Maybe he didn't think of that initially because he'd pick his father, who at the time thought of him as holy and just, before he'd even think of turning to Death. And when he lost faith and trust in God in "Dark Side of the Moon," Lucifer had already raised and bound Death. Hope to hear from you soon, buddy. -- ImperiexSeed, 10:25 PM, July 6th 2014

There you go, buddy, I soundly explained why his title is inappropriate. -- ImperiexSeed, 5:28 PM, July 21st 2014
 * Actually, after a long debate with him, I'm sorry, nothing against you, buddy, but he's right. The ritual is used to restore a person's body and there's nothing to suggest that it'll only work with demonic vessels (or anything at all, for that matter, other than it restores human bodies), so it should be likewise titled 'Human Body Restoration ritual.' -- ImperiexSeed, 7:03 PM, July 21st 2014
 * True, in the show, a pretty good amount of rituals are severely goal-centered, but it seems reasonable to call it by 'Human body restoration ritual' as that's what it is. And there's really nothing to axiomatically indicate that it can only solely work on a demon's vessel purely, as even then, by default, the title would still fit as it's a human body, i.e. 'Human body restoration ritual' is appropriate and accurate and doesn't at all misdirect nor misinformatively shade the topic of the page. -- ImperiexSeed, 5:22 PM, July 23rd 2014

Re: Edit War
What'd I miss? Has the issue been sorted? If not, then here's my 2 cents. The ritual was for restoring the demon's host. We'll never know whether a normal human body that has been charred beyond recognition could be restored by the ritual. So the better thing to do would be to stick to what has been shown on the show. RaghavD '"Look into my eyes. It’s where my demons hide"  16:36, July 24, 2014 (UTC)

Re:On Retcon of Reapers
Really now...what was the retconning? I haven't watched anything from the latest season except the season finale so you will have to bring me up to speed, I'm afraid haha. Calebchiam Talk 13:26, September 27, 2014 (UTC)

Hey, FTWinchester, been a long time hope all is well with you. I was just wondering to get your opinion on the reapers are angels subject. I see you've left templates on pages about it being retconned. I for one think this is a smart as I've always 100% agreed with many around here that this is simply not the case, the line could have Jensen adlibbing or Dean just using slang as he often does. There is simply no way to know for sure for sure off of just one line, I just don't and can't believe Carver would go back and retcon something like that. If you check the internet you'll see this has been a subject of debate for many supernatural fan websites. However the wikis are about compromise and I believe leaving the template is pretty smart as it lets the viewer to decide what to believe for themselves, the more I've talked to users around here the more most agree with me with one or two sticking to their belief of reapers being angels now. My question for you is do you believe the reaper page itself, also needs a template? I believe I saw it there before, but I not sure now, I'm curious if you deleted it and if there was a reason so? Also I see that you're a buffy fan? haha I own the entire series including Angel seen every epi of both at LEAST 10 times. Awesome. BKshadows (talk)

Thanks a lot for your help on that and I agree it makes no sense what so ever but I guess there is little we can do. The writers have actually stated they use the Supernatural Superwiki to consult all things lore when writing an episode, it sure doesn't seem like that these days. Ahh Angel Season 4 was quite a ride wasn't it? While I enjoyed season 5 I'm sorry the show wasn't able to continue on, as you'll see toward the end a lot of things were wrapped up rather quickly in the last 6 episodes, as the cancelation was announced. Are you going to read the comics once your done? I'm sorry to say I haven't been able to keep up but I do know their in Season 10 of Buffy now. It's just a lot of reading! and unfortunately id rather see Sarah Michelle Gellar and the rest on our screens acting things out instead of just reading from the comicbook. BKshadows (talk)

Hi
Just thought I'd come by and say hello. I'm in the middle of season two of Buffy and loving it. ^_____^ Gourgeist (talk) 04:03, October 31, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I do look forward to it! I've heard a whole lot about Angel, too. And don't feel bad, I'm afraid you might not like it anyway (anything can happen), so I like to maintain the thought of possibility. Oh, and I need to start Korra, lol. Happy Halloween and please stay awesome as well! :) Gourgeist (talk) 05:05, October 31, 2014 (UTC)

Re:Adminship
Hey FTWinchester, just familiarise yourself with these (though incomplete for now) and Supernatural Wiki:Administrators. Once you've read and understood everything, leave a message on my talk page and I'll sysop you. Feel free to seek clarification if anything is unclear. There is no official probationary period, so don't be afraid to make mistakes. Exercise your judgment to the best of your ability and ask the other admins if you need help with anything.

Do note however, that unlike in other online communities, being an admin is not the same as being a leader of the community. Your word is not the final say on the matter (just as mine isn't) and if the community disagrees with you - your opinion is no more valid than theirs. This is of course unless the dispute can be resolved based on fundamental Wiki principles that are obvious to everyone, to which no one will blame you if you say stop carrying on the discussion with someone who says that all IP addresses should be blocked from editing the Wiki. But in the case of say the alias/retcon templates or the granularity discussion we had on what deserves an article on the Wiki, your opinion holds equal weight as everyone else's. I cannot stress this enough - the admin's word is not final in such cases.

Of course, if you don't feel comfortable, you can remove the tools yourself. But I think you'll find it straightforward enough. (: Cheers. Calebchiam Talk 03:29, November 22, 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I figured you meant in a general sense. Just making it clear since you're about to become an admin. Calebchiam Talk 03:46, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations! You can now do the following:


 * Edit and move fully protected pages
 * Delete, restore, and view deleted revisions of pages and images
 * Protect pages from edits, moves, or creation by non-sysops
 * Block and unblock users and IP addresses and ranges
 * Edit the interface pages in the MediaWiki: namespace
 * View Special:Unwatchedpages

Use the tools well. Cheers, Calebchiam Talk 04:33, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

So glad that you're finally an admin. Congrats and welcome to the team, bro! :) RaghavD  '"Look into my eyes. It’s where my demons hide"  12:03, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Thanks
Not a problem at all. Feel free to leave a message and I'll respond as fast as I can. Just click and explore things. For instance, try out the theme designer. You'll be intrigued, I'm sure. You can always revert back to the old theme. I've been meaning to revamp the Navigation Bar for a long time. Hopefully we can brainstorm on that. RaghavD '"Look into my eyes. It’s where my demons hide"  14:02, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

Vandalism
this anon keeps vandalizing God, and did the same with 66 Seals. Just warning you Gabriel456 (talk) 00:10, November 23, 2014 (UTC)

Re:Projects
Hey. Both sound like great ideas. The Verb tense policy is effectively a style guide - it will some expansion before it is comprehensive enough, but feel free to create a page at Supernatural Wiki:Style_Guide (which would put it under the Wiki namespace rather than the article namespace) and have a go at it. I'll add on when I get the chance. You can use this as a reference - just ignore the portions that are specific to that Wiki topic. References come under the Style Guide as well, this should prove helpful. If you can get the pages up to scratch on the Wiki, we can certainly start using it as a guide. Cheers. Calebchiam Talk 01:51, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it, I would have been just as exasperated as you. Imperiex has accused god-knows-how-many users of stalking his edits, which has always been counterproductive to the ethos of a Wiki - a place where we build on each others' edits. Calebchiam Talk 03:43, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
 * Say, feel free to go through these when you get the chance. Calebchiam Talk 03:51, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
 * Just a heads-up. Don't forget to remove the links to the images after you delete them. Small-resolution images aren't reason enough for deleting an image by the way, see Season 3 for example of their use. It was still right to delete them since they were unused in the mainspace nevertheless. Calebchiam Talk 04:09, November 23, 2014 (UTC)

Re:Admin Query
Yeah, it's like you expect something and it turns out to be something else entirely. But that's the fun part. Anyway, it depends on you entirely. I don't know if you are aware of this page or not (http://supernatural.wikia.com/wiki/Special:SpecialPages), but whenever you can remember, you can go to this page and just take a look at the Maintenance Reports. Working on the various categories on this page is the actual janitorial work on the wiki. RaghavD '"Look into my eyes. It’s where my demons hide"  15:35, November 25, 2014 (UTC)

Of course. You can take your time. The pages aren't going anywhere. :P RaghavD  '"Look into my eyes. It’s where my demons hide"  16:04, November 25, 2014 (UTC)

Oh, right. I did see them. Should've said something. They are actually good and would be awesome if implemented. I don't know about how popular the References idea would be though. Not saying that it is bad, but people would find it a lot of work to keep adding citations. It isn't any work at all honestly, but people these days have the attention span of a goldfish. RaghavD '"Look into my eyes. It’s where my demons hide"  16:25, November 25, 2014 (UTC)

Blocking
Hey, regarding blocks like these, do note that indefinite blocks are never given to IP addresses under any circumstances. First-vandalism merits at most a 1- or 3-day block. Repeated vandalism, maybe a week. IP addresses are not static, so they may be reassigned to other connections, i.e. you may inadvertently block someone in the future who hasn't even had a chance to make an edit. There's also the fact that simple page vandalism is never serious enough to merit that harsh a response anyhow. Cheers. (: Calebchiam Talk 15:54, November 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it, the other admins and I are here to provide guidance. You're doing fine. Calebchiam Talk 15:54, December 1, 2014 (UTC)

Omnipotence
How you doing, it's been a while? This user 71.170.116.195 keeps removing omnipotence from powers and abilities sections on pages, saying it's not a power, when it means to be able to do anything, which fits well under these sections. Can you block them for a time if they keep doing it? -- ImperiexSeed, 1:13 AM, November 29th 2014

How about instead of listing "Omnipotence" as a power, we say that they have it on their power summary? That way, we are claiming that they have it, but we aren't falsing listing it as a power that they have. 71.170.116.195 19:58, November 29, 2014 (UTC)

Please
Hello FTWinchester, this is EmpyreanSmoke. I left a message for you on my talk page. Could you please take a look and respond to it? Thanks!

Hello, EmpyreanSmoke here again. I read your response, and have a couple questions. So if I am correct, you are saying that posting things at the same time won't help anything. I understand why you don't think that is an accurate way to prove my innocence, so I will try to think of something else. Perhaps I could upload a photo of all of us, but I don't think my cousins or I want to put that kind of personal stuff on the wiki. Without sharing private information or uploading photos, I'm not sure how we can prove we are innocent...I kind of have to agree with my cousin (SuperBossNatural7's) logic though. I have explained that I am not a sock puppet user, and I explained what really happened. The most fair way to judge this would be "innocent until proven guilty". I told the truth about what happened, and there isn't any evidence going against my explanation. As there is no evidence that my explanation was false, and therefore no evidence that I am guilty of doing these things, there is no evidence that I am guilty. Therefore, me being punished is unjust, as nothing shows that I am guilty. Almost everyone, if not everyone, agrees that "innocent until proven guilty" is the most fair way to judge anything, and I am almost certain that you know that. 71.252.162.254 02:44, December 1, 2014 (UTC)

Alright, I understand your reasoning. I think I have a solution that might be able to sort this out. Since I am blocked, I will need you to help me out with it though. Can you please create a blog post, and ask users whether or not it should be "innocent until proven guilty" or "guilty until proven innocent". This will let the communty decide what is fair. I have a paragraph writen out for you to put on the blog post. If you accept, and agree to make the blog, let me know, and I will send you the paragraph. 166.137.139.109 16:30, December 1, 2014 (UTC)

No, I can't post anything on the blog, because I am blocked. I set up my bureaucrat request on a blog, so that is a perfect place to do this. As I can't create a blog of my own, I am requesting that you please post a blog post on my behalf, so we can let the wiki decide if I am innocent or guilty. I have a the blog already typed out, so if you kindly accept to do this, I will leave the message on your talk page.

Please post this on the blog that you made.

When I (EmpyreanSmoke) requested to become a bureaucrat, my cousins (LittleOl'Me and SuperBossNatural7) were some of the various people who voted in my favor. When Calebchiam saw that they shared the same IP address as me (because we made all accounts in the same place), he assumed that they were sockpuppet accounts created by me. I have given the explanation to all of this in full detail, but users are ignoring it because I haven't proved it. The thing is, it is impossible to prove that they are my cousins. Because of this, I have no evidence to back up my story. But also, there is no evidence disproving my story either. Please tell me, which is the more fair judging system? "Guilty until proven innocent" or "innocent until proven guilty"? I would argue the ladder, and so would most other human beings. I am almost certain you would too. Since I am sure we can all agree that "innocent until proven guilty" is the most fair judging system, we have to apply that in this situation. There is no evidence I can provide that my story is true, yet there is no evidence that my story is false either. Since there is no evidence my story is false, and no evidence that I am guilty, I remain innocent. Please comment what you think is more fair; "innocent until proven guilty" or "guilty until proven innocent"?

Another Vandal
this anon keeps vandalizing The Things We Left Behind Gabriel456 (talk) 03:15, December 3, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Amin Query
I don't know who designed the main page, but each section that you see there is a template. To access the main page navigation (It's called the Slider) you've got to go to http://supernatural.wikia.com/wiki/Template%3AMainpage/Slider RaghavD  '"Look into my eyes. It’s where my demons hide"  13:43, December 4, 2014 (UTC)

unblocking
Hello, EmpyreanSmoke here. You told me that you didn't care about the block, and would unblock me if other well established users agreed. So far, ImperiexSeed, RagHavD, and NaiflidG agree that I should be unblocked. Also, Gourgeist told me that in his views, he would have me unblocked. He told me that he will agree with you if you say you want me unblocked. I showed him our conversation where you said you didn't care about me being blocked, but he said that he wanted to see you formally say it. Can you please leave a comment on the blog post saying that you would be fine with me being unblocked, and would like to see what others think? Thanks in advance.

Thanks
Thanks for helping me get unblocked. I know it caused a lot of drama, and took a lot of our time and energy, so I just wanted to thank you. And yes, my passion and dedication will always stay true. EmpyreanSmoke (talk) 21:50, December 7, 2014 (UTC)

Re:Mainpage and Slider
Hey, there's no reason for it actually. Feel free to change it as necessary. Cheers. Calebchiam Talk 03:51, December 18, 2014 (UTC)

Which two templates are you talking about? You don't have to worry about the Main Page at all. Just edit the Slider template every week. The Main Page and the Slider work well without any hitch. I'm not sure I understood your question completely. Just elaborate a little more please. RaghavD '"Look into my eyes. It’s where my demons hide"  14:57, December 18, 2014 (UTC)

Re:RfA
Did a history comparison and it seems alright. I did move it to the questions section though, so that may have been the source of the confusion. Calebchiam Talk 13:46, December 20, 2014 (UTC)

RE:
I am trying to silence a longtime cyberbully who left a taunting message on my page this morning after viciously vandalizing my own wiki of my work, and is now playing dumb in order to goad me into confronting her. Please ban both of the troll's accounts immediately. Moleman 9000  22:16, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

The user above me keeps bullying me by deleting my comments on OTHER people's pages and is also slandering me by dragging me into a dumb conspiracy theory he has cooked up. Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 22:22, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Ban both User:JaneSmithfield and User:Gentle-Willowtree immediately. Moleman 9000 22:25, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

ResonX, you can NOT delete messages posted on any talk page. Additionally, I couldn't see any clear form of bullying from any of their posts. Gentle-Willowtree only greeted you happy holidays.

Gentle-Willowtree, do NOT put my entire talk page as a candidate for speedy deletion.

Both of you, elaborate on your claims as to why the other is bullying you. FTWinchester (talk) 22:35, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

I caught that one, ResonX. Again, nobody is allowed to remove somebody else's message on talk pages unless it is outright vulgar or obvious vandalism. I could not see any clear indication Gentle-Willowtree is bullying you. Please elaborate. FTWinchester (talk) 22:37, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

My apologies, I didn't intend to mark your page as candidate for deletion. I might have misclicked when undoing Moleman's silencing on my comment by accident. I have no idea what this pyscho's problem is. Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 22:39, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

The bullying was not committed here, it was committed on numerous other sites, in this case here, here and here, this incident being only the very most recent in a long history of vicious harassment. The message left to me here was left immediately after the vandalism there. See the "contributions", including "Deleted contributions", under each.

An example of one of the accounts used for past vandalism and harassment would be this, which was also used on this Supernatural Wiki (see) to deny my truthful claims while I was trying to negotiate with General MGD on documenting the trolls' crimes on his site and to spread further lies about me, exactly as it is doing again right here and now.

Moleman 9000  22:44, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

That user appears to be IP banned Moleman9000. There is no way they could come back, especially as another person as they are IP banned. Stop making things up okay? I just wished holiday wishes for everyone and you went totally pyscho. I just don't want to be silenced! Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 22:46, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Addendum: You also threatened to hack me and just started spouting gibberish like a mentally ill person! Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 22:47, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Bullshit. Willow Giovanna and the other bullies associated with her have a long history of abusing TOR software to bypass rightful bans and continue their abuse. She also has an extensive history of lying to people's faces when called to answer for her crimes, as she is doing right now. Here is another example of an account of hers used to attack and blackmail me:  Moleman 9000  22:49, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, tracing IP addresses and checking for proxies is beyond me. However, I would like to inquire more about a few examples ResonX has posted, and I would like Gentle-Willowtree to explain as to why a few of his posts were replaced either by a photo, one really nasty comment, whereas a couple were replaced by what seems like a holiday greeting. On one hand, I could pass the holiday greetings as unintentionally replacing the entire content but in the goodwill of wishing happy holidays, but the first two cases seem intentionally malicious. FTWinchester (talk) 22:54, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Because as I said before, he left a threatening email to me, accusing me of being a friend of mine and a co-worker who I work with. I have no relation to his prior trolling, if such a thing exists. He just sorta lumped me in with everyone and started spamming my email with a bunch of threats. So I kinda snapped (he was doing it for quite some time) and just spammed stuff that I had found by googling his name and stuff. I only did that really recent 3 or two edits on his own wiki because he was spamming my email.

Also what the heck is TOR? Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 22:56, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Let's see her explain and . <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  22:58, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

I just said I had found those pics online and had posted them on your wiki because you were bullying me and spamming my email with harassment stuff. Maybe you should consider people's feelings more and stop out-and-outright BULLYING them online! I may have overreacted, but you kept sexually harassing me via spam! Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 23:01, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

She is flat-out playing dumb and flat-out lying, the same way she did under this account, which alluded to the same elaborate lies of me having stolen from the bullies' original work to spite them when the exact opposite is the case, and created two wikis perpetuating those lies, both now closed but visible under her "Favorite Wikis". <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  23:02, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Gentle-Willowtree, please post supporting evidence to your claims. From my point of view (I'm trying to be as impartial as I can), I have observed several users active here and in Moleman's epic rap battles wiki who appear to post nothing but spam on ResonX's talk page. FTWinchester (talk) 23:04, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

I never once spammed or harassed Willow except in direct response to her own harassment. I have never emailed her once. She is out-and-outright lying to your face while claiming the exact opposite to be the case. <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  23:04, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

I deleted most of the trash emails he sent me and I have no relation to what Willow (as in Willow Giovanna, my friend, not me, Gentle-Willowtree which is based on the tree) does with him. I somehow got caught in thier drama. If they posted stuff on his wiki, they did it for thier own reasons, I got dragged in because he contacted me out of the blue and went ballistic because I know them. I tried being telling him to stop, then revenged spammed his wiki, and then I tried being apologetic and wishing him happy holidays but nothing placates him. A cursory web search of his name brings this thing up though http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Moleman9000/Select-StateProvince-Internet/Moleman9000-Raped-My-Original-Setting-Canon-and-Lore-Internet-1088799, so apparently he has a history of harassment or something. Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 23:08, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

SHE HERSELF WROTE THAT AND IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS PRESENCE UNDER GOOGLE. <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  23:09, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

''I have no idea what you are saying you maniac! I just found that on Google!!1! Gentle-Willowtree (talk)''

Checking for those claims (IP addresses, proxies, histories of pages outside the wiki) are out of my scope. I am withholding my judgment until I let other admins weigh in on this. But for the record, I do NOT appreciate all these new users 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 who have posted nothing worthwhile in the betterment of the wiki, nor the back and forth flame war and accusation that are going on. If you have issues about each other from other websites, I would very much prefer that you keep it there and away from our already controversy-ridden wikia, and to PLEASE STOP calling in more users/creating new accounts for the sake of having reinforcements.

Should all these continue, however, I am considering simply blocking all of you for the time being. AND yes, I have seen the photo. FTWinchester (talk) 23:22, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

I have no idea what is the deal with those other accounts and it appears Willow Giovanna's account is months old. MONTHS before I joined! I have no relation to these people and I agree they add absolutely nothing to your wiki. I just want to be free to be able to post without being silenced on OTHER PEOPLE's talkpages, by an idignant bully such as Reson X. I respect your decision. Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 23:27, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Chat please?
Can me, you, and I guess Reson X discuss all this in chat? It's exhausting to have to go back and forth on talk pages and keep up with it all.


 * I choose not to do so. These things need to be publicly and transparently settled. FTWinchester (talk) 22:54, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Well you could always screencap the stuff or use the snipping tool from windows 7 and later, but I understand and respect your reasoning. Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 22:57, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Absolute proof
Let's see her explain and . <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  22:58, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

That Willow person is a real bitch. Moleman9000 told me about how he wants to strangle and mutilate her, and I agree with him. She deserves it, believe me. She deserves more than just an article on the RLVillians wiki. JeremiahOrtiz (talk) 23:03, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

^A new user with just the above post as the only contribution. This does not look pretty and is hard to accept on its own. FTWinchester (talk) 23:06, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

^

That's cause I never edit on this wiki, and I know who these cyberbullys are. They will dox you, and spam you with calls. They even send pizzas to your house when you don't want them. They are evil and need to be exterminated by you and Moleman9000.JeremiahOrtiz (talk) 23:09, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

And both "JaneSmithfield" and "Gentle-Willowtree" were created on Wikia within the past 24 hours. <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  23:12, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

''Have you not seen those hideous pictures? Please tell me you did ASAP so I can re-delete them. <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  23:15, December 23, 2014 (UTC)''

''I didn't make those pictures! I only found them on google via Shadowness when I googled your name! Also that Jeremiah Ortiz person is being very rude! Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 23:18, December 23, 2014 (UTC)''

More evidence
See this, an outright threat in which Willow refers to herself by name and describes gleefully murdering me. <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  23:18, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Also ask General MGD about this; he knows a lot. <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  23:18, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Joviana is Willow! As in my friend Willow, not my username only Gentle-Willowtree! I have no control over what she does! Stop assuming everything is related! Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 23:20, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

I'M NOT BEING RUDE WILLOW. I'm telling him the truth you cyberbully. Go back to cyberbullyland.:( JeremiahOrtiz (talk) 23:23, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Shadowness
Have a look at THIS. This account was created by Willow Giovanna on an alternative art site, which she FOLLOWED me to to harass me and post hate art there. The same hate art could be found on the putrid cunt's other accounts on various sites, all of which were created specifically to harass me. <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  23:24, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Checking for those claims (IP addresses, proxies, histories of pages outside the wiki) are out of my scope. I am withholding my judgment until I let other admins weigh in on this. But for the record, I do NOT appreciate all these new users 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 who have posted nothing worthwhile in the betterment of the wiki, nor the back and forth flame war and accusations that are going on. If you have issues about each other from other websites, I would very much prefer that you keep it there and away from our already controversy-ridden wikia, and to PLEASE STOP calling in more users/creating new accounts for the sake of having reinforcements.

Should all these continue, however, I am considering simply blocking all of you for the time being. AND yes, I have seen the photo. FTWinchester (talk) 23:22, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Then please simply stop necessitating the continuing of Willow's lying by banning her and reporting her to Wikia and any other possibly authorities. <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  23:28, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

He's telling us to drop it, Reson X. Just let it go. No more bullying and no more flame wars. Can't you see its tearing this wiki apart? It's time to be MATURE and set aside your differences with me, and calm down. Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 23:33, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

I have been TRYING to move past your harassment. This latest incident was completely unprovoked on your part. <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  23:34, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

''Look, I was wrong for vandalizing your wiki because of your email harassment. But you have to let it go now. Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 23:37, December 23, 2014 (UTC)''

Yes, I would really appreciate it if you two just own up to both your mistakes and just stop adding fuel to the flame. Both of you please be the better men and forgive. I have notified the other admins, but if this is resolved here that would be great. And stop it with those disgusting photos for goodness' sake. FTWinchester (talk) 23:42, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Alright. Moleman, I formally apologize to you for slightly vandalizing your wiki because I was upset at your accusations. I hope you will apologize for your sickening email spam and accusing me of being a troll, but I'm probably expecting to much. But I do not wish to continue fighting this pointless fight of mistaken identities. Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 23:46, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

What email spam? <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  23:51, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

The ones that you said I should be sent to the gas chamber to answer for my crimes and that I should be cut into pieces after being r*ped. And also lobotimized. Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 23:54, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

'''Those are all things YOU said of ME, and I can prove it. Let's see your "evidence".'''

'''My evidence is how you treat me in general and besides, like I said, I'm done fighting you. You can choose to be an adult and move on, or you can continue to whine like an angry baby. The latter is not productive to this wiki however and I frown on it greatly along with the staff. You need to stop bullying. That's all I'll say at this point. Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 00:09, December 24, 2014 (UTC)'''

Your folly
The error being committed by you right now is that you seem to be under the impression that what is happening is a two-sided feud where both sides have points. This is not the case. Willow Giovanna is a vicious, lying, sadistic, sociopathic bully who victimizes and psychologically torments good people for fun. She STOLE and actively undermined my original body of work, has a long history of lying and abusing false identities to manipulate people just like you even when morally cornered like she is now, and attacked me in this instance, and in direct collaboration with other bullies, with zero provocation.

Please simply ban both of her current accounts and if possible archive these exchanges. <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  23:50, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

Sigh. You are really wierd. I just apologized and you still accuse me of being Willow Giovanna. I'm not her. Your battle is with her, not me. Please just leave me along and drop this issue. Poor FTWinchester is probably stressed because of this crazy battle you've dragged us all into. Please let it go. Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 23:53, December 23, 2014 (UTC)

''"Let it go" was the message Willow gave when I was reporting her under her previous account. Without me further responding after said message, she later led an all-out vandalism raid against both my wiki sites. Said account also claimed itself to merely be a "friend" of Willow only to later prove itself to be her herself through continued cyberbullying. <font color="Green">Moleman 9000 00:10, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

Let it go is a popular phrase since Frozen dude. Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 00:11, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

More proof still
See this vandalized revision of an article on my site by "Gentle-Willowtree": 

Now look at the link given in that version of the page: This is a known trolling and bullying site from which the harassment of me led by Willow originated. At the bottom of this page, there is a new post from Willow herself under her common alias "Candy" with a screenshot of the current conversations on this very site.

<font color="Green">Moleman 9000  00:23, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

''All I see is Willow ie not me, screencapping and posting your whiney self important post on Empyreansmoke's page. I linked it because I know that it would have pissed y''ou off after you sent those sexually harassing messages towards me before. Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 00:25, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

> "Sexually harassing messages"

EVIDENCE OR IT DID NOT HAPPEN. <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  00:29, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

That rip-off report I posted mentioned that you have sent sexually harassing messages to people before! Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 00:34, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

 YOU WROTE THAT "REPORT", WILLOW. <font color="Green">Moleman 9000  00:36, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

Willow might have, but not me. Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 00:38, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

He's doing it again...after I apologized
After I apologized! He is deleting my comments on other people's pages, not his own! Reson X does not respect your authority! Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 00:33, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

I'm tired of this! Clearly you just can't be levelheaded and mature and drop everything. The chat is a mess and given recent histories of accused/suspicious sockpuppet accounts, I could very well also see that the chat is being used to make it seem that both camps are ganging up on each other. FTWinchester (talk) 00:41, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

I want to get away from this! He just keeps coming after me and deleting my messages! Gentle-Willowtree (talk) 00:43, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

Hey. I know about as much as you as to what is going on. All I know is that ResonX keeps saying that WillowTree is bullying him (which I haven't seen at all), and then he keeps deleting his messages on talk pages (including mine). There have been about twenty reverts on my talk page alone. I see no evidence of Willowtree bullying him, and if he ever did, he stopped. I think the best move would be to shortly ban ResonX from talk pages, and tell him he needs to stop. EmpyreanSmoke (talk) 01:16, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

Hmm
Hmm. I am reading and thinking of a more permanent solution. But, maybe we can send protype message to all users in this argument. (Please, reframe from sending messages or deleting messages from talk pages; that is against wikia policies. Unless, it has to deal with the wikia, than it might be positive to reframe from sending messages. If the arguments continues please contact one of your admins.) Now it's rough and don't have to use it. I'll read more to see what The argument is more about.&#91;&#91;User:Twilight Despair 5&#124;&#93;&#93; (&#91;&#91;The God of Creation&#93;&#93;) (talk) 03:03, December 24, 2014 (UTC)

I will get back to you in a day or two at the maximum. RaghavD '"Look into my eyes. It’s where my demons hide"  07:45, December 25, 2014 (UTC)

Oh. I'm glad to know that the issue's been solved. Hope you had fun on Christmas! RaghavD '"Look into my eyes. It’s where my demons hide"  13:16, December 27, 2014 (UTC)

Dogs and bees
Seeing as how CalebChiam thinks it's ok for the wiki to have pages on Ruby's quite inconspicuous vessels (which I didn't agree with) that can't quite be detailed, can I make pages on animals such as dogs, bees, etc that have appeared in multiple episodes, or no? I wouldn't have even thought about making pages for them before, but seeing as Calebchiam backed up Tyson on the pages, I think it's fairly reasonable to create animal pages despite any variance in the meatiness of these pages. -- ImperiexSeed, 1:40 PM, December 26th 2014

Disambiguation Pages
I'm thinking of creating disambiguation pages for the names "Charlie" and "Nora". However, there is a slight problem. The namespace for those names are already in use. With the name Charlie, the namespace is used by a Season 1 character and in regards to the name Nora, the namespace is used by a character from Season 5.

This means that I have to come up with a new namespace for these 2 characters. What would be an appropriate namespace for these character? Would the following titles be acceptable: "Charlie" to "Charlie (Human)" and "Nora" to "Nora (Witch)" I ask because it seems weird to me to use those title because there is more than one Charlie that is human and in regards to Nora, there are 2 witches with the name Nora (the other witch just happened to have a last name). - JoyaOscura (talk) 22:35, December 26, 2014 (UTC)

ResonX is Back
Hey FTW. I'm sorry to say that the wiki peace was only temporary, becuase ResonX made a new account named BennyCupster. He left a message on my talk page confirming that it was him, and he continued to go on about the bully thing. Could you please block him and his IP adress? Thanks. EmpyreanSmoke (talk) 21:34, December 27, 2014 (UTC)

Another Disambig Question
When it comes to disambiguation pages, is it allowed to point to articles that features the disambiguated name in the title but is not the actually name of the object/place/person?

An example is the name Lily. There's a character named Lily Shoemaker. She had a friend who was featured in the episode with her but the friend's name is never revealed. Therefore, the article for this character is titled Lily's Friend. Am I allowed to put the link to the "Lily's Friend" article on the disambiguation page "Lily" or would it be better to leave the article out of the page?

Another example would be Gary's Coven and Gary's Witchcraft Book. The title of the articles features the name Gary, but that's not the actually name of the group/book. -JoyaOscura (talk) 20:10, December 28, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Hello
Hey there!! :D Of course! It's what I'm trying to focus on most at the moment! Happy New Year!!! I really hope you enjoyed your holidays! ^___^ Gourgeist (talk) 06:44, January 1, 2015 (UTC)

Hate to say it
But Moleman seems to not have learned his lessons. He is still deleting talk page messages even after being warned not to. Is there anyway you can get him into chat? I've actually thought up some peaceful solutions to the matter if you'd be willing to hear them. Scombridae (talk) 01:31, January 2, 2015 (UTC)

Setting things straight.
You and the other users of this site have been deceived.

User:ResonX2 is not me. It is a sockpuppet created by the group of vicious cyberbullies led by Willow Giovanna for the sole purpose of undermining me here. I said none of the horrible things it said in chat while claiming to be me.

Furthermore, all of the non-regular users present in chat during that incident, including User:OneHamMan, User:MAJOR KOMAROV, User:AutismPirate and User:Whinayayay (a sock puppet of the previously-banned-for-harassment User:Whinaaay), are all members of said trolling group. This is provable from the accounts' previous history consisting of repeatedly vandalizing my personal sites.

The conspiracy nature of this is also evident from the fact that the entire incident was posted on a website operated by the bullies and dedicated to attacking and defaming me, here.

And now, the troll accounts User:ChingWhinWhon and User:Scombridae are repeatedly vandalizing my talk page with "chastisement" for "my" actions, repeatedly re-adding their spamming messages whenever I remove them, and claiming that I cannot moderate my own talk page.

I don't exactly have a right to bring you to active involvement in going after these criminals outside this site, but I do want the record to be set straight here with the ResonX account unbanned just for reference while all the offending accounts are permanently banned, and for it to be understood that I did not say those horrible things.

BennyCupster (talk) 03:51, January 2, 2015 (UTC)

Wow, now you are lying. First you try to threaten your way into taking over FTWinchester's position and now you want you're trying to lie to him and manipulate him? That's really fucking low dude. Scombridae (talk) 03:55, January 2, 2015 (UTC)

You are ResonX2, @BennyCupster. You admitted it to me in a chatroom where I pretended to be an ally. I screencapped it (http://i.imgur.com/X0bpTeG.png). I feel like I could've gotten more out of you, but unfortunately I had something urgent to do. None of my friends threatened to kill or rape anyone, nor have we done any of the horrible things ResonX has claimed we've done. ResonX is just taking advantage of people again inorder to attack Willow Giovanna, including everyone that associates with her. He has a history of giving out death threats to several people(http://i.imgur.com/e19JMhX.png). What happened in chat is typical of ResonX. Your final solution is to just ban ResonX on sight(and yes, even us) and ignore him, if he tries to talk with any of you. 24.92.111.183 06:03, January 2, 2015 (UTC)

Seriously? Another forgery? That is literally a CRIME, dude. BennyCupster (talk) 14:28, January 2, 2015 (UTC)

Oh sure every piece of evidence against you is a forgery, right ResonX? I think I need to make it clear to all administrators of this wiki that ResonX's death threats are nothing out of the ordinary. I can recall several people ResonX has threatened to kill over trivial matters. For instance, here's a private talk session from deviantART where two victims of ResonX's death threats talk about their experiences (http://pastebin.com/0qCcKEDj). When things don't go the way ResonX wants them, he can get angry to the extent of wanting to kill the people responsible. And now, he's trying to blame his threats on us, which is just completely unacceptable. A false accusation like that can't just be allowed to slide, seeing how you all reacted very seriously to it. I personally don't take any of his threats seriously, and neither should any of you. Afterall, he doesn't have the resources to act on them. He's more than likely just gonna deny anything I've written on this talk-page. I've never been able to get through to him, and neither are any of you. Just ban him, so that you can all just get back to writing without having to deal with his disruptive antics(And ours, I'm not gonna deny that we've been very disruptive on this wiki, and I apologize for it.). 24.92.111.183 21:01, January 2, 2015 (UTC)

If you don't want me to attack you, then stop harassing me and making false accusations towards me. Also, why would you have that last document, created by the known troll "Jews", if you were not part of the trolling circles he, Willow Giovanna and others are involved in?

In any case, the fact remains that both "incidents" pertaining to the current situation, both the chat incident here with "ResonX2" and the previously linked screencap in which "ResonX" admits to it, are forgeries created by trolls, which the IP address above is unambiguously one of. BennyCupster (talk) 21:08, January 2, 2015 (UTC) BennyCupster (talk) 21:08, January 2, 2015 (UTC)

ResonX, you can keep repeating the same lie, over and over agian but that doesn't make it true. Not without evidence. I give evidence when I accuse someone of doing something, but when you do, the burden of proof is always on you. In this case, I am accusing you of having a history of giving out death threats. I am accusing you of threatening to kill the administrators of this wiki. I've given out evidence in the form of screenshots, and logs. Where's your evidence, ResonX? 24.92.111.183 22:08, January 2, 2015 (UTC)

My evidence consists of the presence of multiple known cyberbullies with a history of deception and manipulation in coordination together here, in the form of accounts recorded as having been created to vandalize my sites, their activities of spamming my pages including with the address of a known bullying forum that has been repeatedly spammed to me, the posting of the forged logs impersonating me, as these troll have a history of doing, on a known trolling site, and the above IP address's possession of a very old trolling document that no legit user would be likely to have ready to present.

The key evidence for "ResonX2" not being me lies in the fact that it was created immediately upon the time of the incident in which it was involved despite myself already possessing multiple accounts, including this one, BennyCupster, which the administration of another site forced me to create or else be banned because of these trolls' nonstop harassment and vandalism.

I'm not trying to start a fight here or get other legit users involved in any dealings outside of this site, I'm simply exercising my right to have the truth known so we can leave this dealing soundly and with it being known that I did not say those horrible things, and that those saying I did are lying trolls. BennyCupster (talk) 23:27, January 2, 2015 (UTC)

It's quite obvious that you created ResonX2 immediately after you were banned so you could have a disposable sockpuppet and not risk getting your Bennycupster account banned too. With a throwaway sockpuppet, you had ampule opportunity to verbally abuse the admins without worrying about a global wikia ban. Since that didn't work, you've reverted to using Bennycupster and trying to plead your way out. Scombridae (talk) 01:12, January 3, 2015 (UTC)

Well after the chat with you on IRC, I whois'd your username, revealing your hostmask.(cgiirc@Rizon-9FE0E9B1.socal.res.rr.com). You're the only person I know that lives in southern california. Whose southern californian hostmask could this belong to, ResonX?

'''ResonX2 is not me. PERIOD.''' These people are LYING to you, as their kind has a HISTORY of doing. Scombridae can immediately be identified as a known troll based on his global user history consisting of the account being created specifically to vandalize my site. I've had enough of this. Please just ban these filth right now and get this madness over with so I can go on with my business in peace. BennyCupster (talk) 04:41, January 3, 2015 (UTC)

Enough, Moleman. 216.185.58.131 05:46, January 3, 2015 (UTC)

Looks like you've failed to refute your accusations, and still shamelessely deny mine, ResonX. Even after providing irrefutable proof. I Don't think it's necessary for me to continue. ResonX confirmed for threatening to kill the administrators of this wiki. I've said what needed to be said. 24.92.111.183 06:16, January 3, 2015 (UTC)

I repeat: RESONX2 IS NOT ME, IT IS A SOCKPUPPET OF TROLLS, STALKERS AND BULLIES WITH A LONG HISTORY OF LYING TO AUTHORITIES. I did not threaten anyone here. I ask permission to remove the records of these filth's lies for the sake of record; in any case, please just ban them for crying out loud so this can be over with. BennyCupster (talk) 06:22, January 3, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, your a broken record, ResonX. Keep repeating the same bullshit over and over again. It won't smell any better. Oh, and the only way for this to really be over with, is by having you banned. Delete what the administrator allows you to, but the fact remains: You threatened to kill everyone, and are now asking the administrators you wanted dead to delete the evidence I brought into the light. You really do have something to hide, don't you, ResonX? Yeah, you totally do. 24.92.111.183 06:39, January 3, 2015 (UTC)

Repeating a lie over and over does not make it anything different. I did not threaten any administration, and the account that said those things is not me. PERIOD. BennyCupster (talk) 06:53, January 3, 2015 (UTC)

Stop bullshitting already. 216.185.58.131 06:55, January 3, 2015 (UTC)

Welp, this is a ride that won't ever end. I'll just leave it to the administrators. 24.92.111.183 07:07, January 3, 2015 (UTC)

RE:
I am TRYING to "drop it" and take leave; I am simply needing to make sure that it is understood that my "accusations" of trolling and bullying are true and that I did not say those horrible things to any of you. BennyCupster (talk) 18:10, January 2, 2015 (UTC)

Renaming the King of Hell
Hey, guy! I was renaming the "King of Hell" and "King of the Crossroads" pages "Ruler of Hell" and "Ruler of the Crossroads," respectively, as gender-neutral to accommodate Lilith (for both) and Abaddon (for Hell). While it worked out perfectly with the "King of the Crossroads" page (and its redirect, "Queen of the Crossroads," which I re-redirected directly to "Ruler of the Crossroads"), it looks like I messed up somehow when renaming the "King of Hell" page. The Talk page and the History page still refer to it as "King of Hell," and while the page seems to have technically been renamed "Ruler of Hell," it doesn't show as a redirect in the URL and typing "Ruler_of_Hell" into the wiki URL results in an empty page, while "King_of_Hell" gets the right page -- though, again, it doesn't show it as a redirect, even though it should.

The only difference I noticed was that the box that should exist at the Rename screen, to rename the associated Talk page, didn't seem to show up when I was trying to move it. Another issue was that I had to repeatedly try to rename both pages, and then refresh it, to change the name because "a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid." I'm not sure if either had something to do with the problems with the King of Hell page (though the Ruler of the Crossroads page ended up having no problems), or both did, or something else entirely. At any rate, could you be able to fix it with the admin tools? And if you figure out what the trouble was, could you tell me so that I can avoid having the same problems in the future? Thanks, and sorry for the trouble!--NaiflidG (talk) 10:26, January 3, 2015 (UTC)

No worries, it wasn't a big thing and the response isn't really late anyway ("late" for me would be over a week). I'm okay; I'd been so disillusioned with SPN under Carver that I turned into a bit of a ghost on this site, but I think I might be starting to get more active again. There's still a lot that I'd planned to do on here. I hope you're doing well and that you enjoyed the holidays. How's admining been so far? (Looks like it might be kind of a headache.) Anyway, getting back on-topic: I checked the page and you fixed the problem, so thank you! With luck, I'll get on editing both pages in the next few days. As long as we're discussing them, there were a few points I wanted to hear from the other users on, so if you have the time and inclination, could you weigh in on the Talk pages for RotC and RoL? And don't worry, I'm always awesome. You stay awesome yourself. :)--NaiflidG (talk) 05:37, January 6, 2015 (UTC)

Gary from Wendigo
Hi there. Could you please delete these pages so I can make room for the Gary portrayed by Cory Monteith in Wendigo? Thank you. Gourgeist (talk) 00:32, January 4, 2015 (UTC)

Oh hey, forget that request actually, it is now a disambiguation page. :) Thank ya anyway! Gourgeist (talk) 23:07, January 4, 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome! I was very active on the Fallout Wikia for years and I believe I am still ranked #37, so I have a great understanding of how it works. Rocco 20:50, January 5, 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I adore how maturely you deal with these situations. Also, I've been quite busy as well with festivities, lol. Also you might want to consider other parties acting inappropriately in this mess. Thanks again. ^__^ Gourgeist (talk) 08:02, January 6, 2015 (UTC)

RE:
I am no longer trying to press my issues on this site; at this point all I am doing is protecting my talk page from vandalism. BennyCupster (talk) 01:42, January 6, 2015 (UTC)