User talk:Mate1234

Power aspiration
Please stop inserting Power to Sims with no aspiration! I've said it twice, here and here. Please do NOT insert any more of this because we haven't known the validity of the Power aspiration! You keep ignoring the fact that we cannot be sure about this aspiration yet. If you need to rebut this, please discuss it first in Talk:Power (aspiration), or we'll be considered to start edit warring.  Nikel  Talk  –  Vote!  05:11, June 19, 2013 (UTC)

RE: Editing mistake
Hello! :) Well, if you think of it: the mistake is the game recognizing them as male, not the appearance being female. Because when the developers created such Sims, they were supposed to be female, but somehow they are not recognized as such and because of that they act like males or adults, but that's not how it should be. Do you agree? -- RoseGui ( talk here ) 14:04, June 22, 2013 (UTC)

They have female appearances, but we edit them as male adults, because game recognizes them as male adults. Mate1234 (talk ) 15:07, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think we don't need to be that strict. If we know it's a mistake, isn't this category good enough for that? -- RoseGui [[File:Thanks rose.png]] ( talk here ) 14:10, June 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * It´s best to write correct, just like in game, if she is actually male, then write that she is male. Mate1234
 * No, they are actually female. That mistake is the way the game recognizes them. -- RoseGui [[File:Thanks rose.png]] ( talk here ) 14:14, June 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * Not correct. They only have female child appearance. Mate1234


 * Thing is, not many people are aware at this, and if there's a reader taking a quick glance, they will be confused for sure; and might even try to "correct" the article again because what's seen is clearly a child. That is why it's stated explicitly in the article itself, because article is to read, and why there's the Category:Gender confused Sims.  Nikel  Talk  –  Vote!  14:33, June 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * In the text is written: ˝Though she has female child appearence, game recognizes her as male adult...˝ That explains everything. Mate1234
 * I know, Mate. You're repeating what I said. People just need a quick glance at the infobox about her stats, but when they read the article, they will eventually know about their glitch.  Nikel  Talk  –  Vote!  14:40, June 22, 2013 (UTC)

Zo Curious
So I just attempted to bring back Zo Curious, and an infinite amount of errors happened. I apologize for not believing you. However, the information about Hamlet Dane isn't really worth noting. Ѧüя◎ґ (talk) 19:38, July 2, 2013 (UTC)

Glabe Curious
While it is implied that Glabe Curious was married to Glarn, we don't actually know her true relation to him. Ѧüя◎ґ (talk) 12:26, July 9, 2013 (UTC)

I think that´s because she was seen in sleepwear with Glarn, she raised Lola and Chloe (after Glarn possibly left her) and I put this in infobox:'
 * spouse = (possibly)'

Original appearances
Absolutely! I love the original appearances! Ѧüя◎ґ (talk) 12:38, July 9, 2013 (UTC)

Useful templates
Check out these templates: Template:PersonalityTable and Template:InterestTable. Feel free to add them to Sim pages. Ѧüя◎ґ (talk) 12:52, July 9, 2013 (UTC)

Hidden Sims
Most definitely. Right now there are several hidden Sim articles on the wiki. Ѧüя◎ґ (talk) 13:00, July 9, 2013 (UTC)

RE:Gallery (Darleen Dreamer)
It's an unneeded fanon image that has no business being on a canon article. —Random Ranaun (Talk to me! ) 00:13, July 11, 2013 (UTC)


 * Please stop re-adding the image to the gallery. —Random Ranaun (Talk to me! ) 17:28, July 11, 2013 (UTC)


 * I'll say it again, they're unneeded. We already have the headshots and storytelling photos to show their original appearances. —Random Ranaun (Talk to me! ) 20:47, July 11, 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm telling you to stop adding them, and I've already told you why. —Random Ranaun (Talk to me! ) 20:54, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

Edit Warring
You and Random Ranaun have reverted several of each others' edits to Darleen Dreamer in the past day. This is considered edit warring and is against the rules. The page has been locked to prevent editing for a short time. I strongly suggest discussing the edit at Talk:Darleen Dreamer before taking any further actions to edit this page. --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 21:36, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Seeing as this issue goes beyond Darleen Dreamer, it would be more appropriate to discuss the issue in a forum post. If you or Random Ranaun don't start a thread, I probably will, to resolve this issue. In the meantime, note that reverting another user's edits to a page (either by using the undo button, or by continually re-adding the same information) three or more times within a 24-hour period is considered edit warring and is against the rules. If you engage in edit warring, you will be temporarily blocked from making edits to the wiki. Therefore, I strongly suggest that you talk about your disagreement rather than continuing to contradict Random Ranaun with your edits. If you have any questions about this, please let me know on my talk page. --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 21:50, July 11, 2013 (UTC)