User talk:Fethroesforia/Archive

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Fethroesforia, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Ageo020 00:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

Hello, you used the {{helpme}} tag. How may I help you? When you've asked your question, please put the tag back so we know to check back. Alternatively, you can join the Wikipedia Bootcamp IRC channel to get real-time help. (Use the web-based client to get instant access.)—— Eagle (ask me for help) 22:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Eagle..I..am kind of new...though i have made a few articles..I just dont know where to ask questions easily..so..Im sorry if this wastes your time..I should really of read up on things first..anyway..on the TOCA videogame page..I was wondering if I could split the page up into seperate pages for each videogame? As the games are quite different in many ways... I dont know if I have to..ask or something else. Im probably being stupid about it..sorry again Fethroesforia 22:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can... but before doing something like that, you should post a message on the related talk page. Talk:TOCA, or what ever it is called. Leave it be for 7 days, and if no one responds by then go ahead and be bold and just do it. Other wise talk it out with who ever responds on that page. —— Eagle (ask me for help) 22:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help Me[edit]

please?

Hi, what do you need help with? J Ditalk 21:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok..i asked a question at help desk but has been ignored...

The fair use drop box when uploading says one screenshot per article..and for most high profile games..it stays true.

But for smaller games (eg..3-D WorldRunner) this rule..seems to not be applied..is there..another rule I don't know? It seems to have..many more than one screenshot and Im wondering if this is still fair use? many thanks Fethroesforia 21:50, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

If you look at other articles, you'll see that hardly any of them use one screenshot. I don't know if this is because they're sticking to the guideline of using no more than three fair use images, if people choose to ignore that, or what; you're probably better off waiting for an answer at the help desk, where somebody else would be able to give you a decent answer.

Whatever the case, images shouldn't be used in articles unless they need to be there. Having images there for the sake of having them isn't covered by fair use, and you should perhaps remove excessive images from articles and tag them as orphaned fair use images if they aren't used in any other articles; or discuss it on articles' talk pages. J Ditalk 21:56, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes I have noticed high profile (Resident evil 2 and 4 i checked for instance) and the rule is kept too..but..often low profile games are flooded with screenshots..but..thank you:) Fethroesforia 21:58, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

No worries. J Ditalk 22:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

If there are many used and they are all fair use, removing some of them is warranted. —Centrx→talk • 21:59, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

so shall i..take some screenshots off them or highlight them somehow ?(sorry..im..new and stupid) Fethroesforia 22:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Read WP:FU#Policy, if after you've read that you think the images should be removed, go ahead and do it. J Ditalk 22:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Living People[edit]

Hi Festhroesforia, just wanted to note that the "Living people" category is actually not double-capitalized: If you ever see items in Category:Living People, they should be moved to Category:Living People if you get the chance. I fixed a few you'd done recently, so I figured I'd drop you a line. Cheers. -- nae'blis 16:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

BNP NPOV tag[edit]

I have beeen meaning to get round to putting it on the page has a strong undertone of bias a prejudice against the BNP throughout. I t refers to them as the nasty party at some points whihc is clearly not neutral it also dose not present the facts accuratly giving a biased and preconcived opinion of the issues such as immigration.--Lucy-marie 00:00, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One word of advice[edit]

This may seam intrusive but i checked the history of this page and it seams you have deleted discussions. Although this is your talk page i think you should keep the discussion open so people cann add to them later with their own views. Also deleting them may make people think you have something to hide. (which you proberbly don't)--Lucy-marie

I have yes, Im just..very compulsive in keeping things empty and clean, though i will re-instate all previous posts on the page. I didnt realise i had too, though thinking about it it makes sense because of warnings and such. Though I do have nothing to hide;) (Fethroesforia 00:06, 30 December 2006 (UTC)) [reply]

BNP talk[edit]

Please excuse me posting on your talk page. This does really belong on the BNP discussion page, but that has got a little confused with people slotting in replies to your separate points and I couldn't work out where to slot this in.

You wrote: "It also includes faith and community leaders and politicians from the Labour Party, the Conservative Party (e.g., David Cameron), RESPECT, the Liberal Democrats, the Green Party, the Socialist Workers Party and the United Kingdom Independence Party. Searchlight magazine has monitored the activities of the BNP and its members for many years, and has published many articles highly critical of them." oh really?source? Fethroesforia 16:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I added: The source for that is pretty obvious - Searchlight itself. Emeraude 21:02, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

And you replied: and im supposed to trawl through the entire website to find the names? seriously? Fethroesforia 21:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Now calm down and read carefully what we have both said and I will do my best to explain. You wanted a source for Searchlight's "many articles highly critical of them". The source is stated. It is Searchlight. It would be absolutely ridiculous, I'm sure you'll agree, to list every article ever printed in Searchlight that is critical of the BNP. On the other hand, if you want a source for the statement that Searchligh monitors the BNP (and other fascist/neo-fascist/far right groups as well), again the source is Searchlight, or, even better, the Wikipedia article on Searchlight. So sourcing is not a problem here. It is also accepted in Wikipedia that we don't have to proof the "bleeding obvious". For example, if you were writing an article that began "Paris, the beautiful capital city of France" you could be in real trouble. How do provide sources for:

1. Paris being a city and not a town 2. Paris is in France 3. Paris is the capital

Of course, no one expects you to. (As to whether Paris is beautiful, that's a different matter and is clearly an opinion, though one that I suspect most people would agree with.)

Similarly, to expect to have to provide sources that Searchlight is anti-BNP, publishes articles critical of it, etc etc comes under the heading of the "bleeding obvious", it's common knowledge just as Paris bing the capital of France is.

Personally, I also think it is common knowledge that the BNP is a racist party. You don't. OK, difference of opinion there, but the article at the moment does say that the BNP denies this (cited) as well as showing why this is believed with examples of who believes it. That's balanced. I think WGee has addressed this issue in more detail so I'll leave it to him. Emeraude 00:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Violation of user page guidelines?[edit]

I just wanted to bring to your attention that the current section on your userpage entitled "I'd like to..." is really inappropriate to have on your userpage. So for that matter is your "vandalise like a communist would" banner.

The purpose of a user page is to enable active editors of Wikipedia to introduce themselves to other editors. Wikipedia is not a general hosting service, so you should not consider your user page to be a personal homepage. Content unrelated to Wikipedia or its editing may be removed.

Please see the user page guidelines, especially this section for more information to help you keep your userpage within Wikipedia guidelines.

I've also noticed that while Werdnabot does archive your talk page regularly, you also have a habit of deleting talk page comments before Werdnabot can archive them. Most of these cases seem to be vandalism or personal attacks, but you don't provide edit summaries explaining this, and it's often a good idea to keep a record of these types of edits as well. Many users keep a seperate archive for vandalism and you may want to think about doing that, especially considering that your talk page seems to attract these kinds of negative edits.

On another note, please keep in mind that while you may be active enough and respond quickly enough to have your talk page archived every day, 24 hours to archive is a very short amount of time and discussion may continue after that. This leaves editors with three possibilites: reply on your talk page to a comment in archive, continue discussion on the archive page, or to sign without a timestamp, (one can be added later from the edit history) as I am about to do now and wait to add timestamps until receiving a response from you and concluding discussion. TStein

k..sorting it:) Fethroesforia 16:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]