User talk:Renamed user e8LqRIqjJf2zlGDYPSu1aXoc/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

WikiProject Films June 2008 Newsletter

The June 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Firearms

Welcome to the WikiProject Firearms. I hope you enjoy being a member.--LWF (talk) 15:09, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Bamboo (military slang)

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Bamboo (military slang), which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Kind regards, Ryttaren (talk) 19:36, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. Since I disagree with your de-prodding, I've brought the article to AfD; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bamboo (military slang). --/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 08:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Dair Atiah

Dear Mendaliv,

Thank you for your changes to this page, but I would like to ask you why you do it ?

What kind of references is requered, If you need any information, write me please..

I will be happy to answer any questions

Thank you in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omarmalali (talk • contribs) 10:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I will respond on your talk page shortly. Suffice it to say the article contains a significant amount of dubious information that must have a reference attached to it. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 22:32, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Union Station

Thats why it's always good to talk about things first :-) Thanks for your help! StarsTrainsAndRandomThings (talk) 20:58, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Glad to be of help! —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 21:00, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Storage Condo

I have been marked for deletion. A Storage Condo is a new product being constructed around the US. Here is a New York Times article on the product.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/travel/escapes/01condos.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Please help me get this definition of in Wiki ! It is not a fade or a slang term at all! Please help!

Lucas N. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackcar (talk • contribs) 19:07, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I've replied on your talk page, though I'm sure it's a moot point now since the article's been redirected. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 03:40, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

So what do we need to do to delete the page Storage Condo? I dont feel it is the best name for what is being built in the US. It is taking on many other names. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackcar (talk • contribs) 23:04, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

You shouldn't bother; if you feel the name "Storage condo" doesn't describe what it points to in the Self storage article, then edit that section of that article. It's highly unlikely that the community will delete an apparently-valid redirect. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 23:11, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:dair atiyah

Hi Mendaliv, I'm not against merging the two dair atiyah articles, but how do we merge them?George Al-Shami (talk) 01:31, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Read WP:MERGE for the guidelines for doing this. Let me know if you need any further guidance, but it shouldn't be a big deal. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 02:41, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films July 2008 Newsletter

The July 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:25, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

User:George Al-Shami

On July 30, 2008, you welcomed User:George Al-Shami to Wikipedia. Since then he has been very active editing a wide range of articles. Is the work of this new editor being monitored? Please urgently look at his edits in Canadian Coalition for Democracies (NPOV) and Arab Canadians (unsourced changes). Please let me know what you think on my talk page. Thank you. --Zlerman (talk) 09:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I've replied on your talk page. I never specifically welcomed George Al-Shami, just provided a suggestion. I'm not involved with him beyond this. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 10:05, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Profuse apologies for my inexcusable confusion. Still, your comments on the latest edits in Canadian Coalition for Democracies will be much appreciated to help me decide how to proceed with appropriate reverts. Best. --Zlerman (talk) 10:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh no, it's not a big deal. I'm sorry if you got the impression that I was offended. As to Canadian Coalition for Democracies, I'd be glad to lend some insight. I'll do so on that article's talk page. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 23:00, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Tone tags

Hi Mendaliv, I've moved Captain Video and His Video Rangers per your request. Why did you add {{tone}} to DuMont Television Network? The template states that a note about the tagging can be found on the talk page, but you're not adding notes to the talk page (you've moved on to tagging other articles), and judging by your comments on other articles, "Whoops, I'd added this tag in August!", "Whoops, I'd added this tag in August!", "Whoops, I added this tag in August!", "(Undid revision 229525545 by Mendaliv (talk) Nevermind; it's uncontroversial- I'll db-move the redirect)" it seems you're having some trouble using Friendly. What's going on? Firsfron of Ronchester 05:01, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah, sorry; I felt it was more self-evident. I'll explain the {{tone}} tag on the talk page. And by the way, none of the self-reverts to which you are referring were of contributions made with Friendly. Those are mostly simple mistakes that I quickly corrected. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 05:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Userpage

just temporary till i design my own one --Blackeaglz (talk) 10:01, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

BARIS

Hi Mendaliv. You suggested I contact you here re. fair use of images in the BARIS Wikipedia page? Peyre (talk) 20:24, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing. The main thing is when you upload a fair-use image, it isn't sufficient to mark its licensing information. That is to say, you can't just upload a game screenshot with the tag saying it's a game screenshot. You also need to include a fair use rationale for each use of that image. Now, most often that'll be a single use (e.g., a game cover). There are some nice templates that do most of the work for you. I suggest you check out the following:

• Image:BARIS cover.jpg; the cover art from BARIS that I've since uploaded. This should stand as a good example of a fair use image. It has an appropriate Fair Use Rationale and is of appropriate resolution. For cover art, I believe that's informally defined as one of the dimensions can't be more than 300 px.
• {{Game rationale}} is a good template for game cover art. You'd use it when uploading the image. In the "description" box you'd put (for example):

  {{subst:Game rationale|Buzz Aldrin's Race into Space|http://www.geocities.com/raceintospace/|Interplay|DOS}}

  This marks the image as being used in the BARIS article, its source as being The Docking Module website, the copyright owner as being Interplay, and that it's a DOS game cover. You wouldn't select a license from the drop-down menu either, since this template takes care of it.
• Category:Non-free use rationale templates; this category has a bunch of other fair-use rationale templates that you might want to check out, especially since {{Game rationale}} is specifically for cover art.
• Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline; this guideline might be helpful, though admittedly it's a bit dense.

As to the BARIS article in general, I strongly advise you to read WP:VG/GL for info on how the article should look. I don't mean to be overly critical, but as it had been written before, the BARIS article was nothing more than a fansite. You've gotta keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a guide (among other things). If you want more advice on improving the article, I'd be very glad to help- I had a lotta fun playing BARIS as a kid. I've gotten a bunch of news articles via LexisNexis on BARIS, which I'm hoping can be used to improve things. Anyhow, let me know if there's any more help I can give. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 23:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Wuff...my head's spinning a bit; all that uploading stuff is complicated! But I'll try to wrap my head around it all. On the other hand, I've started reading the video games article guidelines, and I'm starting to get stoked about modifying the BARIS article. I had seen it flagged as looking too much like a fan site, so I made some improvements to it, but now I'm starting to get a better handle on what needs to be done to bring it more into conformity. Hopefully I can get the page up to snuff sooner or later. I didn't know you were a BARIS fan--have you tried the Raceintospace port? It's true to the original and works well on modern operating systems, without too many new bugs. Peyre (talk) 23:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I just had a look at the BARIS article to get my bearings and decide how to start reworking it, but I see you've chosen to simply gut the article, removing practically everything I added--even the version history. In that case, I believe I'm done; there's little point in putting more effort into the article when the content is likely to be summarily removed. Peyre (talk) 23:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you feel that way. If you disagree with some of the stuff I removed, please be bold(!) and re-add it! My issue was that the page had been tagged as being a fansite-like page for nearly a year. Accurately so, I might add; much of the content seemed to be a reprint of information from the Docking Module website. I'm working on bringing the page into line and enhancing it with well-sourced information. I recommend that if you do want to contribute to the article, you keep in mind the suggestion from WP:VG/GL: "A general rule of thumb to follow if unsure: If the content only has value to people actually playing the game, it is unsuitable". —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 15:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps I reacted more strongly than was warranted. I think my reaction was understandable, given the background and the way it looked from my perspective at the time:

• I had wrangled with Wikipedia over the screenshots over the past couple years, getting the impression that no one believed the images weren't an outright copyright violation, even after repeatedly explaining it.
• It wasn't at all clear how to upload the images so they'd be tagged properly. That's understandable, given the number of copyright states that are possible with images, but still, the Wikipedia rules for this are very tricky to follow.
• When the game's original programmer personally explained the copyright status of the game and screenshots of it, and I had committed to following all the proper rules, trying to work out the image uploads properly, and redoing the article to try to bring it in line with Wikipedia guidelines, I suddenly found the images all removed and most of the article deleted. It probably wasn't meant that way, but it felt like a real slap in the face after I had made a commitment to work out the details and get everything done by the book.

So that was how it looked when I wrote my response, and it looks like I misjudged the situation. But since you're planning to rewrite the article to bring it into conformity, I think I'm content to hold off and see it when it's done. I'll have more fun reading the article than I would writing it, anyway. I'll probably make some contributions once it's written, but this way I won't have to worry about the bulk of the article being within guidelines.

Ah, I'm sorry. I do totally understand your reaction; I've gotten involved in some pretty frustrating content disputes before. I did react too quickly on the BARIS imagery- it seemed really unlikely that those images could be released under GPL. As to the BARIS article, the content that got removed (still visible here) may be appropriate for Strategy Wiki or another gaming wiki, and then linking to it from the BARIS article here... though to tell you the truth I have no clue how those projects work. Probably a lot more inclusive than Wikipedia tends to be. You definitely should help improve and fact-check the BARIS article where possible, of course! —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 20:24, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Mendaliv. I'm looking forward to tinkering with and maybe adding bits to the BARIS article when it's done, but frankly I'm glad you're putting together the bulk of it.Peyre (talk) 22:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

OverClocked ReMix

Hi, I noticed the cleanup notice added to OverClocked ReMix and just wanted your kneejerk feedback on how to improve it. I'd be interested in your opinions, particularly what's wrong with the structure and refs. If you have the time, it's much appreciated, thanks. - Liontamer (talk) 01:44, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Be glad to! My main point of contention is with the way the references are laid out. Primarily in that the quotation going on in there seems a little excessive, and then there's repetition of the portions that ought to be part of citation templates. I'd suggest pruning back the quotes, summarizing the important information, and using a "notes and references" structure, along the lines of WP:REFGROUP or like is used in Jueju. As to the structure, it feels rather eclectic... I might suggest using a style along the lines seen at Wikipedia:WikiProject Websites/Sample. To tell you the truth, I'd almost consider this article in violation of WP:NOTHOWTO for how extensive its documentation is on the processes of submitting a song is. Unsourced statements such as "The community will often pressure djpretzel and the Judges Panel to reform their policies, and when suggestions are not immediately considered, extensive debate and even flaming can ensue. Judge selection, and the process behind it, can also occasionally lead to controversy" come off very poorly and are unfitting of a B-class article. Similarly, the line "[...] and these mixes, along with other "OC ReMoved" songs, are considered a collector's item by some (although they are in reality not that hard to find). After this, however, some who removed their ReMixes from the site requested to return, and this was granted with the provision that they not remove their work from the site again" looks like original research. The "Industry recognition" section is almost entirely unsourced and comes off almost as indiscriminate information. I hope this is of help! —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 05:46, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

It definitely is a big help. Whenever free time allows, these are great suggestions that I'll attempt to implement. Thanks again, Mendaliv! - Liontamer (talk) 06:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films roll call and coordinator elections

Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Italics of the article title in Orbiter (sim)

Just to remind you, as you seem to be a bit overeager with it, WP:LEAD does not call for italics, it is only mentioned in the WP:MOST.

Italics are used for the titles of works of literature and art, such as books, paintings and musical albums. The titles of articles, chapters, songs and other short works are not italicized, but are enclosed in double quotation marks.

I don't think a simulator is automatically called a piece of art or a music album, and application software names are generally not put in italics in Wikipedia. And the discussion if Orbiter can be considered a game is very long and still not satisfactory solved. As it is also used for the development of space missions and visualization, it is closer to an application software, you can just use for fun.

--Urwumpe (talk) 19:56, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I'm sorry. I assumed as it's part of the VG wikiproject, uses the VG infobox, is categorized as a game, and because other similar programs are considered games, that it's a game. Thus I followed, very clearly, the guidelines in WP:MOST to italicize the titles of games. Frankly, I think you're just splitting hairs, but I'm not involved with the game's article. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 20:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films August 2008 Newsletter

The August 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Request to move article Shuttle: the Space Flight Simulator (Virgin game) incomplete

You recently filed a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves to move the page Shuttle: the Space Flight Simulator (Virgin game) to a different title - however your proposal is either incomplete or has been contested as being controversial. As a result, it has been moved to the incomplete and contested proposals section. Requests that remain incomplete after five days will be removed.

Please make sure you have completed all three of the following:

1. Added {{move|NewName}} at the top of the talk page of the page you want moved, replacing "NewName" with the new name for the article. This creates the required template for you there.
2. Added {{subst:RMtalk|NewName|reason for move}} to the bottom of the talk page of the page you want to be moved, to automatically create a discussion section there.
3. Added {{subst:RMlink|PageName|NewName|reason for move}} to the top of today's section here.

If you need any further guidance, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves or contact me on my talk page. - JPG-GR (talk) 05:27, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

OverClocked ReMix

Mendaliv, thanks again for the helpful suggestions given on the OverClocked ReMix article. Using Wikipedia:WikiProject Websites/Sample as a base like you've suggested, upping the amount of sourcing, as well as using the reference style you recommended, I think there is a marked improvement. I do wish aspects of the Cite Web template could be carried over to the Citation template; AFAIK, the ref style you encouraged could only be done with the Citation template, so info like the "work" doesn't show. Perhaps I should just change "work" to "publisher"? The reception/criticisms section is non-existent on criticisms, but most crits I can think of (e.g. slow turnover time for music evaluation, inherent subjectivity in judging music/art, accusations of genre bias or nepotism in music selection) are very informal (and some unfounded) and unable to be formally sourced, so I didn't feel I could add what would be deemed original research. I'd definitely appreciate any quick assessment or feedback you have time for. In time, I'd think this could be an FA candidate, or at least a GA. Hopefully it's at least B-class at present. Even if you don't have time to look it over, the previous style was sloppy, so you've helped me give the article a kick in the ass. It's much appreciated! - Liontamer (talk) 18:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow, looks like you've made a lot of changes! I'm a little busy currently, but I'd be glad to check it out in a day or two. Also, once you're feeling more confident about the page you might want to list it for peer review at Wikipedia:WikiProject Computing/Peer Review (which I believe is the appropriate place for website articles). Fair warning though, website articles aren't my focus so you can expect them to want some further changes beyond what I can advise you do undertake. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 19:03, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem on not being able to look at it quickly. I figured since you suggested the improvements, you'd be interested in how things turned out. I'll definitely try the Peer Review in the near future and see what else can be improved! - Liontamer (talk) 18:41, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

SmackBot

Thanks, that particular template is a headache. I'll get it fixed. Rich Farmbrough, 18:52 17 August 2008 (GMT).

WikiProject Films coordinator elections - voting now open!

Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 21:11, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Eden

I see at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Eden that you sorted this into Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians. It seems to me that this should have gotten sorted into Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Chicago as well. Then we might have saved it. Not much has gotten sorted into our project. Do you know why?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:29, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, frankly I still don't consider the subject to be notable. But in any case, it might simply be that not many obviously Chicago-related articles are getting nommed for deletion; Jeff Eden wasn't obviously Chicago-related, apart from an unexplained tagging as being part of WP Chicago. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 05:35, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Christian Abbiati

I don't know how to add a footnote reference/link and it is not clear where I look to find such information. The article where Christian Abbiati says he is a fascist is this http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/27/italy.acmilan Could you add the proper footnote reference then please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.118.18.24 (talk) 10:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing; I've fixed it up. I've also left a welcome message at your talk page with some helpful tips. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 10:53, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (154/3/2). I appreciate the community's trust in me, and I will do my best to be sure it won't regret handing me the mop. I am honored by your trust and your support. Again, thank you. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 19:22, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

RE: Thanks!

No problem. I'm sure you would do the same :D DARTH PANDA^talk 00:59, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

WTF

Are you a fucking moron dude? Citing sources? The article itself says that it's a theory, all I said was that there are many theories as to what they actually relate to, that information is highly flawed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.81.243 (talk) 01:02, 28 September 2008‎ (UTC)

Okay, so can you provide a source to state that? Or is that statement entirely original research on your part? —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 01:04, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

LMAO, the source lies in this"

Andrew H. Gordon and Calvin W. Schwabe speculated that the Ankh, Djed and Was symbols were derived from"

IT SAYS THEY SPECULATED, I shouldn't have to go find a book with some author telling you that NOBODY FUCKING KNOWS WHAT THEY MEAN! AND YOU SHOULDN'T MISLEAD PEOPLE ON WIKIPEDIA BY TELLING what one theory is, and not ANY other single theory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.81.243 (talk) 01:12, 28 September 2008‎ (UTC)

I'm sorry, that doesn't really follow. I've posted a welcome template on your user talk page, which contains many helpful links which can explain Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I hope this helps! —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 01:15, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

How does it, "not follow". Are you ok, as in, IQ over 105? When someone says that they speculate, it means that they do not know. Many have speculated, wikipedia lists simply their speculation and it irritates me as a student of Carl P. Ruck's. I feel that it is only appropriate if wikipedia either didn't speculate at all, or told people that it is one theory out of many. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.81.243 (talk) 01:19, 28 September 2008‎ (UTC)

I'm sorry, but as you continue to resort to personal attacks, I cannot continue to help you. Good day. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 01:21, 28 September 2008 (UTC)