User talk:Jinnai/Archive 2
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
AfD nomination of List of Mega Man cast members
An article that you have been involved in editing, List of Mega Man cast members, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Mega Man cast members. Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Also note that List of Metal Gear cast members has also been nominated for deletion. The discussion will be on the same page as the Mega Man AFD. MuZemike 16:54, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Dch1.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Dch1.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Dch2.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Dch2.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Dch3.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Dch3.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Dch4.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Dch4.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Dch6.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Dch6.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Dch7.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Dch7.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Dch8.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Dch8.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Dch9.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Dch9.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Re: FF
To clarify what I meant by "primary source" in that wall of text I tossed at you was that was the main secondary source I was using in the article and that person's credentials as to why he should be considered reliable. The only primary source (by wikipedia's definition) being cited is the game's manual, considering the game's text outside of a translation patch is Chinese. The chances of any mainstream sources covering it (and mind you that was after searching like hell) after this point is slim to none. It had a flash in the pan, it had sources, and it's different enough from the base game even in terms of plot points to warrant it's own article. You want to take it to AfD from here there's not a whole hell of a lot I can do to stop you other than voice opposition.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 08:13, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
- Jinnai- I feel that almost all of Kung Fu Man's rationales for the sources are pretty sound. No, they are not what I would consider the best possible sources I would want to use to write an article (I prefer to stick to IGN, GameSpot, and printed sources), but they pass WP:RS in my opinion. Some further details.
- Derrick Sobodash- has written for The Oakland Press[1] and Beijing Today[2] newspapers. As Kung Fu Man pointed out, he's also written for PiQ[3],
- Joel Johnson- In addition to being a past regular contributor for Gizmodo and the related Gawker media sites[4], he's written for Wired.com[5] and Slate[6] and also been on AT&T Tech Channel's Hugh Thompson Show [7].
- Luke Plunkett- He is an established editor on Kotaku and is listed as their Associate Editor for Oceania. His Kotaku posts also appear on the other Gawker.com sites[8][9].
- Brandon Sheffield- In addition being the editor in chief of Game Developer and senior editor of Gamasutra[10], Edge listed him as one of Gaming's Top 50 Journalist[11] and he has even assisted with a video game script[12].
- Kyle Orland- A published video game author[13]. In addition to being a Joystiq writter[14], he's written for The Escapist[15] and GameDaily.com[16] Other credits include Next Generation Magazine, National Public Radio, GameSpot, and Electronic Gaming Monthly.[17][18]
- GPara.com- Been cited by several other reliable sources as a source of Japanese video game news. Wired.com has cited them: [19][20][21]. IGN's Anoop Gantayat has cited it in his IGN Blog several times[22][23] and it has been cited in other IGN articles as well [24][25]. GameSpot too.[26]
- Gameworld Network- Didn't find much on them. The author has written extensively on the website and done an article for UGO.com as well.[27] I'd say this one is a toss up because they are part of the UGO Network. I'll defer to the consensus of others.
- TheTanooki.com- I couldn't find anything reliable about this site or the article's author. It is probably not suitable to use.
- NESDev- Couldn't find much on this site either. I'd recommend against it.
- Excluding a few dubious sources (definitely TheTanooki and NESDev), I'd say the article meets WP:V and WP:N. It also looks like the removal of the content sourced from the dubious sources wouldn't significantly impact the quality of the content. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:47, 7 May 2009 (UTC))
- I hope my post didn't offend you, as I wasn't trying to excessively push a particular point. You were well within your rights to question the sources, some of which actually are not suitable. (I normally avoid using such sources because constantly defending them is nerve racking.) I simply thought providing some evidence to the reliability of the good sources would quickly bring an end to the Final Fantasy VII (Famicom) debate.
- As far as tabling the discussion, that's your call. Even if not everyone agrees with it, I believe such discussions tend to shake things up for the better. For instance, I probably never would have worked on Super Mario 64 DS if New Age Retro Hippie hadn't merged it into Super Mario 64 for similar reasons you brought up at WT:VG. If Final Fantasy IV (Nintendo DS) isn't up to standards, then maybe it should be merged. Maybe that will prod someone into giving it enough attention to make it a proper article. I suspect it could become a good article, but you're correct that it doesn't offer much in its current form. Besides, mergers aren't final and can be undone as with SM64DS. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:50, 7 May 2009 (UTC))
Notability (Fiction)
Whilst I appreciate you have every right to revert my amendments to WP:FICT, I would be grateful if you would care to discuss your own views at WT:FICT when you do, so all the editors contributing to the discussions can get some constructive feedback.
My intention is to bring the preamble of WP:FICT in line with the other SNG's.I would prefer not to be reverted at all if possible, as this is a a substantial proposal, not a trivial one line change. Simply alter the text to reflect what you yourself would like to see, so your own views are made explicit, as I am sure you have an important contribution to make. Whist I would agree with you that the consensus is yet to emerge, and my revisions are supported by existing framework of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, so if you are proposing similar or alternative wording, then we would all benefit from you making them known.
If you have any reservations or doubts, lets discusss them at WT:FICT#Notability before reverting.--Gavin Collins (talk|contribs) 07:52, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Since you recently commented on the talk page of {{cite video}}, you might be interested in my proposal to convert the template to use {{citation/core}} (which {{cite web}}, {{cite news}}, {{cite journal}}, and {{cite book}} use). See Template talk:Cite video#Conversion to citation/core; feedback would be appreciated. Thanks! —TKD [talk][c] 16:31, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Image tagging for File:School Rumble - bike-chase.png
Thanks for uploading File:School Rumble - bike-chase.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 03:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Re: accessmonth and accessyear
I agree in principle. The only other cite template that I can think of that accepts anything other than accessdate is {{cite web}}, which accepts accessmonthday and accessdaymonth along with accessyear, which at least doesn't give the impression that accessmonth/accessyear alone are acceptable (as cite video did). I would fix accessmonthday and accessdaymonth from any article that I were to edit, but I'm not particularly up for trawling through 300,000 transclusions and fixing them. I've learned that people do funky stuff with access dates, including putting them in ambiguous formats (e.g., 04-05-2009; is that mm-dd-yyyy or dd-mm-yyyy?). —TKD [talk][c] 02:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Fortunately, in the cases that I have encountered them, the article was (or at least appeared to be) self-consistent, so I fixed the dates based on the only interpretation that didn't cause impossible dates to arise. —TKD [talk][c] 16:29, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Looking at the documentation, actually, cite web does specify to use the date format of the article. I think previously it allowed ISO yyyy-mm-dd. —TKD [talk][c] 16:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- dd-mm-yyyy and mm-dd-yyy (and mm/dd/yyyy and dd/mm/yyyy) have always been incorrect Wikipedia style because of the ambiguity. I thought that WP:MOSNUM had an explicit proscription against this, but I guess not. Maybe discussing a quick addition there would be appropriate. I think most experienced editors infer that those formats are incorrect by their omission, but perhaps newer editors could benefit. —TKD [talk][c] 17:18, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Looking at the documentation, actually, cite web does specify to use the date format of the article. I think previously it allowed ISO yyyy-mm-dd. —TKD [talk][c] 16:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Mediation at WP:FICT
I'm suggesting we ask for mediation to help build teh guidance at Wikipedia:Notability (fiction). What I propose is that a mediator be the only person to edit the project page itself and be the one to guide discussion and discern consensus. I've proposed it at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(fiction)#Mediation. As a past participant in the lengthy debates, I'd appreciate your input and hopefully your agreement. Hiding T 10:11, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Zatch Bell Characters
The List of Zatch Bell! minor characters has been redirected to List of Zatch Bell! characters per the merge tag.[28] per the merge tag posted since December 2008. If there are any from the minor that need merging, please feel free to do so. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 14:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Same problem...
I semi-protected that article after Bambifan101 got a hold of it and I put a semi-protect template on it...and you're right. It isn't showing up for some reason, but it is showing up as protected. Just a bug in the system, I guess. Please feel free to let me know if you suspect any more activity from that yo-yo. I've written the Wikimedia Foundation regarding this character and I plan on staying on top of this. Thanks for letting me know about the glitch. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:43, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
hey Jinnai
do you know a good anime adim to contact? Because I getting real tired of a user posting something that isn't remotely true or important at all to the show since the thing doesn't exist at all. --"I am an oktau and a baka at times but deny proven facts and you got a fight" comment added by Dragonmaster88 (talk • contribs) 07:12, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
e
Actually, it's quite a common style, perhaps more so in Britain than America, to distinguish between constant e & variable e. Peter jackson (talk) 15:20, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Non-trivial or significant?
Where in WP:GNG, is the term non-trivial used, if at all? --Gavin Collins (talk|contribs) 08:53, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
RE:video game review template
I've tried starting it twice, but made little progress. Working on Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Newsletter/Header jogged my memory a bit, but I still need to get reacquainted with the parser function. Now that I have a sandbox open, I may fiddle with it there so I can do some trial and error edits. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC))
- See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#New review template proposal. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:39, 2 July 2009 (UTC))
- I don't plan on really using it, so I'd say the question is if you're satisfied with it? Any other tweaks or ideas you think would work for it? (Guyinblack25 talk 14:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC))
- Sounds good. Any idea what it should be called? (Guyinblack25 talk 21:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC))
- How about "VG series multi-reviews" or "VG series multiple reviews"? (Guyinblack25 talk 21:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC))
- See {{VG series and remake reviews}}. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:54, 27 July 2009 (UTC))
- How about VG smr? (Guyinblack25 talk 14:19, 28 July 2009 (UTC))
- See {{VGSMR}} (Guyinblack25 talk 18:40, 31 July 2009 (UTC))
- How about VG smr? (Guyinblack25 talk 14:19, 28 July 2009 (UTC))
- See {{VG series and remake reviews}}. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:54, 27 July 2009 (UTC))
- How about "VG series multi-reviews" or "VG series multiple reviews"? (Guyinblack25 talk 21:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC))
- Sounds good. Any idea what it should be called? (Guyinblack25 talk 21:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC))
- I don't plan on really using it, so I'd say the question is if you're satisfied with it? Any other tweaks or ideas you think would work for it? (Guyinblack25 talk 14:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC))
SR video game article merges into the parent article
I'm guessing no longer warranted standing on their own and collectively not enough for a list? Thanks. --BrokenSphereMsg me 01:21, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
- NVM, I saw your comment on the School Rumble talk page. I doubt any of the 3 could get beyond stub status and at the time coverage was hard to find for the 2 that I authored. BrokenSphereMsg me 01:25, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Re: Popotan edits
I'll reply to that on the talk page of the article itself. It seems more convenient. Fyrius (talk) 09:02, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Fumoffu
Hey Jinnai! I'd like to ask for your advice regarding the Fumoffu article. As I read Dandy saying somewhere, pictures are often unnecessary and it is also my belief that Wikipedia should be more about information than pictures. The Fumoffu article has 2 character pictures now since Betacommand's bot (both the user and the bot are now banned) took one of them down. So which way do you advice we go? Upload the missing picture or take the 2 remiaing pictures down? Thanks for your time! OutOfTimer (talk) 23:28, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
- Use a screenshot from the TV show, preferably showing some aspect that sets it apeart other than a scene of a bunch of characters to show what they look like. That's left for the character page. If you have access to the DVD it would be best to use that, perferably without the subtitles.陣内Jinnai 00:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Re: partner peer reviews with milhist and vg
My understanding of the arrangement is that any MilHist PRs should get cross-posted to VG, and any VG PRs should get cross-posted to MilHist; I'm not aware of any intent to limit the exchange to only selected reviews, since the intent is mostly to get "outside" reviewers, not to work on shared topics directly. Kirill [talk] [pf] 01:20, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
DBZ character talk page
Hey mate. I'm asking if you'd be interested to check out the section I opened on the DBZ character talk page in regards to merging. It deals with moving many of the characters listed in the secondary section to the other (tertiary) section, as many more influential and important characters have now been merged or deleted. It would only be proper to sustain and maintain the same consensus on the entire page; I haven't made any changes as of yet as it may not be considered constructive to move characters without a proper debate. Those that are debatable, I've listed them in the same format and hope to get your vote for keeps and merges into the other section. I've only listed the ones I've found to be primarily lesser appearing characters and who are limited to one or two sagas at the most in their appearance, or remain background characters for the most part. As many of the characters who are listed in the secondary section are actually much lesser than those in the other, I was hoping to hear from you and get your votes on the matter. - Zarbon (talk) 23:55, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
School Rumble reassessment request
Hey Jinnai, in light of your reassessment of School Rumble up to B-class, I requested a (largely procedural ;) ) reassessment; just figured I'd drop you a note so you were aware/if you wanted to add any thoughts. =) 「ダイノガイ千？！」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 20:08, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Hmm... It seems this has opened a bit of a can of worms; sorry about that. Just so you know, though, it's probably better to specifically enumerate in prose who licensed the series in what country or language; this is something required on chapter lists gunning for FA (as I understand it), so it probably wouldn't hurt to emulate in the main article. 「ダイノガイ千？！」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 22:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think it's possible to verify all of those networks. I didn't place them all and have no way of knowing where the ones who placed them got their info from.陣内Jinnai 22:51, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- In that case, I would say to simply remove them. If you're sufficiently worried about preserving the information so you can continue to hunt down sources for them, and don't want to dig through the page history every time, you could first copy them to the talk page. 「ダイノガイ千？！」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 05:09, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think it's possible to verify all of those networks. I didn't place them all and have no way of knowing where the ones who placed them got their info from.陣内Jinnai 22:51, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Tears to Tiara
Hi there, I just dropped by to ask what's needed for Tears to Tiara to be upped to B-class article. Thanks! Amaya Sakura (talk) 08:25, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Re: Higurahsi page move
Just so you know, you can't just copy/paste a move, that's what the move feature is for. We'll have to fix it to merge the histories now. I've put List of When They Cry episodes up for a speedy deletion so it can be done correctly.--十八 01:43, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Dissidia
And news about the Johnny Yong Bousch ruling bit?Fractyl (talk) 06:09, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image (File:Popomusic.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Popomusic.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 20:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
WTF
are you normally this much of an asshole? what was the problem with the picture, its not like i was going to change it every week. I just thought it'd be better to see Kurapika's real eyes instead of his Kurata clan eyes covered with his contacts. It wasn't bad whats your problem?
- Those who post the first image have precident, ie if you want to change his image, give a good reason in the talk page. Alternatively you could have added the image and moved the other image to where it talks about his eyes. That probably would have been contentious, but not quite so much.陣内Jinnai 03:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Just a shout, but the holdup for the A-class assessment (the secondary image) has been removed.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
- I left some responses, hopefully they'll meet your points satisfyingly. However two of them were worded a bit confusingly so I'm unsure what you meant...can you take a quick look to see what's left to be done?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 23:01, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
- And left more responses, hopefully this'll be the last batch. Sorry for bothering you about all this.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:03, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
School Rumble and others edits
|
The Manga and Anime BarnLoli Award | |
| For making School Rumble a GA, numerous edits in Animanga GA re-assessment campaign & because it was a long overdue barnstar. Cheers --KrebMarkt 08:33, 29 August 2009 (UTC) |
Bara article
Hi Jinnai;
Thanks for taking the time to assess the bara article. I noticed that one of your comments was "missing a few items that need citation that would likely be challenged". If you have a spare moment sometime, could you point out some of the places that you were thinking of with this? We appreciate your comments. Thanks, JRBrown (talk) 01:09, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
3D video games
and how am I to know that "the entire article is a mass of lies"? DGG ( talk ) 16:55, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Re: School Rumble copyediting needed
グ ルグルまわる．．．？ Spin, spin, spin... Jinnai, I am sorry I cannot help here. Firstly, I do not think I am very qualified to copyedit to FA quality (usually most of my FAs are screened and slashed to quality by other more qualified editors). Secondly, I am a bit busy with my office work at the moment. Thirdly, on the Wikipedia side, two of my watched articles are needing work after some issues were raised. On the whole, I lack the time to give Tenma and gang serious attention (Kobayashi copped out on the final chapters!) You could try asking EyeSerene if he wants to work on something out of his usual areas. He is quite friendly and helpful (he has helped me on a couple of articles). He is an often-asked copyeditor, so he might not have the time, but if you are willing to wait 2–3 weeks, it could be possible to obtain his help. Jappalang (talk) 14:15, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I am also too busy to help out right now. Good luck with the article! Scartol • Tok 20:48, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Re: anime songs
Oh, I did not create any of those articles. I just made a minor edit or two. Thanks for redirecting the articles, though. I agree that they don't pass the notability requirement for music. --Wolfer68 (talk) 03:15, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
NP 246
It said "DS hardware sales". EVAUNIT-666 11:54, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Sailor Venus GAR
I don't know if you were intending on doing Sailor Venus tomorrow, but the review proper doesn't seem to have been started yet? --Malkinann (talk) 06:21, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
- Working on it. It has a lot of issues so it's taking a while.陣内Jinnai 06:29, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
- Glad to know it's getting a thorough review. (FWIW, I think Sailor Mercury is probably the best of the SM character GAs). --Malkinann (talk) 06:45, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
reverted your reversion of Wikipedia:Fiction
I reverted your reversion of my Wikipedia:Fiction changes for the reason specified in the original edit summary. I went to Wikipedia:Fiction looking for the community's guideline on the topic and saw that editors had apparently given up on the proposal. FWIW, the emphasis on real-world content mention in the nutshell version, is my personal preference. But for whatever reason, no one brought the community to a consensus on the gory details in the proposal. 72.244.206.223 (talk) 23:10, 21 September 2009 (UTC).
Brock and Misty
Kinda have to disagree with cutting those two from the VG project. Unlike with Ash vs. Red, there's no distinction that either is a separate character than their video game versions, which have actually appeared more than once in games, albeit in small appearances. The manga even ties more into that with the character's more directly related to their original versions. So I strongly disagree with removing those two on those grounds: even if the anime version can be argued to be more "iconic" they're still video game characters.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:20, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Re: Media Create
Sorry it took so long to get back to you. Anyway, I apologize, but I think you'd be better off finding someone else to do it. Not only do I have no idea how to archive a page (I only know how to access them), but I'm a sporadic editor; I'll work on something, and then be gone. It would probably be better to have a more knowledgeable, frequent Wikipedian do it. Or perhaps a bot could be designed? I don't know how that works. Sorry again. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 05:05, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Removal of PROD from Siro (fictional character)
Hello Jinnai, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Siro (fictional character) has been removed. It was removed by DGG with the following edit summary '(merge is available.)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with DGG before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:46, 24 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)
Re: Air ELs
They're not redirecting for me.--十八 22:09, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Reference library request
Hi, I noticed that you had a copy of Manga The Complete Guide as part of the reference library - could you please look up the Sailor Moon entry for me? Even if there's not anything on the individual senshi to help in their GARs, the entry may benefit other Sailor Moon articles. Thanks! --Malkinann (talk) 00:03, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
- What exactly do you want looked up? Their are several SM entries.陣内Jinnai 23:24, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
- There are several SM entries? Sounds like we're cooking with gas. Is there anything in the book that jumps out at you as being missing from our articles? --Malkinann (talk) 04:24, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry for the long reply. I got a chance to look at it. It won't help for any of the sailor scouts, except maybe Sailor Moon herslf. It obviously could help for the article. In fact beyond Sailor Moon, it only mentions Tuxedo Mask by name.陣内Jinnai 23:50, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
- There are several SM entries? Sounds like we're cooking with gas. Is there anything in the book that jumps out at you as being missing from our articles? --Malkinann (talk) 04:24, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
OrphanReferenceFixer: Help on reversion
Hi there! I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted my fix to List of Popotan characters.
If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both <ref name="foo">...</ref> and one or more <ref name="foo"/> referring to it. Someone then removed the <ref name="foo">...</ref> but left the <ref name="foo"/>, which results in a big red error in the article. I replaced one of the remaining <ref name="foo"/> with a copy of the <ref name="foo">...</ref>; I did not re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the remaining instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove all instances of the named reference so as to not leave any big red error.
If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 19:43, 26 September 2009 (UTC) If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{bots|optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}} to your talk page.
Re: Misty and Brock
The reasoning is completely subjective to be honest. While it's easy to say to you that the character is more recognizable for being an anime character to you, to another editor it might be more recognizable as a manga character, and to someone else, a video game character. The only litmus test we ultimately have is to go with the character's first origin as that avoids any bias or original research.
I guess a good analogue are the Pokemon species articles themselves: awhile back it was argued that they should have anime-styled templates for the infobox because they were "more recognizable" in the anime, but consensus was that they use the standard VG character box to keep it consistent and due to their origin as video game characters.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:39, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- It's objective. Look at the reception the video game characters and the anime characters get. Look at the scholarly analysis.陣内Jinnai 01:51, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- I don't see how one character getting more attention in one format in such material than another accounts for anything. We don't have a MoS standard for such either, as far as I know? Much of Mewtwo's reception regarding it as a character, for example, is taken exclusively from its anime appearance. Yet it still has the VG character template without complaint.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:56, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- Mewtwo and Misty/Brock are completely different. I had a long paragraph about it, but edit conflict cut it. Basically Mew2 was designed even in the game to be a special pokemon. Misty and Brcok were designed as just another gym leader and other than gameguide material, there isn't anything of note about them, other than that they originally appeared in the game. You also continue to use their anime appearance in a video-game template which reinforces my point about the anime being more important.陣内Jinnai 02:03, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- I really disagree with doing this, as it comes across as original research. I'll start a discussion on WT:VG and see what they say, it would be good to have a standard here.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:10, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- Mewtwo and Misty/Brock are completely different. I had a long paragraph about it, but edit conflict cut it. Basically Mew2 was designed even in the game to be a special pokemon. Misty and Brcok were designed as just another gym leader and other than gameguide material, there isn't anything of note about them, other than that they originally appeared in the game. You also continue to use their anime appearance in a video-game template which reinforces my point about the anime being more important.陣内Jinnai 02:03, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- I don't see how one character getting more attention in one format in such material than another accounts for anything. We don't have a MoS standard for such either, as far as I know? Much of Mewtwo's reception regarding it as a character, for example, is taken exclusively from its anime appearance. Yet it still has the VG character template without complaint.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:56, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Just a shout to clarify, but I posted over there on WT:VG that the infobox was meant to convey that the character originated from video games but still show all aspects of them (i.e. anime etc) equally since the other infoboxes are either gangly or a maze and the vg character template is clear cut. Kinda realize how my edit summary came across there. Are you fine with the use of the vg character templates in that regard (meaning, signifying solely their origin, not as in putting more weight on the vg appearance over the others)--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:12, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- While I appreciate the clarrification, the vg template seems to over-emphasize her video game appearance imo. It should defiantly be noted that her origin is based from the video game, but her origin has had nothing to really do with her notability or the way she is percieved and studied. If you look at the VG template it is slanted towards VG characters appearances (obviously) and her role in the video game is not noteworthy except for that is was the basis for her anime, and later manga, counterpart that did become worthy of scholarly and industry notoriety.陣内Jinnai 01:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- I'm just saying that the template reflect where it came from and not "this is more important than that". I mean it can't be argued that the character originated from there, even if the anime/manga version are better received. The {{Infobox animanga character}} template puts more emphasis on in-universe content and has no real distinction as to what the first appearance was where unless you spell it out, and {{Infobox character}} is in the same boat. If you look at how I had the vg box set up on those pages, I showed they originated there, but listed the voice actors for both regions and live-action actor, the creator and designer. That's really all the infobox needed in this case and I'm surprised that the other templates don't keep that style. But anyway, point is it's a more user-friendly box that gets the point across clearer, can we at least agree on that and go from there?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:07, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- When I look at the VG one it does tend to emphasise the video game character though. FE: To be more neutral it should say "Original appearance" or if it were stictly for video games, "Original video game appearance" in which case Pokemon Red and Blue would suffice and should probably have a section for "first anime appearance" as that is what she is most famous for (something like original_other + original_other_name fields) otherwise for cases like these, where the original concept is not so important except for historic notation, it over-emphasizes if with the way the current vg template is setup.陣内Jinnai 02:24, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Hm, I'm going to add a bit to the VG character infobox that might be useful then, as we have had video game characters pop up before that initially appeared briefly in other formats (Gouken, Edge Master). I don't think the anime appearance per se needs to be listed her, as truthfully Misty, Brock, and even Jesse and James when they have their articles back all appeared in a very short time to the beginning of the series, so the prose can cover exactly when, no?
- Anyway once I finish the tweak going to set up the box on Misty. Tell me if you're satisfied with it afterwards, I'd rather show it in action.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:52, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Alright, the template now has a first appearance tag so it can cover situations like this or those like Gouken. If you want anime and manga appearances covered by then we could do an in-universe box tacked on, but I still think both are better handled by the prose in this case. Is this satisfactory?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:58, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe its the fact it starts out with her infobox as "Game series" when she's not really known for that. Probably if it were just "Series" it'd be fine since it contradicts otherwise with her anime avatar in the infobox.陣内Jinnai 03:06, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Simple hassle free solution there: changed "Game series" to just "Series".--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:11, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, yea now it seems fine. I would use that version as a model for the other characters from Pokemon (except maybe a few pokemon like pikachu) and as a model for other games where the probability of the video game is only of historic note compared to the other media (Ken and Ryu i'm not quite sure they are to that level).陣内Jinnai 03:15, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Simple hassle free solution there: changed "Game series" to just "Series".--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:11, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe its the fact it starts out with her infobox as "Game series" when she's not really known for that. Probably if it were just "Series" it'd be fine since it contradicts otherwise with her anime avatar in the infobox.陣内Jinnai 03:06, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Alright, the template now has a first appearance tag so it can cover situations like this or those like Gouken. If you want anime and manga appearances covered by then we could do an in-universe box tacked on, but I still think both are better handled by the prose in this case. Is this satisfactory?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:58, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- When I look at the VG one it does tend to emphasise the video game character though. FE: To be more neutral it should say "Original appearance" or if it were stictly for video games, "Original video game appearance" in which case Pokemon Red and Blue would suffice and should probably have a section for "first anime appearance" as that is what she is most famous for (something like original_other + original_other_name fields) otherwise for cases like these, where the original concept is not so important except for historic notation, it over-emphasizes if with the way the current vg template is setup.陣内Jinnai 02:24, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- I'm just saying that the template reflect where it came from and not "this is more important than that". I mean it can't be argued that the character originated from there, even if the anime/manga version are better received. The {{Infobox animanga character}} template puts more emphasis on in-universe content and has no real distinction as to what the first appearance was where unless you spell it out, and {{Infobox character}} is in the same boat. If you look at how I had the vg box set up on those pages, I showed they originated there, but listed the voice actors for both regions and live-action actor, the creator and designer. That's really all the infobox needed in this case and I'm surprised that the other templates don't keep that style. But anyway, point is it's a more user-friendly box that gets the point across clearer, can we at least agree on that and go from there?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:07, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Archive
cite web |'''archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20040209055921/http://www.popotan.com/3_story/index.html''' |url=http://www.popotan.com/3_story/index.html |'''archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20040209055921/http://www.popotan.com/3_story/index.html''' |archivedate=Februar...
Duplicate parameter. Rich Farmbrough 12:56 28 September 2009 (UTC).
You have your "-ologies" mixed up :) Dabomb87 (talk) 03:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Popotan soundtracks FL
|
The Manga and Anime BarnSakura Award | |
| I, Dinoguy1000, hereby award you this BarnSakura for your excellent work in making List of Popotan soundtracks WikiProject Anime and manga's first featured soundtrack/album list. Cheers! =D 「ダイノガイ千？！」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 18:13, 13 October 2009 (UTC) |
I thought I would let you know as someone else has removed your tag for deletion from this article. Project Sora is a company, a subsidiary of Nintendo, created by the owner of developer Sora Ltd Masahiro Sakurai. It just so happens that their first game under the label of Project Sora is known at this point in the same name. {Project Sora is developing a game temporarily named also Project Sora} I hope this clears up your concerns. Weeman com (talk) 20:53, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
AFD on List of Kemonomimi
It's only fair to alert you that I have made what might be take as strong exceptions to some of your earlier actions with the Kemonomimi article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Kemonomimi. I understand they were done in good faith to do what you think was improving Wikipedia, and I urge you not to think I intended to say otherwise. I do not know why the nom did not inform you of the present related AfD. DGG ( talk ) 19:59, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
An article whose AFD you participated in before is up at AFD again
The article Kemonomimi has been nominated for AFD a second time. I'm contacting every editor who participated in the first one, since if they were interested in it that time, they'd probably want to know the same exact article is being targeted once again. Dream Focus 03:16, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
KiKi KaiKai
Yeah, I hate to tell you that I'm coming up empty twice... but, I don't want to lie! I will tell you that there are obviously some among the reviews that are Japanese ports, but there are probably more European ports, and there are probably still more American games than all of the foreign games put together. Just the way they rolled, I guess! Please don't give up on me though; keep asking whenever you might need something, because I know I'll hit on something sooner or later. :) I've probably done around 200 reviews now and I've still got quite a few to go! BOZ (talk) 03:37, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Dragon Quest PR
I will look at it again but it will take me a day or too. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:21, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for asking, Jinnai! Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that I have either (although I thought I had seen Dragon Warrior in there, but I guess I was wrong). This is a comprehensive list of every review they did, so let me know if there's something else you've got on priority.
- Now, what I can tell you is that the column did a lot of commenting on games which did not recieve a full review at any point, usually in the form of a preview or a quick nod. If you think there's a chance that might be helpful, the Dragon CD-ROM Archives disk contains a search engine and I can have a look to see what might be there. BOZ (talk) 20:05, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- The only referece to Dragon Warrior I found was some guy complaining in the Forum column (ah, the days before internet message boards) about how computer role-playing games don't allow for the versatility to do things like kill villagers. :) I found a few references to DragonQuest, but not what you're looking for. Sorry that wasn't more helpful! BOZ (talk) 20:26, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- Same here! They seem to have hit upon nearly every successful influential game of the period... and plenty that are practically forgotten, for that matter (I can't tell you for how many articles, some having existed for a few years already, the first source added to the article was by me!). Granted, the main focus of the magazine lay in different areas, but their reviews sections was generally comparable to that of magazines which did focus on computers and gaming, so I don't know what to tell you. :) Well, if you come across any other games in the 1987-1995 time period, we'll try again. :) BOZ (talk) 17:26, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
- The only referece to Dragon Warrior I found was some guy complaining in the Forum column (ah, the days before internet message boards) about how computer role-playing games don't allow for the versatility to do things like kill villagers. :) I found a few references to DragonQuest, but not what you're looking for. Sorry that wasn't more helpful! BOZ (talk) 20:26, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
History of Video Games
Yeah, I tried to fix the link (it wasn't connecting to the article), but I was leaving as I finished the copyedit, so I didn't finish the fix. Thanks for fixing it. Angryapathy (talk) 14:21, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
compiling data from VG discussions
Hey, thanks for offering to help out. You mentioned that you might be available this week. I know Wikipedia is probably the last thing on your mind, though, considering you just finished finals or whatever. So if you need more time to breathe, that's cool too. Randomran (talk) 23:56, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
- Correction. My finals end this Thurday which is why I said not until next week, last week. I realize it may have been a communication error though.じんない 06:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot for helping out! Think you have the steam for one more? If I can find someone to do October or November, I'll finish off the other one, and we can get to the slightly more fun part of discussing what it all means. Randomran (talk) 19:16, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- Things got busy for me. But User:Guyinblack25 helped polish off the last month. Protonk wants to standardize the headings before we start the discussion, which I think will be helpful. So it might have to wait until next week. Randomran (talk) 16:55, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Random seems to have stopped editing (and hasn't responded to emails, though they weren't on the subject). If you want to continue the compilation for a full calendar year I can set some time aside to standardize all of the headers so we can put together a bot request to check deletion status, redirect status and crunch some numbers. I can't promise this will be done quickly. Protonk (talk) 23:55, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
RE:VG Data compliations
Sorry for the late reply. To my knowledge, we finished sorting User:Randomran/VGAFD into categories. But I believe User:Protonk was going through to standardize the categories. Not sure how far that was taken, but I remember it should be pretty close to completion. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:47, 28 September 2009 (UTC))
Hey Jinnai. As soon as Dragon Quest's PR is done, would it be O.K if I can be a co-nominator when its a FAC? I'm just wondering since I've been helping with it. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:34, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
- First let's see about getting some info on whether we should revise the table to conform with the timeline for the side series.陣内Jinnai 01:37, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
O.k. Also, congrats on List of Popotan soundtracks being a Featured List. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:41, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
- Can I get some help with the Peer Review? GamerPro64 (talk) 20:43, 19 October 2009 (UTC).
Should we put Dragon Quest on FAC now? GamerPro64 (talk) 19:00, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
- Still need to source stuff, ie mostly that game X exists and that it was released on day Y.陣内Jinnai 19:03, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Re School Rumble
Sorry about the delay. I spent a few hours on the article this morning... and we got hit by a power cut. Nothing saved of course. I'll get back on to it in the near future. EyeSerenetalk 14:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
- Of course, no problem. They're just points that occurred to me as I was going through the text. It's up to you what to do with them (if anything!) There's still a long way to go , and I'm having to squeeze Wikipedia into my RL commitments, which have ramped up recently, so it will unavoidably be a little on-off. EyeSerenetalk 07:22, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
School Rumble
Apologies for the hiatus, been on a week's holiday. Back on the job now though :) EyeSerenetalk 11:18, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Afro article
Thank you for reviewing the Afro Samurai article. :) I think I have corrected the grammatical errors on the page. I cannot see what is inaccurate about the article. Can you tell me what parts? :/ – J U M P G U R U ■ask㋐㋜㋗■ 02:26, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
- You have some contractions that aren't in quotes, a lot of 1-paragraph sections. Those 1-paragraphs are either very long or very short. If they are short, those sections should be combined somewhat and if they are long they likely should be split at some logical place.陣内Jinnai 02:58, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi
Jinnai, and thanks for your review at the above FLC. I wasn't quite sure what your stance on the article was (are you supporting, opposing, are there unresolved comments, etc.), so could you clarify that for me at the FLC? Thanks again, Dabomb87 (talk) 03:25, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Right now it's not supporting until there is a neutral party to adress the diagreement on the grammar clarrification issues I have that Goodraise doesn't agree with. I tried getting someone from WP:ANIME, but no one responded. It doesn't matter who, but someone neutral who hasn't already voted "support". If they agree with Goodraise on any or all of the points, I will drop them.陣内Jinnai 23:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
World of Final Fantasy VIII
I've gone through and dismantled the article per the discussion on WT:SE. The majority of the reception focused more on the game's graphical presentation than the world by far, and elements worked better in the two larger related articles. Prose probably needs tidying in spots but it's a start.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 14:02, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
- Looks likje that was a bit premature on my part. User:Dream Focus started complaining that a discussion was a necessity so it's back up with a merge tag.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 17:48, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
School Rumble update
Apologies for the recent break - I had an urgent request for an article currently at FAC, which took priority - but I think I've basically finished SR now (apart from the lead and a proofread). I've trimmed down the Anime reception section (more info on the talk page), hopefully not to the point of inaccuracy, but you'll be able to judge that better than I can. EyeSerenetalk 13:02, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Push for School Rumble as a FA
Good luck! --BrokenSphere[[User talk:BrokenSphere|Msg me]] 22:07, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you
...both for the shiny and your patience during what turned out to be a very bitty copyedit. I've got the FAC watchlisted, and I may make some further tweaks over the next few days when I get the chance to proofread (nothing major though). All the best, EyeSerenetalk 13:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
About tags
If that's so the plot tag is not necessary for any article. Isn't the in-universe tag for something that it's written in a way hard to understand for non-readers?Tintor2 (talk) 17:44, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe, {{plot}} should be merged with {{in-universe}} or at least be made a section-only tag. Specifically for character lists it is inappropriate because character lists are mostly plot description.陣内Jinnai 18:00, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
- Mostly yes, but it should be noted that it is very detailed. Maybe adding a fancruft tag?Tintor2 (talk) 18:10, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
- I have a problem in List of Gin Tama episodes (season 4); For the episode 185, which is going to be one containing two titles, is not shown in the list. Could you take a look? Regards. Tintor2 (talk) 22:40, 22
November 2009 (UTC)
Extended content
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dragon Warrior GA
Hey there. I thought I'd let you know I finished my review and left a few little things to do and once this is done (it shouldn't take more than an hour tops), this is a definite GA. Congrats :D Here's the list in case it is hard to decipher on the review page. Cheers,
- Add a reception infobox (see Saw (video game) for help))
- Change name from Dragon Quest to Dragon Warrior in the reception section*Unlink Erdrick in every place as it only links to the article itself
- Expand Soundtrack if possible (Optional)
GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 22:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
- I'm gonna have limited access due to the US holidays and my computer not booting due to hardware issues so if you see litte/no progress over the next week, please don't close it. goto WT:DQ if you think something minor could be fixed.陣内Jinnai 02:33, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
- Okay perfect :) Let me know when it's all ready and I'll give it a final runthrough then GA-class is all yours. Congrats. GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 23:18, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
- CHECK IT OUT, CONGRATS!!! GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 08:28, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Akiha Tohno
Hey Jinnai! I was thinking of making a page for Akiha Tohno, and managed to find some reviews on her character in Shingetsutan Tsukihime, and drafted a page about her - do you think that I should go ahead and be bold? I figured that if Arcueid and Shiki had an article Akiha probably could too. I might have gotten a few of the details wrong on the synopsis on her path (And made it a bit lengthy. Over seven paragraphs. -_- I should probably edit it down. Greatly.) so if you think I should go ahead with this I'd like some help in how to fix the links and such, since I haven't made an article before.Amatsu-Mikabushi (talk) 01:26, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
The reviews or l'article? If it's the article, I don't actually have it anywhere online. >_> Is there a place you can put drafts of articles here? Amatsu-Mikabushi (talk) 06:28, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
List of School Rumble characters review
Coming from a mostly anime perspective, as I've read about 1/3 of the manga, I feel the list looks fine as it is.
I have an idea why you might consider moving Karasuma to secondary vs. main character status, but given how much Tenma's affection for him drives that part of the plot and impacts Harima as well, I feel it would be better to keep him as a main character, albeit the lowest one perhaps in terms of hierarchy. My understanding, again not having read the last 2/3 the manga, is that his impact grows as the series progresses. However the anime (not counting the 3rd term) doesn't convey this. --BrokenSphereMsg me 00:33, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
AWB 4.6 is broken
AWB 4.6 is broken due to MW Changes. Feel free to download a SVN snapshots, and use 4.9.0.3. In a few days AWB 5.0 is released. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:40, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
listas
I never realized {{WikiProject Video games}} even accepted the |listas= parameter, which is why I removed it. Thanks for letting me know. MrKIA11 (talk) 14:36, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:School Rumble - bike-chase.png
Thanks for uploading File:School Rumble - bike-chase.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:14, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
GA Sweeps update
Thanks to everyone's efforts to the GA Sweeps process, we are currently over 90% done with only 226 articles remain to be swept! As always, I want to thank you for using your time to ensure the quality of the older GAs. With over 50 members participating in Sweeps, that averages out to about 4 articles per person! If each member reviews an article once a week this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. At that point, awards will be handed out to reviewers. As an added incentive, if we complete over 100 articles reviewed this month, I will donate $100 to Wikipedia Forever on behalf of all GA Sweeps participants. I hope that this incentive will help to increase our motivation for completing Sweeps while supporting Wikipedia in the process. If you have any questions about reviews or Sweeps let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:07, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Hunter x Hunter
Just stop stop stop. What you're doing is absolutely ridiculous. Having separate articles for different categories of characters is common practice, and there's plenty of background information related to the characters that simply will not be cut, and the rest is already fairly compact. At most the infoboxes can be lost to reduce length. Just put it back and leave it be, or put it back and start a month long discussion with the 10 other contributors on how it would be better.
Merging should not be considered if:
1. The resulting article is too long or "clunky" 2. The separate topics could be expanded into longer standalone (but cross linked) articles 3. The topics are discrete subjects and deserve their own articles even though they may be short
All of these are true in this case.
-Zyrxil (talk) 17:23, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- Doesn't matter as WP:SIZE doesn't apply to list articles
- When there is real-world information about them that doesn't threaten the notability of the parent article it would be split from. That isn't the case here and its doubtful you could find such.
- Which is why I am not merging the individual character articles at this time. Though they may be in the future unless they can show notability. The lists aren't that discrete; there very nature, lists, make them non-discrete.
- Much of the argument you base this on is its size and I'll admit, in its present form, its unweidly. However, its present form is not a format that would pass as a quality article; indeed it fails WP:OR. I just editied Ging Freecss and found WP:Synthesis and other original research. Infoboxes are also not used in list articles, further cluttering and expanding it. Finally, those lists have a lot of trivial information that isn't relevant, including trivial one-time characters who are not nessasary for understanding the plot of Hunter x Hunter.陣内Jinnai 17:39, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Arbitration Request Notification
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Character list merge and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks, -Zyrxil (talk) 08:01, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
School Rumble
Sorry I missed your post (my talk-page can be high-traffic sometimes!) I've been through the article and made a few tweaks, but nothing major. Only one thing to check with you: the quote from Lisa Marie about the bike chase - I assume she meant cachet (as in prestige), so I've included a [sic] in the quote, but it might be as well to check. All the best with the FAC ;) EyeSerenetalk 18:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
- It is an audio piece so i'm sure that's what she said. I'll change that.陣内Jinnai 19:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Copyedit
I will either copyedit the article later tonight or tomorrow afternoon. In either case, I will perform the requested second copyedit. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 19:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Unearthed Arcana
I was thinking of running Unearthed Arcana through GAN again. Figure it's improved a bit since the state it was in at the time of your review of it about a year ago? :) BOZ (talk) 05:30, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
- Looks better. However, I still believe it lacks info on the incorperation some of the rules, especially 3rd edition, into D&Ds "core rules" as an impact section.陣内Jinnai 05:51, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
- I don't have, or know of, a source that talks about that, so I don't know what else can be done. I really don't even know anything about how the 3E book's concepts were later incorporated into the core rules? BOZ (talk) 12:44, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
- I remember reading it I think either in one of the books the rules were adapted from in the intro or forward.陣内Jinnai 18:46, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
- Any idea which book(s) that might have been? BOZ (talk) 20:20, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
- PHB2 or the DMG2?陣内Jinnai 22:08, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
- I'll try to have a look through those - they seem to make sense. You figure in the introduction, or somewhere in the book, the designers give a nod to the UA explicitly? If so, I'd really like to make use of that. BOZ (talk) 00:09, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
- I read the introductions for both of those books and neither mentioned UA specifically. If you have any other ideas on where you might have seen something, let me know! BOZ (talk) 06:33, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- Nothing yet, although I did find some creation info on the 3rd edition version. It may have been in an issue of Dragon. If not, I don't know.陣内Jinnai 08:24, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- Yep, I've got that interview cited already. Don't know what else to add, or where else to look, but maybe it's far less crucial to have that info for GA as it is for FA. :) BOZ (talk) 00:30, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Probably for a GA. A GA doesn't require info on everything. FA though would be different.
- Yep, I've got that interview cited already. Don't know what else to add, or where else to look, but maybe it's far less crucial to have that info for GA as it is for FA. :) BOZ (talk) 00:30, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Nothing yet, although I did find some creation info on the 3rd edition version. It may have been in an issue of Dragon. If not, I don't know.陣内Jinnai 08:24, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- PHB2 or the DMG2?陣内Jinnai 22:08, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
- Any idea which book(s) that might have been? BOZ (talk) 20:20, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
- I remember reading it I think either in one of the books the rules were adapted from in the intro or forward.陣内Jinnai 18:46, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
- I don't have, or know of, a source that talks about that, so I don't know what else can be done. I really don't even know anything about how the 3E book's concepts were later incorporated into the core rules? BOZ (talk) 12:44, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
CSE
Have you made any use of it? --Gwern (contribs) 19:26 6 February 2010 (GMT)
- Never mind. --Gwern (contribs) 17:45 7 February 2010 (GMT)
- http://mailinator.com/showmail.jsp?email=jinnai2&msgid=70354
- Since the error seems to've been fixed. --Gwern (contribs) 01:19 26 February 2010 (GMT)
- It was apparently a screw up in the UI code that just made me think everything had been deleted. I didn't take screenshots or keep before-and-after, so I don't know for sure that the searches were unfiltered when I first noticed it. --Gwern (contribs) 22:56 26 February 2010 (GMT)
February GA Sweeps update
Thanks to everyone's efforts to the GA Sweeps process, we are currently over 95% done with around 130 articles left to be swept! Currently there are over 50 members participating in Sweeps, that averages out to about 3 articles per person! If each member reviews an article once a week this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. At that point, awards will be handed out to reviewers. Per my message last month, although we did not review 100 articles last month, I still made a donation of $90 (we had 90 reviews completed/initiated) to Wikipedia Forever on behalf of all GA Sweeps reviewers. I would like to thank everyone's efforts for last month, and ask for additional effort this month so we can be finished. I know you have to be sick of seeing these updates (as well as Sweeps itself) by now, so please do consider reviewing a few articles if you haven't reviewed in a while. If you have any questions about reviews or Sweeps let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 02:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Notability (fiction)
Don't you think the time for WP:BRD on that guideline is long past?—Kww(talk) 02:03, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- I have to disagree because those 2 i left are used in other fictional Wikipedia topics for the same reason. It's only recent local consensus that is disagreeing. I do agree that the other items are more shaky, but I'd want a wider-much wider than the last one-RfC before changing it because what is being done goes against what every other fictional guideline says and I believe some-specifically Gavin-have an agenda to get WP:FICT made stricter than the GNG and claim "consensus" when there are 2 arbcom rulings saying (my paragaphase) "find a compromise that has support from both inclusionists and exclusionists).
- I believe an RfC is justified before removing because you'll note that just prior to the version (where I added the award for fictional characters) that the whole page had been relatively stable for some months. This is only a recent backlash (yes I believe at the core that's what it is) to my addition. I'd want it done with that section in though and if its shown that the section doesn't have consensus from a much wider segment, then I'll concede. If one of them is fine and the other isn't, it should be integrated into the main list of criteria.陣内Jinnai 21:25, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
GA Sweeps Completed!
Thanks to everyone's amazing efforts in February, we have reviewed all of the articles and are now finished with Sweeps! There are still about 30 articles currently on hold, and once those reviews are completed, I will send you a final message about Sweeps process stats including the total number of articles that were passed and failed. If you have one of these open reviews, be sure to update your count when the review is completed so I can compile the stats. You can except to receive your award for reviewing within the next week or two. Although the majority of the editors did not start Sweeps at the beginning in August 2007 (myself included), over 50 editors have all come together to complete a monumental task and improve many articles in the process. I commend you for sticking with this often challenging task and strengthening the integrity of the GA WikiProject as well as the GAs themselves. I invite you to take a break from reviewing (don't want you to burn out!) and then consider returning/starting to review GANs and/or contribute to GAR reviews. With your assistance, we can help bring the backlog down to a manageable level and help inspire more editors to improve articles to higher classes and consider reviewing themselves. Again, thank you for putting up with difficult reviews, unhappy editors, numerous spam messages from me, and taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 02:30, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Re: Images for Dragon Quest
I tried to answer your question on my talk page. I hope it helps you (and Walsh). --an odd name 00:27, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Fixing the list of .hack characters
hey, i proposed an idea and he seemed to like it.
so the idea is that we split the characters into two different articles. One being List of Project .hack characters and the other being List of .hack Conglomerate characters.
this way it would be easier to determine which characters are the main characters from each project. And characters such as Kite and Haseo can have brief description depending on which project they were most important.Bread Ninja (talk) 15:48, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- So do you have an opinion on the matter?Bread Ninja (talk) 18:03, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
| This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |