This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Thanks for uploading File:Warcraft-logo.gif. 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. --B-bot (talk) 03:57, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

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) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article A Thousand Leaves you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Famous Hobo -- Famous Hobo (talk) 21:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

The article A Thousand Leaves you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:A Thousand Leaves for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Famous Hobo -- Famous Hobo (talk) 22:42, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, working on this one now. Let me know if my text works for you. - Dank (push to talk) 04:23, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Btw, since inclusion at List of video games considered the best is based on a game's appearance in top-25 and top-100 lists, that was the language I went with. If that page shows that this game appeared in most of the top-25 lists, then I'll change the summary to say that. - Dank (push to talk) 20:03, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Nevermind, I checked the 11 references, they're mostly top-100 lists. - Dank (push to talk) 20:10, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Precious

video games and albums

Thank you for quality articles such as Mass Effect 2, a role-playing video game with darker and more mature sound, and for more games and albums with supporting details and lists, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:50, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1328 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:02, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sheryl Crow (album) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Homeostasis07 -- Homeostasis07 (talk) 22:00, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

The article Sheryl Crow (album) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sheryl Crow (album) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Homeostasis07 -- Homeostasis07 (talk) 01:41, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Slap-Happy you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Retrohead -- Retrohead (talk) 18:40, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

The article Slap-Happy you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Slap-Happy for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Retrohead -- Retrohead (talk) 20:02, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rather Ripped you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Carbrera -- Carbrera (talk) 21:20, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

The article Rather Ripped you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Rather Ripped for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Carbrera -- Carbrera (talk) 22:00, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

The article Rather Ripped you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Rather Ripped for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Carbrera -- Carbrera (talk) 21:41, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Because it is the same game. No need to have multiple articles of something that is the same. There's nothing wrong with that article be within the other. Example: Tainted Love, same song, different artists & same page.205.189.187.4 (talk) 23:21, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

A few things:

• No, it's not the same game. It has different gameplay, development, and reception. Just because it's a remake doesn't mean it's the same game. Also, just because it has the same name doesn't mean it's the same game.
• The article meets the general notability guidelines.
• Having different articles for remakes is allowed according to the video game article guidelines.
• WP:OTHER is not a good argument. By that logic, I can say that there are multiple remakes with different articles (Metroid: Zero Mission, Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary, Final Fantasy IV (3D remake) to name a few). --Niwi3 (talk) 08:28, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

The rules contradicts. No, it is the same game, just a different release. The release difference is irrelevant, along with the title not applying either. That's like a saying a reissue of an album is different so another aritcle is to be created, so that would seem to go against rules there. The original game article has this game already listed - if it was any different, it would not be listed. Almost as if it shouldn't be listed and we'll just have duplicate articles. Using another article was just an example, but it was a good example as there are a lot of terrible articles out there, this being one and yes all those remakes apply. Why do you think the merging exsists and have been applied to so many articles? 205.189.94.13 (talk) 23:04, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Strange Days (film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Adamstom.97 -- Adamstom.97 (talk) 12:01, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

The article Strange Days (film) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Strange Days (film) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Adamstom.97 -- Adamstom.97 (talk) 00:01, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

The article Strange Days (film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Strange Days (film) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Adamstom.97 -- Adamstom.97 (talk) 11:22, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mass Effect (video game) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cognissonance -- Cognissonance (talk) 21:02, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

The article Mass Effect (video game) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Mass Effect (video game) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cognissonance -- Cognissonance (talk) 00:20, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

The article Mass Effect (video game) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mass Effect (video game) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cognissonance -- Cognissonance (talk) 15:41, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Niwi3. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Niwi3. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Goldeneyecomparison.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) 09:43, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 007: The World Is Not Enough (Nintendo 64) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of ProtoDrake -- ProtoDrake (talk) 13:20, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello Sir,

I just wanted to check in and thank you for all your work on the Mass Effect series. As a reader, I've really enjoyed those articles and noticed that you've done substantial work on them. It is much appreciated! Out of curiosity, are you planning on fixing up the ME3 article at some point? I tried doing some work on it many years ago but eventually gave up due to too many edit wars. I would love to see it done right!

Either way, keep up the good work! It has not gone unnoticed!--Ktmartell (talk) 19:01, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

The article 007: The World Is Not Enough (Nintendo 64) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:007: The World Is Not Enough (Nintendo 64) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of ProtoDrake -- ProtoDrake (talk) 23:21, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

I recently uploaded the "October 13" poster to replace the "coming this fall" one. I did that to follow precedent of other posters, like Ice Age: The Meltdown and/or Sicario (2015 film). Also, showing three actors is clearer to readers than just one actor. Since you improved the "Coming This Fall" image, I wonder whether you can do either the JPEG or PNG version of the "October 13" poster. --George Ho (talk) 21:30, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

I appreciate your point about preferring original/higher-quality sources for reviews/scores at Call the Doctor, but at the moment, Acclaimed Music is the only source for Music Story's review scores; the latter site has been in some overhaul or something and there's no access to them, to my knowledge. Also, I've been through this discussion before about Acclaimed Music's reliability and haven't seen any consensus disputing it; the few discussions there have been have favored using it, albeit not strongly. To echo another editor's comments about the site, I can't recall an instance when the score they attributed to a book source that's checkable online, such as Larkin's Encyclopedia, was wrong. Dan56 (talk) 06:41, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

WP:PRIMARY doesn't say "tertiary sources may only be used if it..." The "Policy" bits for each type of source at that guideline only explicitly state restrictions and the like for "primary" and "secondary"; the "policy" bit for "tertiary" phrases it as advice ("can be helpful", "may be helpful"), without any language forbidding anything.

Furthermore, using Acclaimed Music in this instance can be interpreted as being "helpful in providing broad summaries of topics that involve many primary and secondary sources"; the ratings template makes up a broad summary of a certain topic that involves secondary sources. The only bearing WP:PRIMARY has, IMO, is what is says about "deciding whether primary, secondary or tertiary sources are appropriate in any given instance", which is "a matter of good editorial judgment and common sense," and having it "discussed on article talk pages".

As far as Metacritic, I don't think "avoid citing the review excerpts listed below the aggregate score" is meant to say avoid citing Metacritic for review scores; it sounds more like discouraging using the excerpted texts in the article, as it then says "seek out the reviews in full and cite them individually". Or perhaps it's just not worded clearly as was the intended meaning.

Either way, the loss of Music Story is not a big deal in this particular instance, and I would not be opposed to developing a discussion first before deciding whether to have it in this article. But Acclaimed Music has been used lots elsewhere, by me and others, to cite scores otherwise not easily accessible. And with no consensus against its use, and no policy against using a tertiary source in such an instance (at least from my point of view), I don't think there was anything wrong with either of us reverting one another. It's just a matter of perspective. Dan56 (talk) 21:09, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tomb Raider III you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Indrian -- Indrian (talk) 18:21, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

The article Tomb Raider III you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Tomb Raider III for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Indrian -- Indrian (talk) 15:20, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

The article Tomb Raider III you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Tomb Raider III for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Indrian -- Indrian (talk) 21:02, 27 March 2017 (UTC)