The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
For the reversions of vandalism. Keep it up. Namtar 17:11, 26 August 2011 (UTC) |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
Thank you so much for explaining things to me. Wikipedia can be very frustrating at times but it is a much better place because of people like you who are willing to explain things. City boy77 (talk) 03:53, 29 August 2011 (UTC) |
I would appreciate your comment at Wikipedia talk:Non-free use rationale guideline#Expand the guideline. Thanks. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 06:30, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your constructive criticism. When I placed the ((Plot|date=September 2011)) template in the article sections, they were immediately removed by other editors, even in the article Treehouse of Horror VIII, which is longer than 900 word and has multiple subsections, obviously against the spirit of what plot summaries should be per Wikipedia policy. Perhaps the actions of editors that automatically remove appropriate tags should also be investigated. Finally, I think the name-calling exhibited by Viriditas on the notice board to administrators is more offensive than my good-faith edits and a few errors. Thanks again for your corrections and friendly approach. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Northamerica1000 (talk • contribs)
The Good article section in Discussion pages in articles should be revised, it states directly that good articles that don't meet criterion can be delisted as such. This should therefore be corrected. It is never by intention to ever be disruptive or counterproductive. Northamerica1000 (talk) 13:45, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
I can understand your concerns considering the EqD page, although the real concern should be about the article on that Fighting is Magic which I don't know how the hell it got past notability issues. It was more of an effort to get the operator off my dick ever since I got FiM to GA status. Rainbow Dash !xmcuvg2MH 02:42, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
i love you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.203.3.15 (talk) 13:25, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
I saw your work on The Ico & Shadow of the Colossus Collection – it looks great! I noticed the article meets the criteria for a WP:DYK and was wondering if you'd mind if I nominate it for one. Please let me know, thanks. --Odie5533 (talk) 07:28, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Intoronto1125 has been edit warring, but that does not mean that we cannot officially form a consensus against his proposed change.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:00, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi, did you see my post at [1]. I believe you were quite active when this guideline got off the ground and wondered if you could help to answer it. Please post there. Thanks. 08:11, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
The shot there is actually during that part when they're talking through the glass. I know it's not obvious, but I couldn't find a better shot that could show the contrast between the two Amys. I'm open to something more distinct, but I don't have access to iPlayer to grab a screenshot. Glimmer721 talk 22:49, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
That was cute. Anyway, of interest; this user appears to be running a parallel account? User:Cinema City Romania. Not wrong, per se, but maybe worth a look. --Hammersoft (talk) 12:58, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Lego-david-bowie.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. –Drilnoth (T/C) 21:13, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
I am having difficulties understanding the sentence that I got rid of in the context of your edit summary.
"Reasons for this unusual appreciation include a combination of Faust's direction and characterization, [etc]"
I am unsure whether this sentence is referring specifically to the fact that Lauren Faust did the show, or the direction and characterization of the show, of which Faust happened to be a part. In other words, is the sentence saying:
"Reasons include ... Faust's contribution to the show"
or
"Reasons include ... The general direction and characterization of the show, which Lauren Faust helped develop"
If the sentence is intended to mean the latter, I think that adding Lauren Faust's name is irrelevant and only causes confusion. If the sentence is the former, the phrase 'direction and characterization' is confusing and I suggest revising it to the example sentence I provided.Enigmocracy (talk) 05:09, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
User: JimmyBlackwing has copy edited rhythm game for the purposes of an FAC attempt. Just wondering whether you wouldn't be interested in nominating it. More than half the content must be yours, so you're welcome to a shot at the credit, such as it is... Otherwise, I'll give it a try in few days. Thanks. bridies (talk) 10:31, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
I see the last sentence does mention Dance Central being the "top-selling game for the Kinect", although that's just Nov 2010. What would we need on Tap Tap? The only interesting claim I can see on our current articles is Tap Tap Revenge 2' Already Top iPhone App, 500,000 Downloads. It's hitting me that I've really not been following new games in general for a couple of years and am pretty clueless about this part of the material. Still, hopefully I can chase down info on any given hints... The only other things I'm becoming apprehensive about are firstly the possible lopsidedness in detail between 2009-10 and everything else. Although mulling it over a lot of it seems to directly involve Guitar Hero/Rock Band and perhaps a deservedly hefty 2005-2010 section on the Western franchises is what we should be looking at. The other thing being whether the Japanese section is given enough weight. I'm leaning towards yes, just not totally sure: it seems to breeze through a little compared to those blow-by-blow sales figures found later on. On the other hand, I think even the less detailed sections are at least as good as 4X and maybe something like the history section of SNES. There doesn't seem to be a lot of directly comparable featured content to gauge against, hmm. bridies (talk) 12:29, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
The article is now at FAC. I took the liberty of adding your name to the nomination, I think it's all legit... feel free to add or edit anything. I ended up only making a few minor additions before nominating, we'll see what happens. bridies (talk) 05:34, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
I've tried to find it for quite a while but to no avail, and webarchives aren't helping. Unless it is found, would it not be better to remove the dead link to re-add it if and when the review is located? I'm kinda new at this, so maybe there's some policy in place or something. I'm just trying to do some cleanup of articles in Book:Mario_titles, removing dead links, correcting redirects & duplicates, adding sources where I can. Lemme know. :) Salvidrim (talk) 19:19, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
There is a poll taking place here on whether or not to extend the ArbCom binding resolution, which says there may be no page move discussions for Ireland,Republic of Ireland or Ireland (disambiguation), for a further two years. Fmph (talk) 21:27, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm hoping this was an error? It certainly wasn't vandalism.. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:53, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your work on the above article. I'm not sure if I wasn't paying close enough attention during last season's finale, but I don't remember...
...the 'machine room' being so intricate - all those interlocks and stuff to get to it, etc. In the article, when it says they "take the module to the Machine room" - it kindof pops out and makes you say 'eh?'. Maybe it should be explained a bit more there... Perhaps we have missed something where all that containment was built up around it - but only a week has passed?
Cheers... –xenotalk 19:12, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Bioshock-hack.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. Skier Dude (talk) 05:13, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
I agree with you, but I am rejecting the underlying assumptions in the way that SmashTheState has framed this problem and these proposals. patsw (talk) 02:44, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Tar-7-roadblock.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. Skier Dude (talk) 08:54, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Tar-s1-ff.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. Skier Dude (talk) 09:31, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Please solve this mystery if you can...
On September 23rd, traffic to Portal:James Bond doubled, and has stayed at the new level since then. I can't figure out what happened.
See http://stats.grok.se/en/201109/Portal%3AJames_Bond
Traffic to Outline of James Bond stayed the same (though it was at the higher-level already), which leads me to suspect changes made somewhere in Wikipedia.
See http://stats.grok.se/en/201109/Outline%20of%20James_Bond
I'd like to find out what happened, in case it reveals helpful link placement tips that can double the traffic to outlines too!
I look forward to your reply on my talk page. The Transhumanist 22:54, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 4, No. 3 — 3rd Quarter, 2011
Previous issue | Next issue
Project At a Glance
As of Q3 2011, the project has:
|
Content
|
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 07:34, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Despite the pleasant interactions on my talk page, User:The Pink Oboe continues to restore non-free content to Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Illustration workshop. Seeking your assistance; this is now an edit war, and I want to avoid that. I'm absolutely within policy to revert him of course, but it isn't working anyway. A stern warning, if not for the blatant personal attacks, is in order. --Hammersoft (talk) 01:24, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I know you raised the Continuity section issue on the talk page of WP:WHO before and I came for some advice before I start chopping (this way I have a discussion to hark back to if the revisions are reverted). The article of "The Doctor's Wife" is fairly good, but it's main issue is the continuity section, which is about as long as the plot synopsis itself. What do you think should stay and has reliable references (though citing the actual episode something occured is okay if it's really major), and what should just be deleted? I'm not sure about the first paragraph and how I could find that information or whether that really matters. Also, is it really worth mentioning that the Ninth and Tenth TARDIS's control room is used when it's already in the plot and production sections? And isn't Rory's 2,000 year thing just an inference that it relates back to "The Big Bang"?
Overall, I would just keep the jettisoning TARDIS room thing as it relates to Castrovalva (with a reference), maybe the cube thing if I can find a reference, "madman with a box" (think I saw a review mention that somewhere), perhaps the "Ood I failed to save" and then absolutely "the only water in the forest is the river", as that relates to the series arc and I am going to easily find a reference to it right now. What do you think?
Thanks, Glimmer721 talk 19:16, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Once upon a monster logo.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. Skier Dude (talk) 04:53, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
I would appreciate your input at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 52/Archives/ 41#10c violations. Thanks. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 10:25, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
I think you have it wrong. This is being used in a few articles.Gregory Heffley (talk) 22:56, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Masem/Archive 9! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
Please click HERE to take part. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey |
I want to know why you tagged thisGreg Heffley 18:18, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
But it does though. Please let me continue putting images up, because it gives more information about the episode and really describes it. In fact every episode up to The End of Time does have a screenshot. TrebleSeven (talk) 18:34, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
You contributed to a recent discussion about an editor who was creating many stubs. The conclusion was that this was just a case of a prolific editor, with no violation of policy. There remains a question about whether very small stubs are useful, regardless of how they are created. You may want to contribute to the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Stub/Archive 15#Minimum size. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 19:32, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Any citations for him being executive producer of FiM? –IsaacAA (talk) 10:47, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Betacommand 3. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Betacommand 3/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 24, 2011, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Betacommand 3/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 00:40, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Drafting arbitrator User:Kirill Lokshin has posted some questions to the parties. As you are either an involved party or have presented evidence in this case, your input is sollicited. For the Arbitration Committee --Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 13:50, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Masem, just letting you know I've co-nominated me and you at DYK for the article And Those We've Left Behind. You can find the nomination page here. Let me know if this is an issue. Thanks, Ruby 2010/2013 06:43, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
I recently tried to add this template to one of the wikia I edit. But it requires a sub template (Template:VGrequirements/Sub) to work and it has been deleted here. Can you explain how to create this dead template? Thank you..--117.202.70.70 (talk) 13:26, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
On 20 November 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article And Those We've Left Behind, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Fringe episode "And Those We've Left Behind" marked the first time actors and real-life husband and wife Stephen Root and Romy Rosemont had worked together on a creative project? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/And Those We've Left Behind.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
PanydThe muffin is not subtle 16:02, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
The Good Article Barnstar | ||
Thanks Masem for helping to promote Potato Sack to Good Article status. Please accept this little sign of appreciation and goodwill from me, because you deserve it. Keep it up, and give some a pat on the back today. --Sp33dyphil © • © 02:51, 27 November 2011 (UTC) |
Hi Masem. I'm trying to see where we all stand with regard to what the problem is with image use. Would you mind summarising concisely for me what you think is the problem here. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 10:42, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Regarding this request I have the infrastructure and tools available I just need the green light. ΔT The only constant 23:05, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
just a suggestion, but given the abysmal heat-to-light ratio on that page you may need to set up a separate straw poll subsection with a banner instructing people to put discussion elsewhere, otherwise things are going to implode into petty squabbles the way they are currently imploding. There are too many people dead set on getting their way and hair-triggered about opposition.
Honestly, what I think the page needs is a good old fashioned fist fight - there's nothing quite as effective for burning off excess testosterone, establishing mutual respect, and clearing the head. But, alas… --Ludwigs2 21:18, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Alone, these aren't admin issues alone, but with the above cases noted above... looks like a sentence that I should have written. —DoRD (talk) 21:14, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for noting that these might get deleted. Granted, the only good sources for the characters is the show itself, and that can't be cited. I don't know... but I saw a ton of other cartoon characters with pages that have no sources whatsoever (like the Jimmy Neutron article, the individual Rugrats characters, etc.), so I assumed it would be safe.
Lots of pages on Wikipedia would fail the notability guideline if people actually paid attention to them and took action. - XX55XX (talk) 15:28, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi. In My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Child's Play (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your thoughts at Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content#.22brief_verbatim_textual_excerpts.22_revisited/ I'm looking at Maria_von_Trapp, where the length of the quoted material in the footnotes rivals that in the main article. I think I know your druthers; it would be better to identify facts in the quotes belong to the article, and write them in one's own words, in the article. On that point we agree, assuming I understand your position.
However, I'm trying to determine whether it is a point of preferential style or stronger. Unlike the example I linked before, where I could improve it in a minute or two, cleaning this up it a chore (and one of more than 6000 items to review, many of which have similar issues.) RAN has been helpful when I've pointed out clear cut cases - obvious copy and paste requiring rewrite or very deficient referencing. On this article I think I am on weaker ground; while I think it could be improved materially, I don't know that RAN is obligated to write an article differently, simply because I like a different structure. Your thoughts would be most welcome.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 19:59, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Muhammad images. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Muhammad images/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 2, 2011, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Muhammad images/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 15:11, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of 2012 in downloadable songs for the Rock Band series, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: 2011 in downloadable songs for the Rock Band series. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:45, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sega-patent-6200138-image.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:28, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
You contributed to a discussion either here or here. I'm attempting to summarize and move the discussion forward here. You may well have this page watchlisted, but as I am trying to carny on in a slightly different place, I'm letting everyone know who contributed.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 17:03, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Hey Masem, we bump into each other a bit on the video game articles. There's an editor going around that I believe is working against general consensus on how Plot sections of video games should be done. The user constantly tags plot sections with citation needed, including his own additions as he adds them. He breaks plots up into unconventional sections, tags them outright as needing rewrites (After making extensive edits), and populates them with excessive numbers of quotes from the games to act as citations. The quotes themselves possibly being OR. I've fought these edits (With talk page consensus) on a couple of articles but I see it's occurring in other articles that I don't watch, after reverting another one today that I do watch.
What's the best approach to attempt to address this? I've responded to the user directly a few times, including a warning about flagging all of their updates as "minor edits" when they change substantial sections of articles. I don't want to police the user's contributions everywhere, that doesn't feel right or in the spirit of Wiki. I'm also a big opponent to people dropping big tags like rewrite, which direct users to the talk page for more information, where the tagging editor did not leave any issues or suggestions. -- ferret (talk) 18:58, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Masem, I don't want you to think there was any bad blood between us. I have full faith that your edit was in good faith. What happened was when you made the edit a bit of the info disappeared (I believe it was about the soundtracks). This was, I'm sure a technical issue. I merely reverted the issue to save the vanished content. I always assumed that you would come back and fix it. Maybe I should of been more clear. 08:38, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 4, No. 4 — 4th Quarter, 2011
Previous issue | Next issue
Project At a Glance
As of Q4 2011, the project has:
|
Content
|
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 06:28, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Hey Masem, I think you have an incomplete thought at the end of this thread? Did you miss something or just forget to delete it? Here's the diff. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 01:02, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Your attention is requested here: Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates#Reshoot_of_Yogo_sapphires. PumpkinSky talk 23:31, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Masem - I think (and am glad) we managed to converge on a mutual understanding at WT:FAC before the surrounding furore resulted in a closedown. In any case, I welcome further discussion, and if you want my thoughts and/or support in taking your latest ideas forward, feel free to contact me at any time. I have also been substantially involved with WikiProject assessments in the past. Geometry guy 22:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited 2012 in downloadable songs for the Rock Band series, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Free Ride (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Masem,
You are receiving this message either because you expressed an opinion about the proposed SOPA blackout before full blackout and soft blackout were adequately differentiated, or because you expressed general support without specifying a preference. Please ensure that your voice is heard by clarifying your position accordingly.
Thank you.
Message delivered as per request on ANI. -- The Helpful Bot 16:37, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
I left a note on User talk:Dream Focus#Merge != Delete reminding this editor that merging isn't deleting and also reminding them to assume good faith but the initial response indicates that they are still looking at this from a very defensive position. Would you mind weighing in there as well? Maybe having 2 editors share their thoughts will help. If nothing else it will allow us to take this to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct to get some other points of view. I'm a bit reluctant to go ahead with the merge as DreamFocus and Luciferwildcat seem unwilling to compromise.--RadioFan (talk) 02:22, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
See Talk:Yogo_sapphire#Latest_pear_and_purple_photos. Hope you think they're better, and just in time for the Great Wiki Blackout of jan 2012! PumpkinSky talk 01:05, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
Re your reversion, could this be handled by a note stating that the protest was on 17-18, 18 or 18-19 October depending on the local timezone, seeing that it ran 05:00 18/10 to 05:00 19/10 UTC? No need to reply, just make the necessary amendment if you agree. Mjroots (talk) 19:23, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Q.U.B.E. at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 20:47, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:42, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, there. Can you do me some favour, please?
JSH-alive talk • cont • mail 15:13, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! Sven Manguard Wha? 22:15, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
On 26 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Q.U.B.E., which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Q.U.B.E., an indie puzzle video game, was developed by Toxic Games without having a single programmer on its team? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Q.U.B.E..You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, Masem, you framed those issues better than I did. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:39, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited BioShock Infinite, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ken Levine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article titles and capitalisation. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article titles and capitalisation/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 24, 2012, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article titles and capitalisation/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 15:14, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Masem, you do a lot of good work on here, but the VP thread is I think indicative of a recurring problem I've seen with you. It's not a consistent problem, but it has been a periodically recurring one. I had no problem with you proposing merger, just as I'm sure you had no problem with me disagreeing with it; the problem was with how tendentiously you carried on your side, and how you were justifying it on a subject that was easily volatile without really knowing what you were talking about, i.e., without understanding how reliable sources, aka the real world, frame the subject and issues. And you kept at it even when this was brought to your attention and offense was expressed, by posting wall after wall of text. You had already expressed your opinion; the best thing to do would have been to just drop it, maybe even apologize, but instead you dug yourself in deeper, as if you had to get the last word no matter what.
I think you can be too much of a policy wonk (contra WP:IAR, if nothing else), which can blind you to the content issues (or even just alternate interpretations of policy) presented by others. Whether because of this, or in addition to it, you also have a tendency sometimes to just repeat yourself in the face of persistent disagreement without advancing your argument or showing how you understand the other viewpoint, and you do it in a lot of words with every post. And in a manner that can seem like you're trying to lecture rather than truly respond. It's less likely to raise hackles in abstract policy discussions, but this was particularly a problem when you were dealing with a subject that obviously brings a lot of emotion with it to a lot of people, one that you admittedly were unfamiliar with, yet you still kept at itIn that context, ignorant statements, no matter how well intentioned, are almost unavoidably offensive. Now that was the first instance in which I have seen that particular problem from you, but I think it stems from the broader issue, that you can focus on your view of policy so much that you elevate compliance over other concerns, and your feeling of certainty and lecturing tone kept you from seeing that you were trying to school people on how to handle a subject that you just didn't understand. No doubt not everyone may agree with me on this, but you know I'm a prolific contributor here on a wide variety of subjects, not a POV warrior, and someone who has regularly participated in policy discussions, closed AFDs, and used his admin tools without any controversy. So I hope you'll take these observations seriously coming from me, take it to heart as constructive criticism, and reflect on how you can improve on these issues. postdlf (talk) 15:57, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi there! As a frequent editor to Fringe articles, I thought I'd let you know I'm proposing a new taskforce for the series. If you're interested, you can find the proposal page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Fringe (TV series). Thanks, Ruby 2010/2013 04:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Looks good so far...--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:29, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:40, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
|
The game hasn't even begun development yet, so it's important to isolate all the (indeed very important) information about its financing, and the impact that's having from discussion of the game's development in order to keep the article organized and useful. Given the proposed "transparency" of the project, there will likely be a lot to say about the development, but none of the information in the article is development related. Discussing how the industry has reacted to this and all is important, but you can't call it "development" or it'll just be a blob of rambling text that no one can use. Frogacuda (talk) 23:46, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Double Fine Adventure, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Full Throttle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:51, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Double Fine Adventure at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with ((db-g7)), or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 22:24, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Needing/Getting is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Needing/Getting until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Velella Velella Talk 22:42, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Dustforce at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BRMo (talk) 05:52, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
On 16 February 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Double Fine Happy Action Theater, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the developers of Double Fine Happy Action Theater incorporated new game behavior in response to watching children play with their augmented reality game? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Double Fine Happy Action Theater.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
On 16 February 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dustforce, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the video game Dustforce won the $100,000 Independent Game Developers prize at the 2010 GDC Online conference? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dustforce.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 16:02, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:57, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Double Fine Adventure at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! LauraHale (talk) 11:35, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for not deleting my edit. So underrated these days. LiamNolan15212 (talk) 23:26, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
I was serious that your comment deservedly qualified to set upon no time. Raw truth like that is timeless. It's ironic that oops is attributed when in fact metaphysical power had warped the time continuum just enough to ensure your powerful prose self identified as timeless. It takes some good stuff to do all of that. My76Strat (talk) 00:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
On 21 February 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Needing/Getting, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that OK Go band member Damian Kulash was trained in stunt driving for the making of the music video for "Needing/Getting"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Needing/Getting.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:04, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
You are correct, I made an error when I said the quote was from Eurogamer. It is indeed from the Wired article. Here's the quote: At one point the progress was great, so we talked about the timing of the launch in the past. But now it’s making progress, but still not to the level — it’s playable, but not to the point that we can talk about the timing of launch. --Krevans (talk) 14:53, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
On 26 February 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Double Fine Adventure, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Double Fine Productions raised more than $1 million in under 24 hours in a record-breaking, crowd-sourced Kickstarter funding drive for their upcoming adventure game? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Double Fine Adventure.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Live Free or Die Hard, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page United States Capital (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Masem, seeking your advice and/or help. A college friend of mine recently released "Break Blocks" through his company "Greater Good Games", being published by Tripwire. Googling a bit, I see a Gamespot review and a few other hits that may work for notability. However I feel I have a conflict of interest here, as I'm looking into the topic because of talking to him.
Is there enough notability for an article? And if so, how could one get created in light of my own potential COI? -- ferret (talk) 18:30, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited The Darkness II, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Iron maiden (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed you reverted my link to the Rock Band Aide article pointing out that Harmonix accidentally leaked the Three Days Grace DLC. Just to let you know: that is an 100% reliable source. Harmonix even sponsors Rock Band Aide, and they post all of their trailers for DLC on YouTube. And if you read the article (which I'm assuming you didn't), they even gave a LINK to the blog that they accidentally leaked containing the DLC (which they removed shortly after, but I managed to see it before it was removed) and they even posted the trailer of that DLC on that article.
Anyways, I know you probably didn't read the article so it's all good. Just note that for the future ;)
Percivl (talk) 21:39, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
So, on a side note, are you a fan of Rock Band yourself? I'm a huge fan; been playing since '09 and own all games. Percivl (talk) 00:23, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Because of the high number of edits that you have made at Wikipedia talk:Television episodes, I would like to call your attention to a list of the most critically acclaimed episodes and season articles that need to be created: Wikipedia:TV-EPISODE#Important_articles_to_be_created.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:15, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
I saw you reverted my edits but see no mention that articles about porn films and actor articles are permitted. The reason being WP:Censor is linked directly from Talk:Main Page and I wanted to calrify that its pointless moaning about topics like gay pornography being directly linked on the main page on Saturday afternoons as the "community" fullly supports it. What do you suggest we do then to prevent som other poor sucker for receiving just heavy-handed treatment at complaining about such topics being inappropriate for main page viewing?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:43, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
I just got involved in a discussion regarding cover art fair use. I see you were heavily involved in such a discussion before, and saw you intended to make an RFC. Did that happen? What was the result? Gaijin42 (talk) 15:51, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
I have the impression that you are one of the more experienced editors regarding NFCC and as one of the people who provided evidence in the BCD Arb case you are probably aware of the drama and heat this topic can generate. Hammersoft and I wanted to conduct a community poll regarding the position of the community in relation to the NFCC. Please see User talk:Toshio Yamaguchi/Archive 3#Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/NFCC Enforcement for the discussion leading to the decision to start a poll and User:Toshio Yamaguchi/Community poll regarding the NFCC situation for a rough draft of the poll page. If you have any feedback that would be much appreciated. If you are not interested, just let me know and that will be it.
Thank you. Regards. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 12:45, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Counterpoint (Star Trek: Voyager), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vulcan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
I wonder, did you read my edit summaries before reverting? Specifically, this one... Hearfourmewesique (talk) 13:09, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Think Tank (Star Trek: Voyager), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:34, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Masem. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 11:44, 5 April 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks for uploading File:Rb track pack v1.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. Stefan2 (talk) 20:28, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 5, No. 1 — 1st Quarter, 2012
Previous issue | Next issue
Project At a Glance
As of Q4 2011, the project has:
|
Content
|
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 19:29, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
You commented at the first FAC, so as a courtesy, I am notifying you of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Here We Go Again (Ray Charles song)/archive3.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 12:46, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Rock Band Blitz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Digital download (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Hey, just letting you know I nominated "Letters of Transit" for DYK. You can find the page here. Thanks, Ruby 2010/2013 23:18, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Template:TARDetour has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. —Ryulong (竜龙) 08:44, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
I've also done the other related templates that seem to have never been used.—Ryulong (竜龙) 08:47, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited The Prisoner in popular culture, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Walter Bishop (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:07, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the notification of this revert, by the way! I appreciate it. — foxj 07:20, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
I appreciate what you have done to expand coverage about Fringe, but I have thoughts about Friday nights in general. Without enough research for general information about Friday nights, this article would be full of intricate examples again. --George Ho (talk) 16:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi. :) Somebody has asked me to weigh in on the application of NFC. This is not my area, so I need to find somebody who works there - and when I think of NFC, you are one of the first people I think of. Would you be willing to take a look at User talk:Drmies#G.I. Joe movie characters and offer some input? If not, please let me know, as I will need to find another expert to help out. :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:59, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi, you mentioned they exist. I was calling for these to be developed years ago. I'd be delighted to see them, but can't see mention at WP:NFCC. Thx. Tony (talk) 15:39, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
I disagree; every thread will be archived after seven days of the latest post. --George Ho (talk) 18:07, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
On 1 May 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Letters of Transit, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the futuristic Fringe episode "Letters of Transit" contained references to The Prisoner and Star Wars? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Letters of Transit.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
PanydThe muffin is not subtle 16:05, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
I did indeed! Great image you uploaded. BTW, I don't want you to think that I'm hogging all the Fringe episode articles. If you feel like bringing any by GA, please feel free to go ahead. I wouldn't want my large number of edits to the articles to seem like a deterrent to you or any other interested editors! Ruby 2010/2013 02:36, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi Masem,
I'm suggesting that essayification of the failed proposal Wikipedia:Notability (fiction), which you began on & December 2010, should be reverted to preserve the record of the failed proposal. If there is to be an essay, I think now that it should be started and developed as a separate page. You may like to comment at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Notability (fiction). --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:46, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
The Furry fandom article doesn't have opinion articles saying that the fandom is "weird", neither does the otherkin article, or 4chan article, or any such fandom/community. The opinion sources are not RS content, nor do they contribute to any further knowledge about the my little pony fandom. They are opinions. I7laseral (talk) 02:31, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
IP.*.86 seems to be a on some sort of crusade with fiction guidelines. We have both reverted his edits at this point and he seems to be determined to edit war making massive changes without discussion. Ridernyc (talk) 00:23, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Ridernyc seems determined to editwar to revert back over a month of changes by multiple people. He's trolling my talk page as well. 86.** IP (talk) 00:35, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
The fair use section is IN the edits I reverted; it's just moved to a more logical position. Your 3RR reporting is malformed, contains a lie about something that wasn't a revert of anyone else, and shows you haven't actually looked at the diff in question. You clearly did not bother to actually review the diff you reverted, which does not show due diligence on your part, the 3RR report shows you did not even bother to review the edits in question, or you'd have noticed that I agreed with you, and left the Fair use section stand, due to your argument. It did move slightly, but that was due to me undoing my edit because of your argument at about the same time you did, and I think it got moved when I fixed that, but, really, I do think you need to undo your 3RR report, because reporting someone over false information is just wrong. . 86.** IP (talk) 14:29, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Indeed, your edit adds a direct lie. The paragraph of the copyedited section reads:
Your edit, based on ridernyc's changes, inserts a falsehood:
The Fair-use policy does not say that. The link's there, if you check, you'll see that quote does not appear anywhere in it. The revised version changes that to read:
Information about copyrighted fictional worlds and plots of works of fiction can be provided only under a claim of fair use, as such, we should limit the amount of detail to a reasonable level that informs the reader about the subject, while not going into excessive detail or attempting to substitute for the original work.
Which keeps the spirit - which is important - but does not lie by attributing a direct quote to policy which does not appear in it. 86.** IP (talk) 14:44, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is False accusations at Editwarring noticeboard. Thank you. Equazcion (talk) 16:20, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
When you edited the Template:Episode list, you did something to where the episode titles are no longer in bold. Can you fix this please? Jaxsonista (talk) 20:36, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
This is a note to let the main editors of Limbo (video game) know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on May 10, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 10, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:
Limbo is a puzzle-platform video game and the premiere title of independent Danish game developer Playdead. The game was released in July 2010 as a platform exclusive title on Xbox Live Arcade, and was later ported to the PlayStation Network and Microsoft Windows via Steam. Limbo is a 2D sidescroller, incorporating the physics system Box2D to govern environmental objects and the player character. The player guides an unnamed boy through dangerous environments and traps as the boy searches for his sister. The developer built the game's puzzles expecting the player to fail before finding the correct solution. Playdead called the style of play "trial and death", and used visually gruesome imagery for the boy's deaths to steer the player from unworkable solutions. The game is presented primarily in monochromatic black-and-white tones, using lighting, film grain effects and minimal ambient sounds to create an eerie atmosphere often associated with the horror genre. Limbo received positive reviews, but its minimal story polarised critics. A common point of criticism from reviewers was that the high cost of the game relative to its short length might deter players from purchasing the title. The title was the third-highest selling game on the Xbox Live Arcade service in 2010, generating around $7.5 million in revenue. The title won several awards from industry groups after its release, and was named as one of the top games for 2010 by several publications. (more...)
UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
This is a note to let the main editors of Limbo (video game) know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on May 13, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 13, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:
Limbo is a puzzle-platform video game and the premiere title of independent Danish game developer Playdead. The game was released in July 2010 as a platform exclusive title on Xbox Live Arcade, and was later ported to the PlayStation Network and Microsoft Windows via Steam. Limbo is a 2D sidescroller, incorporating the physics system Box2D to govern environmental objects and the player character. The player guides an unnamed boy through dangerous environments and traps as the boy searches for his sister. The developer built the game's puzzles expecting the player to fail before finding the correct solution. Playdead called the style of play "trial and death", and used visually gruesome imagery for the boy's deaths to steer the player from unworkable solutions. The game is presented primarily in monochromatic black-and-white tones, using lighting, film grain effects and minimal ambient sounds to create an eerie atmosphere often associated with the horror genre. Limbo received positive reviews, but its minimal story polarised critics. A common point of criticism from reviewers was that the high cost of the game relative to its short length might deter players from purchasing the title. The title was the third-highest selling game on the Xbox Live Arcade service in 2010, generating around $7.5 million in revenue. The title won several awards from industry groups after its release, and was named as one of the top games for 2010 by several publications. (more...)
UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tar12-startingline.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:54, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
On 15 May 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Worlds Apart (Fringe), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a scene in the television series Fringe received praise for featuring two versions of the same character conversing together? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Worlds Apart (Fringe).You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Orlady (talk) 00:04, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi, re this revert, I'm just curious to why you believed this was 'good faith'? This user blanked out fully referenced sections, so they could ask about games and post their email address. Reading it through, it seems like they knew what they were doing. Best --Chip123456 (talk) 18:24, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
hi. sorry if i edit conflicted you on My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic fandom. i am done for now, i want to see what you are adding before i make any more minor fixes. Brohoof! -badmachine 14:03, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
"You can not be serious!" Plot summaries are assumed to be referenced to the original source? Well, Ok, if you can show me where this is real, genuine policy, I guess I'll go with it or consider whether it is a thing Wikipedia should change. But it must be unique in that it is a primary source that is acceptable? Tell me more :) Fiddle Faddle (talk) 21:05, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Masem, I ran across you in the WT:N archive as well as two recent discussions, mixed martial-arts notability, and then my attempt to clarify summary style in re notability. The latter is partly related to the former, in that I am trying to determine how summary style applies to a wide variety of N debates I have observed over the years, with MMA being the catalyst topic. (I believe that a clear statement of summary style might be a workable compromise in the MMA topic-area challenge, so I added text from other guidelines into WP:SS and have been interacting with Dmcq there, and at WP:SIZE (now an RFC there).)
As you affirmed, a number of spinoff articles and lists are technically nonnotable by some readings. Irrespective of the MMA question, I think it important to clarify somewhere (like SS) that these are not "N fails". It seems some count them notable because they are semilogical subtopics, and thus can be regarded as sufficiently notably sourced, while others count them nonnotable but "part of" a notable topic. But like 1998 World Series of Poker, they sometimes rely on their parent topics to demonstrate sufficient secondary sourcing for V.
I'm hoping I can start a dialogue with you to see if my ideas are properly interpreting the guidelines or if there needs to be further clarification. It seems this has not been settled because there are multiple POVs about what N means in these cases, and that ambiguity may need to be preserved. But this is just to whet your appetite, because I've found it best to discuss topics like this with reasonable people first. JJB 05:22, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello Masem. I wanted to let you know that I made a request at WP:ANI for an uninvolved administrator to review the block of Xenos2008 as I believe it was made in contravention in policy. You are mentioned in the summary of events. —Psychonaut (talk) 21:05, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Can you please respond to this message? Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 00:20, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Hey, I saw you undid my additions to that list, and I was wondering what the difference between network songs and downloadable songs is. I wasn't 100% about adding them, but since I'd added them to the songs' articles a couple years ago, and they were still on the RB site, I figured they were okay. Thanks. —Torchiest talkedits 03:41, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
I've emailed you on a Signpost copyright matter. Tony (talk) 03:45, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Template:Infobox television Top Chef has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. AussieLegend (talk) 06:11, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Krolar62 (talk) 03:05, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
At Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content#Proposal_2 I said that our readers are apparently too stupid to understand that File:Casi discovery channel.jpg means they have reached an article about the Discovery Channel. That was sarcastic of course. At Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2012_June_4#File:Discovery_Channel_International.svg, you're being outvoted 5-1. Or course, it's not a vote...but it will be closed as keep as you are the only one voting to get rid of it. This completely breaks policy of WP:NFCC #1. Every rationale on File:Discovery Channel International.svg is for identification purposes, to ensure the reader they've reached the right article. Nobody is so stupid as to be lost on seeing File:Casi discovery channel.jpg. But, that's not the purpose of the non-free logo in reality. The underlying problem is one of culture, as I've outlined before. When policy doesn't match up with culture, it's policy that has it wrong. But, if you try to change policy to reflect culture, you get shot down every time. I find this all very humorous! --Hammersoft (talk) 20:28, 12 June 2012 (UTC)