User talk:Gold Stur

This user may have left Wikipedia. Gold Stur has not edited Wikipedia since 4 May 2020. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Welcome!

Hello, Gold Stur, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Alai 22:42, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

About Leisure Suit Larry

You recently removed my comment from the Entertainment Software Rating Board article that stated Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude Uncut and Uncensored was also rated AO. Well, it seems that the Leisure Suit Larry article (my source for that tidbit) would disagree with you. Notice that I had said "Uncut and Uncensored" version, not the normal retail which IS rated M. I won't bother changing the ESRB article again, since the text no longer implies San Andreas being the first AO game for this generation, but I just wanted to let you know. --Zeromaru 22:29, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: It also seems to me that you're not in the position to be making comments on AO-rated (or even M-rated) games, as you're not old enough to play them. I know this seems kind of rude, but it's far more tame than your uncalled comment on Germany.

Green Day

Please do not change the categorization of Green Day without first gaining consensu on the talk page, the current categorization of Punk Rock/Pop Punk was reached via consensus on the talk page and shouldn't be changed without consensus. Jtkiefer ^{T | @ | C} ----- 04:06, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits on Talk:Green Day

I have removed your personal attacks from Talk:Green Day. Please refrain from violating our civility policy both in the contents of your edits and in your edit summaries (for example, this one, where your edit summary is "rv faggotism"). Such comments are against Wikipedia policy and, if continued, may result in being blocked or banned. Kelly Martin (talk) 13:34, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Edits marked as minor

Regarding [1]: Please see Wikipedia:Minor edit. Appropiate edit summaries are vitally important, please do use the accepted conventions. - brenneman ^(t)^(c) 02:57, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

This user page is attrocious. If they want to have a page like this they should go elsewhere. This is an encyclopedia.

Along with the graphical sexual images, which any minor may view without verification of age, the page is also vocal against Jews, blacks, and the Polish. yalbik 01:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's so against black Polish Jews, that's why I, a black Polish Jew made it! As for the picture, I didn't upload it, and it has been used in previous articles. As for it upsetting minors, there is some Wiki policy of not censoring for minors. I'll find it later, I'm a in a bit of a rush. Gold Stur 12:29, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit, I found it. Here. Feel free to hit me with a rebuttal, it's what I live for. Gold Stur 22:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Green Day#Punk rock or not?

I saw your ideas, Please support me. New!!!!!oneone 11:57, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I worship you

I like the way you talk about Green Day. Teach me your secrets. 88.153.142.102 09:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mayble you'll find {{user realpunk}} useful.

This user appreciates real punk music.

<- 88.152.182.249 20:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Used. Gold Stur 01:08, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your secret is a template on the wikiserver. now thats real, punk.!, again... what is your definition of punk? Xsxex 22:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Green_Day#Genre_again

If I may, I quoted you there. p sychomelo₍di_s c _ussion) 13:43, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a common convention that all articles note that a rock band is a rock band, because there are other sorts of musical ensembles. It's a simple rule of clarification for those who may not know anything about the band. I don't believe anyone is arguing that Green Day is not a rock band; the debate is over particular subgenres (punk rock, punk pop, etc.). WesleyDodds 00:52, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ignore that. I read the wrong edit. Still, people are rather touchy about this subject, which is why I think the whole sentence "Once considered a punk rock band, their music now leans more towards pop punk/pop rock" should be removed. It seems to purposefully antagonize people, even if is meant to give credence to opposing viewpoints. Anyways, Green Day have been called pop punk since Dookie so it's not like people are arguing that they've become pop punk only since American Idiot. WesleyDodds 00:58, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories

Hi - please read and respond to comments there. Thanks. —johndburger 11:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning Pop Punk

Hey kid, do some research... there is no Pop punk revival... and Wikipedia IS NOT A PLACE TO INVENT NEW TERMS>>.... !!! thats what PUNK IS FOR... start a band... write a zine... subscribe to Punk Planet or MRR... its cool that you care though...keep it up.. and see what you find. Bring us some good sources! - Xsxex 01:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey i wrote you.. you should write back.. or not.. im just a loser with no life... Xsxex 22:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bands I listen to: I listen to The Ramones, The Sex Pistols, Generation X, The Misfits, and The Clash. I also listen to Green Day, blink-182, and Fall Out Boy. I also listen to R.E.M., They Might Be Giants, and Weird Al. I also listen to many other bands and styles of music. But as for the ones which are punk, i think you know. If theres a band that I should check out, let me know. Xsxex 19:25, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GoldStrrr, you're response was exactly what i thought it would be. Again, if you want to enlighten me about any specific bands, i'd appreciate it. I listen to a wide variety of music and have been "in the scene" or whatever that means since late93/94'. I consider my "punk" experience to be a work in progress or an ever growing shifting mountain of rock which is living and plastic. Show me the way. Xsxex 21:20, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Green day edit

Please do not alter cited material, as you have done with this edit. It has been documented frequently in the media that Green Day brought about a punk rock revival in 1994. WesleyDodds 06:55, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Dukecover.PNG

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Dukecover.PNG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Mickel.PNG

Thank you for uploading Image:Mickel.PNG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

holy shit

you are one of the stupidest people whose profile I have ever had the good fortune of reading on wikipedia 72.200.192.250 (talk) 05:20, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the cool thing is it's almost 12 years later and I'm still alive and kickin but you have probably either contracted coronavirus and/or ran out of toilet paper 😎 --Gold Stur (talk) 13:19, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

October 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page User:Synthetic coma has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 03:48, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]