According To Wikipedia We Do Exist

[aisback]

yes the yugioh abridges series is on wikipedia finally its acknowledged

another battle won

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugioh#...bridged_Series

[Noah Kaiba]

Excellent.

[Mirage Gecko]

We must Rejoice! I shall bring the cake! ^o^

[musigal]

to quote kudos "*pulls out ginger beer and cheesecake* *throws confetti*"
XD

[Spectrum~Dreams]

Woooo :D

[Kroze]

Ehh... don't speak too soon, from the looks of the discussion page it seems its about to be deleted yet again.

[ggctuk]

Well, here's an interesting excerpt from E-Wing:

Originally Posted by E-Wing from Wikipeida

After seeing at least one episode on Youtube I conclude that the one who posted it committed copyright infringement against Konami and 4Kids Entertainment, particularly the act of reproducing the copyrighted work and making derivative works of it. Better someone contact these companies as well as Youtube about it.

So not only does he not want Wikipedia to have anything about it, he now wants to have LittleKuroboh sued? Eh, try it. If 4Kids actually cared that much they would have done so a long time ago.

[MrsSallyBakura]

But how come YGOTAS can be on IMDb but not on Wikipedia?

[Choi Jin-Ah]

...>:V I swear, If it wasn't for Abridged, I wouldn'tve started buying cards again and rebuilding my deck from the ground up.

Therefore, LK should be given an award for getting me (And about 13 of my friends) into it again.

YAY, WE'RE ACKNOWLEDGED! *Pops the cork on the champagne* ;D

[ggctuk]

Actually, that's what happened to me! I'm now hooked on buying children's trading cards XD

Pop the cork, but drink the champagne quick, else they'll remove it for the ninth time.

[Choi Jin-Ah]

Pfft, I already downed the bottle ;D

*DRUNKEN SWAGGER*

ANYHOW yes... >> THANKFULLY we still have this: :V~<333 And all sub-categories.

[ggctuk]

Yep, Wikia acknowledge us, and I'm sure now Wikipedia wants to ban that too :(

[Kroze]

Originally Posted by MrsSallyBakura

But how come YGOTAS can be on IMDb but not on Wikipedia?

Wikipedia is filled with people I like to call "WikiNazis", they are hardcore wikipedia users and concerning even a small mention of YGO:TAS, they will fight to the death against it just due to not regarding what we refer to as "new media shows" due to just being on the internet as credible at all.

It seems not even the mashable's award win or the fact that IMDB approved an entry on YGO:TAS (Seriously, how the HELL did that even happen, let alone pass IMDB approval!?!? That's just crazy!) will make them accept YGO:TAS as credible.

[animex75]

that's what i like to call 'denial'

while i'm at it, i may as well mention the page TAS has on the Yu-Gi-Oh wiki

[BryyMiller]

Hey, uh, guys?

Wikipedia does not acknowledge anything done by average people.

You have to be famous.

(Unlike the IMDB, amirite?)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1578694/

[aisback]

Originally Posted by Kroze

Wikipedia is filled with people I like to call "WikiNazis", they are hardcore wikipedia users and concerning even a small mention of YGO:TAS, they will fight to the death against it just due to not regarding what we refer to as "new media shows" due to just being on the internet as credible at all.

It seems not even the mashable's award win or the fact that IMDB approved an entry on YGO:TAS (Seriously, how the HELL did that even happen, let alone pass IMDB approval!?!? That's just crazy!) will make them accept YGO:TAS as credible.

KROOOOOOZE is right on this. Wikipedia is run by individuals who think they know best even though it doesnt infringe copyright.

[ggctuk]

Well, there's talk on the talk page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yu-Gi-Oh!#YGOTAS

Seriously. Some people just hate the average person. We're talking about the 'elite' here. Or, at least, that's what they'd like us to think - that we're all wrong, they're right, and **** anybody who dares to prove otherwise.

[Invincabal]

This is simply fabulas .
Screw the lame people YGOTAS exists

[SirFluffykins]

Firstly i am dsylexic so i cant spell. secondly it is illegeal it has not been licensed from toei it is done without permission so is illegal regardless what you think. thirdly this is a warning be a abusive again you will be left with a ip warning which might lead to ip ban

I think it was mentioned about 5 times 4Kids knows about the Abridged Series and the guys reply basically is, "Screw everyone, I don't have to spell correctly on WIKEPEDIA because I apparently have a problem I never bothered to work around and you're all wrong because Toei isn't involved. I'll ban anyone being abusive to me online" :/

Sounds like someone was illegally downloading the japanese episodes :3

[Fat1Fared]

Originally Posted by ggctuk

Well, here's an interesting excerpt from E-Wing:



So not only does he not want Wikipedia to have anything about it, he now wants to have LittleKuroboh sued? Eh, try it. If 4Kids actually cared that much they would have done so a long time ago.

Good thing LK is English and we have overriding presedent in this area (take that rest of world and Wiki person with no legal knowledge <___<) they can only sue for illegal profit (so that is 00000.00000) and damages which something tells me won't be a lot, unless they can proved Yu Gi Oh Abridged has lessened poeples prematers to watch Yu Gi Oh normal,

PS also this is not actually copyright Law, as its not about selling another persons product with fair lisence/Title because LK doesn't sell any of their products (the few things does sell are his own)

[animex75]

besides, if anything's turning people away from Yu-Gi-Oh, then it's 4Kids and their edits

[ggctuk]

4Kids and Konami cannot complain either, as somebody else pointed out, it's boosted the sales of Yu-Gi-Oh! Merchandise.

[animex75]

yup, i had stopped using anything Yu-Gi-Oh when GX came out (i have cards from season 2, but otherwise nothing to do with it), TAS actually got me interested again

[mystra]

you gotta love *written dripping with sarcasm* how a dyslexic person can edit a viable article and talk about legal shit they obviously know nothing about. it's obvious that they aren't smart enough to edit/view ANY article anywhere since they aren't even smart enough to use spell check.

[Fat1Fared]

Originally Posted by mystra

you gotta love *written dripping with sarcasm* how a dyslexic person can edit a viable article and talk about legal shit they obviously know nothing about. it's obvious that they aren't smart enough to edit/view ANY article anywhere since they aren't even smart enough to use spell check.

If you are on about me, then yes I am dyslexic person and no, I do actually do know about the law (or so the fully trained lawyers I study and work with tell me, yes I am Law student and voluntary legal adviser, so amazingly I do know a little bit about the Law)

PS also if you were half as smart as you think you are, you would know that dyslexic people have to have at least average IQ and something like 70% of dyslexic's are actually above average intelligence and some of history's most famous poeple have been dyslexic

Albert Einstein, Thomas Edison, Winston Churchill, Benjamin Franklin, Mozart and John Lennon were dyslexia and all 10 times more intelligent you or I will ever be

-Another interesting problem with your theory is that to be dyslexic is not just to be a bad speller (in fact only about 30% suffer from that, me included) it is about translation problems throughout human body/culture, so just because someone cannot spell doesn't mean they are dyslexic, and just because can, doesn't mean they are not

(I bet you do not even know what the word means or what causes it, though sure a quick check on internet will make you feel much smarter, when you answer that with...well its means...etc <yes even we dyslexia's can use sarcastic comments sometimes isn't that nice?>)

PS even if you are not on about me, seriously, learn a little about dyslexia before make somewhat simple idea, that person must be dyslexic if there dumb or that lack of spelling profess is sign of lack of intelligence [ I put up with this a lot and maybe 7 hours of legal lectures have left me little hot under collar which reacted to this when normally just ignore it, but something about what you put really got to me

-Best bit is, if you were on about me, I was actually joking anyway, as they would not sue LK at all, because simply say it would cost more than he is worth, I was merely joking about fact that this tech doesn't come under the legal guidelines used because of problems within the legal system of england (where case would almost certainly take place) to do with lack of statute based on computer soft-ware, and fact tried to use 50 year old acts to control it ]

[Koneko-Chan-Nya]

:D Awesome.

[SirFluffykins]

If you are on about me, then yes I am dyslexic person and no, I do actually do know about the law (or so the fully trained lawyers I study and work with tell me, yes I am Law student and voluntary legal adviser, so amazingly I do know a little bit about the Law)

PS also if you were half as smart as you think you are, you would know that dyslexic people have to have at least average IQ and something like 70% of dyslexic's are actually above average intelligence and some of history's most famous poeple have been dyslexic

Whoa, whoa, where did you get the idea anyone was talking about you? Thanks for the long rant, but he's talking about the guy from Wikipedia. :/

[ggctuk]

Originally Posted by Fat1Fared

If you are on about me, then yes I am dyslexic person and no, I do actually do know about the law (or so the fully trained lawyers I study and work with tell me, yes I am Law student and voluntary legal adviser, so amazingly I do know a little bit about the Law)

PS also if you were half as smart as you think you are, you would know that dyslexic people have to have at least average IQ and something like 70% of dyslexic's are actually above average intelligence and some of history's most famous poeple have been dyslexic

Albert Einstein, Thomas Edison, Winston Churchill, Benjamin Franklin, Mozart and John Lennon were dyslexia and all 10 times more intelligent you or I will ever be

-Another interesting problem with your theory is that to be dyslexic is not just to be a bad speller (in fact only about 30% suffer from that, me included) it is about translation problems throughout human body/culture, so just because someone cannot spell doesn't mean they are dyslexic, and just because can, doesn't mean they are not

(I bet you do not even know what the word means or what causes it, though sure a quick check on internet will make you feel much smarter, when you answer that with...well its means...etc <yes even we dyslexia's can use sarcastic comments sometimes isn't that nice?>)

PS even if you are not on about me, seriously, learn a little about dyslexia before make somewhat simple idea, that person must be dyslexic if there dumb or that lack of spelling profess is sign of lack of intelligence [ I put up with this a lot and maybe 7 hours of legal lectures have left me little hot under collar which reacted to this when normally just ignore it, but something about what you put really got to me

-Best bit is, if you were on about me, I was actually joking anyway, as they would not sue LK at all, because simply say it would cost more than he is worth, I was merely joking about fact that this tech doesn't come under the legal guidelines used because of problems within the legal system of england (where case would almost certainly take place) to do with lack of statute based on computer soft-ware, and fact tried to use 50 year old acts to control it ]

Nice rant, and it's nice to get these things off your chest once in a while (perhaps we should have a Venting forum here?) but they were talking about the user who goes by the name of Andrewcrawford, unless you are Andrewcrawford?

He could be a mod, although there's no flag on his page about it - he certainly threatened one user with being banned. In any case, why was I the one having to point out that Wikipedia is not a forum and that Talk Pages are for discussion on editorial changes to the article, and not on the actual content of the article?

[mystra]

Originally Posted by Fat1Fared

If you are on about me, then yes I am dyslexic person and no, I do actually do know about the law (or so the fully trained lawyers I study and work with tell me, yes I am Law student and voluntary legal adviser, so amazingly I do know a little bit about the Law)

1. i was on about whoever was the dyslexic person writing in the wiki thread on wikipedia

2. i am dyslexic so i do know something about it.

[Mirage Gecko]

Okay, how did we get to this point? o.o