Jump to content

User talk:Tezero/archive8

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Sleeping Dogs FAC

Have you seen the progress made? URDNEXT (talk) 22:14, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes! It seems to be coming along nicely; it certainly is wonderful that it was picked up by a copyeditor so rapidly. Tezero (talk) 22:19, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
And John will also be copy editing the article as well. URDNEXT (talk) 22:20, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Serge

Ok, fair enough. I actually left you a detailed reply on his talk page, but her removed it (though its viewable in his history) and then stopped me from talking to him via that means. Anyway, I'm done. Thanks for a decent experience from you though.Nice to see not everyone is that bad (and I sense you kinda see my frustration). Good luck.

87.112.83.31 (do IPs get notifications like this?), I'll reply on your talk page. Tezero (talk) 01:29, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Sonic X

Congratulations on the FA! Get ready for another FA today or tomorrow with Sleeping Dogs too. URDNEXT (talk) 19:41, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

URDNEXT, I wouldn't count on it getting promoted that quickly; Sonic X had to wait a few days after the last comments were made, and Sleeping Dogs last I checked still has some unaddressed copyediting issues (that I nonetheless can't fix because of the generic way in which they were posited). I think I am gonna look over Tony Hawk's Underground a bit more and nominate it soon after Sonic X's FAC template gets updated, though - plus someone has agreed to copyedit Amy Rose. All in all, I've got enough FACs to last me quite a while. Have you got any plans for more? Tezero (talk) 19:53, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
I'll take Super Mario Bros. 3 to FA, The Social Network to GA, then FA, Batman: Under the Red Hood just the same as the latter, and Payday 2 just like them. URDNEXT (talk) 19:58, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

So, how's it going? URDNEXT (talk) 20:28, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

I feel kind of... sunbleached. In a literal sense it's very warm and bright where I'm sitting at the moment, and I'm also rather "burned out" from various obligations. Actually, right now I should be looking for transport to Cincinnati, from which I'll be taking the train next weekend; penning a couple of documents for my university's honors program; and cranking out a couple of assignments for my Web Programming class. In other words, heh, Wikipedia is not of the highest priority at this moment and I'll log off after telling you this. On Wikipedia, I dunno, I'm also getting kind of disillusioned with my work - it feels like I'm just going through the motions at this point rather than actually improving articles and educating myself. Actually, I might not bother FA-ing everything on my "current projects" list; it only depends on whether the motivation's there when the time comes. I'm considering just putting most things on Wikipedia aside for a month (except whatever FAC's on the table at the time) and doing the GA Cup; that might be a nice change of pace. I dunno. What are your feelings on the matter? Tezero (talk) 20:45, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
I highly reccomend you do the GA cup. It's necessary for someone to have a change of pace on something they do a lot for their own sanity. URDNEXT (talk) 20:58, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations

Congrats with making Sonic X a FA. It is looking really good. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 22:44, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

RfC: Should the Four Award include post-GA DYK?

I have closed the discussion. --Pine✉ 07:55, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Question

Do you have Netflix? URDNEXT (talk) 20:11, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, URDNEXT, why do you ask? Haven't watched much on it lately. Tezero (talk) 20:12, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Can you do me a favor and watch The Social Network? Of course, if you haven't already. URDNEXT (talk) 20:13, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
I saw it on DVD circa 2011. It was pretty good, though I found Mark Zuckerberg's girlfriend profusely unlikable, and I now kind of resent Johns Hopkins, where it was filmed, for rejecting me but only waitlisting someone I know with an ACT score ten points below mine. Why do you - wait, you're working on that page, right? Is this so I can make sure the plot is adequately represented? Tezero (talk) 20:23, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
No. I was wondering if you were willing to take the page to GA with me in the GA cup. I saw that you were interested in participating, so I thought I'd help. URDNEXT (talk) 21:22, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Nothing against you or anything, but I'd rather not. Looking at it now, it's in pretty good quality, and I'd prefer to use the GA Cup to improve articles in direr straits and, if possible, on subjects less familiar to me. (Maybe I'll find a way to get the Navajo article topped off in a few days and then pick some obscure language articles. And I've wanted to try a mathematics or geography article for a while now.) Of course, as soon as that starts I'm open to collaborating with you if you want. Tezero (talk) 21:32, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
If you want, I can help you with one, if not all the article you're working at. Just a thought... URDNEXT (talk) 21:41, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Just so you know, the GA Cup is for reviewing GANs, not nominating them czar ♔ 23:40, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Then I'll start my own GA cup, with blackjack and hookers! (I'll either do the real GA Cup or just get a bunch of GAs outside my comfort zone as planned. Haven't decided.) Tezero (talk) 00:21, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Seriously, I didn't know the GA cup was about reviewing. Oh well... 02:24, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

FAC

I think you placed this on the wrong FAC page. Just a hunch. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

SNUGGUMS, too, this might interest you. RationalObserver's attempt to rewrite policy after I mentioned it supported my close-paraphrasing of a few critics with in-text attribution. Note: He's been at that policy page re-writing things since I started to refute his argument about the Phares paraphrase on 27 September. I followed the rules and limited my close paraphrasing to a few critics per the guideline when I wrote the article. One reviewer has now re-written policy to impose his personal criteria and objection. Dan56 (talk) 23:34, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Dan, given how you've had multiple FAC's for other articles fail for plagiarism/close paraphrasing issues in past months, I don't think Rationalobserver did that just to see this one fail for FA. Whether it was to change guidelines is another story. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:40, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
SNUGGUMS, that was one article. Might point was they changed guidelines to fail this one, likely because of this. Dan56 (talk) 23:43, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

SNUGGUMS, you're right but since my iPod doesn't do well with editing large sections (I.e. it crashes) I can't fix it myself. Would you mind? Tezero (talk) 00:18, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Very well, just thought I'd point it out. Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:48, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
I think he meant that he needed help moving it since he is on an iPod—anyway, I took care of it czar ♔ 01:28, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Tony Hawk

Hello, Tezero. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tony Hawk's Underground/archive1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:06, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Amy Rose


Meeting

We need to talk about the FAC. @Czar I think we'e screwed now that Blackmane dropped out. URDNEXT (talk) 16:22, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

What do you mean "meeting"? Do you want to Skype or something? ...Honestly, I don't blame Blackmane; there are too many viewpoints going into what the article's scope should be. Tezero (talk) 17:21, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
We need to discuss the article and what to do now that we have 3 oposses. Czar should join us too. URDNEXT (talk) 17:24, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
UDNEXT I've left you a message on my talk page, I was gonna leave it here but I didn't want to clutter or annoy anybody. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:26, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
It's fine. Thanks for the message! URDNEXT (talk) 17:29, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
What do you suggest we should do? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:38, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Emergency re-write of Plot, Development and a copy edit of Reception. At least that's what Jimmy said in the FAC. URDNEXT (talk) 17:40, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
I'll make a start on the plot section now. You're right, all three of those sections could be easily restructured. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:49, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Jaguar! URDNEXT (talk) 18:08, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

RE: FAC

FYI, since you're and ‎SNUGGUMS's objections to xx (album) was based on RationalObserver's portrayal of my paraphrasing as inappropriate, his attempts to rewrite Wikipedia's policy to substantiate his opposition to my FAC have been reverted on the basis of what I have been arguing to him, that Wikipedia allows the kind of limited close paraphrasing that I used with in-text attribution ("Distinctive words? No, no. Just about anything could be labeled WP:Plagiarism or a WP:Copyvio matter in that case") I'd appreciate it if you didnt let what might be a begrudged sock undermine the hard work I put into the article and made your decision based on your own observations/review. Dan56 (talk) 00:33, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Dan56, I didn't have a uniform opinion on the paraphrasings - some of them I thought were reasonable - but the ease with which the other reviewers found them in a small amount of text suggested there could be a lot more. I'm not yet taking a position on whether Kww is a sock; I don't see enough evidence yet. Tezero (talk) 00:41, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
What "ease"? And what "other reviewers"? My paraphrasing was done according to Wikipedia's "longstanding guideline" on it, before RationalObserver rewrote the policy to sway you and others to opposing the article, tainting the review. Dan56 (talk) 01:14, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Also, where did you get the suggestion that Kww is a sock? He's an admin and I collected my evidence/info to his talk page (which I had linked for you in my original message), since several socks of User:Jazzerino have tried to sabotage my work and activities, including User:Flow Ridian who did just what Rational Observer did and derailed a past FAC of mine. Dan56 (talk) 01:16, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Also, he just conceded (after being reverted by the actual policymakers) to the guidelines that supported my paraphrasing, even though he finds them "flawed". Like I originally said in the FAC, he has been trying to impose his personal criteria to writing and convinced you in the process that his inflated paraphrasing section at the FAC is based in any of WP's rules. Dan56 (talk) 01:20, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Hmm, now that I take a look, Dan56, his "observances" do look to be ill-received by the community and not in line with Wikipedia's actual policies on plagiarism (which I'm admittedly not well versed in; I've never had copyvio complaints on an FAC as far as I can remember). I don't think they were made in bad faith, but it reminds me of an ongoing WP:TFAR I have, where an editor opposed based on his personal distaste for some of the sources, despite the fact that they're routinely accepted as reliable. Tezero (talk) 01:29, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Well, FWIW, the "policymaker" that reverted me has said: "While Dan56 has often contributed positively to Wikipedia, I do see that he has engaged in a lot of WP:Close paraphrasing at the article in question. So I understand your concerns on that front." Rationalobserver (talk) 15:47, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
In that case, I'm going to uphold my support, Rationalobserver: if someone else opposes on copyvio concerns it likely won't pass anyway, so in case it really is okay I don't want my oppose to keep it from passing. The reason I can't be firmer about this is that I'm not well-versed in what constitutes excessively close paraphrasing as I've never been asked to consider it before. Tezero (talk) 16:50, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Fair enough, and FTR, I'm not trying to convince you to oppose, but I am concerned that if you judge proper paraphrasing based on what Dan56 does, you will be sorely mistaken. Rationalobserver (talk) 17:00, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Code

Does the editor know about any notable portal where users upload videos? 84.127.80.114 (talk) 06:23, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Man, it's like an authentic version of vaporwave. I'm tired as a log's lazy cousin right now, but I'll try to pick out some details for you tomorrow. Tezero (talk) 06:57, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions notification - BLP

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q3 2014

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 7, No. 3 — 3rd Quarter, 2014
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q3 2014, the project has:

Content

Project Navigation
To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Afternoon, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bell curve, Stress and Diurnal. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:51, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Afternoon

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Afternoon you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 14:21, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Afternoon

The article Afternoon you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Afternoon for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 19:22, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 16:20, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

This is to inform you that Sonic: After the Sequel, which you nominated at WP:FAC, will appear on the Wikipedia Main Page as Today's Featured Article on 29 October 2014. The proposed main page blurb is here; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. Brianboulton (talk) 17:33, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pokémon Black and White, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Level up. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:01, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game)

The article Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 17:00, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Project M (mod)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Project M (mod) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 20:02, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Project M (mod)

The article Project M (mod) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Project M (mod) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 06:21, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

SMT IV

Since you seemed a little puzzled about it being a Stub while containing B-class information, I#ll explain. it was B-Class until yesterday evening my time, when I did my work on it. I've been preparing the rewrite in my sandbox for a couple of days. --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:29, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Ah, okay, thanks, ProtoDrake. It puzzles me that users seem unwilling to make class assessments of their own work (if I had a nickel for every "hey, can someone tell me if this counts as C-class or not?"...), and I figured that was the case here. Tezero (talk) 14:46, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Project M (mod)

The article Project M (mod) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Project M (mod) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 21:23, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your help on Pokémon Black and White, it's now a GA. Would have been a lot harder without your help on it! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:43, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ethnic Cleansing (video game), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Level (gaming). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Notice

Please read this notification carefully:
A community decision has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Gamergate controversy.
The details of these sanctions are described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date. RGloucester — ☎ 02:34, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

GamerGate & WikiLeaks

READ THE VERGE'S ARTICLE. There is literally a paragraph on that page going "These GamerGaters were happy, but these GamerGaters weren't sure." There's a reliable source containing the claims I put onto the page. That's is all I have to do on this matter.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 03:39, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

Hello Tezero:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:02, 28 October 2014 (UTC)



Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Precious

genuinely improving articles
Thank you, master of the userboxes, caring "about genuinely improving" quality articles, for Sonic: After the Sequel and Afternoon, for helpful reviewing, for listing your plans (such as Navajo language, and up to 2016) before your achievements, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:09, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Congrats

Congrats on Sonic: After the Sequel making it to the Main page! I hope you're not doing anything all day today, because (as I recently found out) editors will improve it and IPs will vandalize it all day long. (Later, check the article traffic statistics) Good luck! :-) Prhartcom (talk) 13:57, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, congratulations! Good to see some quality Sonic articles on the main page. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 14:57, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Prhartcom and Prototime! Sonic Retro appears to be having a field day with it (it's their front-page story), as do people on LakeFeperd's Facebook profile (which I probably shouldn't share per privacy concerns and the "friends-only" settings). I hope this allows the game to pick up a bit of attention from a more mainstream audience; it sure is difficult for fangames to otherwise. Tezero (talk) 17:27, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Lightning FA

I was wondering if you might have a look at this FA and leave comments or whatnot. I feel silly asking you, but I don't want this FA to fail. You seem to have been a major contributor to the XIII-related articles alongside me and PresN, although definitely not as involved as I've been. By the way, here's a Metacritic-accepted review from French site Vandal.net for Freedom Planet. Hope this helps a little on the reception front. By the way Mark-2, how many supports does it take for an article to be accepted as FA. --ProtoDrake (talk) 17:50, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

I've seen that review - actually, it's commented out in the article right now; there was some questioning of its reliability. Thanks anyway, though! I'm not sure I'd be qualified to review Lightning, ProtoDrake, as I did some copywriting early on, but I can anyway if you want. Typically the number of supports required is 3, though more are ideal. Actually, Tony Hawk's Underground has been sitting at 3 for a while now, so it should be on the verge of passing... Tezero (talk) 18:21, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I would really like it. I've got two supports and a passed image review so far. --ProtoDrake (talk) 18:38, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#RfC

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#RfC. Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:52, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ethnic Cleansing (video game)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ethnic Cleansing (video game) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of ChrisGualtieri -- ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:41, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ethnic Cleansing (video game)

The article Ethnic Cleansing (video game) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ethnic Cleansing (video game) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of ChrisGualtieri -- ChrisGualtieri (talk) 01:02, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Meetup

Get my email? czar ♔ 04:06, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, sorry about that. I saw it, but I hadn't yet found a time that would work and ended up getting distracted and forgetting. My friend and I are gonna be up early watching Sonic Boom tomorrow (and, honestly, probably just a bunch of anime and Futurama until then), plus I've got an assignment due online, so Sunday is looking like a better idea. Responded by email, though, just in case. Tezero (talk) 04:14, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Mussie

Hi- I've left you another good source on the article talk page. There will hopefully be something you can use. J Milburn (talk) 13:19, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sonic Lost World

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sonic Lost World you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 19:22, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sonic Lost World

The article Sonic Lost World you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Sonic Lost World for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 20:42, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sonic Lost World

The article Sonic Lost World you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sonic Lost World for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 13:23, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Alternative to consoles

Hi, thanks for your advice before by Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games. Regarding what you said about more of the video game people being centered around actual games, I'd like to help. I'm very knowledgeable regarding the Portal and Halo games, and I know alot about a bunch of other games. Can you help me get a start on things to edit in, or people to talk to? thanks,GeneticOS (talk) 00:31, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, GeneticOS, most articles related to those series are already at GA or FA status - not that you can't edit them anyway, but there won't be a whole lot to do. The category Category:Start-Class video game articles lists articles in our project that are fairly undeveloped, but aren't, like, one or two sentences. You might try a few of those. Alternatively, go from the angle of games you like that don't seem to be of very high quality here. A few years ago I noticed that there were no Sonic the Hedgehog articles that were GAs or FAs other than Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games, so I got to work and now there are lots of them. (Of course, that's taken a huge amount of work, but it's just an example. Perhaps your goal isn't simply to get lots of shiny things, which is perfectly fine.) Do you tend to like games similar to Portal and Halo? I know that Team Fortress Classic, Call of Duty 3, Half-Life 2, and Borderlands could use some work - I just don't happen to be interested in that kind of stuff, since I don't play FPSes a whole lot (mostly just TF2 and the BioShock series). Tezero (talk) 00:40, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
I assumed as much with those pages. Trurhfully I don't have so much free time, and would rather make minor-ish edits to some of those pages. Thanks for the help, GeneticOS (talk) 00:46, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Well, GeneticOS, no one is obligated to make any kind of edits to anything. Change as much or as little as you want. Tezero (talk) 00:55, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Sonic X vandal

In response to the Sonic X vandal, check his edit history: here. Just revert him or her next time. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:52, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Strange. Thanks. Tezero (talk) 17:54, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

FAs

Well, I think everyone would like to have FA on their "curriculum." I didn't nominate any article for FA a few reasons: a) it's not really my ultimate goal b) I don't feel so confident on my English c) I've never written an article that I felt it was on its limit of completeness. "a" and "b" aren't really big issues but along with "c" they cause me some constraint. I myself consider Akeelah and the Bee (GAN now) the closest one to FA, and Princess Knight (I'm still working on) with the most potential due to its popularity and coverage. When you asked was you thinking on a specifically article? Cheers. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 23:25, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

PS: It's not that unusual to have several GAs and none FA e.g. users Andrzejbanas, 97198, Raintheone, Cavie78, Prism, 11JORN, PancakeMistake, BlueMoonset, JuneGloom07, Anotherclown, Petergriffin9901

You might be closer than you think, Gabriel Yuji. For example, I can't see any glaring issues with Mello (Death Note) or Black Cat (manga). If you put them up for peer review and got someone to look at the sources (though the more spurious ones tend to only be used for simple things like release information), I think they could probably pass. Personally, I like the feeling of having the front page of Wikipedia display something you've substantially worked on - when Sonic: After the Sequel was TFA a couple weeks ago, the developer, his friends, and a few Sonic fansites were extremely excited and surprised. I liked that. Of course, if you're fine without it, I can't complain; you do plenty of good work elsewhere. I just thought I'd bring it up. Tezero (talk) 23:32, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, you're probably right. In the end, maybe my main problem is just that I need a bit of more self-confidence. Thanks for the encouragement. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 22:56, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Am I trying to make Sonic Lost World look bad?

To the contrary, I'm a Sega fan (hence my interest in Sega Saturn and Dreamcast among others). I think Lost World is a pretty cool game with a few flaws and some definite moments of greatness, and consider it the best 3D Sonic since the Adventure series. (The multi-lock homing attack is a terrible idea, though; while not necessarily worse than mapping it to the boost button in Unleashed, locking on to multiple enemies should require you to hold down the A button or something so players can retain a degree of control). Regardless, the critics were not loving it. I admit you caught a bad word choice with "blasted". Regards,TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 03:34, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying that, TheTimesAreAChanging. And on the contrary, I'm not a big fan of the game; it's my least favorite of the 3D Sonic platformers unless Unleashed counts. I just dislike very long Reception sections and especially very long paragraphs in any type of section, and paraphrasing and reorganization seemed like good ways to fix that. Tezero (talk) 03:39, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kipea language, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Morphology. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Sonic the Hedgehog 2

Hey Tezero, just wondering if you would be interested in helping get Sonic the Hedgehog 2 to GA soon? I mean, you're the main contributor to nearly all of the Sonic articles and I thought it would be rude not to ask... I think the development section is looking solid, but everything else could do with a cleanup. What do you think? Regards ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:35, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

I'd love to, Jaguar! In particular, I think Gameplay's a bit detailed and Reception, on the other side of the coin, could use more expansion using the sources that are there (and probably trimming of some of the lesser known reviewers - the standard is about 8-10 and I'm counting 15). I don't see any unreliable sources other than ScrewAttack from a flighty skim, but the ones there could use some standardization - but hey, I don't mind doing that. Was actually thinking of working on something like Sonic Advance, Sonic Advance 2, or Sonic Battle since those are in more dire shape, but eh, I don't know how often those are really searched for in comparison. Tezero (talk) 21:41, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Great! Yeah I agree too, I'm sourcing the article now and will get to the prose side of things soon. It looks workable to GA, so it shouldn't be too difficult. I run all the references through the main VG reliable source search engine - it's never let me down before. Also, the date formats are all different, some are year-month-day and some are day-month-year. I'm not sure which preference people prefer, nor am I sure if that kind of thing would derail a GAN. Uh, sorry if I'm distracting you from Advance! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:51, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Jaguar, the convention is to simply continue with whatever format (e.g. November 14, 2014; 14 November 2014; 2014-11-14) is dominant if there are no strong ties to any particular English speaking country, but there don't appear to be any ties or consensus either way, so we can go however we like. I typically use November 14, 2014, but with Pokemon Black and White I standardized them at 2014-11-14 since most were already that way. Oh, and it's no problem; Advance is just an idea. (I'd actually like to work on, as strange as it sounds, an article on an exotic city or something - I tried looking for sources for Pak Kret last month but couldn't really find anything in English, and I wasn't sure learning Thai would be worth it. Bummer.) Tezero (talk) 21:59, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Oh I see now, maybe it's easier if Sonic 2 uses the year-month-day format as that is what most of the references look like anyway? I don't know why but whenever I apply references it uses d-m-y dates! Other than video games I only bring towns/cities to GA too - they are definitely more rewarding. Pak Kret sounds interesting, but other exotic cities that springs to mind would be some in Japan or India, if that's what you specialise in...? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 22:11, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Jaguar, let's do year-month-day, then, I suppose that does look slightly dominant over the others. I'll start working on that now. Japan's a thought, although perhaps not exotic enough for my tastes. I am working on improving my Japanese, though. 提案をくれてありがとう！ Tezero (talk) 22:15, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
あなたは歓迎されている! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 22:18, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey, what do you think we should do about those [full citation needed] tags that are in the article? They are all from early 90s magazines, and I think that's going to be hard to come by. I mean, should we replace them with new online references or find some actual print sources? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 15:41, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Jaguar, Sonic Retro has got to host some of them in their "Sonic the Hedgehog 2 (16-bit) magazine scans" category; we can look there. As for the rest, yeah, I think we should start looking for replacements if we can't find the rest of the info. Tezero (talk) 16:44, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
What do you think of the reception section now? I think that's the only thing holding the article from becoming GA at the moment. After careful researching I gave it a small expansion from the sources that were already there (as well as adding in a few more) and copyedited it. Do you think it needs more content? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:43, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Oh, yeah, looks better, Jaguar. Additional quotes could definitely be mined, but we aren't going for FA here. (I mean, but we can afterwards if you want, or just work on more Sonic GAs or something.) Tezero (talk) 21:30, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Tezero! I thought the reception section needed more of an expansion, but I think that's because I'm used to being punished in reviews a bit more... Truth be told I've never fully built an article to FA before, I've helped out in them but strangely enough I'm only involved in the GA process. Don't worry, that doesn't mean I don't want to try something new, if ever you need help with getting a Sonic to FA (or GA) I'm always around. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 00:27, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey, thanks and well done on helping make this a GA! Very well deserved. Glad to hear that Sonic 2 has its honour back. Sorry that I couldn't deal with most of the GAN, timezone issues. But I hope I helped out enough with it. Regards ☠ Jaguar ☠ 22:13, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 November 2014

Your GA nomination of Sonic the Hedgehog 2

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sonic the Hedgehog 2 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 101.222.239.82 -- 101.222.239.82 (talk) 08:21, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

I've taken over and will be the reviewer. Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:38, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Tony Hawk's Underground

Congrats on getting this to FA :) Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:17, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, SNUGGUMS! I'm glad the coordinators finally swept off the table a bit, since I'd had another candidate waiting to be nominated for weeks, and I was finally able to do that this morning. It's a tough life. Tezero (talk) 19:21, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Morphological typology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ido. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 23:12, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Pokemon Sage

Hello. I'm a longtime member/user of sage, and I tried to edit the article you made to reflect the current status/accurate information of the project. I did not cite any sources in my edits because I am aware that Wikipedia does not accept primary sources, but the info that I removed was either outdated, or totally incorrect. If we can discuss how that information can be removed or corrected in a way that would follow Wikipedia's guidelines, that would be great. I'm just about to go to bed so i'll detail why I removed what I removed once you confirm that that's cool when I wake up tomorrow.

I know it probably doesn't matter, but for proof, here is my account on the pokemon sage wiki, I am the 10th most contributing user there: http://capx.wikia.com/wiki/User:Jabberwockxeno Jabberwock xeno (talk) 09:19, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Jabberwock xeno, sorry about the misunderstanding. Wikipedia does accept primary sources (for content, anyway, not to establish notability, but that's done anyway). I removed the content because it didn't even have a primary source. We can't cite wikis because they're so volatile and can be edited by anyone, but I think if you could find a news article on the Sage wiki that details an update made to the game, we can use that. I hope you understand: it's just a matter of verifying that the information is true. Tezero (talk) 16:17, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
So we need to make some sort of press release then? I'll talk to some people about us doing that. We never really had a need to because the project is pretty insular. we never wanted still really don't want outside people looking in. TBH a lot of people in the project would probably rather the wikipedia article not exist, but for better or worse as you say, we have notability from the articles from the news sites, and I am aware that subjects of articles do not have a right to demand their page's deletion.
But yeah, i understand. i'm not a huge editor on wikipedia but I have a rough understanding of it works, it's no biggie. Jabberwock xeno (talk) 18:55, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
That said, I see the bulbapedia article cites the bulbapedia main page for the site's slogan, so would our main page not be usable as a source for the information listed on that page? Jabberwock xeno (talk) 20:06, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Jabberwock xeno, I wonder if the members of the site are opposed to the original press coverage that allowed this article to exist in the first place... Anyway, something I meant to emphasize is that wikis, even if edited by reliable users, tend to be eschewed here because they can be changed at any time. That's why I'd prefer a press release/news article/interview, or at least some stable revision of a wiki page that can be agreed upon. Of course, I'm only one editor and perhaps others don't agree with me. You might consider asking the Video Games WikiProject what they think. Tezero (talk) 20:14, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Yes, most people were... unhappy about those articles when they were made as well. In fact, most people right now don't want to write up a press release and would rather this article just be marked for deletion, or that it be left inaccurate so it would be more likely to be deleted. Anyways, In regards to what you said, the main page of our wiki is locked to normal users and has gone mostly unedited for many months, the particular line of info there that is important (the project starting in 2012, not 2011) has been there since I joined the project myself last July. In any case, most of the info I had removed was unsourced anyways ( "The development team has sought out help from outside sources, allowing submissions for concept art and in-game sprites." and "It features a conflict between two villainous teams based on real-life inhabitants of these areas throughout history, such as the Aztec Empire and the Spanish conquistadors." which even conflicts with the correct and cited information at the bottom of the page "by June 2014, even the villainous team had not yet been chosen from a list of candidates").
Can that information just be removed due to not being sourced to begin with? Anyways, I also question the category of "Aztecs in fiction", "Video games set in Mexico" "Video games set in South America", and "Video games with historical settings", since while the region is based on central and south america, it's not set in any particular real life location, it's a fictionalized amalgamation of various areas in those regions. It's even less accurate to the real life locations then the main pokemon games, which actually use real like geography. Obviously, the game isn't set in a historical setting, it's fictional. I just don't see how those categories work when the main pokemon games aren't put in analogous categories themselves. As far as the "aztecs in fiction" category, well, there are no aztecs in the game, again, there's things analogus to the aztecs, but there are no actual aztecs. While obviously I don't have a source for that info right now, there isn't a source that supports it being there either. Jabberwock xeno (talk) 21:47, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
That information isn't unsourced, Jabberwock xeno; I knew nothing about this game before those articles, so I wouldn't have had anywhere else to get it. In fact, it all comes from one source, which says that the villainous teams still haven't been decided (or hadn't as of June 2014, when it was written) but that they were definitely going to be based on two warring peoples from the Americas, such as the Aztecs and the Spanish. It also says that the project started in 2011. And for future reference, Wikipedia articles aren't deleted for inaccuracy, but for non-notability. The only way this article could be deleted would be if the sources were deemed non-noteworthy, and unfortunately, the likes of Kotaku are well-known. Tezero (talk) 22:16, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
I just didn't see the citation number/link by those lines, so I assumed it was unsourced. As far as page deletion, I am aware that the lack of notability is the only reason pages are deleted outside of stuff that involves trade secrets and the arbitration committee, and I tried to explain that to other people in the project when the page was brought to our attention and when they debated the press release, but they don't seem to trust me that kotaku is considered a reputable source as far as Wikipedia is concerned. As you can see, one of our members already marked it for deletion; we really, really do not like attention, reading the comments in http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/06/25/4chans-project-pokemon-sage-and-why-you-should-be-playing-it/ should show you what I mean. We don't like outside influence, and a lot of people are concerned that us being put in the Pokemon link portal/infobox/whatever it's called will lead to an influx of people who will cause problems, or worse, will lead to us being shut down.
At the very least, I think a lot of us would be more at ease if we were removed from that infobox. Would anything in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons be applicable? Jabberwock xeno (talk) 22:35, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Jabberwock xeno, BLP policies only apply to coverage of celebrities themselves; no individuals are mentioned by name in the article, and even if they were, nothing in the article is slanderous. I can see now why you might not want to be covered, but I can't erase the page's notability - the best that can be hoped for is some kind of consensus not to list it in the Pokémon navbox, but even that's unlikely as this is standard for fangames with articles. I fear the community may trigger a Streisand effect if they get too vitriolic and loud in their insistence that their game not be talked about, so I'd advise you to suggest they be as civil as possible. Tezero (talk) 22:42, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Well, asking for any group of people on 4chan to stay calm is like trying to ask a hungry lion to not tear one's face off; at best nothing will happen, at worse it just acts as a catalyst. I want to reiterate that I am not a spokesperson or officially speaking for the project in any capacity; I hate to compare us to Anonymous (group), but we operate in a similar manner: We don't have any official structure or hierarchy or spokesperson, we are just a group of people who argue with each other on 4chan about making a game and we have a wiki as a information resource. I am involved myself in this matter out of my own desire that if there is going to be a Wikipedia article on us, that it be accurate.
So, I read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games#Pok.C3.A9mon_Sage and the response from the user there, what does "JX" mean? I assume "RS" stands for reliable source? In any case, as explained, we have no leader. I have attempted to convince the other people who edit the wiki to just get one of our wiki admins to post a news article clarifying/explaining the info that is needed to make the page accurate, but the majority of people don't seem to understand how notability and reputable sources work on wikipedia, or just think the page should be deleted. In any case, I have to work on some stuff for the project that is more important then this, so I will not likely respond for a few hours. Jabberwock xeno (talk) 23:03, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Jabberwock xeno, so that there's no miscommunication, would you mind linking the discussion? Oh, and JX was probably an abbreviation for your name; RS does indeed stand for reliable source. Tezero (talk) 23:07, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Which discussion? Jabberwock xeno (talk) 23:16, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Jabberwock xeno, whatever discussion/s people are taking issue with Wikipedia's Sage article in. Tezero (talk) 23:24, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
That was in our skype chat as well as some disscusion in our thread. When I have time later I will ask if people are alright with me posting bits and pieces of the skype convo and I'll link you to the post in the thread archive, I really have more important stuff to be doing right now then this relating to actual devolpment, so I'll get back to you when I can. Jabberwock xeno (talk) 23:34, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sonic the Hedgehog 2

The article Sonic the Hedgehog 2 you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Sonic the Hedgehog 2 for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 05:20, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Freedom Planet/archive1

I think the nomination statement is way too long and there might be a danger of putting reviewers off. I suggest you precis it. Graham Beards (talk) 10:00, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Good idea, Graham Beards; I've decided to collapse it, primarily so that if people saw it before and were considering reviewing, they know it's the same one. Tezero (talk) 18:47, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Lightning FA update

An update concerning the FA nomination of said article. It's in the process of being promoted. Thank you for all your help. --ProtoDrake (talk) 15:39, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome, ProtoDrake; feel free to contact me if you need input for your next FAC! Tezero (talk) 19:53, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sonic the Hedgehog 2

The article Sonic the Hedgehog 2 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sonic the Hedgehog 2 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 101.222.239.82 -- 101.222.239.82 (talk) 21:42, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 November 2014

Your GA nomination of Navajo language

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Navajo language you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Maunus -- Maunus (talk) 06:40, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

E

I am interested in your rationale for nominating this article for GA. Why do you think it shouldnt be quickfailed on criterion 3a? Note that I am not reviewing it as I am assuming that you are fairly tired of having to deal with me. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 06:43, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, Maunus, I only saw this now. It looks like this is a case of a language having extremely little written about it, unless the Austronesian Vocabulary Database link is a reliable source (it didn't initially look the part), in which case I can expand a great deal. Tezero (talk) 16:57, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
It probably is, and there are hundreds of languages with equally little documentation. I don't think they make very good GA candidates. I know some others disagree, but I think some topics are just cut out for making full articles.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 17:36, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Well, you said it yourself: the point of Wikipedia articles is to accurately represent the literature written about their subjects. If this doesn't happen to have much literature, well, we can at least provide the reader with whatever there is. There are lots of short GAs; it's more FA where this becomes a problem (although see ones like MissingNo.). Thanks for the opinion on the source, though; if you want, you can advise me on how to work it in. Tezero (talk) 18:16, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Maunus? You're essentially the judge on whether language/linguistics articles are done right or not nowadays, so I might as well get your input from the start. Tezero (talk) 22:07, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
I wouldnt say that. But I do take an interest in keeping the standard high. I dont think the article E should be a GA. I understand the argument that some articles have little literature and that one way of interpreting the GA criteria is that it should just represent the extant literature. I would interpret it a little stricter. To me it is essentially an oversize stub and is probably never going to be anything more. If you like you can ask Kwamikagami, Taivo, Peter Isotalo or Gpurevdorj about their opinions as well, they are also competent in linguistics and have participated in reviews. As I said I will not review this article, but would recommend pulling the nomination and focusing on improving Navajo language.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:11, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Well, Maunus, I mean input about how to incorporate the source you said would be reliable. I'm aware that, as a result, it's not complete enough now. Tezero (talk) 22:14, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Its just a word list really. I dont know how to base an article on that. Ive worked on one language article with a similar dearth of sources, Mangue language for which we also have only a wordlist. But really it is still on a stub stage.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:26, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Well, then I'll just be as complete as I can with it. If the article fulfills the GA criteria, even if it isn't that "good" an article, I don't think the reviewer will have any grounds to complain. Thanks for your input, though. Tezero (talk) 22:29, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Otomi language failed partially on the grounds of there not being sufficient literature about Otomi syntax.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:33, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited E language, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Autonym and Chinese phonology. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

PRO (linguistics) GA nomination

I plan to renominate the PRO within the next few weeks. There was a mis-communication, and I nominated the article before we intended to.

I'm glad you enjoyed reading the article. I encourage you to point out weaknesses and shortcomings in the article on the Talk page!

Jaxsun (talk) 09:25, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Help please

Recently you helpfully suggested a user adjust their tone and condescending remarks diff.

Unfortunately the user continues to use such type of language in comments lately that is unnecessary when simply focusing on the issue itself as opposed to focusing on the contributor would be more effective, kind, and polite. Please see diff and diff.

Perhaps you could help please with this?

I'm trying to engage in polite dialogue with this individual, but I'm not sure how best to encourage this person to improve their verbiage to be a bit more civil in communication?

Thank you,

— Cirt (talk) 16:35, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Tezero, thoughts? I'll respectfully defer to your third-party judgment. Thank you, — Cirt (talk) 17:02, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
I'm responding, Cirt; I've gotten a few edit conflicts. I do suggest that just as you expect others not to focus on you as a person, you try not to focus on their tone. Tezero (talk) 17:04, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
A good suggestion, though difficult to carry out when one sees unfortunately a repeated behavior pattern, could use your help with that. — Cirt (talk) 17:06, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Czech language

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:14, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Afternoon has been nominated for Did You Know

FA congratulations

Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Tony Hawk's Underground to FA status recently. I know you know all about WP:TFAR (specific and non-specific date slots) and the "pending" list, so this is just a reminder to use them as and when suits you. Many thanks. BencherliteTalk 10:44, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 December 2014

DYK nomination of Afternoon

Hello! Your submission of Afternoon at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:09, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Czech language

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tezero/archive8&oldid=1136135042"