User talk:Clyde Miller/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Clyde Miller. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 7 |
Topics
- Rise and Fall:Civilizations at War
- F-Zero GX
- Gwoyeu Romatzyh (writing systems)
- Empire Earth 3 and series
- Rise and Fall: Civilizations at War
Signpost updated for January 29th, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 5 | 29 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 17:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Clyde. When you get back, do you mind helping me with this article? I'm basing it on your FA (Empires), and I'll try to get it to GA (and eventually FA too). Since you have more experience in article writing, I was wondering if you could help. Thanks. | AndonicO Talk · Sign Here 12:43, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'll work on it a little when I get a chance, maybe with the lead and using citeweb for references and the like. I've never played the game, so my help with the gameplay will be little more than copyediting and referencing. As it stands, it has a good fight for GA. I just got off of wikibreak (I think) so I'm still trying to clean up a few...problems since I left (and it only was four days :) ). Also, you might want to take into consideration that there are three important flaws with Empires tat could never be addressed due to it's obscureness and defunct makers. One is that there are no present sales figures, another is a lack of an audio section, and the last is it's small size. Take these warnings with you when you put rise up for scrutiny, and I will help fix these things as best I can. I'm not too worried though: you've always been someone who puts 100% in what you do, and always gets it done. --Clyde (talk) 22:24, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- 100%? Um... okay, if you say so. ;-) Thanks for the tips, and welcome back! | AndonicO Talk · Sign Here 23:34, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well you really only need one screenshot for the gameplay section, just so you can demonstrate what the game looks like while it is being played to help the reader. Fair use says only one is allowed per article, but this is under discussion, and if one of the other two pics serves some other purpose in the article, I'd say it's okay to put in. My other screenshot was showing what an ingame cut screen looked like, and gave the reader a look into the story mode (kinda what the arena shot does). One example that comes to mind is if you want to put an image in development or reception regarding the game's graphics, gameplay etc. Personally I like this one the best for the gameplay section, based on it's cropping and demonstration of battle, environment, formation use, and civilization uniqueness. However, I've never played the game, so the choice is really yours. It's a little big for web resolution, so if you could make that smaller, that would be good too.--Clyde (talk) 23:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- P.S. I'm still in the process of transferring resources to cite web, but my breaks kinda interfered with that. I'll take care of that as soon as I can.
- Hey man I was sticking some fair use rationales in the images, and I couldn't find the sources for them, so I can't make them web resolution. Do you know anything about this that I might not?--Clyde (talk) 00:35, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- They are from heaven games this page, the last one. Is that what you wanted, or did I misunderstand you? · AndonicO Talk 00:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Wait did I miss something? I was looking for this or this. I don't think they're on there.--Clyde (talk) 00:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- The first is here, but I'm still looking for the second... · AndonicO Talk 01:05, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- No, sorry. The link the uploader gave was this one, but they don't seem to have the game anymore. The uploader seems to be inactive, and he doesn't have e-mail. Should I upload a new one? · AndonicO Talk 01:11, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- If you want (I could also), but you might want to keep it in the 500 X 500 range so it's web resolution (whatever that actually means).--Clyde (talk) 01:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, the new one is in the article now. I just noticed the old one had a watermark saying "copyrighted materiel", apart from being 40+ pixels too big. · AndonicO Talk 10:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Now that the citations have been formatted, the reception section box put in, and the images fixed, are you going to go for GA with rise and fall? Except for something written about the audio and multiplayer (both have small mention in reception) I think it is ready. What do you think?--Clyde (talk) 21:39, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think PR would be a good idea first, but yeah, I think it's ready. I'll see if I can get a better screenshot for the gameplay section though, since that looks like the editor, and is cropped. · AndonicO Talk 22:39, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hey saw you put rise and fall on the CVG PR. The list of specialized RTS editors is pretty small, and I think you might be better if you put rise and fall on the main PR for grammer, copyediting and the like. I guess we should wait it out and see if we get a bite first, though.--Clyde (talk) 01:36, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, I put it on both. :-) See here? · AndonicO Talk 01:41, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Being thorough is a good thing, but if you put it on the regular PR, I'm pretty sure it shows in the CVG thing too...but whatever.--Clyde (talk) 01:44, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
RE: 3RR
Okay so I need the advice of a man who has caught every type of crap invented on this encyclopedia. I was working on The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth. Particularly, I was cleaning it up, and removing this section. I removed it here then an anon added it back in here, then I removed it again here, and finally an anon added back in again here. Am I allowed to remove it again? You worked on CVG articles, and you know what is game guide material, and I think you agree it must be removed. How do I go about this?--Clyde (talk) 21:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- My talk page is a madhouse with spammers at the moment so I'm replying here.
Those edits are several days apart and don't really constitute revert warring, so you don't have to worry about the 3RR. I agree, the info being reinserted by the anon is a datadumpy gameguidy crufty list. I'll watchlist the article myself and keep it out. Might try talking to the anon if it becomes an issue. Good catch. -- Steel 21:18, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
The GX path to FA?
After only a couple days of break (or are you still out?) - two things for you, first the "Reception" section of GX, needs something like what Wind Waker has in its own "Reception" (IGN/GS review) "IGN complained..." "GS called...". Second, what the heck should be done about the "missions" section recently added? FMF|contact 01:34, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well as to being back, I couldn't stay away more than a couple days. I'm probably going to be at low editing until the week after next because I have stuff going on, but there is too much here to do, and over the last four days I would go on but not edit. Kinda counter-productive. As to constructive stuff, I agree with you that the reception section needs some more quotes. I find the best combo for writing recepetion sections would be to intersperse vague impressions and specific details. However, I think it's okay as is, since most people approve of a paraphrased citied sentence as much as the direct quote. I find that direct quotes do the job better. So, rambling aside, you might want to consider something like this:
- F-Zero was generally praised among the critical community, earning a 89% on gamerankings. Gamespot stated that "if you want a light-speed racer that looks and plays sharply while simultaneously offering some dramatic challenges, F-Zero GX is exactly what you're looking for." and "there's a lot going on in F-Zero GX." Gamespot was not totally convinced, noting, "There are a couple miniscule issues to speak of here (a few less than spectacular tracks, a daunting difficulty), but those noted F-Zero GX is still my favorite racer this generation, by far."
- The usual setup is PP 1=General comments (opening and closing quotes work well) and then PP 2 and 3= exceptionally good and bad things (the stuff you've included already, except in quote form). Then you have your PP about sales figures and the like. I also ran into people during FAs who wanted me to include a PP which compared the game to other games like it. You may want to compare it to the sucess of other F-Zero games.
- As to the missions section, delete it, send to strategy wiki and the like if you really want to. Sorry about the length, but uh yeah, I hope this answers your question.--Clyde (talk) 03:02, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Gwoyeu Romatzyh (writing systems)
Hi
I've been doing some revision work on the Chinese romanization system Gwoyeu Romatzyh. User:Ikiroid suggested you might be able to help with editing/improving it. If you feel it's of interest, I'd be grateful for your comments. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 00:21, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Your welcome for the help, but I don't know how much more I will be able to help you. I am not a linguist, but I would be willing to help in any other way I can (maybe as an out-of-universe perspective).
- Many thanks for your considerable initial assault on this article! Your contributions looks most valuable: at last I've got something to get my teeth into. I must admit I too had my doubts about the final "age of the internet" section—the phrase "would have been delighted" was decidedly non-encyclopedic—though I think something about GR in the modern world may be useful.
- Some of the things you've changed were legacy phrases & sentences, so I don't feel too bad about losing them. Back to work now.
- BTW What is your feeling about adding a picture showing the "vestigial" spelling of Shaanxi province? There's one quite nice one at http://www.study-in-china.org/School/Shaanxi/sxkd/images/tu1.gif. I know nothing about getting permission to use this sort of thing. It's not too easy to think of images to illustrate something as abstract as a romanization system ... --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 10:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunatly, as to the image, if the building still exists, you're not allowed to use it. If you go to the upload file and click on the licenses, it says picture of an existing building is invalid. I'd guess that this is because a free alternitive could be easily made, simply by going there and taking the picture (I use simply in a very rough fashion). If you really are serious about this, you might want to ask if the image is fair use on the Fair use talk page (you are a braver man than I) or you could email the people who took the picture (most likely someone at the university) and ask for expressed permission to use the picture in this article.--Clyde (talk) 00:28, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Some more comments on my talk page. NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 10:37, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- (from talk page)
- Sure, the OOUP is an important one! The non-specialist who's come across the crazy term GR needs to be able to grasp the essentials of what it's all about from the lead section, & then delve a bit deeper if s/he wants to.
- One question at the back of my mind is: Should the illustrative example towards the end of the article have an English translation as well as the characters & Pinyin? I'm tending to think it should -- otherwise it simply excludes all non-Chinese-speaking readers.
- I don't want to get too hung up on this particular image. The more general point is: should the article contain any image(s), just to relieve the monotony of acres of text? Isn't that almost a WP policy? So if you have any other suggestions for images I'd appreciate them. Thanks again for all your hard work. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 10:33, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 5th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 6 | 5 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 04:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 12th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 7 | 12 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 04:59, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Empire Earth 3
Hey I saw that you started the EE3 article. I'll see what I can do about sources so it isn't deleted because it is too far in the future to have an article about it. By the way, you can't have your discussion page deleted (at least to my knowledge), but it's your own right to keep it blank if you want. People may not be happy though. I don't care, I just wanted to let you know I'm gonna try to work on EE3.--Clyde (talk) 18:53, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- that is the only news about it so far, and if anyone attempts to delete it I shall nuke them.--Empire Earth DUDE!! 19:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oh by the way, the link that you are adding to Conquest is linkspam, I think, which are removed because sometimes the owner of some obscure forum adds them into an article just ot get the name of the forum out. No ads are allowed in wikipedia either, so I hope it is okay that I get rid of the link to the forum.--Clyde (talk) 19:32, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- i am ee expert and that link is to the OFFICIAL forums, please leave things alone you do not understand --Empire Earth DUDE!! 19:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well let me explain how things work. Not all the content you added is encyclopedic. Wikipedia is not the place for game guide info, a place for FAQS, nor a "how to" guide (see here). It's fine to put in an article that people cheat and forums were made to stop it, but to say where to go, what happens, and who looks at your problem, that's a "how to" guide for cheating related stuff. So what you might want to do is put in the sentence from before, with the external links removed. You can then put your external links you added at the bottom of the page with the other ones. Go ahead, put the official sierra website at the bottom. Heck, you might even be able to put the "official" forum there (not sure if that falls into linkspam)....but don't put it in the main part of the article. It's just not where it belongs. Finally, there's another slightly important rule here. You're not allowed to revert back to the same reversion three times within 24 hours or your blocked from editing. Now I'm going to overlook that rule as long we can solve this in a civil manner talking back and forth (in the past blocking only makes things worse), but please stop dogmatically asserting that I should "leave things alone" because I "do not understand" or I'll involve a third party. We need to reach some sort of compromise here.--Clyde (talk) 23:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- the link that was added is a SOURCE, it is to official forum showing that i am right, instead of being useless why dont you rephrase my additions instead of just blindly reverting because you just dont like it eh?
- Hi again. After I realized that we would not be able to quickly reach an agreement, I stopped reverting back to my version. Another user (User:Harlock jds) reverted it the fourth time, not me. Also, you said " why dont you rephrase my additions", I thought that the version I made was rephrasing your additions. I'd like to reach an agreement about this, and I really don't have any preference either way toward liking this or not. I looked through here, here, and here, and I think the best place for the forum would be as some kind of reference or note (I couldn't find whether forums are acceptable as references or not, I'll see what I can find). Maybe something like "There are many exploits which are readily available for players to use. Forums have since been started as a place to report them in an attempt to minimize the use of them.[1]" and the "[1]" would be the forum's website in a references section. What are your thoughts?--Clyde (talk) 21:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- they are official forums because the game was published by Sierra Entertainment which is part of Vivendi Games, and they are vivendi forums. i know it must sound confusing to a grasshopper such as yourself
- I'm quite aware they are official forums, but forums are usually not allowed as sources on wikipedia, and I'm pushing it by trying to include them. Also external links to other sites are not supposed to be in the article anywhere except in the external links section. Finally, attempting to insert any forum, whether official, "official", or fan made can easily be considered spam in article, and removed on good pretenses. You didn't answer my question on whether my idea was acceptable or not, you simply attempted to insult my intelect and call me grasshopper. Do you assume I've never heard of Sierra, played an RTS, or know what a forum is? Now I ask you again, Yes or no to my idea.--Clyde (talk) 21:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- just do what you did in ee3 article, also we need screenshot of game in ee3 article!
- Okay I'll add the citation and the screenshot. Now that we've reached an agreement on the EE3 and conquest, I'm going to ask an admin about the 3RR.--Clyde (talk) 22:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 19th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 8 | 19 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Since it doesn't seem like peer review is going to help anymore, I've added it to WP:GAC. It's already A-class, so I don't think it'll have too much trouble. · AO Talk 14:03, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- It passed already; that was quick! · AO Talk 15:51, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well it's had to 2 PRs, it's a GA, and suggestions were made during it's GAC. Are we going to push for FAC? And if so, when?--Clyde (talk) 21:07, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well, the GA reviewer thought I only had to add the date, author, and publisher to all the refs for it to be ready (which I finished a while ago). I'll wait to see if I did it correctly, but I don't think it's 100% ready. It needs a paragraph on multiplayer, and (according to the peer reviewer), more historical details in the Alexander campaign. I don't think it would hurt to mention the editor either. I'll do the editor now, but I've never played multiplayer, and I can't remember the Alexander campaign too well. Unfortunatly, a friend of mine is borrowing my copy of the game, and it's not due back in three weeks, so I'll do the multi and campaign parts then. In the meantime, let me do the scenario editor part, and let's take a shot at FAC. When I get the game back, I'll finish polishing it. · AO Talk 21:17, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well I suppose it might be possible to write based on reviews and guides and the like, but having zero experience with this particular game, I'm not much help. Well I'll keep a tab on R and F's progress until FAC.--Clyde (talk) 21:26, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm almost done with the editor part, so after that, we'll just wait for Nifboy to confirm that I did the refs correctly, and we're off! · AO Talk 21:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Does that look good? · AO Talk 21:58, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- I asked my friend if he would let me use the multiplayer next week for the article, and I'm sure he'll say yes. I'll add the article to FPC next week, after writing the multiplayer part (that way it's "comprehensive" :). · AO Talk 22:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I've added a part about multiplayer; do you think the article is ready now? Should we go for FPC? · AO Talk 13:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Surely people will know what series means? Keep up the good work on the ee articles and I will use my barnstar cannon on you.--Empire Earth 22:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- I don't write it, I just try and stay under the radar. I think my barnstar snipers will hit before your cannon though : ).--Clyde (talk) 01:32, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- oh so you made empires a featured article, what is your next featured article? PICK!
- Hmmmm...in my experience getting an article to GA takes 50-100 edits and maybe a month, and getting an FA takes 100-300 edits and several months. However, most of these articles are developed enough that it would be much less. Maybe I'll do Empire Earth, but unfortunatly I don't own any games in the Empire series other than DotMW. Maybe a good mutual goal would be to go for Featured topic in the empire series. To do that we need maybe EE and EE2 either FA or GA, and the expansion packs well written. I'm going to go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games and see if a series article or an expansion pack article have been GA or FA for some guidance.--Clyde (talk) 05:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Go buy empire earth then, or aquire it another way..--Empire Earth 18:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well there's enough in gameplay that I might be able to get it to GA with only my experience in RTSes and what's already in the article. Trust me, the gameplay isn't the hard part of writing a CVG article. Finding sources is hard, and writing the development section is the hardest. Other sections we might want to consider including are audio, promotion, packaging, and release info. It kind of differs based on the game and what is available. Right now I am just looking for development info on Empire Earth. Also, from now on you might want to source things using Template:Cite web, since if you go to GAC without the refs in that form you'll have to transfer them to that anyway.--Clyde (talk) 19:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- I do cite, check my user page for other articles i been editing (especially new one!). Cite from heavengames.com like you did with empires article, there is two EEH's one for EE1 and another for EE2. I don't know where the official ee1 site went though.--Empire Earth 19:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- i dont mind you checking up on my edits, revert any bad ones unless I fix it myself, so wait 5 mins before reverting any.--Empire Earth 15:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Have you considering joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games or Wikipedia:WikiProject Strategy games?--Clyde (talk) 23:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- why would i need to join?--Empire Earth 09:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Is Template:Reflist the best? I don't know which code to use.--Empire Earth 15:44, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- In regards to groups, you may just want to join so people know where your interests lie if they want to contact you or ask for help, and most people on the CVG talk and strategy talk are part of their respective projects. As to reflist, I use {{reflist}}, but any one will do. As to the waiting five minutes, I can't guarantee that I will wait exactly 5 minutes, but I'll wait a little bit to see if you revert it yourself.--Clyde (talk) 04:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Good Article Collaboration of the week
F-Zero GX is the current GACo! Will people actually contribute? Spread the word. :P FMF|contact 22:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- You might want to consider posting it at CVG. I'm not sure if that's frowned upon or not, but it would certainly raise awareness.--Clyde (talk) 23:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- I never did it but now get ready for any future contributions that need to be addressed since F-Zero GX is now a FAC. FMF|contact 18:06, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- As usual, be prepared for people to rip your finest work apart and all you can say is "thank you sir may I have another." Also be prepared because many articles don't make it their first FAC. However, the input you get will be important toward attaining FA. I'll help as best I can, and good luck.--Clyde (talk) 18:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well you have my support now, and I think it would be worth something as the main contributor to put in your support (might want to let the community know that you are though.)--Clyde (talk) 21:28, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 26th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 9 | 26 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
ee cellphone
Do you think the cell phone Empire Earth is notable enough for its own article? Or do you think it should just be added into the main Empire Earth article?--Empire Earth 16:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC) I am quite sure it is released, it was announced a very long time ago. Going to need some sources though.--Empire Earth 17:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- I would say to keep in the EE article, and give it's own section comparing the two versions. That's what usually is done. By the way, has it been released. IGN says yes, gamespot says no. Do you know?--Clyde (talk) 17:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- official webby is here http://www.empireearth2.com/mobile/ --Empire Earth 17:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well that answers the question, and shows me that gamespot is out of date.--Clyde (talk) 17:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- collab on game articles is quite interesting + fun, good seeing the improvement--Empire Earth 22:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah I always keep a check on them to see if I can help. That's actually another reason I was offering you join CVG, but if you work with the GCotW and don't feel like joining, its just as well.--Clyde (talk) 23:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
3RR Rule
Happened again here. Technically I reverted it twice, and I don't feel like being blocked. Wanna help me out?--Clyde (talk) 01:35, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Nevermind.--Clyde (talk) 01:51, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Clyde, sorry I missed you... If you are worried about violating the 3RR rule with respect to reverting vandalism, you needn't worry. 3RR does not apply to obvious vandalism. This fact is noted in the exceptions section here: WP:3RR#Exceptions KatalavenoTC 14:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Oh thanks. I always get worried about 3RR, but it looks like the vandals were blocked anyway.--Clyde (talk) 23:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
I went ahead and added it. :) Do you think it stands a chance? · AO Talk 00:53, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for helping! :) · AO Talk 22:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- I am also copying the design of empires article :) --The Negotiator 22:06, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 10 | 5 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
guide
What do we do about this? I'm trying to balance no game guide info with giving anons a chance. What do you say?--Clyde (talk) 03:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- rv it and put one of those thank you but no game guide welcome templates on talk page--Empire Earth 18:50, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Username
...nice. Clyde (talk) 02:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- what is that suppose to mean?--The Negotiator 15:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- I meant no offense by it. The nice word itself was referring to the new user name. Good name. The link within the "nice" word was a joke. If you've ever seen the particular South Park episode I linked, there is a very distinct and humorous way of saying nice in the episode so you would understand how I would have said it in real life.--Clyde (talk) 23:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Assisstance
assist me on ee3 article please.--The Negotiator 20:09, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- What do you need help with? It looks pretty good.--Clyde (talk) 00:11, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- im sure you can do something, i cannot help on newbie as it is a difficult article and finding sources is even harder.--The Negotiator 17:23, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- I did wonder where all those references came from on AoC article.--The Negotiator 21:06, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Gwoyeu Romatzyh
Hi Clyde, thanks for helping out so far with this article's improvement. I know you've done a lot on the GA/FA scene (or at least quite a bit more than me), so would you be willing to find an editor who could assess this article? We have it up for GA status, and it's been awhile, and still nothing. If you could give me a good name to get the article that would be great. Thanks again. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 01:36, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well as to waiting, there are two articles in front of it, and one has been waiting over a month. When I had a GAC, it was about 2 months before it was reviewed. I took the time to look in some of the GA languages, and I found some people. First, most of the GA languages suck. I'd consider doing a mass review of every article User:Mark Dingemanse made a GA (and tell him about the progress). Most never went through the review process, and he just promoted them on a whim (see Sudanic languages for an example).
- However, of all the GAs I found, User:Gnangarra and User:CTSWyneken actually mentioned something about their review when they promoted their respective articles (both were a while ago, so keep that in mind). Finally, if you want a review faster, you and Nigel should review the two articles in front of Gwoyeu Romatzyh to make it move faster. You two are probably the best experts at GAC right now for languages.--Clyde (talk) 02:29, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- OK, thanks. I'll contact those people after taking care of the other two candidates. Actually, I've already edited one of the other candidates, so I can't review that one! Perhaps another editor collaborating on GR could do that. Anyway, have a good one. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 03:55, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 11 | 12 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Note
What do you think here? I was going to start sending it out.--Clyde (talk) 00:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- I made a couple of minor changes; I think it looks fine. Are you going to use AWB, or do you want me to help hand them out? · AO Talk 09:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well I don't have AWB, so I was going to deliver by them hand (won't take that long). I'm going to start from the top and start delivering. If you get bored and want to help, knock yourself out.--Clyde (talk) 00:05, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- P.S. I changed the heading to WikiProject Strategy games.
- Okay, I don't have much time right now, but I'll get bored tomorrow at around 10 AM (UTC). · AO Talk 00:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- <pitiful moaning>Did you give it out to everyone? You didn't even leave the last one for me?</pitiful moaning> Oh well, good job. · AO Talk 11:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry I got really bored really fast. Looks like it is 1-2-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1.--Clyde (talk) 22:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- 1-2-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1? What do you mean by that? · AO Talk 23:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Look at the votes. Stronghold is in the lead.--Clyde (talk) 00:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- 1-2-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1? What do you mean by that? · AO Talk 23:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry I got really bored really fast. Looks like it is 1-2-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1.--Clyde (talk) 22:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- <pitiful moaning>Did you give it out to everyone? You didn't even leave the last one for me?</pitiful moaning> Oh well, good job. · AO Talk 11:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, I don't have much time right now, but I'll get bored tomorrow at around 10 AM (UTC). · AO Talk 00:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 12 | 20 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream" | News and notes: Bad sin, milestones |
| Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:01, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
StarCraft
Want me to give you a hand with the StarCraft merges? — Deckiller 00:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. I've never played the game, but I'll try to use my RTS knowledge and what I know about the game to help. I suppose I'll just start doing it when I get a chance. Oh and BTW, wow.--Clyde (talk) 13:18, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- I just found this place [1], maybe we could transwiki some stuff to there.--Clyde (talk) 04:01, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- Absolutely. The problem is that there is just so much of it, I'm not knowledgable about the series, and we would be dealing with a lot of editors attached to the in-universeness. — Deckiller 04:34, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well I think it would be best to put some tags to decide what needs to be merged or redirected. Maybe Template:gameguide or Template:In-universe. The we could try to merge some other stuff. Maybe make a list of Starcraft characters, list of starcraft locations, and move the factions into their respective species. Once we do that, we can try to remove cruft, unsourced, or non-notable stuff, and then see what we can do about the stacraft universe related articles. But I'm too tired to start until tommorow (whenever that is for you). Til then, Clyde (talk) 04:44, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- Absolutely. The problem is that there is just so much of it, I'm not knowledgable about the series, and we would be dealing with a lot of editors attached to the in-universeness. — Deckiller 04:34, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- I just found this place [1], maybe we could transwiki some stuff to there.--Clyde (talk) 04:01, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
|
Thank you Clyde Miller/Archive 3 for reverting vandalism on my userpage. --The preceding comment was signed by User:Sp3000 (talk•contribs) 05:06, 23 March 2007 (UTC) |
FAC move
Hi Clyde, I saw your post on Ndsg's talkpage. Do you agree with my idea of closing peer review and simply diving into FAC? Is there anything we should consider first that neither Ndsg nor myself have already thought of? I would appreciate your input. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 21:02, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
- First off, your headings look weird. I would consider rearranging the stuff at the top of your talk page to fix it (unless you like it that way). As to GR, I would reccomend closing the PR, listing as an FAC, and going here to get a few more copyeditors to take a look at it during or before the FAC. You seem to almost be one yourself, but another pair of eyes never hurt.--Clyde (talk) 21:13, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the pointers. I'll wait for Ndsg to make a response, and then based on his input coupled with yours we'll make a decision. By the way, what do you mean by "headers?" Are you referring to section titles? The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 21:18, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
- 1. cool you have my support 2. the table of contents is what I was refering to.--Clyde (talk) 21:21, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
- OK, thanks. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 21:30, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 13 | 26 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 13:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Template
I added what I think is the final version to Talk:Rise and Fall: Civilizations at War to use as an example (because it only works in article-space). If you think it's fine, I'd say we change the old template for this one. If not, tell me, and I'll fix the problem. Also, we'll need to work on Wikipedia:WikiProject Strategy games/Assessment later; I created the page just to get rid of the red link in the template. (P.S. That was hard work for a non-template expert like myself!!!) · AO Talk 00:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
User:Ndsg has taken care of the citations. Drop by and tell him whether or not you think it's FA now. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 21:05, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- I responded, but you might want to know that asking someone to respond in an FAC is usually frowned upon. Do it with care.--Clyde (talk) 00:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Personal info
Hey Nights I would reccomend you remove your personal information from your userpage. In fact, I'd consider getting an admin to delete it. That isn't something you want on your page if you have an arguement and some freaky user gets mad at you. And yes, I am paranoid. ; ) Clyde (talk) 02:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for cluing me in on that, I suppose it was rather stupid on my part, but I'll get an admin to remove it later today. Thanks! (talk NiGHTS into Dreams... 10:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)