User talk:H Hog

Welcome

Hello H Hog, and welcome to Wikipedia! Here are some recommended guidelines to help you get involved. Please feel free to contact me if you need help with anything. Best of luck and happy editing! --Yanksox 22:46, 26 May 2006 (UTC) Getting started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikipedians Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Conflict resolution Getting technical Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Snail Maze

Thanks for putting snail maze back! Hopefully someone doesn't remove it again! Luminifer (talk) 22:01, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, BAY-BEE!

Hey, H Hog? It's me, Luigifan! Yes, the one from the Moogle Cavern! It's good to see you here! I hope you like it here at Wikipedia! --Luigifan 23:44, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Heh, thanks. I've been here for a while now, but fun to see you around here, too. =P --H Hog

Oh, I've mentioned your webcomic, "The Horror", on your user page. (What I want to know is, how did you come up with that name?) --Luigifan 00:44, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Kid Radd

Hi. The article was deleted in a vote due to the usual, notability concerns (webcomics are a decade-old medium with next to no mainstream presence, and there's an increasing demand for sources). I did a lax job defending it, the opposing side threw the book every chance they got, and the closing admin went with the deleters' arguments. Grr. I agree with you in that its destruction is a mistake, but what proof do we have of Kid Radd's notability? Any ideas? --Kizor 20:33, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

---

Proof of notability... peh. Sorry for this impending rant, but... I need to vent this....

I swear, some delete-happy moderators in this place are just plain reaching for stupid excuses, policies and empty "notability checks" to determine what can and can't stay. This is exactly why I don't even like to come here anymore... people are being elitist bastards, throwing their moderating weight around to delete articles with the excuse that they're not "notable enough", while in reality, they're just not interested in the subject matter, finding it inferior and not "worthy" to be put on "their" encyclopedia. If a splendid comic like Kid Radd isn't even notable enough, then what is? Penny Arcade, Megatokyo, and other such comics who are only popular because they've been mentioned somewhere other then the Internet a couple times? Hell... in some other webcomic debate, I've heard someone mention once that Keenspot/Comic Genesis ITSELF, which is probably the largest free webcomic host on the internet, isn't notable enough because of some weird rating I never even heard of.

So if Kid Radd isn't notable enough, then what, pray tell, is next to not make the cut? Dr. McNinja? Dominic Deegan? RPG World? I don't see those being mentioned in any offline media (apart from their own published works, obviously), and they're all high-quality webcomics with decent articles that are all still around.

Sometimes, a subject doesn't need media coverage to be considered notable. It's just that people refuse to acknowledge it. --H Hog 20:54, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I know, I know. Product over process. To be anal fair this recent comic scourge is being done by devoted, non-administrator fans of webcomics who nevertheless insist on the broader and, here, counterproductive content policies. --Kizor 12:06, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Alex Kidd

Thanks for your answer. I became pretty angry when I've recognized that Alex Kidd has been removed permanently on everyvideogame.com. Although thanks for your answer. Greetings and a happy new year!!! Morris Munroe 12:18, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi! I tried to read the links you've gaven about downloadings. Well, that's rather difficult to understand. Can you give me links where I can play Alex Kidd in Miracle World over Internet with Java (except everyvideogame.com)? Morris Munroe 12:10, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Hee hee hee... If I remember correctly from my time on the Moogle Cavern, H Hog is making an Alex Kidd fangame... but it's suffering from roughly the same fate as Blaze Hedgehog's Sonic: The Fated Hour; creative laziness. :p No offense, guys. The same thing is getting in the way of my Kirby: Crystal Calamity project. (It's not a fangame, it's a comic.) --Luigifan 12:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Sonic the Hedgehog (8-bit)

And about Sonic for Sega Master System. Can you give me links where I can play 8 bit Sonic The Hedgehog over Internet with Java? Morris Munroe 12:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm waiting four your answer. Morris Munroe 17:45, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't want to be inpolite but you said that I can leave a message on your talk page. Morris Munroe 14:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Furry

Looking for something to do? WikiProject Furry is improving articles on furry and anthropomorphic topics, and we'd like to have you on board. Our current goal is to raise Anthrocon, furry convention and furry fandom to good article status and beyond - but if that doesn't take your fancy, there are plenty of other articles to work on. Give it a go and let us know how you're doing! You received this one-time invitation because you are a Furry Wikipedian. GreenReaper 22:48, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Aaah! What's happening to the Moogle Cavern?!?

Oh, dear... I just heard that Kulock's about to take down the Comics and Hoaxes archive at the Moogle Cavern... :( Where am I going to find the comics now?!? Will I ever get to see Things that are Completely Different, Dead Parrot Store, Geable Geable Goo, or Mega Geable ever again?!? (I know where to find The Horror... it's on Deviant Art, right?) --Luigifan 01:45, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it most certainly is. Where the other comics have taken refuge at though, I do not know. --H

So Kulock took down the Moogle Cavern. Tis a sad day indeed. I hope we can still keep in touch H. You always seemed like a cool friend. --Redrapper (talk) 15:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Bit late for me to reply to this only now, but as it appears, obviously we still can. =P --H

You maybe interested in the Article Rescue Squadron

Article Rescue Squadron

I notice some of your templates on your user page, and I would like you to consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles for deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever to Wikipedia, you may find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia.

Ikip (talk) 21:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding Sonic R

Hi H Hog i just want to know whose side are you on? Sergecross73? or me? i cant tell? Speedy X 99 (talk) 05:03, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not picking "sides" per say, I think you both make a fair point, but I also think you're both handling it in a horribly petty way towards each other at this point. In my opinion, you're right in saying Sonic R is not technically a kart racer, but I don't believe it deserves no mention on the page whatsoever as it is still a mascot-based racer in a similar genre.
Sergecross73 is -again in my opinion- technically correct by broadening the casual public's understanding of the game by making the Mario Kart comparison, but I feel the comparison requires a bit more nuance than it currently gets, but he doesn't seem to be willing to discuss the matter any further and -frankly- seems to be going through rather ridiculous lengths to "prove" the comparison is warranted by adding in messy and unneeded sources to articles by independent reviewers giving their personalized opinions of the game, barely even mentioning Mario Kart in more than a casual namedrop. So yeah, that's my stance on the matter. --H Hog (talk) 21:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

• At no point does the article call it a kart racer, it just says it's similar to kart racers.
• Are you faulting me with finding sources to back my stance? Or sources to back the Reception section. Both of these things are critical with how things work. It's how you're supposed to do things here... Sergecross73 msg me 22:00, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not faulting you for anything. What I'm saying is that it seems a bit silly to me how a minor note for the sole purpose of comparing Sonic R to Mario Kart requires two sources to completely different pages to have said mention warranted. I understand you added those in to back your claim and prove your point towards Speedy, as upon further inspection he does seem to have a "vendetta" of sorts against the mentioning of Mario in Sonic-related articles, but to the casual reader, it just appears messy and overdone. But maybe that's just my opinion. I understand the frustration involved, though. --H Hog (talk) 22:09, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm still really confused how adding two sources to back up a contentious statement is "messy", "sloppy", or "unneeded". Per WP:BURDEN, this is exactly how these types of issues are supposed to be handled. WP:BURDEN is a subsection of WP:VERIFY, which is the very foundation of which Wikipedia is built upon. Sergecross73 msg me 00:30, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

What I'm getting at is that Speedy is the only person who was ever really in dispute about the mentionability of Mario Kart in the Sonic R article (Please remember that while I have shown disagreement with calling the game a "kart racer" rather then a "mascot-based racing game", I never actually said the comparison didn't belong there entirely), and while the sources certainly touch on the connection between Mario Kart and Sonic R (albeit briefly), and serve well enough to push Speedy's proverbial nose in the facts, they only serve that particular purpose, as no one else really needed the "proof" to begin with, making the links on that page feel -in my humble opinion- like cluttering up the page with unneeded external linkage. In this case, citing sources to prove Mario Kart's notability in comparison to Sonic R could just as well have been done in relative privacy on the talk page, without cluttering up the main article. Again, in my opinion, at least. --H Hog (talk) 00:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, that certainly is a bizarre viewpoint regarding how to handle sources. The sources belong in the article, like any other sources, in fact its especially important they're in the article in this case, for people who may question it in the future. Plenty of people edit without ever looking at a talk page. Additionally, I fail to see how using a mere 2 sources to back an single idea is "cluttering" things. Sergecross73 msg me 00:59, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

When the sources outnumber the ideas being backed, especially when said idea is a minor note in the first place, and the sources being referred to are opinionated reviews from independent bloggers (Okay, so an IGN editor is kinda reputable, but a "regular" member blogging through GameInformer?), it just comes across to me that way. But again, maybe it's just me. I don't habitually see people quoting two consecutive sources for the mere purpose to compare one game to another, after all -- but maybe I'm just not on this place enough to notice. I guess in a way I'm just an advocate for inhibiting "clicky" distractions. --H Hog (talk) 01:30, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Your compromise

I removed it because I wasn't happy with it, and I doubt Speedy X would be either, considering his agenda seems to be to remove all allusions to Mario from any Sonic articles. (Check out his contributions.) That being said, I had several problems with it. One, no sources or purpose in using CTR example. Secondly, you moved the sources around so that they were all grouped together rather than next to the specific points they reference. Third, like I was saying above, it was a reword that didn't address what Speedy X wanted, and I didn't like it because it took more words to say pretty much the same thing. It didn't solve anything. Sergecross73 msg me 22:00, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

The CTR mention was, granted, merely added in to give at least one more comparison to a mascot-racer besides Mario Kart. I didn't add a source because I felt the nature of the game itself was example enough, and as I mentioned earlier elsewhere, too many source links within the flow of text just looks messy in my opinion. I understand (now) that Speedy is merely after the removal of Mario Kart being mentioned as a whole, I was not aware of this before, that's why I figured my compromise might have helped bring nuance to the comparison. Taken at face value, I suppose it does "explain in more words" what was already being said, yeah. But I tried wording it in a way that differentiated Sonic R from Mario Kart more, as I was under the impression that most of Speedy's problem was related to the comparison between Sonic R and Mario Kart, rather then the mere mention of it. --H Hog (talk) 22:20, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I understand, it's just that here at Wikipedia, what we go by is WP:VERIFY - what can be verified. Personally, I recognize that CTR is also similar. But since we don't have a source, it shouldn't go in there. It would be rather contradictory to add that in, after all of the lecturing to Speedy X that this isn't the place for his personal opinions, to add that personal opinion, you know? Sergecross73 msg me 00:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy's rebuttal

• With my opinions added between the lines in italics. --H Hog (talk) 21:53, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I said its not my opinion but sergecross still things it is i tell how Sonic R is not similar to Mario Kart 1 Sonic R goes on foot & Mario Kart goes on karts.

-This is mostly a cosmetic change - but it does make the term "kart racer" a bit of a misnomer - which is why I suggested to refer to it as a "mascot-based racing game".

2 Sonic R you can change the weather Mario Kart you cant.

-Weather options doesn't really make for a significant difference in gameplay.

3 Sonic R does not use weapons Mario Kart does.

-Aside from the fact that some characters do use weapons, this doesn't really detract from how they're still both mascot-based racing games.

4 the gameplay is difference.

-Well, they're both racers, but I'll give you that one - Sonic R is more platform based. But the article states that much already.

5 Sonic R has a replay Mario Kart doesnt.

-That's a bonus feature, it doesn't change the gameplay.

6 Sonic R you collection rings Mario Kart you dont collection coins.

-Depends which one you're referring to - there are coins in the first Mario Kart. They make you go a little bit faster if you have a lot of them.

7 Sonic R characters are 3D models Mario Kart characters is not.

-Again, depends which Mario Kart you're referring to. They do in the more recent ones. Besides, that doesn't detract from the game's genre, the change is purely cosmetic.

8 Sonic R you can change the time of the day Mario you cant.

-Not really a significant change in gameplay.

9 And i have -> sources http://www.gamefaqs.com/saturn/198698-sonic-r/reviews/review-53958 said this ain't no Mario Kart 64.

http://www.gamerevolution.com/review/sonic-r they didnt say anything about Mario Kart so they dont think its like Mario Kart.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2m1alNFQ8s he didnt say anything about Mario Kart so he doesnt think its like Mario Kart.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbpAhAa61JQ he didnt say anything about Mario Kart so he doesnt think its like Mario Kart.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW6hQkAXdbE he didnt say anything about Mario Kart so he doesnt think its like Mario Kart.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJDLWnORjh8 he didnt say anything about Mario Kart so he doesnt think its like Mario Kart.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zi0VkCMQpl0 they didnt say anything about Mario Kart so they dont think its like Mario Kart. if they are really similar they would have said something. Speedy X 99 (talk) 03:28, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

-The fact that an article about one title doesn't mention another title doesn't mean anything. I've seen several articles about Phantasy Star that don't mention Final Fantasy, but they're still both turn-based RPG's.

Look, I agree that the games play differently, but they're both still mascot based racing games with a similar premise - using characters from the game's respective franchise to race other characters within the same franchise, and reach the finish. We all know that the game is not the same as Mario Kart -- if it was, then we could have sufficed calling it "Mario Kart with Sonic Characters" and call it a day. Differences are what makes one game worth playing alongside another, similar title. You can still enjoy playing Saints Row alongside Grand Theft Auto or Red Dead Redemption. They're all wildly different titles, but they all have a similar underlying focus on being free-roaming action-adventure titles. For the sake of the article, while I agree that the titles are most definitely not the same, I think the title still deserves a mention if only for the fact that, again, they're both mascot-based racing games. I personally would have phrased it so that people don't immediately think it's similar to Mario Kart, but I don't think the mention should be removed entirely, either. Now, I think all three of us have stuck WAY, WAY, WAAAAAY too much time, effort and most of all discussion about what by all rights and means is one single bloody sentence on an article about a rather mediocre videogame, and honestly, I believe we could all be spending our time in much better and more productive ways. Just let it go. --H Hog (talk) 21:53, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, H Hog. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, H Hog. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

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

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

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

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)