User talk:Frecklefoot/Archive12

Rogue (Computer Game)

As I wish to avoid a dear user letter...I am doing a bunch of work on Rogue (Computer Game), and working on improving both its notability, and its general articleness. I wanted to ask you why you took away the italics on roguelike. I put it in italics because its a jargon word. Also I wonder why you removed the dialbo II refrence. Rogue, and its system of magic is one that started with old make believe games in Oxford, became Tolkiens Fairy world, inspired Gary Gigax to create D&D, inspired Michael Toy, in Rogue, and followed the books, gaming system, and wildly popular UNIX game, followed by Diablo, and Diablo II, and continuing on with World Of Warcraft. There is a common thread, of fantasy, that puts each of them on the map as important milestones in popular culture. Rogue, Diablo II, and World of Warcraft being three of the most popular computer games of all time. What would be the best way, in your opinion of establishing this connection across the articles? I see you have an interest in the article, and perhaps you can add a few suggestions as to how it may be improved. Thanks 71.193.2.115 (talk) 07:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I have a lot of concerns to address here. Let me start with the first:

I removed the itals on roguelike because it doesn't need to be italicized. At best, it should be in quotes to signify that it's a jargon word. But, in fact, I don't consider it a "jargon" word. It's a name for a class of computer games. What's jargon-like about that? Is the term "first-person shooter" jargon? (No, I'm not trying to say that roguelikes are first-person shooters—it was just an example).

I removed the Diablo II reference because Diablo, the first game in the series, is more like Rogue than Diablo II is. It had a randomized dungeon that was the focus of the game, like Rogue, while Diablo II was more expansive. While it had randomized dungeons as well, it was further removed from being a roguelike than the first game was. The only acceptable way to include it, if you really feel it needs to be, would be to say the Diablo series.

As for Rogue being the forefather of WoW, I don't buy it. It owes its lineage more to the popular role-playing games such as Dungeons & Dragons than it does to Rogue. While they both have elements of fantasy, just because Rogue came out before WoW (or even Warcraft, for that matter), it doesn't mean that one follows the other. Rogue didn't invent the fantasy-genre of games and doesn't need to be mentioned as the fore-father of WoW. Saying such is jumping to a conclusion and constitutes original research. Now, if you can find a verifiable reference that says the Rogue served as inspiration for WoW, that's another matter. But for now, without a reference, there is little to demonstrate much of a genealogy between the two.

You don't need to educate me on the importance of Rogue—I'm a fan from way back. But, to be honest, while Diablo, Diablo II and WoW are all very popular games, Rogue was never a big hit, despite the numerous ports it's had. It was only ever really popular among the hacker and geek subculture. While many non-gamers (and non-geeks) will recognize WoW and maybe even Diablo, almost none recognize Rogue in name or visible representation. So Rogue isn't really a part of popular culture as you state, but just geek culture.

In any event, I stand by my edits. If you have questions or concerns about them in the future, put them on the Rogue talk page so all Rogue editors can see (and respond) to them.

And lastly, please set up a user account. Getting an account is free and gives you more privacy than a straight IP address. Plus, it's easier for other editors to follow your edits (and give you credit for them) than by a a string of numbers. Thanks! — Frecklefσσt | Talk 12:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And you certainly hit the nail on the head regarding Dungeons and Dragons. Pretty much all roads lead there. Even Rogue, which according to one of the authors was directly influenced by Adventure, which itself was directly influenced by Dungeons and Dragons. And the fact that Blizzard dedicated one of its recent patches for WoW to Gygax speaks volumes on his legacy and direct influence on the industry. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 17:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rogue, went from running on BSD, to being ported to almost every major UNIX distrubution, and including most minor ones. It was avaible from almost every shareware vendor I could find. I left out Dungeon Siege. Chris Taylor told me at E3, that his biggest influnces for Dungeon Siege were Diablo and Rogue! Of course I cannot use that, but it does point to the influence of early games on games designers.

I had a user account. The main page got vandalized weekly, for more than a year. I deleted it, when a few articles I helped improved were deleted for *notablility*, which despite the retroic, is just basically a popularity contest. American Idol is a much more important article than say...Ida Red. Editors and pesky admins can use my IP to trace my edits. 71.193.2.115 (talk) 11:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but I still stand by my edits. Verifiable references are the only thing we can use, which I gather you understand. So, we can only use in the article what we can prove. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 12:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Singles Ward

Hello. I commented on the article and would appreciate your attention. Thanks. --Eustress (talk) 14:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Psygnosis

What is your problem with adding Category:Video games developed in the United Kingdom in the category? The category consists of only game articles and Psygnosis was a UK based company.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mika1h (talk • contribs)

The "problem" I have is that Psygnosis was not a video game, but a video game developer and publisher. If there was a Category:Video games developers in the United Kingdom, I wouldn't have a problem adding them to it. But as it is, they were not nor ever were a "video game". — Frecklefσσt | Talk 12:01, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is Category:Video game companies of the United Kingdom and Psygnosis is included in it. We can rename the category to "Psygnosis games" so it would be consistent with other developer game categories such as Category:Codemasters games and Category:Criterion games. --Mika1h (talk) 17:43, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine with me. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 17:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Mika1h (talk) 20:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Sims

Wikipedia:WikiProject Sims/Outreach/Signup S. T. H. 00:09, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Importance notice regarding WikiProject Sims

You may wish to look at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Sims#Important_Notice

Thanks,

Blue Goblin^7even 20:57, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Homeschooling May 2008 Newsletter

	The Homeschooling WikiProject News
Issue Four • May 2008 • About the Newsletter
News Recent Project News Collaboration of the Month nominations are currently open for WikiProject Homeschooling's Collaboration of the month. So far there have been two nominations. You can nominate and vote at May's Collaboration page (link). Project member count reaches 37 members! Invite others using our invitation templates. A new article, List of homeschooled individuals has been created. You can help the project by tagging the talk pages of articles with `{{WikiProject Homeschooling}}` We are working on getting the homeschooling article to GA status.
Archives • Newsroom
Newsletter written by Diligent Terrier (and friends). Newsletter delivered by Diligent Terrier Bot

The message above has been delivered by Diligent Terrier Bot, a bot operated by Diligent Terrier.

WikiProject Homeschooling

I noticed you had moved your name into the withdrawn section. Would you still like to receive the newsletter? - Diligent Terrier (and friends) 23:51, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, thanks for asking. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 23:59, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category: Game programmers

Jc37, I was about to create the Category:Wikipedian game programmers, but then saw it was deleted twice before by you. I see it went through a debate before it was deleted, but I can't find the transcript for it. Any chance you could point me to it so I can see what was discussed? Thanks! — Frecklefσσt | Talk 13:53, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure.

Wikipedia:User categories for discussion/Archive/April_2007#Category:Wikipedian game programmers

WP:RFPP.

Commented here. · AndonicO ^Engage. 16:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks. That was driving me nuts. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 17:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

People like me don't exist; we're part of the software. ;) · AndonicO ^Engage. 17:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

Hi there, Frecklefoot. I've been reading your wiki pages and discussion and wondered if you might be interested in serving as a technical editor for an upcoming book on the greatest games ever made (to be published by Focal Press). I'm the author of Dungeons & Desktops and my co-author Bill Loguidice has published a multitude of articles on Armchair Arcade and Gamasutra. The pay would be $500. Please let me know if you are interested; prefer email at mattbarton.exe at gmail.com. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattbarton.exe (talk • contribs) 18:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll think about it. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 21:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[1]

IMHO Past Simple is suitable (like the present version). Why Past Perfect ?? It couldn't be used here (at least in British En. , don't know maybe in US En. there are different grammar rules, so tell me ;] ). Thanks, Sir Lothar (talk) 21:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an English expert, but it was awkward. The change in question:

a number of programmers decided they have had enough and left.

versus:

a number of programmers decided that they'd had enough and left.

The first sounds like the present. The second is clearly in the past. It happened in the past. I don't know why you prefer the former, but it sounds poor to me. If you feel I am greatly in error, bring it up on the Activision talk page. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 21:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're the boss, you're the native speaker so I won't argue. But why not just Past Simple like: a number of programmers decided they had enough and left. ? Sir Lothar (talk) 23:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, no one is really "the boss" on Wikipedia. But your past simple change—"they had enough"—would be fine by me. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 11:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No I've meant "boss" because it's your native language from the birth , so you know better than me :). Greets, Sir Lothar (talk) 14:08, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, gotcha. I had no idea you weren't a native English speaker. What is your native, Polish? — Frecklefσσt | Talk 15:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly :), Sir Lothar (talk) 22:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! I was just "passing through" this page, and came across this interesting thread. Though, am myself not native English speaker, and definitely not an English expert, I'd like to suggest the following "a number of programmers had decided that they (had) had enough, and left". Regards. —KetanPanchal^taLK 09:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's probably the best wording, though it still has the double "has", but there may be no way around it. I'll change it if it hasn't been greatly improved already. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 12:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mambo a Go Go

Bridge words/letters are suppose to be in lowercase regardless of how the title is marketed or formatted by the creator. Can you point to the style guideline or policy or common sense point that says this game gets to have an upper case A? --AeronPrometheus (talk) 21:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll just fix it later then. -AeronPrometheus (talk) 19:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really familiar with this game. I just moved it based on how it was capitalized in the game article itself. If it is capitalized Mambo a Go Go by the developer/publisher, then that's the way the page should be capped. But if that's the way it's capped, the article text should match it. Right now, the article has it as Mambo A Go Go. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 19:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, well the article needs freshening too probably. I was just bored and doing random Wiki-cleanup work. --AeronPrometheus (talk) 04:57, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:X7ModuleCover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:X7ModuleCover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blast from the past!

Well following is the comment that you'd posted waaaaay baaack on the talk page of an article called Triceps reflex:

"This article is nonsense to the layman. All Wikipedia articles should try to educate readers enough so they understand the contents of the article, at least to some extent. That means explaining jargon and writing in a straight-forward manner. Right now, it looks like it is aimed at an expert.
Also, the intro sentence is all wrong. It says what it does, not what it is. All articles should first state what the subject of the article is. The opening sentence:

The tricep reflex tests the patency of the sensory and motor pathways within the C7 & C8 spinal nerves.

Should actually read something like this (just an example):

The tricep reflex is a reflex of the tricep muscles.
Please rewrite the article so it conforms to the above suggestions. — Frecklefoot | Talk 22:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)"

Keeping in view your comments, I've made a few changes to the article, please do see if you find the article more understandable now. Actually, a lot more work would have to go into not just the said article, but also into articles that link to it. It's very challenging to remain concise, precise and intelligible at the same time when dealing with such topics where too many terms, and more importantly, concepts are involved that are important to understand the article, but don't happen to be their core subjects.

Likewise, if you encounter any other Medicine/Health-related articles that are very difficult to understand, do let me know, I might like to improve them.

Regards.

—KetanPanchal^taLK 09:29, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it looks better than it did, but it didn't hit the nail in the head. I re-arranged much of what you wrote for greater clarity and to conform to Wikipedia standards. In short:

You wikilinked the terms in the title of the article (i.e. Triceps reflex), a big no-no. Words in terms being defined should never be wikilinked. If you want to wikilink them, it can done later in the article, as it is done in the article.
You said the reflex is tested in the opening sentence. You didn't say what it is. The opening sentence of any article should first always explain what the subject is. This is covered in the Manual of Style.

I hope I didn't mangle the definition with my change. You may want to check the change. Regards! — Frecklefσσt | Talk 13:18, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! All the changes you've made to the article are absolutely agreeable. While adding to the article, my major aim was to provide the additional information to make the article understandable. May be had I returned to it, I might have made further changes. But, of course, which is not to mean that your changes were not impressive. In fact, I was very impressed with them. The only disagreement would be that I'd have liked the various maintenance tags to remain as actually the tendon reflexes are very important topics in medicine (and I was really appalled to see the standard of this as well as other tendon reflex articles). Thanks and regards. —KetanPanchal^taLK 16:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can put the tags back in, but you really should explain on the Talk page what needs to done to improve the article. The tag without any explanations is nearly useless. Cheers! — Frecklefσσt | Talk 17:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Sims

I have put up a vote for WP:Sims. for the format of the WP:sims. Electrical^{Vandilize Me} 16:15, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July issue of WP:Sims Newspaper.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Sims/Newsletter/1/07/08 E E

ESRB.

I reverted your edit.

Video games work differently that many software would be already in work by the time it is officially announced to public. (You see the trailers, do you?) As the article says, a preliminary rating õf a game is rated at the development stage and, is posted online. Hence the news leak. A final copy of the software have to be submitted for final review. SYSS Mouse (talk) 20:02, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the reference and it appears you're correct. However, having been in the video game industry for over 15 years, I've never heard of it happening. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 11:19, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsay Lohan and Samantha Ronson

There are ongoing RfCs on both talk pages about the issue you inserted. Please discuss there and try to work toward consensus rather than adding contentious material before consensus is reached. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 12:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I had no idea it was contentious material. I just thought it was missing material. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 13:13, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Honest mistake. But I would also point out that biographies of living people are definitely not the place to add rumored information, especially when it comes from tabloids or similar sources. Thanks. Ward3001 (talk) 16:52, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Langdell

Article is neutral - apologies for the detail which may have made it seem otherwise, but I am currently writing a book on the early members of the game industry and hence the depth of knowledge. The contents of the page are based on my reseach over the past 2 years. Do you wish me to stop editing the article? Or should I continue to add references where you have indicated they are needed? Cheridavis (talk) 14:35, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and keep editing it, adding refs. The version I converted to NPOV seemed overly gushing. So I assumed Langdell had originated the article himself. Just keep in mind, however, to present material in a neutral point of view. And when mentioning a person, apart from the initial introduction, refer to them by their last name. Take care! — Frecklefσσt | Talk 20:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

You have been invited to join the Wimpy Kid WikiProject, a collaborative effort to build a more detailed guide on Wikipedia's coverage of the Diary of a Wimpy Kid series. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks or add some of your own.

~~ ĈőмρǖтέŗĠύʎ890100 (t ↔ Ĕ ↔ ώ) 18:08, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gamebryo

Can you explain why you removed Biodroid Productions at Industry Use and you let stay something like Nibris?? Are you joking, man? Do you want notability? Here you have it: http://wii.ign.com/articles/851/851117p1.html and http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17317 . What more do you want? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.193.154.135 (talk) 15:14, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out to me. I removed that one too. Biodroid Productions and their game still aren't all that notable, your links notwithstanding. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 03:22, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BadDudesTitle.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BadDudesTitle.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I know you're just a bot, but apparently the members of the Video Games WikiProject think screenshots are a bad idea for the video game infobox. Since that's the only place where this would be relevant, I guess I'll just leave it alone and let it get deleted. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 13:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem

Thanks for your uploads. You've indicated that the following images are being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why they meet Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page an image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --09:16, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not good at providing rationale for such things. It's just a screenshot of gameplay and one of the attract mode title screen. Go ahead and delete them, I guess. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 19:09, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I lied. I tried adding rationale for the images. I hope it's sufficient. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 11:20, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

D&D articles for Wikipedia 0.7

Hi there! :)

As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. Please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 17:47, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have put some work into the Gary Gygax article, which I have nominated for a GA review. If there is anything you can do to help it get passed, please join in! Also, feel free to comment on the D&D WikiProject talk page regarding our efforts to get articles in the 0.7 release. BOZ (talk) 03:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please, if there's any help or insight you can provide into this problem with the Gary Gygax article, it would be appreciated. Thanks! :) BOZ (talk) 21:08, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great news! :) Gary Gygax is now a Good Article. I have now nominated Wizards of the Coast. BOZ (talk) 02:27, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wizards of the Coast is now up for GA review. If you're interested in helping, come join me. :) BOZ (talk) 21:47, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at what I've done so far. :) BOZ (talk) 04:38, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wizards of the Coast has been successfully promoted to GA status! :) Thanks for your support on this and the EGG article. I was also thinking of nominating Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms; see the project talk page for discussion on that. BOZ (talk) 19:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:RS1ModuleCover.jpg

Thanks for uploading ~~Image:RS1ModuleCover.jpg.~~ You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 04:36, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There, added some rationale. Hope this helps. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 11:23, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Sims

Hello I have proposed that WP:Sims to be moved to a task force in WP:VG under there Inactive project cleanup Task force. Since WP:Sims has been tagged inactive. There is a discussion on it, here.Hereford 16:59, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Found evidence that MicroProse Sytems owns no game titles

MicroProse has acquired not a single game title, they own simply the brand name [Talk:MicroProse#Is_Microprose_Systems_out_of_business.3F]. Worse since September their website is offline. The company is private, young and small, there will be no public announcement declaring that it shut down.

Therefore, I am suggesting deleting Microprose Sytems's article per WP:N and WP:Corp and restoring the article as it was, mentioning MicroProse System in one or 2 lines at most. What do you think?EconomistBR 15:28, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but your source does not back up your claim and you're obviously not familiar with the US trademark and patent system. The patent and TM filing system is for registering tm's to brand names and properties - it does not track anything that is not filed for. It does not state ownership of said properties, because that's not what it exists for - it exists to track names, etc. that an owner wishes to protect. That would be in a securities statement (sec) etc. is for (listing business transactions and transfers of properties), if one exists or other legal documents. Likewise, it clearly states "ASSIGNS THE ENTIRE INTEREST". Likewise, the F-15 strike eagle source simply lists the last time a TM was filed, which was 1998. Hasbro sold their entire software division to Infogrames in 2001 (save the properties they publicly stated were kept), this included all the Microprose, Atari, etc. etc. brand and their assets. Its up to the new owner to file for tm's each time a property expires. You'll find that with other properties (such as Atari's Centipede for instance) filings have been kept up. And the I Dr.'s states Patrick is sharing ("ASSIGNMENT OF AN UNDIVIDED PART OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST") a percentage ownership of the brand with them. They did not "aquire it from him". Now I suggest you try once again and maintain a level head and call for an RFC before trying to make these changes and wild accusations. You have found zero proof that anyone lied, and your attitude and obvious slant towards your edits are going to start bordering on disruptive editing - which I know you don't want. You've accused a company and individual of lying without actual evidence of such and which violates several Wiki policies, and you've now accused me of lying the last x months and being incapable of researching said topic - which I take as highly offensive. And I'll add one more thing regarding why I'm further offended at your claims - *I* was contracted to do an update to F-15 for them for XBLA and a flash mini-game. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 17:11, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And once again, the Microprose article should not return to its previous state. The way its currently structured encapsulates the original brand and companies from any future ones - which is something *you* wanted. As is stated, this isn't the last use of the brand, and the fact that someone is no longer licensing the name and titles from Patrick does not change the fact that they were and that the brand was exercised publicly over the past year. Regardless of any personal "thing" you have against anyone. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 17:29, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don Bluth

Frecklefoot, Just got back on the site, sorry for not responding to this last year. The information we posted last year was from personal experience. When we reviewed the page last year, Gary asked me to update the info that was incorrect. Any links we deleted may not have been relevant info. Can this still be reverted?

Sincerely, Kip Goldman Associate Producer Don Bluth Films, Inc.

PS, Don is semi-retired, however, we are currently seeking financing for a 2D Dragon's Lair movie.

Kip

Nierika2 (talk) 22:13, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding. Please see your talk page where this discussion was originated. I also moved your comments above to there for clarity. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 01:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Frecklefoot, Thanks. I'll see what I can verify. That looks close to what we posted last year.

Nierika2 (talk) 23:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Endless Stair

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article The Endless Stair, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Drilnoth (talk) 22:20, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, God!

Was reading the discussion on Oh, God!. Did you decide not to "rewrite"? Or...? At any rate, the link is dead. Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 02:15, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]