User talk:Howa0082/Archive 1

Malazan Pages

G'day Howa0082, I don't know if you're going to be restricting your contributions exclusively to the MBotF pages, but I'm very happy to have someone else contributing. There's lots to do. In case you were looking at House of Chains, it's missing a plot summary. I've been working on it on-and-off, but it's an extremely long task to perform. I've started a plot summary on Talk:House of Chains, but it sucks right now. My plan was to break the book into sections focussing on characters (i.e. sections on Cutter/Apsalar, Whirlwind Camp, Kalam) rather than going through the order in the book (too fragmented). Feel free to take over if you'd like. I'd also like to start a page on the Theloman Toblakai, similar to the ones for the Tiste Edur, Andii and Liosan, Forkrul Assail and T'lan Imass. But it's wikipedia so you can pretty much do whatever you want. Have fun. WLU 18:44, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to do the Thelomen Toblakai page. I just decided to write about Karsa, is all. If you've got the summary for House of Chains in the works, I'll not touch that page, so... no worries! Howa0082 00:28, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Allow me to make myself more clear. Please write the House of Chains summary, oh God have mercy, please write it... If you feel like taking that task out of my hands I'm very happy to let you. It's a far bigger project than I initially anticipated. Anyway, if you decide to start on plot summaries, use it or not at least know that there's one for HoC in the talk page. WLU 14:24, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Howa,

I'm totally not stalking you and I'm really glad that you're expanding the Malazan pages. And I'm not obsessive-compulsive, honest! Just a couple things I thought you might find handy when editing, and a heads-up for a change I made. I re-named Cotillion, ascendant to be Cotillion (Malazan) 'cause normally things are in the format of Name (Disambiguation) rather than with a comma. I also added a disambiguation link to the Cotillion page (the actual dance. Second thing is, a while ago Captain Crawdad created a tag for the Malazan books, Category:Malazan (in double square brackets, I don't know how to make them show up and not turn it into a link). Put it at the bottom of the page and it it automatically links to the Malazan category page. There's also the MBF (in double-squiggly brackets) tag that throws a box at the bottom of the page which links it all the books and a bunch of other categories. I've just added them to the pages I started on the Tiste, Forkrul and Imass. WLU 14:45, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

About AD&D Rules

I agree with your point totally. Customized AD&D rules work better in videogames than the original P&P rules. Maybe the solution is not calling them anal or faithful but hmm... Vigilant? If I remember correctly, I was reverting lots of lame boob jokes from the BG articles at the time, so your exellent point might have fallen as a victim of my reverting crusade. I'm terribly sorry about that. Regards Arsestar 14:05, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Re:Seriously. (Or, How I Learned to Utterly Dispise Love Other Editors)

My half of this convo is retrieved from the other users' talk page.

What is with you and constantly reverting my edits on The Blind God? I'm going to suppose you eventually bothered to check the edit history, since you reverted back to my redirect finally, but why the edit war over a completely superfluous page? I had already asked the admin to delete it, and I was told "No." So I blanked it. Were you do obnoxiously blind as to fail at noticing that the content of the afore-mentioned page was already in the main article of Blade of Tyshalle (and covered better), hence my efforts at removing it? Now, it's a redirect to the main article, yet you go and revert it to the article text only to revert BACK to a redirect a minute later. What the hell is your problem? Gunning for adminship? Howa0082 17:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Blanking a page is not the way to have an article deleted, no matter how superfluous you think the article is. If an administrator already refused to delete then you should have taken it to WP:AFD for other editors' opinions. Wholesale blanking is almost certain to be reverted, either by another editor or an anti-vandalism bot. ... discospinster _talk 17:59, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

That doesn't explain or justify you reverting my redirect. Howa0082 18:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

The best way to go about creating a redirect from an existing article is to propose a {{mergeto|Blade of Tyshalle}} and then wait a week or so to see if anyone objects. Otherwise it's really not all that different from simply blanking the page. However, I didn't wish to get into an edit war. I was not objecting to removing the article; I was objecting to the way you were doing it - without any consensus. ... discospinster _talk 18:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

See WP:Be Bold I'm not going to sit around waiting for people to reach a concensus will will almost certainly be "yes, this page is crap, toss it". As well, WP:Ignore all rules I know the rules, and I know that ignoring them works pretty damn well most times. This isn't like debating merging Upper Canada with Canada West. This is turning a stub into a redirect to a more informative article that already covers the topic of the stub. Howa0082 18:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Well then, I guess the issue is how closely one is going to follow the rules. ... discospinster _talk 18:37, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Re:X-wing GA

Read your review of the X-wing article for GA status, and I feel you've raised some good points. I've been working on a substantial rewrite of the article for some time now (some of which was used to plump up the article before the GA nomination), and I'd like your opinion on how well the material in this rewrite addresses your concerns. Please keep in mind that this is a work in progress, and so is not meant to be completely flow-through prose. Thanks muchly! -- saberwyn 12:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Blade of Tyshalle is cool

That was a good book. Is the next one out? Were you going to be contributing a bit more to the Malazan pages? There's an eager new contributor, User:Krmarshall, and it's nice not to do all the heavy lifting by myself. WLU 20:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Judas Priest

Hi, I tried to do good faith edits to the Priest article like I do with many band articles, to remove praise-laden wording that you don't normally see in an encyclopedia (e.g., a "very successful tour", "Fans hailed the album as a masterwork", etc). Editors sometimes like to use effusive language when describing the albums of their fave band : ) ....I still have a concern with a word in the lede: "definitive"...seems POV. Perhaps if it had a source: "Metal historian John Doe calls Priest the "definitive" heavy metal band." Your reference to me adding weasel words was probably the way I replaced "fans hailed" or "many fans believed" type wording with "critics." I am assuming that the claims in the article are claims made by music critics, which can eventually be dug up by doing research, and not the opinions of fans, which would be hard to ascertain (unless you had a survey)....Just one thing. You called the edits "random." I think there is a pattern in the edits...simplify, reduce the number of words, remove minor details.Nazamo 15:13, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Judas Priest

The article Judas Priest you nominated as a good article has failed , see Talk:Judas Priest for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of said article. If you oppose this decision, you may ask for a reassessment. Cheers, CP 22:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Article assessment - Star Trek: Enterprise

As requested here I've assessed Star Trek: Enterprise. I've included a summary of my thinking here.--Opark 77 15:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Article assessment - Dungeons & Dragons (TV series)

As requested here I've assessed Dungeons & Dragons (TV series). I've included a summary of my thinking here.--Opark 77 10:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Article assessment - Kamen Rider 555

As requested here I've assessed Kamen Rider 555. I've included a summary of my thinking here.--Opark 77 10:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

OMG

My response is on my page. Navnløs 04:01, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Episode list

I'm learning by doing myself. I know that {{Episode list}} works inside of a wikitable. See Help:Table for advice on setting up a table. The template itself has instructions if you follow this link {{Episode list}}. I've set up a table on the page and transposed the available info about the first episode (just the title). I hope this helps, if it still isn't making sense come back to me and I'll try and be more specific.--Opark 77 (talk) 23:01, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Den-O episode list (Other Editors, part 2)

The entire conversation past the original comment is taken from the other editor's talk page. Apparently, it's really hard to post your responses on the other guys' talk page so that they can actually get your message, y'know?

The headers are there for ease in navigation, and I agree that the summaries can be cut down (even if they are sourced to the official site's summarizations).—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

It might make it easier to go straight to an episode, but it creates a massive directory at the top of the page which has no place on a clearly defined table. It's not an indescriminate collection of information, it's a list of episodes, and I can't see a reason for a directory there. The list of Kabuto episodes doesn't have that, and I was under the impression that that list was the standard to aim for, so... Howa0082 (talk) 20:26, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

But how else do you go through the table, and also the list of Kabuto episodes is from last year which is before I started really editting these articles. The Den-O list does need to be cut down, but the section headers make it easy to go through the list, which is easier than making several articles for each episode which according to current WP policy won't be notable anyway.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:36, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

The directory is a page long. That's insane. People can scroll down, for god's sake. Who seriously needs a giant list like that to go through a list of one topic? I'm not saying make an article for each episodes, but that directory makes it actually more difficult to navigate, because now people have to scroll past the immense object on the page. Directories are made to enable people to find information in the surf of the article, by dividing everything into topics. Episode lists are all one topic. QED, no directory. Howa0082 (talk) 21:51, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

It's not a directory. It's a table of contents. It shows what's in the article. The only other person who felt that it was unnecessary was an individual who was trying to get the particular version of the template deleted.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:10, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

...a list that tell you what is in something is a directory, as well as a table of contents. Either way, it's redundant having a list that tells you what's in... a list. Just have the actual list itself. Howa0082 (talk) 22:22, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

If nothing else, look at featured episode lists from WP:TV. Those don't have episode-by-episode topic headers. They may still have topic headers, but not for each individual episode. Howa0082 (talk) 22:40, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Canadian English

I do find your personal experiences interesting. Where did you grow up/live and how old are you? I am 41 and live in the northern GTA and rarely hear zee from residents and have heard children be corrected for wrongly saying "zee". I would hazard a guess of about half of times I hear "leftenant" vs "lootenant" (and really, who wants to be a tenant of a loo anyway :-) ). Cheers! DoubleBlue (Talk) 17:03, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for your reply. I went to the University of Alberta and I too noticed that Alberta seems to have a great deal more American pronunciation and spelling. I've often wondered if that was due to the proliferation of Americans for the oil industry, being one of the latest provinces for immigration, or the separation from older Canada (by distance to central Canada and by the Rockies from BC). DoubleBlue (Talk) 18:25, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

article assessment--Angel of Retribution

Hi. Your article is in my assessment teetering right on the brink of a "B", which is as high as we can assess at WP:ALBUM. The only thing that keeps me from being comfortable reassessing it as such is that the section that meets the requirement of "at least one section of informative prose other than lead" is more of a list than an ordinary prose section. If this were restructured into a paragraph, I'd feel comfortable reassessing. :) Anyway, I respond because I seem to be the only (or one of the very few) members of the project actually assessing albums right now, so if I don't pick it up it may sit there for a while and I wanted you to know why. If you decide to revise that section or add another section of prose, feel free to drop me a line, and I'll be glad to take a look at it. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Reassessed. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:46, 10 December 2007 (UTC)