User talk:Headbomb/Archives/2013/November
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Headbomb. 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. |
The Witcher
"Used for purposes of illustration in an educational article about the entity represented by the image. The image is used as the primary means of visual identification of this article topic." This is the rational used for the image; as the enhanced edition is not the article topic, it has no valid rationale. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 03:30, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
- The Witcher:EE is part of the Witcher topic, so yes its use is justified. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 03:35, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
- The rationale states that it's the primary mean which is patently untrue. Ignoring that, a second box art is not acceptable for use to describe a topic. This is indisputable. Exceptions are made in cases where the box art itself is identified - not the subject of the box art, but the actual box itself - for example, Okami, Mega Man (video game), and Ico all use a second box art but only for the purpose of showing the art, which in all three articles is discussed by reliable sources. In order for The Witcher: Enhanced Edition's box to be featured on the page, the art itself must be the subject of critical commentary or be notable on its own merits. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 03:43, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi! You improved this article a fair bit at a point; while you're not the original author you might still be interested in the review comments.
--Gryllida (talk) 08:27, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Strangeness production
What happens if there are no interwikis, which could be put into wikidata? Should the mess remain then in Strangeness production? Hidaspal (talk) 07:26, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
- Ah, I see, I thought you were removing those because it cluttered the edit window. Yeah if the links aren't relevant (and they aren't), then they should just be removed. I see you just did that however, so there's nothing more to do here. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 13:32, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello Headbomb. The bot which runs on Book reports is facing an error while updating the book report for the above one. It is updating one article—Cheek to Cheek—as unassessed, when it has been assessed by the relevant project. Can you please check it out? —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 07:29, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Higgs boson
Hi Headbomb, I've left a note regarding your recent revert of the Quark page on the page's talk section. I would be grateful if you could address the points I make in it. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quadrupedi (talk • contribs) 17:21, 29 November 2013 (UTC)