User talk:RainBowAndArrow/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

DQ9

Brian Ashcraft meets the criteria of WP:SPS as he is a contributor to Wired magazine.陣内_Jinnai 20:48, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Notability

It seems you think video game ratings and release dates in non-English countries are "non-notable"? I don't think that's an appropriate editing strategy. Some guy (talk) 09:56, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

I would think, for example considering the existence of the article Public holidays in South Korea on this English Wiki, common sense dictates we can have release dates for non-English countries in the articles. They don't take up much space. Some guy (talk) 10:19, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

That's cluttered? Have you seen the infobox for a car or a common firearm? I'll try the WP tomorrow. Some guy (talk) 10:29, 19 July 2010 (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 Lego Harry Potter: Years 1–4.

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 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 .

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⚡ 22:27, 21 July 2010 (UTC) If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{bots|optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}} to your talk page.

Corrib Gas Controversy

I'm no anarchist! I speak only factually. Maybe you're right. Maybe people can complete an EIS before they have done their research and expect to get planning permission before they have started making trial boreholes to see if the substrate is suitable or not? Well, isn't technology wonderful these days? Or maybe..........? dare I say............?? no, no, better not........! Maybe you will indeed be going to hell as your own info boxes suggest? Comhar (talk) 18:53, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Comhar

Hey Fin, hope you're keeping well? I see you left a message for Comhar earlier. I've been in a good bit of contact with her over the last few months. They've being doing a good bit of work on Mayo related articles and have done some really good work in these areas. FWIW its worth I believe they are exercising some moderate POV on Corrib Gas articles. I've been trying to keep on eye on things and steer them along in the right direction where necessary, I'm not so sure they have a COI just some mild POV. They are relatively inexperienced and are still getting to grips with policies GainLine ♠ _♥ 19:15, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

"I don't quite understand your comment about hell, but please be careful. Thanks! Fin©™ " If you didn't put it on your own page then you better check your page for vandalism. Your own page seems to me to declare you think you'll go to hell? Comhar (talk) 20:46, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello, RainBowAndArrow. You have new messages at GainLine's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sorry, I didn't mean to put it on your user page. I just did not recognise TM as being your talk page. I think that all the information I put on Wikipedia articles is useful, informative and encyclopaedic and I don't intend it to be anything else. I work towards putting Mayo things that I know about on the 'wiki map' which was not available before and, according to page view statistics of articles I have created or improved, I have been increasingly successful in getting orphaned articles and other errors I used to make, more accessible and better linked. Many of my articles now have 50 - 60 views per day which I reckon is pretty good as six months ago they had no views at all as they didn't exist! I take pride in keeping "my" (I know I don't own them, of course) articles encyclopaedic, interesting and keeping an eye on them on a regular basis. While the Corrib Gas issues might be minor to you, wherever you live, to us they are extremely major issues which will severely impact on the future story (encyclopaediacally speaking) of many of the places my articles deal with. Comhar (talk) 12:00, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Need your perspective

A debate has started on the Precursors article. Basically, a guy is trying to add mention of his own patch to the website using this[1] as a source. As I see it, that doesn't make it notable. Eik Corell (talk) 13:12, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Reliable sources

I have reverted this change that you have made, because not only does it link to a source that is a blog, a blog which doesn't really give us any clues as to whether or not it is even reliable. Did you read the about page? There is none, it's a 404 error. Further, to say that it is 'more reliable' when it gives the exact same information seems rather POVish, especially when looking at the site you replaced, which in fact looks more reliable. I see no reason why it should be deleted, indeed, you could easily use both, but even then, I would not recommend the blog due to the fact that it violates WP:RS, and the fact that it cites it's info to a truly reliable source; this article. Please evaluate the sources in an objective manner, and please do not blindly revert like that. If both sources support the same info, there is no reason to not include both of them. If anything it makes the sourcing stronger for such a statement. If you reply here, I will not likely see it, so please leave a message on my talk page if you do.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 09:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

We should never use personal opinion to decide if a source is reliable or not. If it is to pass wikipedia's standard of reliable, please demonstrate how it is such. As of this moment, it looks awfully unreliable; not only does it not have an about page, it doesn't have any sort of page telling us if it's editors check their facts. I will be bringing both it, and the source you replaced to RSN after a set amount of time, as I have sent an email to the creator of the other site. If he doesn't answer in a week, I'll take it there with what I have.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 10:11, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

RE: Notice: Conflict of Interest on Monday Night Combat.

Please be more specific as it seems like you're accusing me of being an employee of Uber Entertainment who made Monday Night Combat. --FLStyle (talk) 22:13, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

The page in question has been edited for a more neutral view. Feel free to flag it for addition changes by other users if you're not satisfied that it meets the rules of COI. For future references I have been in contact with Reach Out to the Truth on occasions since his original post about additions to the Whiskey Media and Giant Bomb that doesn't bleach the Wikipedia rules ie. unpublished information. Since my first edits that he took issue with in March I have always strived to make sure I have published references and that I do not stray into original research violations. Futhermore I am in no way in any sort of agreement with Whiskey Media about editing their pages for them. I do it simply because I choose to help Wikipedia in having more complete and up to date data. Thank you for your help in improving my quality of writing.

--FLStyle (talk) 13:58, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Removal of the GameShark review

What does "nn review" mean? It was you justification for removing the GameShark review from the Civilization V article. We've got a long article on GameShark and the template contains places for "extra" reviews, so why not use them? It was also properly referenced. I find the GameShark review was a valuable addition as it differed slightly from the general praise with the B+ score. —ZeroOne (talk / @) 22:00, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Flatout2pc.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Flatout2pc.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 05:28, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

[2]

Hello. Why did you remove this rating form the article ? Sir Lothar (talk) 10:06, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

I see. Thanks ! Sir Lothar (talk) 19:35, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Pictures removed from Medal of Honor (2010) and Killzone 3

Hi. Could you please let me know why the pictures I had added to Medal of Honor (2010) and Killzone 3 were removed? Thanks! Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 05:18, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Saw your response - makes sense - although would not agree its just a bunch of people playing the game since its more like participation in a company-organised marketing effort. Will it be cool though, if I add some text on the pre-release marketing efforts and add these pictures, as they form part of pre-release marketing campaigns of the respective games ? Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 12:42, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Removal of information about APB

Hi, can I ask why you removed the information about All Points Bulletin being bought over? Since it came from a source and I see no reason not to let the community know about this. DJScias (talk) 20:56, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

VGChartz

Any reason why you keep defacing the VGChartz entry? TadjHolmes (talk) 09:04, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Sure you are - you are re-adding an extended paragraph detailing the Simon Carless article and adding conjecture as to why the site isn't credible in some eyes, when this is already discussed later on the expansion paragraph and the Carless article is already referenced there TadjHolmes (talk) 09:12, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

SPI

I'll open an WP:SPI on JadamHosey as it passes the duck test in my opinion. SmartSE (talk) 15:32, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Gamecruft

Hi, I want to ask about something. What is gamecruft? I am not native American, so I don't understand some words. So please explain me, what it means, because I can't find meaning of this word in Internet.

I am asking because you removed my edit in article Fight Night Round 4.

--ArkadiuszEurope (talk) 17:36, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Need for Speed

Hello there! Thanks for your messages, first of all, I did not change "%" scores, I only changed scores from 10 and 100; second, I don't think if we need to remove the ratings have 0.1 score, I think the rating function in Wiki, show differences between 8.7 and 8.8, although, there is not much difference between these scores, what do you say? Nima1024 (talk) 12:38, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

You must not revert my edits, there are many 9.0 and 8.5 and 9.5 ratings, these can be shown right. Nima1024 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:45, 24 November 2010 (UTC).

The Fight: Lights Out (video game)

Hi. I hope you are fine. Can you explain why my edits were reverted? The game had mixed critic reviews, and positive customer reviews. Also, the organization I made was clear and referenced. Thank you87.236.50.10 (talk) 11:29, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Lego Harry Potter Year 1-4

I send an e-mail to TT games to find out about the release date of Lego Harry Potter for PS2 and they still don't want to give me some answer when the Lego Harry Potter for PS2 going to come out. They first mentioned in the trailer and still never out yet. I think they lie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.48.50.11 (talk) 16:29, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

uncivil edit summaries by BLGM5 (talk · contribs)

Any comments you may have would be appreciated. --emerson7 04:53, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

sorry i forgot to post where i reported him yesterday here --emerson7 20:48, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

GT5 locked?

Hi there, the article for Gran Turismo 5 appears to be locked, and nobody on the talk page is paying any notice at all. This looks to be one of the biggest videogames of the year, and there is lots lacking in the article - any chance you could do something to get it editable again?

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.22.71 (talk) 20:18, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

SSX 3 soundtrack

The soundtrack listed is not complete. They are only the ones part of the soundtrack CD, which are only about half of all the songs featured in the game! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.112.194.153 (talk) 12:07, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Raskulls lead reception?

Why'd you pull the Reception summary from the lead? The lead is supposed to summarize the article, that's why I wrote the second paragraph. --Teancum (talk) 13:59, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Medal of Honor 2010 cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Medal of Honor 2010 cover.jpg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:03, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)