User talk:Czar/2018 Sept–Dec

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is a selective, manual archive of my talk page. I saved non-notifications that someone may want to access in the future. To find something I haven't archived, try an external search.

Talk:Moon_Crystal#Restored Harizotoh9 (talk) 23:43, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[1] czar 16:53, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jake[edit]

Hi. Since you seem to have written the articles about all of the other Overwatch League players, I figured I'd let you know that I wrote one on Jake, and might poke around at some other players too, if I can find the sources for them.

If you see any issues with the article, please let me know. It's been a long time since I wrote one.

Thanks, The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 02:37, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nice! Left some feedback on the talk page. czar 16:32, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Boogie[edit]

Hi, I wanted to apologize for not notifying you about the AfD, it wasn't intentional. Regarding the nomination, I did a before check like I always do before a nomination and didn't see anything about an award.The coverage in sources is borderline enough that an AfD nomination was warranted for discussion, as determining what is a significant award is usually not a unilateral call. Nomination is not always a vote for deletion, sometimes articles are borderline and the call needs to be made by the community, especially because this appeared to be a recreated article. I changed my vote partially based on the comments of the previous deleting admin. Had I known you were the page creator, I most likely would not have nominated but would have contacted you directly. Seraphim System (talk) 18:23, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Seraphim System, no worries. When considering notability nominations in general, my unsolicited advice is that the tie goes to the runner. I don't feel strongly about Boogie2988 but if I was looking into an argument for deletion, I would have ignored the primary source cruft to pinpoint the reliable, secondary sources that prominently discuss the figure because that's what the other AfD participants will be doing. Also I recommend using Twinkle, which will automatically configure routine Wikipedia nominations and handle their user talk page notifications for you. czar 12:32, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bull Shit Jobs references[edit]

Hey, thanks for the article but I think the references are messed up, they should appear next to each claim in the article, instead it seems all of them are packed where the full reference should be, do you need any help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aganon77 (talk) 20:19, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! The article is properly referenced and its "Further reading" section was simply a means to provide the most relevant reviews until someone (maybe you?) adds them to the article. I've moved those sources to the talk page because it has attracted an undue amount of attention. (Maybe because this is one of the most prominent summaries of the book on the Internet?) Feel free to have at it, or otherwise I'll chip away at the article over time. czar 00:14, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Restored article, with enough refs for a start. Many more sources listed on the talk page. Harizotoh9 (talk) 21:41, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page sources would add no depth over the ones already added, and the latter barely extend past mere mentions of the game. I merged the four effective sentences of content to its parent, where it can expand summary style when more Japanese sources are unearthed. czar 14:08, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll move it here instead[edit]

Hey Czar, I actually believe at least some of yours articles such as Emily Kaldwin should be "redirected or deleted". Especially if even compared to Corvo Attano from the same game (which is not yours, and in my opinion not even well written, just not forced and pointless). Btw, "leading an industry trend towards more prevalent lead female protagonists at the 2015 Electronic Entertainment Expo" (to quote your lead) wasn't even true (see [2]) and so the supposed importance of this character is based on a false premise. You may change it to "causing a perception among journalists" or something like that to be factual. And perhaps I misspoke a bit, because I don't "actually" want it to be removed in any way. I rather think it should remain. The really only article I'd like to be done with at the moment is the weird essay Treason in Arthurian legend but in the way to possibly salvage and reuse parts of it elsewhere, if useful. I just can't get myself to nominate it due to a mental block of some kind. You don't need to reply and actually don't reply. --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 18:36, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If your linked Medium article was newsworthy in asserting that IGN, the Guardian, the Financial Post, The Verge, and Develop (as quoted in the same article) were wrong, a reliable source would have covered it. Show me such a source and I'd consider it. Until then, I'm sticking with the sites that have editorial process. (Also the article doesn't even deny that lead female protagonists had more exposure. He contends even after his back-of-the-envelope 2014 comparison that there is a clear "industry trend" in exposure/narrative.) If you "actually believe" any article should be "redirected or deleted", I would encourage you to nominate it. But I think you'll find that other editors disagree re: Kaldwin, who is a great example of a female fictional character whose coverage was actually dedicated to her details and industry/out-of-universe importance rather than simply ripped from passing mentions in game reviews and "top 10 babe" listicles. Those low-quality sources shouldn't even be cited in an encyclopedia article if they don't build to sensible prose—as articles are more than simple listings of facts/mentions—and such sources certainly should never form the basis of an assertion of independent notability. czar 10:24, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Big Trouble in Little China (remake)[edit]

Hello czar! Please undo the deleted edits of Draft:Big Trouble in Little China (remake). And please move Draft:Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark (film) to Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark (film), thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 17:01, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Captain Assassin!, ✓ done czar 00:16, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Issues with Cambridge Optic's edits (in my view)[edit]

Hello Czar!

I've noticed the rather recent and negatively extensive (and biased) edits on the value-form and the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. I think your view on them is rather similar to mine, at the very least on its negative extensiveness and peculiar bias. To anybody non-familar with the topic and as well actually to a lot of people who are familiar with the topic, but overwhelmed by its extensiveness, these articles (I have the feeling that these two aren't the only two) have become barely or entirely unreadable. What can be done about articles such as these in general? JulkaK (talk) 18:03, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@JulkaK, the advice I had left on its talk page still applies, I think. The reliance on primary sources makes the article essay-like. If it were instead reduced to summary of secondary sources, as a tertiary source like an encyclopedia should be, it would lose many of its length issues. Ultimately, the article just needs an intrepid editor with a hacksaw to either halve or third the extant content. Alternatively, someone could rewrite it from scratch using its best secondary sources. czar 10:32, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Medieval (film)[edit]

Hello! Please undo the deleted history of Draft:Medieval (film), thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 16:07, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Captain Assassin!, ✓ done czar 11:01, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Structured Data feedback - structured licensing and copyright[edit]

Mockups of structured licensing and copyright statements on file pages are posted. Please have a look over the examples and leave your feedback on the talk page. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 20:32, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again[edit]

I have to admit, I feel pretty crappy about how things ended last time we spoke. I apologize for the way it all degenerated, and for my snideness, to put it mildly. The most ridiculous thing about it in hindsight was that I actually ended up reincorporating almost everything you did in the edit I threw the hissy fit about, and also incorporated everything you mentioned at FAC3. After we talked, I ended up working with Niwi3 to re-write most everything in 'Concept and design' and 'Appearances', and also worked a bit on the latter section with Victoriaearle too. Sarah hasn't responded, and Ealdgyth doesn't want to be involved. I was wondering if you'd be interested in revisiting the article? I'm not asking for a cheat-sheet or detailed line-by-line analysis of the entire thing, just general points on what could be done to get your support at any future FAC, should you choose to participate.

I'm much happier with the article than the last time we spoke, including the 'Reception and legacy' section—I feel I've addressed one of your major points at FAC3 (vis-a-vis creating a narrative), in that every sentence has some aspect which ends up relating to both the previous and the next sentence. This has led to a couple of instances where the prose could do with refinement, such as how the commentary on the use of the RE3 outfit in the film could be better integrated with the commentary on the reception of that same outfit in the original game, but... that's really a timeline issue/figuring out how to utilize what was already on the article (i.e., original game commentary vs. retrospective game commentary vs. commentary of the movies, which came between the former two); Victoriaearle gave some useful insights about using an in-universe perspective, but I don't know how this can relate to reception, and she has since retired from Wikipedia. Aside from this sort of stuff, I feel like it's all pretty much there. Since this was one of your key points at FAC3, I'd appreciate any advice/feedback you might have on this, or any other aspect of the article. Thanks, and sorry again. Homeostasis07 (talk) 01:19, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya, thanks for the note. I'll see about taking a look this week czar 01:51, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[3] czar 16:53, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You Are My Friend (film)[edit]

Hello! Please move or histmerge Draft:You Are My Friend (film)You Are My Friend (film). Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 15:26, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Captain Assassin!, ✓ done czar 15:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. And another one is here, please also do the histmerge of possible edits from Draft:Medieval (film)Medieval (film). Thanks again. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 15:37, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Captain Assassin!, ✓ done czar 16:11, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Shaun the Sheep Movie 2[edit]

Hello, please undo the deleted history of Draft:Shaun the Sheep Movie 2, thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 18:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Captain Assassin!, ✓ done czar 21:33, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. And now please do a histmerge of Draft:Shaun the Sheep Movie 2 into Farmageddon: A Shaun the Sheep Movie. Thanks again. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 16:25, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Captain Assassin!, ✓ done czar 16:36, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New discussion on Commons talk:Structured data[edit]

Hello. I've started a new, important discussion about creating properties for Commons on Wikidata. Please come join in, if the process is something that interests you or if you can help. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 16:48, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance[edit]

How do you have a marker that shows if you are watching a page? Is it manual or automatic? If automatic, could you please show me how to set it up? Thanks in advance. Cogaidh (talk) 14:27, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! For the marker that adds pages to your watchlist, see Help:Watchlist#Controlling which pages are watched. And if you mean "(not watching, please {{ping}} as needed)", that's something I add manually before I sign on a talk page when I want to signal that future replies should ping me if they want me to see it. I recommend using a text expander (there are many options) for instantly recalling such text both on Wikipedia and in general. czar 12:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie's Angels (2019 film)[edit]

Hey czar! Please move Draft:Charlie's Angels (2019 film)Charlie's Angels (2019 film). Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 15:22, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Captain Assassin!, ✓ done czar 12:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Structured Data - upcoming changes to viewing old file page revisions[edit]

How old revisions of file pages work are likely going to have to change for structured data. There is information about the change on the SDC hub talk page, please read it over and leave feedback if you have any. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 15:30, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Neuralink for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Neuralink is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neuralink until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. TOMÁSTOMÁSTOMÁSTALK⠀ 22:29, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Structured Data - search prototype[edit]

There is a search prototype for structured data on Commons available. Please visit the search prototype page on the structured data hub for information on testing and feedback. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:07, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greek anarchism[edit]

Hello friend. In Greece the name of Konstantinos Speras is well known. We can make his article in WP again correctly because the previous one had a lot of promblems. But please, friend dont delete the sources that proves that he became a well known fascist. If you have any objections about it, and you believe lies that communist forces killed him (or cut off his head) cause he was an antistalinist socialist i will be very pleased to give you full proofs that he was fascist. Just check the bibliography of Greek article and request book and page. Best regards --Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 16:32, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Αντικαθεστωτικός, thanks for the note. Could you please share a scan of those sources— mail me or link here? (I'm trying to determine the quality of the sources.) czar 10:33, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
>czar

1 Speras in 1926 as a witness in court against (all) the leadership of KKE, and he accuses them of nation traitors(with the possibility to have death penalty). Not stalinists in the leadership of KKE then but Pandelis Pouliopoulos.

2 Speras as hero of Greek fascists. (dont believe what he writes cause he dont have proofs for everything, he make from his mind many things)


3 Speras with the allias of "Greek worker" wrote the history of "Greek workers" in the fascist newspaper in the logic of worker fascist logic.

4 A greek right wing minor historian (but with many famous publications with good archive) wrote "ΑΝΔΡΕΑΣ ΚΟΝΔΑΚΗΣ. Επρόκειτο για αξιωματικό σε π.δ., ο οποίος ήταν πρόεδρος της Συνομοσπονδίας Παλαιών Πολεμιστών.[...] (Ν. Καλύβας, Ε. Ευαγγέλου, Κ. Σπέρας),. He writes about an army official who collabarate with the axis, and he had a circle of trade unionists between them...Speras. The first one Kalyvas, was in 1944 by nazis, a minister. He was killed by OPLA.


There is a lot of staff in Greek. But the big deal is that in 2018 noone says the opposite side. Only one left guy Stinas said before 30 years that Speras was an anarchist, in his memoirs he said a lot of lies and he did a lot of copy paste from anticommunist propaganda!Because he had very anger cause, stalinists killed his friends.

There is a lot of noise about him in greek internet maybe from his relatives, but after the last publication of Kostopoulos (a well known left journalist) who he just repeat what greek wikipedia wrote the conversation is ended for sure.

Απόστολος Κοκμάδης was an young army official who has give interviews and he says about the end of Speras. They were together and they went to fight against National Liberation Front (Greece). Κοκμάδης later became an officer of the army of communists, while Speras executed. Not beheaded. Not killed by OPLA as the "red terror" want. In Greece there was a ridiculus myth for years that Communist Army (ELAS) was good, but Communist police (OPLA) was bad. New historians proved that as good and as bad was ELAS so was OPLA. So Speras wasnt killed by OPLA as the myth wanted for not to blame the good face ELAS army, but from Orestis a prominent "captain" of ELAS.

Just to say that Avraam Benaroya and Yannis Kordatos insist that he was police informant from 1925. Was Avraam Benaroya or Kordatos a stalinist? I dont think so. --Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 12:26, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Αντικαθεστωτικός, from what I understand, you're interpreting those sources as proof that Speras identified as a fascist. That would be fine if you were a historian making a claim in your own book, but with Wikipedia, we don't make original claims like that. Instead we cite secondary sources (such as historians) who make those claims for us. So do you have a reliable, secondary source that you can quote as explicitly having said that "Speras became a fascist"? If not, we unfortunately cannot make that claim until we have a reliable source to paraphrase. By the way, I have a friend who can help with translations from Greek if need be. Appreciate your patience, czar 16:27, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
czar No. I dont say that. I gave you the sources of the archives to understand what was happened and to find the truth alone if you want, cause there is a little deny that he was facsict. For wikipedia rules: Three historians are saying that he was a Fascist. Hondromatidis, Kostopoulos and Koukounas. I gave the 2 sources in the article. Case closed for Wikipedia. Hondromatidis is saying that he was a member of Fascist party of 1936.
Hondromatidis, had written a book about Greek fascists. See the list of the Fascists.
--Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 19:18, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Αντικαθεστωτικός, great—I expanded the citation:

Chondromatidēs, Iakōvos P (2013). Ο αναρχικός Κωνσταντίνος Σπέρας [About the Anarchist Konstantinos Speras]. Hoi Hellēnes 'phasistes': hoi phasistikes kai ethnikososialistikes organōseis stēn Hellada tou Mesopolemou (1927–1936) Οι Έλληνες «Φασίστες». Οι Φασιστικές και Εθνικοσοσιαλιστικές οργανώσεις στην Ελλάδα του Μεσοπολέμου (1927–1936) [The Greek "Fascists": Fascist and National Socialist Organizations in Interwar Greece (1927–1936)] (in Greek). Pelasgus. p. 161. ISBN 978-960-522-356-4. OCLC 899259825. {{cite book}}: Invalid |script-chapter=: missing prefix (help); Invalid |script-title=: missing prefix (help)

Can you scan page 161 for me and quote the part that says Speras became a member of Mercouris's party? czar 20:18, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Right now i dont have the book of Hondromatidis. But as you see he has written a book of Greek Fascists, and he was in a chapter the case of "anarchist" Speras. Right now i have the book of Kostopoulos of 2016. In Greek : Στη πραγματικότητα, ο Σπέρας ήδη από τα μέσα της δεκαετίας του 1920 είχε ταυτιστεί δημόσια με τους διωκτικούς κρατικούς μηχανισμούς, καταθέτοντας ως μάρτυρας κατηγορίας στη δίκη ηγεσίας ου ΚΚΕ για το Μακεδονικό επί Πάγκαλου κι αυτοπροβαλλόμενος σαν <<προιστάμενος του συνδέσμου των συντηρητικών εργατών>> . Το 1934 μετείχε στα εγκαίνια των γραφείων του Εθνικοσοσιαλιστικού κόμματος στην εφημερίδα του οποίου αρθογραφούσε, [page 150 ends] ενώ το 1936 εμφανίζεται ως παράγοντας μιας <<Εθνικής Συντηρητικής Οργάνωσεως>>. Αξίζει ν' αναφερθεί ότι, σε αντίθεση με τους φόνους των τροτσκιστών που έμειναν κατά κανόνα αδικδήκητοι ο κατοχικος Ριζοσπάστης δεν είχε κανένα πρόβλημα για την αιχμαλωσία του <<καθάρματος Σπέρα>> από το 34ο σύνταγμα του ΕΛΑΣ, ως εξουδετέρωση κατασκόπου σταλμένου <<Από την ομάδα Λαζαρή του ΕΔΕΣ>>

In a footnote Kostopoulos writes: Ο Λαζαρής υπήρξε πρόεδρος του αθηναικού παραρτήματος της Φασιστικής ΕΕΕ. translate : In fact, since the middle of the 1920s, Speras was publicly identified with the persecution of the state apparatuses, as a witness of accusation against the KKE leadership trial of the Macedonian during Pangalos dictatorship and self-proclaimed as "the headmaster of the conservative workers' union." In 1934 he participated in the opening of the offices of the National Socialist Party in whose newspaper he wrote, and in 1936 appeared as a factor of a << National Conservative Organization >>. It is worth mentioning that, unlike the Trotskyist killings that were generally unclaimed (my disclaimer: from the Stalinists of KKE), the Rizospastis(my disclaimer: the newspaper of KKE) during the Occupation of Greece had no problem with the capture of the << scum Speras >> from the 34th Constitution of ELAS, as the suppression of a spyman of Lazari team of EDES >>

In footnote : Lazaris was headman of Fascist EEE section.

--Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 21:16, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 – czar 01:02, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there![edit]

Just want to say hi!Τζερόνυμο (talk) 18:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The sources you provided are really interesting, esp the cleanup listing. I 'll see what I can do on that. I was trying to change the references in the article of Anarchism, from standard citation code to short-footnote. I have been told that it is not a significant improvement and stopped it. What is your view? Oh and something else It came to my attention the discussion on Konstantinos Speras. There is much controversy on him and this is not reflected in the article. Orthodox Communists portray him as a fascist collaborator and anarchists as a hero. (Unfortunately....nothing new here, imho) Both sides of this controversy deserve to be represented in the article. Have a look here Τζερόνυμο (talk) 18:25, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus on English Wikipedia is to usually use whatever formatting standard is currently in place, as the article's original steward chose that format as the easiest to maintain and it's usually hard to argue that another option is superior or something other than personal preference. But if you were to get consensus or go-ahead from the article's talk page to change the format, there would be little reason for someone to object. I, for one, wouldn't be opposed to short footnotes on Anarchism but a lot of the content needs to be rewritten from better secondary sources anyway, so that conversion could be part of that process.
Check out the conversation on Konstantinos Speras at the top of my talk page. I have a friend of a friend who is into contemporary Greek history and have been waiting to ask him about the sources linked above, but open to feedback if you can review them yourself instead. I haven't confirmed if they say what that editor claimed. I don't know what kind of editorial process the KSL has, but I'd consider that pamphlet a better source than the random hobbyist sites on the Internet, at the least. czar 18:35, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Collaboration[edit]

Hey Czar

Just wondering if you’d like to collaborate somehow in your Smithsonian position with Black Lunch Table? So exciting. Congrats! Maybe an editathon or something? We’d love to help. --Heathart (talk) 11:54, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love that! I'll think through potential options but totally open to ideas too czar 12:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I wonder what our schedules are. Bringing Fishantena (talk) into the convo... December is too soon/cold? or what do you both think? I could come down easily enough for a simple editathon if maybe you had a selection of new images that needed volunteer writing... or ? Maybe we should move this coordination to email? I'm heather at blacklunchtable dot com and cc jina with same email. Looking forward!--Heathart (talk) 18:10, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Sent czar 14:10, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review[edit]

Hey, I am continuously working on my Alodia article to get it ready for a FA nomination. Would you be interested to review it when I am done with it (which I guess will take two or three more weeks)? LeGabrie (talk) 18:41, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@LeGabrie, nice! Sure, let me know when you're close and I'll take a read as time permits. Fair warning that my FA reviews are somewhat brutal, but even without going full throttle, perhaps can give some light feedback. I think the biggest hurdles will be (1) maintaining readability for a general audience, given the level of jargon, and (2) the source review, in which a reviewer should spot-check the article's claims (and will likely need help accessing offline sources). czar 14:08, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Alrght, I am already quite excited, knowing that people will read and analyze my work very carefully :) LeGabrie (talk) 17:50, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I just finished the "Languages" chapter, working my way up to down. What would you think if you'd already start with the PR, so we both do our work at the same? Reason is that I might run out of free time soon. LeGabrie (talk) 20:41, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rambo V[edit]

Hello! Please remove Rambo V to make space and move Untitled Rambo fifth film to Rambo V per discussion at Talk:Untitled Rambo fifth film#Requested move 3 October 2018, thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 14:29, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Captain Assassin!, ✓ done czar 14:56, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 15:56, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again, please move Draft:G.I. Joe Ever Vigilant to Draft:G.I. Joe: Ever Vigilant, thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 19:25, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Captain Assassin!, ✓ done czar 19:32, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

no sources refer to her by this deep lore factoid[edit]

It's literally written on the official Overwatch website (click on the 'Story' button). Y'know, the link right in the bottom of the article? Not exactly what i would call 'deep lore factoid'. Trade (talk) 21:39, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The fictional character's in-universe name is not something that a general reader needs to see in the most importance sentence in the article (its first sentence). As I said, it's already mentioned appropriately within the article. czar 21:45, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question about Video Game Articles[edit]

Hello again. I hope that you are having a great start to your week. I am considering Desperate Housewives: The Game as my next project, but I ran into a small issue while starting the "Plot" section. The player can select a name for the protagonist and her husband and son; none of them come with default names. I was wondering if you had any advise on how to write a "Plot" section without awkwardly repeating "the player character", or if you knew a high-quality article (i.e. a GA or FA) that handled this situation well. Thank you in advance, and apologies for the random message. Aoba47 (talk) 03:12, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47 Hm. Most VG with stories sizable enough to justify a discrete plot section also title the main characters, so a tricky predicament. No examples readily come to mind but feel free to browse the lists of good and featured VGs. For straight variance, can use "player-character", "protagonist", "main character", as appropriate—how much of a protagonist is the central character? I'd specify/source that the character has no canonical name. In any other game, I'd also try the construction "the player's X" (the player-controlled alligator, the alien character) but it's too weird to substitute "wife" into those examples as the character type. You're going to have to get crafty. I'd focus on writing it out first and can worry about reducing the redundancy later. Alternatively, I'd be curious how the sources discuss the importance of the plot in the game. If the story is a central game element, carry on, but if it's not, might not need to explicate the turns of the plot in such detail. VG plot can often be covered in context within the Gameplay section. czar 10:09, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the response. I believe that the plot is sizable enough to warrant its own section, as it is one of the main aspects of the game. I would describe Desperate Housewives: The Game as pretty much a visual novel-esque game ran into some weird form of The Sims game engine. I was thinking of maybe referencing the characters through the generic titles (the wife, the husband, the son) as all of the characters (whether they were taken from the show or are original) have full names. It will certainly be interesting, but it would be cool to try out sometime in the future. Aoba47 (talk) 18:22, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Godzilla vs. Kong[edit]

Hello Czar! Please do the histmerge of Draft:Godzilla vs. Kong into Godzilla vs. Kong, all the edits before July 15, 2017‎. Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 16:39, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Captain Assassin! and Rusted AutoParts, ✓ done. Histmerge didn't quite make sense, so I just mainspaced the draft version since I couldn't repair the cut & paste move. If you pull from the other version's edit history, please remember to properly attribute the origin of each edit so that the authors receive proper credit (Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia). czar 03:48, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 16:42, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Social Centres in the United Kingdom[edit]

Reply to Czar

Hi Czar, thanks for getting in touch. I've been an admin of the Social Centres Network in the UK for a number of years, after re-launching it with a view to help it survive and flourish. I've had limited capacity to support the network as much as I would like to and have had very little time to be online also. I haven't been the only person working on the 'Social Centres in the UK' page but I have been doing my best to keep the information on it up-to-date and all links working etc etc. The page has been our main 'go-to place' for information about the network as we do not currently have a website. Lots of people have said that it was good that we had a Wikipedia page and not a website, and it was nice that anyone in the network could edit the page etc. I have to say it was quite shocking when I went online to edit the page and the content was suddenly missing, and this was without any warning, messages or discussion at the top of the page as I used to see on Wikipedia. We have lots of links going to the page, and do not have the information on the page stored anywhere else, so it is not that I 'prefer that version' as you assumed, but it is our *only version* so to speak. I had to undo it in order for the information to be saved and links that we use to work for people to find out about us, the network and the projects etc. And so I would very much like to "please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus" as this is how we work as a network and in our groups. However this is not how Wikipedia editors seem to have acted. I was the main editor on the page and was never contacted until I took action to save the work that had been done to the page. Please let me know how we can keep the page, and what we need to do to get it up to Wikipedia standards - I thought Wikipedia was about preserving information, making it accessible and open in the process, and so I hope that we can see that in action with this page instead of destroying it and acting instead like the editors (non-consensus-based) of other websites. Thanks. --RossPepier (talk) 15:22, 15 October 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RossPepier (talkcontribs)

Responded at User talk:RossPepier#October 2018 czar 18:25, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

Precious
Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:28, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there![edit]

Hello Czar -- returning your greetings here. Thanks for the invites -- I'm still learning the ropes, and it's nice to have a guide or two... (Let me add: I do translation work, and I'm interested in adding content from wp in other languages to the enwp coverage of anarchism.) -Jesse.

Cohn-jesse (talk) 15:23, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Cohn-jesse, nice—welcome! Drop a line if you ever have a question or need a hand with anything. The French Wikipedia (frwp) has useful links to the online Jean Maitron encyclopedias for minor anarchists.
Maybe not as exciting, but I'm working through all anarchism articles with maintenance tags for cleanup. Today I came across the anarchist-affiliated French musician Léo Ferré, which needs source cleanup (basically to remove its uncited sections if they can't be sourced). The French version has more potential sources. Otherwise it'll likely need to be gutted. czar 18:06, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Czar -- question: how to create an English translation of the French bio for Daniel Colson while disambiguating it from irrelevant English-language pages under the same name? Cohn-jesse (talk) 18:15, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Cohn-jesse, I've moved the character article to Daniel Colson (character) so you can create the article at Daniel Colson now. Since the human would be the primary topic for that name, the title doesn't need a parenthetical disambiguator. By the way, have you seen/tried the Special:ContentTranslation content translation tool? (More background here.) czar 18:29, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Czar, want to have a look at what I have so far? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cohn-jesse/Daniel_Colson Cohn-jesse (talk) 23:56, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bios (film)[edit]

Hello! Please histmerge the Draft:Bios (film)Bios (film) as much as possible edits. Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 18:30, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Captain Assassin!, ✓ done czar 05:10, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Structured Data - copyright and licensing statements[edit]

I've posted a second round of designs for modeling copyright and licensing in structured data. These redesigns are based off the feedback received in the first round of designs, and the development team is looking for more discussion. These designs are extremely important for the Commons community to review, as they deal with how copyright and licensing is translated from templates into structured form. I look forward to seeing you over there. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 16:25, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What Men Want (2019 film)[edit]

Hello! Please do the histmerge of Draft:What Men Want (2019 film)What Men Want (2019 film) — Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 16:57, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Captain Assassin!, ✓ done czar 02:27, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. And please move Draft:UglyDolls (film)UglyDolls (film). --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 18:47, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Captain Assassin!, ✓ done czar 18:49, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Original Barnstar
Nice and professional writing :D I don't understand how you people just write up an article out of thin air; the only thing I'm good for is occasional grammar and spelling errors (and of course the occasional barnstar for those that deserve them) Mascer (talk) 00:52, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

episodes lists[edit]

Hi, I started a discussion involving you here. Your input is welcome. Best regards,Jeff5102 (talk) 08:59, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday![edit]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!
Best wishes, A 10 fireplane (talk) 19:52, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DF update[edit]

Hey Czar, any updates on the work with Spaff? I'd be interested in collabing on a broad or narrow DF improvement project if this comes through, so I'm eager to hear how it's going! Axem Titanium (talk) 22:45, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Axem Titanium, nice! Thanks for letting me know. Planning to send the request this weekend and will keep you apprised! czar 02:48, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page of the article erroneously notes that the discussion was closed as Keep. It is still open. 7&6=thirteen () 11:22, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Probably overlooked when it was relisted at deletion review—totally fine if you wanted to correct it on your own, in the future czar 11:49, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

delete sources[edit]

Finally its not NYT of 1913, now its Kemp and you delete greek historians view. Ok i suppose you win. I prefer Greek wikipedia. there we dont delete sources, newspapers are not strong claim. there is no censhorship.

but your house, your rules.


bye p.s tommorow i had planned to bring 10 sources from Greek library from uptodate historians like Thanos Veremis. But i cant stand in a place with censhoship. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 16:10, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

delete greek historians view

My edit removed an incorrect paraphrase of Kemp. The author said that there was no evidence of Schinas being a spy, not that it was a valid alternative theory. He called it a "conspiracy theory". Didn't touch anything related to views of "Greek historians". czar 16:21, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
your edit removed the others historians view. It was a clear censhorship of the sources, as you did from the beggining when you promoted sources of 1913 as...RS. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 17:17, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not in any edit I see in that page history, no. The New York Times of 1913 is a reliable source, yes, though as I've said elsewhere, a more recent secondary source analysis is preferable, as we found in Kemp 2018. As for censorship, we've been through why some sources are more appropriate than others ad nauseam on the talk page. Wikipedia:Fringe theories also explains why some minority viewpoints, especially those that aren't verified, are not suitable for an encyclopedia. czar 17:35, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your claim about NyT is outrageous and maybe you dont understand what are you talking about. If i add Greek newspapers i can prove that he was gay or german spy etc. There are primary sources not secondary. You keep deleting greek prominent historians to add books of computer scientists or book with just three words(!) about Schinas. I understand what you are doing with the other user. Promote as RS ...newspapers of 1913 that you like, and now promote books that you like. Ok you win. Fringe theories are yours theories, that are based in books that says hoax about anarchist school of ...Volos lol. I have put historians. You have put newspapers and books that are three words.
if you bring me something about anarchisti school of volos i will convert to Hinduism :) Saludos
Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 17:51, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Here Cinadon36 (talk) 18:02, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Jensen's citing the NYT there too (fn 42) czar 18:14, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The NYT is a newspaper of record, known for its authority. If you want to refute the NYT, you'll need a source equally exceptional or at least evidence from a non-fringe press. We've been through several sources, each with their own host of problems. If the claims are seriously regarded as noteworthy by journalists and scholars, we should not have to venture to the dregs of source material to verify them. Specific to Schinas's school, Kemp has counter-evidence against the school but poses it as conflicting reports, giving more weight to the NYT's report than overturning it. If this warrants discussion, take it to the article's talk page. czar 18:12, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So you suggest that newspaper Kathimerini isn't a primary source? and if i add Kathimerini's opinion about Schinas or anyone of 1919 isnt original research? this is an outrageous claim!! i cant contribute in such situation. I have read anything about greek socialist movements, if you find a greek person/historian person who lived in Volos, Greece, was anarchist,socialist or whatever that says so about school of Schinas i will go to India. The "historians" like Kemp dont know Greek and the say things for... Volos with the soucre of ...Nyt! ok. this is wikipedia. english sources from computers security writers are better than Greek historians. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 18:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Newspapers can be both primary and secondary sources depending on the type of report—depends on the article's objective distance from the subject. Analyses from reputed newspapers are generally good as a baseline, though we prefer scholarly analysis with even greater distance from the subject, with the benefits of time. If the claim is disputed, sourcing becomes a balance based on the strength of the source's reputation for accuracy (reliability). Again, "original research" means something very specific on Wikipedia: when editors like you or I synthesize claims that haven't been explicitly made in secondary source analysis. Wikipedia isn't the venue to right great wrongs—we simply report what has already been accepted. If you are trying to make the claim that Schinas was not an anarchist, contrary to Kemp and the NYT, you either need to publish your own secondary source analysis to be accepted by the scholarly community (for us to subsequently cite) or show how someone else has already done that same task. This is how knowledge is produced vis-à-vis Wikipedia. czar 18:45, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
i think that my english are very bad, or you dont read me or you dont care about what i say. In any case, byeΑντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 19:07, 2 December 2018 (UTC

1. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 08:54, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A)That book is not a RS for Schinas, but for King Pavlos. (per WP:RSCONTEXT) The author is discussing the life of King Pavlos, is not dealing with Schinas as the rest of RS sources used in the article. B)It would be better to present your newly found arguments to Schinas Talk Page. Cinadon36 (talk) 09:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Richard Clogg is the writer. Google it, and stop the trolling. It is my last warnign. The next time i will inform Greek and English community about your doings here. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 09:58, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
a)Inform anyone you wish.b)claiming that I am trolling is yet another personal attack. Cinadon36 (talk) 10:04, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
2 In March 1913, King George fell prey to an assassin's bullet. A Greek madman espied the aged monarch out on his daily afternoon walk along the waterfront in Thessaloniki from Thomas Gallant (historian)
3 Ιστορία του Νέου Ελληνισμού, 1770-2000, Η εθνική ολοκλήρωση (1909-1922), Από το κίνημα στο Γουδί στην Μικρασιατική Καταστροφή, εκδόσεις Ελληνικά Γράμματα. τόμος 6ος σελίδα 16. Prominent historian Mavrogordatos. He says that the theories about Schinas as an active of Germany, was never confirmed, but Germany win from his assasination and Schinas suicide was weird. Nothing about the claim that he was an anarchist.
4 read Kemp's book page 184.

Hello again[edit]

I was gonna let sleeping dogs lie. But, for some reason, can't think what... there's something that's been troubling me for the past several months that I feel like asking you about, publicly (since you "never got" my e-mail about it). Back when I sent the request to McFarland for the Jill Valentine source, I was sent the most fascinating series of e-mails from someone associated with the McFarland project. The first was innocuous enough: sent from the main account, indicating that my request had been confirmed and I'd be receiving it in "2 to 3 weeks". The next two messages were sent almost immediately [the first, just 4 minutes later] from the personal e-mail account of someone associated with the McFarland Project. The e-mails indicated that McFarland had been approached by an unnamed Wikipedia administrator, who asked I not be sent ("speedily deny his request") the source because "a strong concensus has emerged at FAC not to promote any further articles relating to fictional characters, particularly not one as sexualised as Jill Valentine", and that "We'd really appreciate any help you can offer in trying to subvert this [i.e., me, Homeostasis07] sexist asshole". Thankfully, the person associated with McFarland cared not for "FAC consensus", and instead sent me a copy of the Wiki admin's entire e-mail (minus their name/ID, as the McFarland person was very concerned with WP:OUTING). As you can imagine, this was all very... troubling.

I'm genuinely erring on the side of believing this unnamed admin wasn't you, since they used the ~ised suffix, when I've seen you use the ~ized variant in several conversations. But, on the other hand, there were so few admins involved in the whole Jill Valentine debacle to begin with, and even fewer who knew I could be identified as "his". I'll be going further with this regardless of which way things go. Just thought I'd give you a friendly heads-up, and inform you that FAC4 won't be the last time you'll be speaking with me. Cheers. Homeostasis07 (talk) 23:51, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I usually don't dignify threats with a response, but since this may provide some solace by way of closure, no, I didn't go through the trouble of recommending TWL access and personally following up with the coordinator on your behalf only to then attempt to sabotage it. By the way, editor gender selections are public on Wikipedia: {{gender|Homeostasis07}} >> their. czar 01:43, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hardly a "threat". As I said, I don't believe it was you, but someone was spiteful, vindictive and manipulative enough to do this, which all speaks to the very nature of the current FAC process. BTW, I changed my "How do you prefer to be described?" preference literally two minutes after posting the above, so your formatting doesn't negate my original point. Apparently, people already know I'm a "he". So screw it. Homeostasis07 (talk) 02:00, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Homeostasis07, this is a serious allegation, and it implicates the three admins who opposed the Valentine FACs: Ealdgyth, Czar and myself. I can tell you without any doubt that none of us would do this; it would be especially odd to suspect Czar given that he was the one who suggested you apply to McFarland in the first place. To be frank, I can't see any admin or experienced editor doing this. Would you mind sending me a copy of the email? Also, when you say the "McFarland Project" forwarded it to you, do you mean the Wikipedia Library and its partnership with McFarland, or do you mean McFarland itself? SarahSV (talk) 04:32, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@SlimVirgin: Yes, this is very serious indeed. But I won't be providing you with the e-mails, or a running commentary. For a multitude of reasons. The most pressing of which being that your response above seems more concerned about uncovering the identity of the snitch, rather than finding out who sent the mean-spirited and disturbed e-mail in the first place. And I'm not inclined to believe that it was Ealdgyth who sent the request, because she arguably was never involved in the article enough to care one way or the other... nor do I believe she's possessing of the kind of personality who would do this sort of thing. But look on the bright side: there are at least 3 other usernames I could add to your list, although I won't. Not right now.
And I'd like to point out that I don't particularly care about being called a "sexist asshole"... because I know I'm not "sexist", but I can admittedly be an "asshole" from time to time. My primary concern is the bizarre implication that there's a "consensus" to reject every fictional character FAC nomination, regardless of an article's merit. And it's telling that neither of you have taken the two seconds required to address and/or respond to that implication. Homeostasis07 (talk) 01:35, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Homeostasis07: I didn't realize there was a "snitch". I assumed from your post that the Wikipedia Library coordinator had forwarded it to you because it was about you. There are three possibilities: (a) it was simple trolling and should have been ignored; (b) it was a joe job designed to cause bad feeling; (c) it really was from a Wikipedia admin. I regard (c) to be barely worth considering. No admin would try to sabotage an editor's application to the Wikipedia Library, and emails to the publisher would obviously be forwarded to the Wikipedia Library, so it would be a stupid thing to do, unless causing trouble was the purpose. But whether it was (a) or (b), I can't tell without seeing the email. As for the consensus claim, that has no merit.
Can you explain what you meant when you told Czar: "FAC4 won't be the last time you'll be speaking with me"? SarahSV (talk) 01:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Unless causing trouble was the purpose": you say this like it's an aside, while I consider it the primary/perhaps only purpose. And the FAC4 comment was directed solely to Czar, and is none of your concern. This page has been removed from my watchlist, and the next message I leave here will be an ANI notice. The "snitch" has been quite forthcoming. Goodbye. Homeostasis07 (talk) 02:15, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's everyone's concern, because "FAC4 won't be the last time you'll be speaking with me" sounds like a threat when delivered to a reviewer who has just opposed your nomination. A situation can't be allowed to develop where reviewers feel threatened; the whole process collapses without reviewers willing to oppose. Pinging Laser brain so the coordinators are aware of this. Andy, this is about Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jill Valentine/archive4. SarahSV (talk) 02:17, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't about Czar opposing any nomination, especially since his opposition to my current one has been effectively rebutted. This is about the circumstances leading up to the nomination, and – thanks to your pinging an FAC administrator – this has now been brought to the attention of the wider FAC "community". I genuinely thank you for that. I'll be honest, I don't especially give two craps about Jill Valentine. I'm pretty much done with Wikipedia anyway; @Mike Christie: can attest to that. But there's something inherently disgusting going on here, Sarastro1's e-mail being the least of it, apparently. A good purge is what's needed. Homeostasis07 (talk) 02:50, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What does Sarastro1 have to do with this? SarahSV (talk) 03:14, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What indeed? Ian Rose (talk) 20:06, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Homeostasis07, regarding your note to Sam, he works for the Wikipedia Library, which is part of the Wikimedia Foundation. His only connection to McFarland & Company, the publisher, is that the Wikipedia Library arranges access to McFarland's sources for Wikipedia editors. When you wrote above that someone had sent McFarland a poison-pen email, did you mean that that person had sent it to the Wikipedia Library?

Please send Sam a copy of the email. If I've understood you correctly, it looks as though someone sent it, knowing you would see it, to make you angry and looking around for suspects. It may be connected to the Jill Valentine FAC or it may be because of something else entirely. By not sharing the email, you're protecting the person who wrote it. Please reconsider. SarahSV (talk) 03:36, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Artwork of Ness from Super Smash Bros. Ultimate[edit]

Why did you remove the artwork of Ness from Super Smash Bros. Ultimate? Stein256 (talk) 16:28, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Stein256, you can view my edit summary in the article history, but in short, all non-free images on Wikipedia need to satisfy the non-free content criteria. #8 on that list is contextual significance: We only use non-free images to illustrate sourced text which necessitates illustration. If sources discussed the character's appearance and if the reader would not be able to understand the character through text paraphrase alone, there would be a case for illustration, but it's just decoration as is. Please mind the non-free content criteria before adding more fictional character images to other articles. czar 11:23, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rouvikonas[edit]

Hi Czar! How can I add the newly formed and stub article on Rouvikonas in Category:Stub-Class Anarchism articles, or other categories, so more editors could contribute? Cinadon36 (talk) 08:22, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Cinadon36, with the {{WikiProject Anarchism |class=stub }} banner template! You can also announce articles/projects at the project's talk page, though more specific questions/requests tend to get the most feedback czar 07:50, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seasons Cheer[edit]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Czar, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019.
Happy editing,

Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:08, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Ways to improve The Erosion of Childhood[edit]

Hello, Czar,

Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for creating The Erosion of Childhood! I edit here too, under the username Boleyn and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

This has been tagged for referencing issues.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Boleyn}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 17:29, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Feeling a little left out here. Where’s my welcome to Wikipedia? Where’s my Tea House invitation?? Sergecross73 msg me 00:07, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello[edit]

Hello again. I hope that you are doing well. Apologies for leaving a more personal message on your talk page; feel free to delete it if you would like. I just wanted to check in and see how you were doing. I have been thinking about possibly pursuing some video game articles in the future as potential GAN/FAC projects, possibly starting with either Alias (video game) or Desperate Housewives: The Game (2006 video game) as it would be nice to see either one of them improved. Either way, hope you are having a great end to your year! Aoba47 (talk) 00:01, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47, but this is what talk pages are for! I think you should go for it. You can find many models for how to structure those articles by perusing WP:VG/FC, particularly the recent stuff. My advice would be to take the gist of the sources and write for a general audience—a generally knowledgeable passerby that may know little about the medium. What was the game about, how does it work, how was it developed, what did reviewers say (in general), and what was the critical consensus. Resist any urges to give granular nuance, especially in the plot, that wouldn't serve a general reader. Let me know if you have any questions or feel free to reach out to WT:VG for general assistance. Happy New Year to you too czar 04:19, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the response. I am going to start by collecting sources for the Alias video game. I will definitely look toward the video game FAs as a model. Thank you for the advice! It can be quite easy to get caught up in small details so I will make sure to avoid it. The WikiProject for video games is very helpful, particularly the guide on sources. I am looking forward to contributing to the project in the future! Aoba47 (talk) 05:01, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Authorship[edit]

Template:Authorship has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Pkbwcgs (talk) 10:48, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]