User talk:Newerfag

From 1d4chan
Jump to: navigation, search

Is this how you set up pages to talk to others? No idea but thought it might be better than spamming pages to try to get your attention.


Yes, it is. I'll overlook the irony of you using capslock and strikethroughs here though.--Newerfag (talk) 06:28, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

So i went to halfchan to check up on how things are going there...[edit]

and apparently they banned smut threads? whats the story? what were smut threads and why are they banned? i never read them but i know theyve had a dedicated community for years. seems like the pocketeers are getting even worse over there. it also looks like the anti smut fags are trying to ban the entire smut page from 1d4chan too. --Kapow (talk) 18:09, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

/WST was a series of threads dedicated to people requesting /tg/ related Erotica(book porn). Essentially for games like shadowrun and DnD. However, recently a bunch of trolls have basically decided that they don't like wst, and started a whole campaign to shitpost over them, and in a fit of genius, decided to create hundreds of smut threads to get the mods attention. Evilexecutive (talk) 18:22, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
However, the root cause of this as I've figured out, was that someone got offended by a wst artist putting up a Patreon page on a thread. The butthurt then spread like wildfire. Evilexecutive (talk) 18:22, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
More precisely, it's actually one guy with a cellphone and the deluded belief that raids are still a thing. You might remember him as the asshole who singlehandely ruined /qtg/. Oh, and stay the hell off It's said shitposter's stomping grounds.
No idea what /qtg/ is, care to explain? Evilexecutive (talk) 18:27, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Quest Thread General. A general where quests of all types were discussed. This douchebag took offense to it and plunged it into a black hole of shitposts and a staging ground for his one-man crusade to turn back the clock to the days of Nazimod. (Can't say WHY he would think that would be good for /tg/, but he's convinced he's right and that everyone else is wrong.) He can occasionally be seen on the ghost threads as a tripfag called "Martian Triggerman." I have a feeling he was the one who blanked the smut index here as well, he's obsessive enough for that. Seriously, I've seen half the public ban list taken up by his faggotry in previous weeks. --Newerfag (talk) 18:33, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
  • We basically made lewd writefaggotry of all types, and for a while the mods actually went out of their way to defend us. One unusually persistent shitposter made it his life's mission to drive us off the board by triggering arguments and making fake threads to accumulate flamebait in, and after making 7 of them in a row the mods must have simply lost patience. He was banned dozens of times, but the magic of airplane mode made sure that didn't do jack shit. In retrospect, we were lucky to last as long as we did.
For the moment, /d/ has welcomed us with open arms, but the same shitposter who drove us out of /tg/ seems hellbent on following us. I can only assume 8chan's lower traffic means it gets that much less scum to deal with. Can't say I consider the mods malicious so much as lazy and overly willing to take the easy way out, but it does set a bad precedent. Now people know that if they scream loudly enough they can force the mods to let them have their way. Shouldn't they be banning the rabble-rousers instead of appeasing them? --Newerfag (talk) 18:21, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
wow, hes trying to get it banned from /d/ too? wtf? how can anything be banned from /d/? obviously he doesnt give a fuck about the health of /tg/, or fun, and instead just hates smut threads. does he have some kind of ideological hatred for them?--Kapow (talk) 18:33, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
It's the only explanation I can think of that makes sense. I know I've been a bit stuck-up about what makes something /tg/-related in the past here, but at least I was willing to discuss it and back down when I was shown to be wrong. He's just convinced that he knows better than the actual mods, since they actually kept us clean in the early days. He might have a few hangers-on as well, but with his habit of using airplane mode on his cellphone to switch IP addresses there's no way to be sure of that. --Newerfag (talk) 18:36, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
well ill help defend the smut page from vandalism if i see it, there is literally years worth of work on that page, and it should be preserved against autistic haters.--Kapow (talk) 18:44, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Much appreciated. Tell the people on otherchan to go and pay a visit to us as well if they can. We need the traffic real bad if we're going to survive. --Newerfag (talk) 18:47, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Eh, don't worry too much. Let the heat blow for a couple of months and we'll be able to get back.

Only War Edit[edit]

Hey man, maybe your group had a house rule about support specialists being unable to profit from the Advanced Specialties rules presented in Hammer of the Emperor but per RAW they're definitely able to do just that. See for clarification. The upcoming Shield of Humanity supplement has been confirmed to contain AdSpecs for some of the support classes, too. Eli (talk) 21:29, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I was not aware of that. Thank you for informing me of this. However, it specifically mentioned that only Guardsmen player characters could use the ones in Hammer of the Emperor (I.e. no support specialists). Perhaps you got that mixed up with remaining dedicated to the current specialty?--Newerfag (talk) 22:17, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Don't worry about it, we had some confusion over the whole thing in our group as well. I've edited the article again to clarify that HotE only contains AdSpecs for Guardsman characters, hope that's better now. Eli (talk) 10:21, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks and Similar Flimflammery[edit]

Just wanted to give my thanks for your insight and involvement, Newerfag. Whilst I know we haven't always seen eye-to-eye, I want it known that I hold you in fairly high regard and worthy of respect. -- Jaimas 18:26 November 01, 2013 (EST)

Not a problem. For what it's worth (and I'm probably remembering something wrong), Retro mentioned that they were particularly interested in exploring the other bounty hunters that Samus regularly competes with- perhaps a successor to Metroid Prime Hunters? In any event, it's not the first time a Nintendo franchise has been presumed dead only to be suddenly restarted (see Kid Icarus). It could be great, it could be just OK, it could suck ass- but until it's released (or confirmed at that matter) it's all just idle speculation on our part. And odds are pretty good that Other M will either be made non-canon in future games (assuming that it's ever acknowledged at all).--Newerfag (talk) 22:37, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

We can all hope. Thanks again! -- Jaimas 21:20 November 01, 2013 (EST)

Halo vs. Starcraft[edit]

I see that you've just tried to strip out all Halo-related content from the wiki, but left StarCraft alone. See, for example, your edit of Starship Troopers. They're both video games with official tabletop adaptations. If anything, I would say that there is a stronger argument to have some background on the Halo universe on the wiki (though, having glanced at the Halo pages many moons ago, I totally understand that it's possible to write too much on a topic), given that there is a fandex in the works. Why blank one but not the other? --Not LongPoster Again (talk) 05:55, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

The Halo page was growing far larger than it needed to be- so much that it was essentially becoming its own wiki. The Starcraft page has shown no such tendencies as of yet, but I will treat it the same way if it too becomes troublesome in that respect. While some background would not hurt, the key word is "some", and the Halo page in its current state was growing out of control.--Newerfag (talk) 06:47, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the bicker-edit.[edit]

Thanks for clearing the talk page of the bullshit. Last fucking thing I need right now is a bunch of wannabe critics insulting my ability when they have nothing of their own to display. Anyways, like I said, much appreciated. Creed of Heresy (talk) 06:59, 11 November 2013 (UTC)


Hi, I see you didn't agree with the joke material I wrote about the number of pokemon, that's fine since we are all working together to make the wiki. Instead of just removing it though could you please add something in it's place then about the number of pokemon since there isn't a bit about it already otherwise that is just taking without adding. If you don't feel you want to I will add a brief note about it when I work on the article more after my break --Alorend (talk)

Added it. You'll have to pardon me, as I have been a diehard fan of the series from the very beginning and I am sure that I would have noticed if there were quality issues. Also, I am rather bad at picking up on jokes.--Newerfag (talk) 14:38, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Knights Inductor Codex[edit]

When exactly did he say not to include Kraken Bolts like that. He said not to include Kraken Bolts as standard wargear because they are rarer, so I introduced them as an upgrade. Rarity in 40k is represented by a points bump as i'm sure you know, so I represented them as a per model upgrade. This, I think, is a balanced way of introducing the canon Kraken Bolts.--Mirmidion43 (talk) 6:30, 9 April 2014 (WST)

You failed to let him know that you were adding them in, and it specifically said to inform him before making any edits whatsoever. It's his overhaul, not yours. --Newerfag (talk) 23:01, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Check his talk page, you are completely wrong --Mirmidion43 (talk) 8:34, 9 April 2014 (WST)

Very well. Perhaps I was a bit too hasty in assuming what he wished. --Newerfag (talk) 02:02, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to clog up your talk page a bit Newerfag. To clarify: what I want has been stated on the front of the codex and in the codex's talk page, I will be the only one doing the edits for the foreseeable future until the codex is at least a little less in a state of flux. Mirmidion43, it's a waste of both our time if I'm forced to constantly undo or redo your edits especially if it messes up balance elsewhere in the codex. However when you talk about your concerns and ideas on the codex talk page it really helps me with constructing the codex. For example you did talk about a small general price reduction and kraken bolts being made as options rather than standard to compensate and I'm most likely going to implement that in some form.

Tl;dr don't edit the codex please, if your ideas are sound enough when you present them I'll most likely go on ahead and add them in a way that the codex is kept in balance at least with itself Remoon101 (talk) 14:35, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

No problem. Glad we could sort this all out. --Newerfag (talk) 15:23, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Games Workshop Edit[edit]

Strikethroughs may not be beautiful, but they are at least entertaining. Not understanding the difference between profit and revenue is just retarded. The whole paragraph makes no sense; switching seamlessly between marginal revenue and what should be marginal profit doesnt work unless the example is reworked to take account of the costs of production throughout. Yes, I could have deleted it all but there was clearly so much thought and love put into it I just didnt have the heart. Or, I could have redone the whole thing to only account for profit, but that would have required so. much. effort. And we both know that I would never make excuses for GWs shameless racketeering incredible business strategy.

The wiki has been trying to discourage the use of strikethroughs for ages now, so don't read that much into it.

End Times Chicanery[edit]

I'm not trying to be contrarian, and I'm not a shill, I did however like the End times, both gaming groups I'm in liked the End Times, in fact I'll completely frank I didn't even know that this End Times story hate existed before checking out this page. Look I don't want to be a dick, not do I want to keep changing the Troubling issues but but currently it's a dump of inaccurate or misleading information. Look everything else aside, I think GW's financial practises are complete shit and indefendable, however the End Times IS by the vast majority of people I've met (read all, of a test group of 50ish) considered good, hell even my friend who plays Dwarfs and Chaos Dwarves likes it and they were 2 races that barely got a mention, chaos dwarves were, dwarfs got a mention and it was then getting kicked in for a few books. I'm happy to put up reasonable alternative take comments, but they keep being edited out. And in case you're wondering about how long I've been playing and the basis that has on my outlook I've been playing warhammer for over 2 decades at this point.

  • I find that the End Time in general was more skub than anything else among my circle of friends, but everyone hated the ending. The article in question seems to mostly articulate that view. That said, if you don't like the section, there're ways of going about it besides what basically amounts to starting an argument on the page or blanking the section you didn't like altogether, principally, the discussion page. Also, when you post on a talk or discussion page, add the two dashes and four tildes to include a signature: --SpectralTime (talk) 15:56, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Duly noted. My main problem was that the anon making the edits (which I would assume is Void) was taking the opposite extreme of the segments he objected to and calling the people raising those issues whiny bitches who don't know what they want instead of raising valid points. I am open to hearing the counterarguments, but when they begin by calling the original argument the product of butthurt neckbeards I am that much less inclined to listen when they dismiss issues as "bitter tirades" and assuming that the dislike of how the ham-handed way they went about changing the setting (which if they don't retcon it will make the new setting feel pointless since even the illusion of being able to delay Chaos will be gone) somehow equates to not wanting the setting to change at all. If you do have reasonable alternative take comments, post them- but make sure they're actually reasonable first. --Newerfag (talk) 16:35, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

/tg/ smut additions[edit]

Thanks for adding my smut to the list. Gave me an excuse to add the rest of my dumb writings.

- Kitty

Awesome Page[edit]

The vandal's back at it. Probably didn't need a heads up but just putting it out there. Remoon101 (talk) 23:53, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

So I noticed. Crazy Cryptek seems to have gotten it, though. You'd think he'd have learned after the first three times. --Newerfag (talk) 00:03, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
This is the power of not leaving the house much.Crazy Cryptek (talk) 00:04, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
You and me both. --Newerfag (talk) 00:06, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
And jesus christ, this guy is persistent. What the FUCK did 1d4chan ever do to him?--Newerfag (talk) 02:50, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Maybe we kicked his dog on accident at the Christmas party or something?Crazy Cryptek (talk) 00:30, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
We had a Christmas party? Invite me next time, will you? --Newerfag (talk) 00:31, 20 June 2015 (UTC)


Really now, i did what you and Ben told me, I got some negative , positive and neutral comments on 4chan. my post is there and you still delete my page!!!

I was on the thread, the comments were almost totally negative. And you still stole art from other people to put in your articles and then lied about it- that alone is enough to get the article deleted. Haven't you learned not to take what doesn't belong to you? --Newerfag (talk) 22:23, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

What do you mean Lied about it ??? wtf?? I didnt steal anything, I never said i made those pics, i just used them, stuff on the internet are free for everyone. don't you know? right click , save!

That's where you're wrong. You didn't give credit to where the pictures came from, and you tried to pass them off as your own by scribbling gas masks on them. It's a serious rule violation, and one which can get you permanently banned. --Newerfag (talk) 22:30, 19 June 2015 (UTC)


Just wondering, what makes some strikethroughs bad, while 1d4chan is littered with them?

They're essentially ALL bad- it's as lazy as it is unfunny. I can't be held responsible for that, nor am I obliged to clean up the messes of everyone who adds strikethroughs. But I sure won't be adding any of them myself, at the very least. --Newerfag (talk) 23:17, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
  • The only time Strikethoughs are acceptable is if they are kept small and is part of a joke (Like the Dark Angels page for example), but even then there is only so much strikethroughs we can handle before it becomes a unreadable mess. Derpysaurus
Mostly what Derpysaurus said.-- 03:49, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

About the whole Vaxi thing[edit]

I don't suppose we could keep the Vaxi Atrocity page as it is? I will probably be making other pages about similar events in the FFG40kRPG timeline (like the Angevin Crusade and such - see my page for my list of things I'm planning on doing, I'm very open to suggestions!). I think that this kind of events that have a lot of information and can be interesting should have a page. --Talon of Anathrax (talk) 22:09, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

It's fine now. While I still personally think the fluff itself is exaggerating the events' magnitude, we'll just keep arguing in circles if we keep debating it. Better that we agree to disagree there.
On that note, something about the Haarlock dynasty, St. Drusus, and/or the Severance Dominate might be good ideas too on account of all the plot points related to them. --Newerfag (talk) 22:13, 22 October 2015 (UTC)


I appreciate you deleting the whining about the TF Wiki. How random anons feel about their wingnut political views being questioned is definitely unrelated to /tg/.

I didn't actually delete anything until a moment ago (though I would have loved to), but I appreciate the sentiment. --Newerfag (talk) 20:59, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Oops. Misread the recent changes. EatTheRich (talk) 23:46, 22 April 2017 (UTC)