User talk:Hbdragon88/Archive 3
- WP:ADMIN: One-click rollback is only intended for simple vandalism; other kinds of reverting should be done manually with an appropriate edit summary.
 Archives |
|---|
John Hall photo
[edit]Can you hold off on this one just a bit? He got elected, and as his office web site promises, an official, high-res public domain photo should be available soon (always my intention to replace that one once he was in Congress anyway). Daniel Case 05:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Find out who put it there in the history file. Daniel Case 05:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
So did I. But it probably will be up soon. I think you can take the tag off and put something on the page to the effect that a PD image will be available soon. Daniel Case 05:59, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
What exactly was the reason you tagged this with "no source?" The uploader tagged it with {{PD-self}}, which clearly specifies that he/she created the image. Mangojuicetalk 20:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
- I actually find it very believable that the user took those pictures. The ones tagged with PD-self are all images of Casinos in the same local area, probably pictures taken on a trip. WP:AGF dictates that we shouldn't question the user's {{PD-self}} tag, which is just about all the confirmation we could ultimately get anyway. Mangojuicetalk 21:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
- Still, the right thing to do is to simply ask the editor. Tagging with "no source" basically demands deletion unless they comply, which . There are loads and loads of editors who upload a couple of valid contributions to Wikipedia, don't know our rules and policies, and then vanish, but we shouldn't aim at deleting those contributions, when they say everything that's needed, just because we can't be sure. Wikipedia is a volunteer project, and should honor volunteer contributions. If you still find yourself suspicious and worried, the image would at least need to go through WP:IFD, because it does give a source. Mangojuicetalk 21:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Newyorkbrad's RfA
[edit]Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 20:39, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 22nd, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 4 | 22 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| Wikipedia modifies handling of "nofollow" tag | WikiWorld comic: "Truthiness" |
| News and notes: Talk page template, milestones | Wikipedia in the News |
| Features and admins | 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 06:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
AfD Nomination: List of pequeninos
[edit]An editor has nominated the article List of pequeninos for deletion, under the Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the nomination (also see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on why the topic of the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome: participate in the discussion by editing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of pequeninos. Add four tildes like this ˜˜˜˜ to sign your comments. You can also edit the article List of pequeninos during the discussion, but do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top of the article), this will not end the deletion debate. Jayden54Bot 13:31, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
SH2
[edit]I did a bit of work. Could you tell me if you see any more problems? --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 21:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Trust me on this
[edit]I saw your comment on the Administrators' noticeboard. If you insist on finding out as much as you can, well, no one can stop you from digging. But I'd like to recommend that you not. Life'll be easier. I guarantee it. No need to reply. Picaroon 02:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Monobook.js question
[edit]Could you leave me a message as to where you found your mnobook.js page? There's a small problem with it, and I'd like to get the author to fix it. Thanks. SkierRMH 21:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Merging for you
[edit]Yu-Gi-Oh! GX media and release information—Each episode has a sentence long synopsis. Have fun❣—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
The class system is now working on the above. I've tested it for each class and it worked on everyone of them (see the history on the talk page) - X201 22:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 29th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| 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 17:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Prods of HP books/films differences articles
[edit]I've removed the prod templates and brought up a discussion at Talk:Differences between book and film versions of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets#Proposed deletion. Thanks. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 06:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Saying that there are three cards unused is OK, I'm just really adamant about seeing crufted edits, but otherwise, your edit is OK with me.
As of this discussion, I'm totally paranoid about the cruft this "Denise Christie Chan" leaves on gaming pages such as House of the Dead and Time Crisis that's why I'm starting to get adamant about the edits on these two franchise pages, but saying "Three cards from Tarot is unused" is fine with me. You can also say "As of today's date/date of the edit, three cards from the Tarot deck remains unused."
Sega is remaining tight-lipped about future HOTD games, though. — Vesther (U * T/R * CTD) 15:21, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
WUSA
[edit]How about we do this...and by we, I mean me....I call WUSA tomorrow, I get permission and the whole damned image gallery goes back up? I think permission from the actual company and actual station overrules any fair-use/public domain crap any day. Yes, I will have them send it to the admins in charge of the whole site and in writing. If necessary, I will do this for each and every station. Then they all go back up and we go on with our lives and I don't have to think about fair-use or public domain again. - SVRTVDude 03:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Broussard Quote on the DNF article
[edit]I don't think the Gamespot link is nearly as reliable as the direct Broussard quote. The Shacknews message database is just as reliable for staying around as the Gamespot news stories, and goes directly to the actual words being quoted instead of the factually *incorrect* Gamespot article. By using the citation from Gamespot you are actually making the accuracy of the DNF article worse. Charlie Wiederhold 08:23, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Or to put it another way, when quoting other people do we favor a citation of someone else referencing them, or do we favor the original writing of the person? The same standards should apply here. Especially in light of the Gamespot article being wrong. Charlie Wiederhold 08:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- The Gamespot article you are quoting is citing the exact message board quote you are saying can't be used. I somehow doubt it's incorrect to reference a quote from the direct source, but to quote someone *else* who is referencing that original source would be ok. The Bulletinboards, wikis, and posts to Usenet section is in relation to research/verification of information. In other words we can't just have a message board post about someone doing research into Cold Fusion. This (was) a case of a direct quote being used by a person in a manner which we can rely on being the person in question. Since the actual quote and the incorrect information has been removed my primary complaint is lessened, though I think the current edit is far less informative and useful, as well as misleading since it redirects to an article which we can verify to have false information. The information that you have decided to provide in the current edit also came from a message board post (so you are doing the exact same thing you are stating I was doing incorrectly), again referenced by the Gamespot article. Finally, you cite that the Gamespot one is reliable because it had contacted 3DR, except in the article it specifically states that they had had no confirmation from 3DR that they had actually said anything in the article. If we were to follow things to the logical conclusion you set out with, all we could do is reference the Shacknews article and stop there. Either we accept that the forum posts were by who they say they were, or all followup sources are invalid. Charlie Wiederhold 10:09, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 5th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| 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 05:03, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Certain Time Crisis articles
[edit]Yesterday I attempted to simplify the Time Crisis 4 article to the best of my power, and I'm prolly going to do the same thing with Time Crisis 3. Check out the Time Crisis 4 article and tell me what you think. Give me some suggestions, as there could be bugs even with the simplification and condensation of the article. — Vesther (U * T/R * CTD) 12:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Precedent?
[edit]What makes you think that image was freely licensed? I'm confused. Jkelly 00:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
- No need to apologise, and it's a trivial point -- I was just curious. Jkelly 00:43, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Interwikis
[edit]Actually, I had went to that page to learn what they were about after the first message on my talk page about them. I thought someone was trying to enter a category in a different language and it wasn't work cause it was Russian on English Wiki....hence my deletion. My mistake...sorry. I guess I still have alot to learn here on Wiki, what with the Interwikis and whatnot. Sorry again for the confusion. - SVRTVDude (Yell - Work) 05:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
- No worries, but thanks....I appericate ya going an extra mile to find that for me. Now if I could just read Russian, I would know what those Interwikis say:) - SVRTVDude (Yell - Work) 05:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Deletions
[edit]Thank you for explaining about where the correct deletion discussion was, I am not an experienced Wikipedian and the original notice on the entry for Jossed was ambiguous, implying that it was okay to delete that notice once the article had been improved.Agrestis 06:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Third opinion
[edit]In re your listing on Wikipedia:Third opinion—there was no talk page link provided to direct WP:3O to the location of the dispute. — Athænara ✉ 08:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
AGF
[edit]It is against Wikipedia policy to assume bad faith. Stop doing so. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:50, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well then, good thing - we wouldn't want people not going around insisting, without a shred of evidence, that what they say about someone is true. In fact, I'll do so right now - you're a bad Wikipedian and have not contributed anything good to Wikipedia. And since it's only a silly little insignificant guideline that says I can't say this, I guess I can then. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:18, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- So are you telling me that it is okay to say things about other Wikipedians that cannot be substantiated, and they know they cannot substantiate it, but they "just know" that they are right? If you're saying that my response was inappropriate to such a concept, well... I really cannot agree. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:25, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- "ALTP added edit history to prevent other people from moving it back" please, for all of us, explain why that ArbCom case substantiates that statement in way imaginable. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:32, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you. I would appreciate it if you took down the statement. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- "ALTP added edit history to prevent other people from moving it back" please, for all of us, explain why that ArbCom case substantiates that statement in way imaginable. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:32, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- So are you telling me that it is okay to say things about other Wikipedians that cannot be substantiated, and they know they cannot substantiate it, but they "just know" that they are right? If you're saying that my response was inappropriate to such a concept, well... I really cannot agree. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:25, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 12th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| 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 05:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
re: Han Tzu
[edit]Hmm, you're right. Somewhere along the line I'd gotten the idea that Dragon Army was entirely launchies, that Ender hadn't gotten a single veteran; a quick check of the paperback proved that wrong. I'll go alter change it now. Thanks for the catch. =) ~Marblespire 07:24, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Do not remove an external link just because it is not complete; that way, half of Wikipedia should've been erased right now!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vikrant Phadkay (talk • contribs) 11:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC).
Signpost updated for February 19th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| 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 07:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
[edit]
|
The Working Man's Barnstar | |
| Since you did that for me, here. A Link to the Past (talk) 14:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC) |
Ah, I see what I did wrong.
[edit]I didn't use the lead with nihongo.
It would seem that there's no nihongo for most Johto and Hoenn cities. :| I ought to get someone to do that. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 26th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| 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 08:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
42 All-Time Classics
[edit]How do you figure? I've said it once, I'll say it again - Google results are by default biased towards North American names because NA media is stronger than EU media. However, the popularity of Clubhouse Games is not significant enough to warrant preferential treatment towards it.
But on a related note, what do you think of moving Trace Memory to Another Code: Two Memories, based on a google search for "Trace Memory" +"Nintendo DS" having weaker results than "Another Code" +"Nintendo DS"? - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
On a related note, do you think that Daredemo Asobi Taizen should be given its own article, since it has several different games from Clubhouse Games? - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:23, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:user page on user namespaces. For privacy reasons, if the user wants a photo of them published on their own user namespace, they should be the one to do it other than another user. If that user is in fact you, then please login under that account and do so. Mkdwtalk 05:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Again, I point out that User:Larry Sanger is a user profile and not in the article namespace. Mkdwtalk 06:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| 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 06:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
In regards to "Revision $1 dated $2 by $3"
[edit]Howdy hbdragon88. There is some problem with the latest popup script by Lupin. For a variety of IE users, we are getting a weird "Revision $1 dated $2 by $3" problem. Please see User_talk:Lupin#Getting_.22revision_.241_dated_.242_by_.243.22 for a discussion on it. I wish I can fix it, I don't know how. :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Enderminh (talk • contribs) 00:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC).
Centralized video game navbox discussion
[edit]You previously expressed a strongly-stated opinion about a video game navbox or all video game navboxes in general, or perhaps I clicked on your talk page by mistake. Whichever it is, you are invited to offer your opinion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Navboxes III: Son of Navboxes. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
resigniture
[edit]my bad man wont happen again Revansrangers 13:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Spam list?
[edit]Wuzat? - A Link to the Past (talk) 13:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
That discussion you backed me up on
[edit]Would you be willing to comment on it? I need comments. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Feebas
[edit]Well i suppose i would need more weight if there was some disagreement that Feebas is one of the more difficult finds. However, i've never seen anything say it was easy. And the quote itself does not say Feebas is the most annoying, just one of, and i'm not saying it, my source is. As for the comparison between Feebas and Magikarp, the source refers to Feebas as a "Magikarp clone". Since clone usually refers to appearance, rather than copy verbatim what was said, i merely stated they are both fish-like and water-types. The contrast is discussed, briefly, in the source, "Feebas as a Pokemon is fairly weak, however unlike Magikarp it can learn TMs." This sentence would never do in something meant to be read by lay people so i had to delve a little into detail for explanatory purposes. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 12:29, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Apology
[edit]Earlier, I called you a "bad Wikipedian who has not contributed anything to Wikipedia" (loose quote). While this was just making a point that just because AGF is only a guideline it should still be followed, it was uncalled for and I should have conducted myself much better than I did, so I apologize. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:28, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| 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 05:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Alai
[edit]I split Alai and Han Tzu to new articles, as even though they were minor characters in previous books, become major characters in Shadow of the Giant, with several chapters written from their point of view. The latter is now also the protagonist of the short story Cheater. Overall, I wouldn't consider them more minor than Hyrum Graff or Mazer Rackham. If any of the current Enderverse character articles should be merged into a list, it should be Admiral Chamrajnagar. Ausir 17:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I still think their major role (both as characters and as only national leaders/monarchs in Ender's jeesh) in Shadow of the Giant justifies giving them separate articles. Han Tzu's article can also be expanded based on the short story. I would also keep Graff and Rackham (which can be expanded based on Mazer in Prison), but merge Chamrajagnar, and keep Ender, Peter and Valentine articles - maybe only merge John Paul and Theresa Wiggin? Ausir 17:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well, Rackham again plays a major role in Shadow of the Giant and in the prequel short story Mazer in Prison. We could also use a list of Lusitania characters - currently we only have Novinha. Ausir 20:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
What?!
[edit]I just recieved a block warning from you for submitting spam links. What are you talking about? I have not even added any links to wikipeda recently? You can't just give a warning and not explain what you are talking about.67.163.193.239 02:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| 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 07:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Banning spoiler warnings on the Final Fantasy Wikiproject
[edit]Hello, I've noticed that you're interested in the video game articles. You might be interested in adding your opinion to the discussion currently taking place on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy#Banning spoiler warnings completely. Kariteh 22:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Ooh, I'm famous!
[edit]Thanks for that... the joys of recent changes patrolling! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Samtheboy (talk • contribs) 08:05, 22 March 2007 (UTC).
We're all famous it seems today! --Samtheboy (t/c) 08:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
2Wikid
[edit]I'm a bit confused here: why do you have two accounts? I actually thought that 2Wikid was a new user until I checked the diff and realized it was you. Hbdragon88 03:54, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- I’m honestly not sure why you thought that, especially at this point. The names are very similar, I have been using both for a long time, and anything more than a cursory glance easily shows that both have the same WikidSmaht signature, and the User/Talk pages for 2Wikid redirect to the WikidSmaht ones. Sorry if I confused you, I guess looking at only histories would give an impression like that.
- I also don’t understand why you care, but: I created 2Wikid so I could add all pages I am interested in( 500+ Pokémon articles, anyone?) to one Watchlist, while keeping the other for only the pages that are most important to me. Eventually I started using it for certain minor edits, especially mass page moves, most notably my campaigns to move TV series episode articles from titles like Title (Series episode) to Title (Series) per the TV naming conventions. Now I use it for some other edits too. There is no hard-and-fast rule, but often I make the first one or two major edits from my main account, and follow-up edits from 2Wikid. --WikidSmaht (talk) 09:17, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Blooper
[edit]I don't see why the Blooper page needs to be deleted. He's a character that has appeared in numerous games and will be a playable character in an upcoming Mario game. Its a great article that has recieved alot of contributions. I don't think it should be deleted because a couple of individuals don't want it. Maybe his page should be merged with the Gooper Blooper page, instead of being deleted all together?Giantdevilfish 21:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
No-Risk Risker...
[edit]Heck, I can barely do elementary wiki-markup, and until I completely weirdly stumbled onto the conversion bot talk page, I didn't even know that little bit of WP history. I figured I was being pretty gutsy just to post on the AN page... Thanks for the laugh! Risker 07:45, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Just a tip
[edit]On that boss in Sonic Rush, use spindash to make it quickly up to the head. Also, when you see the control pad in the corner of the screen, hold down until he finishes trying to shake you off.
Just though I'd leave you that tip there.GrandMasterGalvatron 01:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| 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 13:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Keith Howard: Reply
[edit]Not true at all, several other articles note individual cards for their importance, but don't explain what they do. It's very common in the Yugioh articles. I'm certainly okay for rewriting pages and such, but also believe in a balance between excessive detail and too little. Drake Clawfang 01:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Image talk:Robert Post.jpg
[edit]Is there somewhere better to put this? I hate to leave orphan talk pages lying around. Thanks, NawlinWiki 03:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Sounds good, let me know and I'll be glad to restore and move the debate to wherever. NawlinWiki 04:00, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
