User:Deckiller/archive7
The following is an archive of my comments from February 8 to February 13, 2006.
Re: Welcome back
[edit]Good work with the cleanup; I'll rejoin the Xeno-cleanup wagon in a few days (I've been sidetracked with lots of other wikiprojects). I greatly appreciate your help though; finally someone besides me is interested in cleaning up the pages. One thing I recommend is making sure gamefaqs info is deleted as well. Deckiller 23:24, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
- My main gripe is that there's so much plot info in the individual Gear description sections. Maybe I'm pursuing a lost cause trying to slim the article down to where it doesn't give the whole game away, but either way there are a ton of typos that need straightening out in any case. There's also a bit of fancruft, such as the "Gebler Spacecraft" which is stated to be "similar to a Gamma-class shuttle in Star Wars". I can't recall any mention or sighting of such a craft in the game, and the reference to Star Wars is a little irrelevant, IMO. Stuff like that, really. Anyway, cleaning up typos and removing speculation and extraneous plot info is my main goal for that page. Someone added a bunch of plot info to the Miang page, which I'm not happy about, but I realize that trying to "protect" my original version of the page will never work ;) Double-edged sword and all that ;) TKarrde 23:33, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Re Project
[edit]Then I shall do my best to help out with it as much as I can. Star Wars rocks lol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darthgriz98 (talk • contribs)
Fair use images on templates
[edit]I just wanted to drop in and wish you good luck with the Star Wars project (I won't join, though, I have so much else to do already). The SW articles indeed attract disproportionate amounts of fancruft and trivia. I remember removing most of the lists from Star Wars because they had a tendency to grow that made them almost umnaintainable. At some points, there were about 25 people in the list of main characters. Also, I want to warn you that you will probably run into problems if you use fair use images like Image:StarWarsOpeningLogo.JPG or Image:Imperial sd.jpg on the project template. WP:FU forbids the use of fair-use images on templates, and people have started enforcing this rule recently. You should try to find free replacements for these images so you don't run into avoidable trouble. Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 05:34, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- You should only have free (GFDL or public domain) images on the templates your project uses. The picture on the userbox is fine, but the ones on the WikiProject StarWars template that I mentioned above will be a problem once your project goes live. Something like Image:Star Wars Tie-Fighter.jpg or Image:Star Wars X-Wing2.jpg or Image:Stormtrooper Wondercon2005.jpg would probably be better and avoid copyright problems ("No fair use outside article space"). I think you should be able to make your own "free" Star Wars logo, but I am not a copyright expert: the people at Wikipedia:Copyright problems or some place linked from there might know. For now (while your project only exists in your userspace) you might be technically violating the fair use policy/Lucasfilm's copyrights, but as long as you make sure you get rid of all fair use images once your project goes to Wikispace, I wouldn't lose any sleep about it. Good luck again, Kusma (討論) 02:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Editing
[edit]Oh, not too bad, I guess, except that I feel that I've been doing a lot more reverting and merging than actually adding information recently. But I guess that kind of thing needs to be done just as badly as anything else. Sorry I've not really been around of late: real life has been catching up with me, y'know? – Seancdaug 00:09, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Book/fair use debate (section one), Sean and me vs. Remiri (solved)
[edit]Renmiri, I don't want to appear overly harsh here... but please desist from creating articles for every single piece of merchandizing tie-in for Final Fantasy X and Final Fantasy X-2. Wikipedia is not a fan site, and, generally speaking, that means that we do not create articles for things such as strategy guides and artbooks. In the case of Final Fantasy X-2 Ultimania, I placed the information in the trivia section because there does not seem to be enough useful information about the subject to warrant a seperate section in the article: the mere fact that something is a book does not necessarily make it notable. It is in no one's interests to create dozens of stub articles when the information contained within them can be adequately presented in one place: it leads to unnecessary duplication of information, and makes maintaining things much more difficult (for instance, to add information regarding the Shinra/Shin-Ra connection, it becomes necessary to make substantive edits to three or more articles). – Seancdaug 18:56, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Respectfully, I disagree: the Soundtrack has it's own page, the DVD has it's own page. The books need their own page, at least one page with a list of all books and a small commentary on them. The Shinra / ShinRa conection does not belong on the main page IMHO. It is a very controversial theory that appeared in ONE interview in 2003 on the book you just deleted. It belongs on that book page and nowhere else Renmiri 19:32, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- The DVD does not have its own page, actually (it was another one of the items I merged). The soundtracks have their own page because of size management issues (the track listings make the articles too long to effectively merge). If the only rationale for having an individual article on a book is because of a piece of trivia that is not notable enough to include on the main article page, then that speaks very poorly of the notability of the book itself. Also, "commentary" (though I'm not entirely sure how you mean to use the term here) is largely inappropriate for Wikipedia, falling under the realm of literary criticism, which violates neutral point of view. More to the point, standard practice and style requirements (both for the Final Fantasy WikiProject, as evidenced here, and for Wikipedia as a whole, as evidenced here and here) frown upon such highly nuanced articles. And, for the record, I have deleted nothing. However, I will nominate these articles for AfD, if necessary, and I highly doubt, given past experience, that they will survive the process. I'd rather it not come to that, however: I would suggest that, in place of these Wikipedia articles, a brief summary be presented in the "trivia" section of the game article (or in a short section of its own, a la here), and an interwiki link be provided to either the Final Fantasy wiki or Wikibooks. – Seancdaug 19:47, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Moreover, even if I believed that the Final Fantasy X-2 books article was warranted solely on account of the Shinra/Shin-Ra connection (which I do not), it does not need to be mentioned twice in that same article. I would ask again that the information be merged into Final Fantasy X-2 and that you attempt to seek input and consensus before creating even more unnecesary article sprawl. – Seancdaug 19:50, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Regarding your threat to list the contents of Category:Final Fantasy albums at AfD, be my guest, but be aware that you would very likely be violating WP:POINT in doing so. In any case, there's no reason the interviews cannot be mentioned in a brief prose paragraph (unlike track listings, which should follow Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums style guidelines). And by "nuance," I mean "detail": I was simply suggesting that, while this a precedent for having album articles, there is no precedent for articles dedicated to individual artbooks/strategy guides/what-have-you, and that they have traditionally be removed as fancruft. More to the point, articles should first and foremost reflect usage: as the books in question are largely unknown to the majority of English speaking readers, they are unlikely to be accessed except by those who stumble across that information in the main game article. Which means that there is no need to create a seperate article for reasons other than space management. At this point, we simply do not have enough information about the books (or the DVDs, for that matter) for more than a paragraph or two, and there's no reason we can't add another paragraph or two into the main game article. Creating stubs for information like this means that either they will perpetually remain stubs, or that they will serve as a beacon for unencyclopedic fancruft as part of a misguided attempt to destub them. Which is the reason why the creation of articles like this is frowned upon in the first place: new information should generally be added to more general existing articles and, if necessary, later spun-off into a new satelite article. – Seancdaug 20:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Exactly. Look at the Star Wars cruft: I've been narrowing down what was once 500 stubs; nearly half of them were stuffed with 2-3 paragraphs of original research and/or speculation. Furthermore, the ones that were legit were usualy less than 2 paragraphs, and required merging into an organized list. By placing this into the main article, we are countering the possibility of pointless expansion associated with stubs (like Sean said) and giving readers a brief background. This is a general interest encyclopedia, after all. Deckiller 20:15, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- You two are forgetting that 90% of the images on the articles for Spira and FFX / FFX2 have been scanned from said books, so at least for better justifying claims of fair use the books should be mentioned. It is NOT fair use to scan half of the book and refuse to give it prominence on the Enciclopedia IMHO. And will wager that SE agrees. Renmiri 20:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- I went through exactly what you did back in July: I created a laundry list of red articles for very minor items. However, I quickly learned that it was not the thing to do, and I became a mergist. We're not trying to destroy your enthusiasm, if anything, we RESPECT it and want you here as a contributor (which is why we are taking the time to talk with you). Merging helps keep everyone on Wikipedia happy in some way or another; it's a compromise, and a way to keep things combined and organized. Deckiller 20:19, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Exactly. Look at the Star Wars cruft: I've been narrowing down what was once 500 stubs; nearly half of them were stuffed with 2-3 paragraphs of original research and/or speculation. Furthermore, the ones that were legit were usualy less than 2 paragraphs, and required merging into an organized list. By placing this into the main article, we are countering the possibility of pointless expansion associated with stubs (like Sean said) and giving readers a brief background. This is a general interest encyclopedia, after all. Deckiller 20:15, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Regarding your threat to list the contents of Category:Final Fantasy albums at AfD, be my guest, but be aware that you would very likely be violating WP:POINT in doing so. In any case, there's no reason the interviews cannot be mentioned in a brief prose paragraph (unlike track listings, which should follow Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums style guidelines). And by "nuance," I mean "detail": I was simply suggesting that, while this a precedent for having album articles, there is no precedent for articles dedicated to individual artbooks/strategy guides/what-have-you, and that they have traditionally be removed as fancruft. More to the point, articles should first and foremost reflect usage: as the books in question are largely unknown to the majority of English speaking readers, they are unlikely to be accessed except by those who stumble across that information in the main game article. Which means that there is no need to create a seperate article for reasons other than space management. At this point, we simply do not have enough information about the books (or the DVDs, for that matter) for more than a paragraph or two, and there's no reason we can't add another paragraph or two into the main game article. Creating stubs for information like this means that either they will perpetually remain stubs, or that they will serve as a beacon for unencyclopedic fancruft as part of a misguided attempt to destub them. Which is the reason why the creation of articles like this is frowned upon in the first place: new information should generally be added to more general existing articles and, if necessary, later spun-off into a new satelite article. – Seancdaug 20:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Moreover, even if I believed that the Final Fantasy X-2 books article was warranted solely on account of the Shinra/Shin-Ra connection (which I do not), it does not need to be mentioned twice in that same article. I would ask again that the information be merged into Final Fantasy X-2 and that you attempt to seek input and consensus before creating even more unnecesary article sprawl. – Seancdaug 19:50, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- The DVD does not have its own page, actually (it was another one of the items I merged). The soundtracks have their own page because of size management issues (the track listings make the articles too long to effectively merge). If the only rationale for having an individual article on a book is because of a piece of trivia that is not notable enough to include on the main article page, then that speaks very poorly of the notability of the book itself. Also, "commentary" (though I'm not entirely sure how you mean to use the term here) is largely inappropriate for Wikipedia, falling under the realm of literary criticism, which violates neutral point of view. More to the point, standard practice and style requirements (both for the Final Fantasy WikiProject, as evidenced here, and for Wikipedia as a whole, as evidenced here and here) frown upon such highly nuanced articles. And, for the record, I have deleted nothing. However, I will nominate these articles for AfD, if necessary, and I highly doubt, given past experience, that they will survive the process. I'd rather it not come to that, however: I would suggest that, in place of these Wikipedia articles, a brief summary be presented in the "trivia" section of the game article (or in a short section of its own, a la here), and an interwiki link be provided to either the Final Fantasy wiki or Wikibooks. – Seancdaug 19:47, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Renmiri, I am sorry if this is frustrating you, but that is the nature of Wikipedia. We are part of a collaborative project, and these discussions, believe it or not, have been had many dozens of times already. A WikiProject was established to help coordinate our efforts, and to establish guidelines. The upshot to this is that no one, least of all me, is singling you out for abuse. I'm merely doing my part to enforce the guidelines, previously established consensus, and goal of Wikipedia (namely, to create a general interest encyclopedia accessible to everyone). You clearly have a lot of good information, and I absolutely do not mean to chase you away, but, again, I feel that a lot of the detailed information you've added is better suited to a more specialized resource. We can always link to it after the fact (which is particularly easy for other Wikimedia projects, like the aforementioned FF wiki). As it is, I've put up a formal merger request at Talk:Final Fantasy X-2, so that we can get wider input on the subject. As I've said, my previous experience indicates that such articles do not last long, but it is probably best, at this point, to gauge the reaction of the community-at-large. – Seancdaug 20:27, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- We might also want to make a note on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Final Fantasy/things to do page. Deckiller 20:29, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Same debate, other half (sean's page)
[edit]Respectfully, I disagree with your view the Soundtrack has it's own page, the DVD has it's own page. The books need their own page, at least one page with a list of all books and a small commentary on them, just like the soundtrack page. Or delete them all to make it consistent. The Shinra / ShinRa conection does not belong on the main page IMHO. It is a very controversial theory that appeared in ONE interview in 2003 on the book you just deleted. It belongs on that book page and nowhere else Renmiri 19:34, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- The DVD does not have its own page, actually (it was another one of the items I merged). The soundtracks have their own page because of size management issues (the track listings make the articles too long to effectively merge). If the only rationale for having an individual article on a book is because of a piece of trivia that is not notable enough to include on the main article page, then that speaks very poorly of the notability of the book itself. Also, "commentary" (though I'm not entirely sure how you mean to use the term here) is largely inappropriate for Wikipedia, falling under the realm of literary criticism, which violates neutral point of view. More to the point, standard practice and style requirements (both for the Final Fantasy WikiProject, as evidenced here, and for Wikipedia as a whole, as evidenced here and here) frown upon such highly nuanced articles. And, for the record, I have deleted nothing. However, I will nominate these articles for AfD, if necessary, and I highly doubt, given past experience, that they will survive the process. I'd rather it not come to that, however: I would suggest that, in place of these Wikipedia articles, a brief summary be presented in the "trivia" section of the game article (or in a short section of its own, a la here), and an interwiki link be provided to either the Final Fantasy wiki or Wikibooks. – Seancdaug 19:47, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Put it for AfD if you would like, but I will put the entire category Category:Final Fantasy albums for deletion based on the same rationality. Wikipedia is not a Fan site. Now I also do not want to come to that, so I propose that we create a page just for all FFX and FFX/2 books, just like the soundtrack is. As you suggest, listing the content and interviews would make the articles too long to effectively merge with the main page. Which is why I'm taking this issue to heart. It took a lot of work for you to simply delete without a single warning
- PS: I have no idea of what nuance you are talking about. Provide specific examples so that I can defend myself, please Renmiri 19:58, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- Just a point: Final Fantasy albums can be fleshed out with a track listing, infobox, and so on. It is hard to do that with minor books. Although I do think that all published items belong on Wikipedia, many anti-fictional Wikipedians will throw WP:FICT in our faces if there are several stub articles on minor books. Deckiller 20:02, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Not true. Look at The Art of Final Fantasy X book which I own so I was able to input all the info. I feel that if we go to the trouble of listing every single voice actor that is on the game, we should at least give an equal treatment to the books
- Nevermind, Sean deleted that one also... This is so frustrating! I had blogged about how wonderful it was to help build Wikipedia, but Sean is destroying my enthusiasm so I wil blog a correction: Don't ever get close to Wikipedia! Renmiri 20:11, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- I seem to recall reading about not biting the newcomers which I surely feel Sean DID NOT follow by deleting four pages (1, 2, 3, 4) I spent a lot of time doing without a single message and without leaving it for consensus. This is definitely NOT the experience I had so far with other users here on Wikipedia, some of them with a lot better claim at being right than him. I put the image and at he books they were scanned issue up for review at the project page, so we can have consensus. Your view will stand on it's merits and so will mine. But I am also real tired of this discussion so I won't be editing more pages until this is resolved Renmiri 20:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- Well, all I can say is that I feel as upset as you are and I do not feel erasing 4 pages is assume good faith kind of behavior. Sure they are retrievable. I know how to do it and even did it with the first deletion I noticed. I am not retrieving the pages out of respect for Wikipedia, to avoid getting into a editing war. Anyhow, this back and forth arguing is getting us nowhere so I entered a request for mediation with the Wikipedia Cabal. Renmiri 21:16, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- I seem to recall reading about not biting the newcomers which I surely feel Sean DID NOT follow by deleting four pages (1, 2, 3, 4) I spent a lot of time doing without a single message and without leaving it for consensus. This is definitely NOT the experience I had so far with other users here on Wikipedia, some of them with a lot better claim at being right than him. I put the image and at he books they were scanned issue up for review at the project page, so we can have consensus. Your view will stand on it's merits and so will mine. But I am also real tired of this discussion so I won't be editing more pages until this is resolved Renmiri 20:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- Nevermind, Sean deleted that one also... This is so frustrating! I had blogged about how wonderful it was to help build Wikipedia, but Sean is destroying my enthusiasm so I wil blog a correction: Don't ever get close to Wikipedia! Renmiri 20:11, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- PS: I have no idea of what nuance you are talking about. Provide specific examples so that I can defend myself, please Renmiri 19:58, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- Put it for AfD if you would like, but I will put the entire category Category:Final Fantasy albums for deletion based on the same rationality. Wikipedia is not a Fan site. Now I also do not want to come to that, so I propose that we create a page just for all FFX and FFX/2 books, just like the soundtrack is. As you suggest, listing the content and interviews would make the articles too long to effectively merge with the main page. Which is why I'm taking this issue to heart. It took a lot of work for you to simply delete without a single warning
- What you are forgetting that 90% of the images on the articles for Spira and FFX / FFX2 have been scanned from said books, so at least for better justifying claims of fair use the books should be mentioned. It is NOT fair use to scan half of the book and refuse to give it prominence on the Enciclopedia IMHO. And will wager that SE agrees. Renmiri 20:18, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- It is not the erasing of content that got me upset, it is HOW it was done and the "my patience is wearing thin" coments that came with your remarks. The case is here in case you want to add your side to the story
- Unfortunately, justifying fair use claims is never an argument for creating (or keeping) an article. Notability is the one and only criteria. We can use images from artbooks and whatnot for other illustrative purposes (say, using an image of Shuyin from FFX-2 Ultimania to illustrate Shuyin), but to suggest that we need to have an article on a book to justify using images from the book to illustrate said book is a little too recursive.... And (though I suspect you were exaggerating with the "half of the book" comment), we're technically cannot claim more than 1/10th of a work under fair use, period. See Wikipedia:Fair use criteria. – Seancdaug 20:26, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Moving on is fine with me. I now feel you understand what got me frustrated and I also respect the work that all of you have been doing prior to my recent collaborations. We have both agreed to abide by what the outcome of the merge requests and the note on the project page says. Consider this matter closed. No hard feelings left on my side. That goes for you too Deck ;-) Renmiri 03:13, 12 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
Brief talk with Mipadi
[edit]See Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars. Thanks! Deckiller 17:11, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Awesome. nice work! – Mipadi 17:19, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Hey, I'm thinking that we're going to need to focus on a major task together right now: merging stubs, finishing list creation, and that sort of thing. That'll release a burdon off our sholders and let us focus on the other tasks. Deckiller 22:34, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- I think that would be good. Do you have any more specific ideas in those areas? – Mipadi 00:47, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- I listed a few proposals/ideas on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars/things to do page, but I think we should create specific lists for each type of character, based on whatever common item we can find (residence, affiliation). That will really help us with the stub merging without creating 150kb lists. Deckiller 14:00, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Template idea
[edit]That's an awesome idea, and it would save a lot of tedium. --Deckiller 18:20, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Glad you like it. Too bad there is no easy way to get a list of SW articles with tags like cleanup, wikify, merge etc. on them, though. --maru (talk) contribs 18:22, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- I'll start combing through the articles and adding any templates I see to the ToDO page. I also think the Todo page may need to be reformatted to conform to the various tags instead of general desciptions. --Deckiller 18:26, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- It's looking good. I added a bit about fanon and inaccuracy, but overall the criterion look pretty good. I guess what we are trying to get at is that the template should only be on the talk pages of articles which aren't in need of attention, which can be left in maintenance mode. It'll take a while to tag all the articles methinks. --maru (talk) contribs 23:09, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, sounds good. I agree; it'll take a few hours to sort through. Perhaps interested people can split up and review different categories. It's time for dinner though ^_^ so I'll be back in a bit. --Deckiller 23:11, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Hey, I just started a capital ship list for all the minor/small capital ships, although there are probably a few that can be split again. --Deckiller 00:56, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Wikiproject
[edit]Sure, I'll join! Oy, a lot of the Star Wars articles here need some work—but we'll get it done :). Anyway, yeah, I'm a NE Patriot fan. I take it you're one as well :)? *raises eyebrow* —Mirlen 17:18, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- Nice job on it :). (Sorry 'bout the constant use of emoticons, btw). Too bad we didn't go to the Superbowl this year...the last game *shakes head*. My friend scolds me for not being patriotic enough, but I've got to keep some rationality—or I'll turn crazy, lol. We'll see next year and win again :D ;). —Mirlen 17:25, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- I'll read the to do list and see what I can contribute, with the lists and all. *mock-salutes* —Mirlen 17:27, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- We better win! Or else I'll come over there and knock some sense into them :P. Just kidding. But yeah, we'll win and show the Steelers what we're made out of. —Mirlen 17:28, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- I'll read the to do list and see what I can contribute, with the lists and all. *mock-salutes* —Mirlen 17:27, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Can you check the Antarctica article; User:Circeus moved the images around, I would like to hear your opinion on how it looks now. It looks worse (IMO) [1], and I'm wondering if it's just me (my monitor resolution). Thanks, appreciate it. Gflores Talk 19:03, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
![[1]](http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/471/wikipediascreenshot1nc.png){kind=link}
Regarding the Best User Page Project
[edit]Let us try an experiment. Until further notice, the voting system will be open, using the method described in the Guidelines. This will make us understand how reliable the current system is and whether the project has a real possibility to expand into hundrends of users or not.
All users are encounaged to display the {{BestUserPage}} banner on their User Page.
All members all encouraged to display the {{BUP}} banner in their User Page, and also notify that the project has started.
We will refer to the votes for this first session as "March 2006" in the archive.
Federico Pistono ✆ ✍ 19:34, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Awards
[edit]Oh, yeah, thanks for formatting my user page :D. Better than what I was trying to do :P. —Mirlen 20:05, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- Good luck with the clean up your page, lol. Anytime you want help with a clean up, just give me a shout over at my talk page, alright? —Mirlen 20:09, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- No problem :). —Mirlen 20:11, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Re Opentasks for my love
[edit]heres a list of things I found so far darling.
Griz 02:38, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Darth Bane
[edit]I was looking around at various Star Wars related pages and noticed that Darth Bane has the link to a deleted picture. What should be done? The article could really use a picture. Dark jedi requiem 03:20, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Darth Bane
[edit]Can I use a comic book cover? Dark jedi requiem 03:32, 13 February 2006 (UTC)