User talk:Hyperspacey

Welcome!
This is not an automated message! This is a friendly hello from one Wikipedian to another.
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! The Wikipedia Tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, ask a question on the New contributors' help page or ask me on my talk page. Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Again, welcome! (Yes, I can see you've been here since June. Better late than never) -- Steel 21:48, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedian. I'd be a bit worried if there were any Wikipaedophiles around here. -- Steel 21:54, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: MGS3

I accept that my wording might not be the best, though I didn't think yours was much better either. I'll think of a different wording and ask a friend of mine (who's read more of Edge than I have) if he has anything to say. -- Steel 00:15, 15 August 2006 (UTC) P.S. I'm going to remove your comment about adminship from my talk page since I'm not actually an admin. Not sure where you got that from :P[reply]

[1]. What's that in English? -- Steel 00:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno, and 1:30am is too late to be having this discussion anyway. Oh, and ZoE2 deserves more than a 4/10, even if the anime style graphics don't really appeal to me. -- Steel 00:31, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MGS3 storyline

That really is an excellent story section. The only slight concerns I have is that you don't really emphasise the relationship between The Boss and Snake, so at the end when you say they have an emotional battle, it's not entirely clear why. Also, you don't mention the legacy and the philosophers until the end, when they are in fact introduced before then. While I was strongly against giving them entire sections to themselves (as was the case in the old version), they do need to be explained where they're relevant to the story. Other than that, you did a great job with that. No, really, you did. Better than I could do. -- Steel 11:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to your response

I responded to your response in the MGS4 Talk page. 24.23.51.27 10:14, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Hitman query

Thank you very much for your Hitman answer. I had really a mind trouble about this and I appreciate your answer very much. --Λeternus 13:01, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Feeder (band)

Howdy!,

I was wondering if you could review the Feeder article please? :). I've given it a slight re-write with references citing statements that were not cited before, after I submitted the article to a few users and acted on their feedback.

The problem was that there was not enough cites, and cites that were there needed a clean-up with author name and retrieval dates.

Cheers!.

Marcus Bowen 22:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nae worries, when I've got a chance I'll give it a once-over. Hyperspacey 15:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback!! :), I've now had a go at merging some sentences together with the paragraphs in each section bar the introduction.

What do you think of the merging I've done?, is it keeping a good flow going or confusing any outside reader?.

Marcus Bowen 19:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine my man, good for a Good Article review and then try for Featured Article. Hyperspacey 21:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've recieved this feedback regarding a Peer Review I submitted, it looks pretty much a bit of work if we want Good Article status.

Marcus Bowen 08:59, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy!. I have now given the article a re-write based on your version :-). Another Wikipedian who did the peer review assessment suggested I should go ahead with a "Good Article" nomination :D.

Marcus Bowen 21:04, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!!!, just thought you'd like to know, the article has been passed for GA!!!!. If it wasn't fir you in the first place, I wouldn't have worked and worked on this for months and months to get it to a proper article with no bias and only neutralism. I was asked to write a critism of the band if there is one, and made a new paragraph onthe NME critism. Didn't enjoy writing it as they're a bunch of p****s, who praise Pete Docherty's actions and have no idea of decent music. But I knew I had to do it to get GA. Roll on FA!!!Marcus Bowen 21:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Centralized video game navbox discussion

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) 07:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Metal Gear Solid

"If you think there is any chance that another editor might dispute your change, please do not mark it as minor. Marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette, especially if the change involves the deletion of some text." - Wikipedia page on "minor edit"

Deleting a portion of an article that someone has worked on doesn't exactly constitute as "minor". Having said that, the last part of your article/sentence does make some sense. I was trying to find a way to add in some examples of code names initially, but I couldn't remember too many of them. Upon reading your edit, the code name "puma" came to mind, as it was commonplace in my MGS experience. The word "playthrough" struck me as odd though, so I looked it up, and I only found some instances in which it was used. It was two words instead of one, and it was used in a different context, closer to a verb than a noun. --Silent Siberia 19:58, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have a habit of marking re-writes that maintain the meaning of the previous sentence as minor, mostly since I'm just compressing wording down and making it more readable. I did not expect it to cause much dispute. Play-through, playthrough or play through as a noun is something I seem to have acquired through my reading of various game-related articles in the papery realm, and I admit it was a bit vague (note the timestamp on my edit, vagueness at 3am is a common issue with me!). Performance is definitely an improvement. Hyperspacey 03:39, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Well, what's done is done. You like to be brief and I like to be descriptive, but I'm content with what is on the page now. Thank you for all.--Silent Siberia 22:41, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for the heads-up anyway, I'll mark any re-writes as non-minor in future for sake of possible debate. Hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia, I see you're new. I'm working on the MGS2 page at the moment, so feel free to dive in! Hyperspacey 02:34, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MGS4 edit locking

I am quite concerned with the gazillions of edits in the past few days, especially that edit war Mc razza's been doing RE Meryl and the never-ending It's-going-to-360 bit, which I'm long past fed up of hearing about. I've already brought this to Scientizzle's attention (he also recovered the entire file after some "homo" editor bastardized it), can this article be blocked from editing while no official information has surfaced yet? As seeing you've been very active in writing Metal Gear-based stuff, I hope for a favourable response from you soon. thanks.Eaglestorm 04:14, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MGS 4 plot

I agree with your commentary on trimming the plot as much as possible, but apparently somebody does not get the message in your last MGS4 edit summary. Perhaps you'd like to explain it to him? I've undone his big edits twice, which are basically those that you removed on October 7. Thank you. Eaglestorm 09:19, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Though it's three months late, thanks again for reminding him. As for "gotten tired and given up though," that, my wikifriend, is a understatement-has not made any other edits ever since. Meanwhile, i saw a guy post a monsters and critics link regarding Konami's No MGS4 in 360. what do you think? Eaglestorm (talk) 04:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Feeder discography

Just thought you'd like to know that this article I've written myself is now featured!!.Marcus Bowen 11:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MGS sites

hi, could you intervene on the main Metal Gear site? Somebody's been putting spam links. I've removed them at least twice, but they still keep on coming. Thanks. --Eaglestorm (talk) 05:04, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good work with the warning on one of them. Another's been flaming me on the MG talk page, but it's already covered. --Eaglestorm (talk) 02:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MGS4 Demo

When are you puting the ref up for MGS4 Demo? A Candela (talk) 23:11, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you go I wanted you to put the ref up. A Candela (talk) 20:13, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFC on User:63.161.203.12/11

Hi, is it possible to do RFCs on this user?

even with the little difference in IPs, it's still the same guy who didn't stop advocating MGForever and MGConfidential sites a few months back. And surprisingly, argued with Thirteen and I (Strongsauce even in 2006) recently over MGSPO not being part of official MG canon, supposedly being vindicated for citing MG Saga docus for his six-main-gams only argument.

Hoping for your response soon. thanks --Eaglestorm (talk) 15:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Hyperspacey. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]