User talk:Blaze The Movie Fan/Archive Jul 2007

The Helpers
Hey TheBlazikenMaster, I created a group to help with Family Guy edits called The Family Guy Helpers. I would apriciat it if you at least think about joining. You can learn more by clicking here. At least read the link.--BrianGriffin-FG 00:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

What the hell, why not. I'll join! I'll still try to get Helpers, but every Helper will be a Project member. How's that.--BrianGriffin-FG 18:16, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Quick Question
I recently bought Prison Break on DVD and don't regret it. I will try to keep that question short, and specific at the same time. The question is simple, but I don't expect a simple answer, in fact I can wait until tomorrow, but the question is: Is already a Prison break-fan userbox? I would go check it out myself, but since this isn't the only place I'm back to on the internet, I will ask someone else, since it took me long time to get most of the userboxes I wanted. Thanks. TheBlazikenMaster 23:36, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Check WP:UBX as well as User:UBX for updates.  Mi r a n da   00:25, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

My userpage.
There is a problem, I need help. Any time I put a new userbox the "My Sandbox" thingy gets back to where it shouldn't be, as you could see in the history. I need help. TheBlazikenMaster 00:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Make a new userbox. User:TheBlazikenMaster/sandbox2.   Mi r a n da   00:43, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid that won't solve the problem since the sandbox one isn't info about me, and should be on separate section. TheBlazikenMaster 00:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * What sandbox are you talking about, please be specific. And, if you want to see the template concerning speedies, go to Template:Db-meta.   Mi r a n da   00:46, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

HelpMe
 * Well, | click here, I didn't say anything about a template. I'm talking about a section. It's hard to press enter so often just to get the "sandbox" section where it should be, and it reverts back to the wrong place any time I add new userbox, that is a problem. I hope this is specific enough for you, if not, then please let someone else help me, since I'm being as specific as possible. TheBlazikenMaster 00:50, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

<--- Try this.  Mi r a n da   00:52, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Nope, doesn't work either. TheBlazikenMaster 00:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Try putting your userboxes in a table.  Mi r a n da   01:01, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, will do tomorrow. TheBlazikenMaster 01:03, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Let me tweak it.  Mi r a n da   01:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅  Mi r a n da   01:09, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Made more shortcuts.
I find those shortcuts a little excessive. If this were an animation-only wiki, maybe this would be okay, but all the new links are ambiguous and may be useful for some other project. Also, with the exception of FG (which is especially likely to be needed for some other use), they don't really provide much convenience.

Would you be okay with my putting those up for deletion?

One place we could use more shortcuts is the subpages, i.e.:
 * WP:FAMILYGUY/Things you can do
 * WP:FAMILYGUY/Tasks
 * WP:FAMILYGUY/Tasks archive
 * WP:FAMILYGUY/Episode citation style

/ edgarde 13:52, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: WP:FAMILYGUY isn't a good shortcut.
Unless you can find another Wikipedia page that uses WP:FAMILY I see no reason why you should do this. I mean common. WP:SPONGE redirects to the SpongeBob WikiProject, so why shouldn't WP:FAMILY do? At least keep one of the shortcuts on the page. Not everyone can remember to type out, shortcuts aren't supposed to be full names. They are suppose to be for easy use, I'll take another example: WP:WAR redirects to the Warcraft WikiProject. WP:FAMILYGUY is fine, but we need another shortcuts, I just wanted to help. TheBlazikenMaster 15:50, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * WP:FAMILYGUY is an ideal shortcut for WikiProject Family Guy. It's short, distinctive, and easy to remember. WP:FAMILY only takes 3 letters off WP:FAMILYGUY. Who's the arthritic grandmother who can't type 3 more letters?


 * The word family is very common and may be desireable for a future page, project, or guideline. The lack of a currently existing project at this time does not mean we should squat on the name.


 * Having 5 shortcuts means 10 redirects (including Talk page shortcuts) need to be created for each subpage. It's way too much, and WP:FAMILYGUY is fine. / edgarde 16:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, and note this disambiguation at the top of WP:WAR:
 * "WP:WAR redirects here; you may be looking for Edit war or WikiProject Military history."
 * That shortcut has already caused conflicts. edgarde 16:52, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

No, it's not fine, we need shorter redirect. Can I at least get WP:FG back? TheBlazikenMaster 16:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm on the fence with WP:FG, but if you real feel a need for it, I guess it's fine. Be sure to also make a WT:FG for the Talk page. / edgarde 16:52, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. By the way, they are called shortcuts because they are short form, that's why WP:FAMILYGUY isn't the only one needed. You're right about five being too much, but still, seven is too much, I made WP:FG to make it short, we need it sometimes for example, summaries, as they're very limited. Two is fine, even though you might find it pointless, keep in mind it can be useful for some. And after many have joined, I won't be the only one needing that, trust me. TheBlazikenMaster 17:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Requests for page salting
HelpMe Just a quick question: Is there any real page where I can redirect this to?
 * No, would be a nonsense redirect.  Mi r a n da   23:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * How would it be a nonsense redirect? I mean, admins don't randomly pick pages to protect from recreation. TheBlazikenMaster 23:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Administrators don't randomly delete pages. Pages for deletion have to go through a process such as WP:AFD, WP:XFD, or WP:MFD, which has the input of the community.   Mi r a n da   23:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but what about salted pages, such as serious business? TheBlazikenMaster 23:21, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:REDIRECT and Criteria_for_speedy_deletion if you have any more problems.  Mi r a n da   23:26, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No, that doesn't answer my question, I'm not asking about redirects, I'm wondering how pages become salted. TheBlazikenMaster 23:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

(reduce indent) If the pages have been made three times or more, the pages are protected from recreation. No redirect needs to be made to that, because that would be redundant.  Mi r a n da   23:30, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * So you're saying that there is no particular page on Wikipedia where people ask for pages to be protected from recreation? Thanks for answering, are you watching my page or something? Because you have responded to all the stuff I had today. TheBlazikenMaster 23:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * No expert, but I would imagine Requests for page protection would be a logical redirect, presuming the requestor was asking about an already-deleted page. Otherwise, it would be part of the deletion request. / edgarde 23:37, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No, I don't think it would be. This is for protection of a deleted article.   Mi r a n da   23:39, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) No, because it would be patent nonsense which is deleted over and over again. Administrators would protect the page if the CSD pink notices were used.  And, no, I am not watching your page, I am on IRC and a bot notifies me in #wikipedia-en-help.   Mi r a n da   23:39, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Legendary birds
Is there real world information that can actually be added to them? It seems like they have nothing more to write about than the articles like Bulbasaur and Charizard, which are just general descriptions loaded with fluff. At most, a general header on the list would be enough. TTN 22:28, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * As I see you're going with the species articles and stuff, the general discussion seems to be leaning away from them as far as I can tell. TTN 22:30, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * As a whole, they need to be able to provide information, which is still unlikely. If combined on the list, they can get around that sort of like Characters of Final Fantasy VIII (surround them with general information, and then stick small pieces into them when applicable). TTN 22:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't do Magikarp, but it was reverted because the list entry was very incomplete. TTN 22:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

ROTK
Because it's already in the lead. Frankly, that would mean the first sentence would be like this: "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King is the third in Peter Jackson's Academy Award-winning $1 billion grossing epic fantasy film..." It's just good writing. You need the basics first. I mean, is winning an Oscar the most important thing? Alientraveller 08:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The basics of being an epic fantasy film, the third in The Lord of the Rings trilogy, and directed by Peter Jackson, is more important than winning some award. Academy Award-winning can also sound biased to them. It's generally discouraged, otherwise it'd be nightmarish to list all the awards: ROTK is an Oscar-winning, BAFTA-winning, Globe-winning etc. Note how FOTR it was much better to discuss the BAFTA wins. Alientraveller 08:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Tagging of Template:Uncyclopedia
I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Template:Uncyclopedia. I do not think that Template:Uncyclopedia fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because "I don't like it" isn't a reason for speedy delete. If this is to be deleted, it will have to be by means of WP:TfD. Take it there is you like.. I request that you consider not re-tagging Template:Uncyclopedia for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES (talk) 16:02, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * My error. i checked the historty and found this had previously been deleted  by TfD. So i have tagged it with db-repost which is the tag to sue when something previously delted by AfD, TfD, or CfD (not speedy) has been recreated. My appologies. DES (talk) 16:08, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If you insist. It isn't structured as a userbox, currently, however. Your speedy reason wasn't vlaid, IMNO, but the prior TfD debate is a perfectly suffficient reason. (I might have opted for "keep" in that debate, but that is a different matter. DES (talk) 16:18, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Townsville (disambiguation)‎
Hi BlazikenMaster, Disambag pages are supposed to direct you to all articles which a browser could be chasing when they type in a word, in this case Townsville. There is no article called The city of townsville, and until there is it shouldn't be linked on the disambag page, and I didn't go into it but considering it is the far more likely meaning of a search for 'The city of townsville' that page should be redirected to City of Townsville and not the powerpuff girls. Cheers, WikiTownsvillian 03:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Closing redirects
Please note: things that you think people have forgoten may actually just take a few minutes sometimes. Please consider that the next time before you make such a post. Please also note that you might want to brush up on your speedy deletion criteria. --After Midnight 0001 20:36, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * BTW, per your edit summary, the unsigned tag being replaced was as a result of me clearing the edit conflict that you caused me during my attempt to close the discussion. I was trying to save again quickly before I was e.c.'ed again. No malice was intended, only expediency. --After Midnight 0001 20:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

A question regarding templates and categories for discussion.
Why can't they have their own pages like Articles for discussion? After all, these get full in no time. (most of the times). TheBlazikenMaster 00:08, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure, and I've been here long enough that someone would have explained it to me if I asked. :) The short answer is that there is no coordination between the different forms of deletion debates (WP:XFD), so the managers of each form can choose to use sections (RFD, TFD, CFD) or subpages (AFD, MFD) as it suits them.  Subpages create more server load than sections, but when they are used, it is easier to find the discussion you are looking for because it can be linked directly, not merely by its location in the daily log.  Generally, for short or nonexistent debates, sections work better; for long debates with many opinions (as is common on AFD), subpages work better.  If you think this should be changed, the place to suggest it is the village pump for proposals. Shalom Hello 02:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

My reversion of your changes at RfD
I reverted you at Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 July 19. Please see the talk page for my explanation.  Big Nate 37 (T) 16:58, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Category redirects.

 * I'm not 100% sure myself (which is why I'm leaving the helpme tag there), but Categorization and Template talk:Category redirect address this matter.  Big Nate 37 (T) 21:38, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * From what I can tell by reading the documentation on this, the template is used because although redirects work in that it redirects you from one category to the other, it does not cause pages placed in that category to be listed in the other. For example, if it is decided that Category "A" should be redirected to Category "B", even if you put a redirect at Category "A", if someone puts some article IN category "A", it will not be visible in the list of articles at category "B". However, by using the template, bots can be used to periodically check for articles placed in category "A" and manually change them to category "B"; the template being what triggers the bots to check for articles placed in that category. --Nick—Contact/Contribs 22:45, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Fuckass
Hi, I just deleted Fuckass, a redirect to Profanity. I trust your good intention in creating the page, but it seems unlikely that someone would type that in and expect to go to profanity. As such, it qualifies the page for speedy deletion under criterion R3 (A recently created redirect from an unlikely misnomer). Since I agreed that it was unlikely, I deleted it. By the way, your mention of similar redirects is a noted argument to be avoided in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). I'm sorry, but I'm sure that it was valid to delete the article. I noticed your message on the talk page as I deleted it, so I figured you'd appreciate hearing my reasoning. Thanks, Nihiltres ( t .l ) 01:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

WP:POKE is doing some housecleaning
This notice is to inform you that because many people have added their names to WikiProject Pokémon but do not seem to be active, all names are being deleted in an effort to find out who is still truly interested in the project. All you have to do is re-add your name if you'd still like to be considered a member of WP:POKE. Any questions, you can contact me on my talk page. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 17:47, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

movie ticket
I know it should redirect to somewhere but I don't know where exactly... The dab page of ticket is confusing me. TheBlazikenMaster 18:38, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Well I'd say the most apt target for a redirect would be Ticket (admission). Hope that helps. Will (aka Wimt ) 18:45, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Since I am here and got an edit conflict anyway, I agree. :) - Two  Oars  18:46, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help you two, really really appreciated. TheBlazikenMaster 18:49, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

On other note, is any article I can redirect list of villains to? TheBlazikenMaster 19:21, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

There is an article villian. Perhaps there you can use the contents of this list to improve the article by showing these excamples of villians.--Thw1309 19:32, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

If you look at the article, you can see, that there many different types of villians are discribed. You could use the content of the list as excamples of the different types of willians. I do not think, they have to be main characters to be used an such an article and to improve it. --Thw1309 19:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

List of comic book superpowers
Just a note about your post and subsequent retraction on the talk page. The reason the Powerpuff girls wouldn't be used is becuase the page is only for comic book examples as its been agreed its the most common medium that powers are exressed. Just thought I would let you know. Thefro552 23:25, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I just took your comment, "they don't have anything special enough that other superheros don't have", that thats all that you thought. I can't tell you how many people don't realize that its just for comic book characters and put all matter of other example, Heroes and Charmed being the most common. Just thought I would be polite and give you the heads up is all. Thefro552 23:38, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Redirects
I have nominated several redirects for deletion that you created recently, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 July 24. If you plan to create a redirect, please make sure it is correct and necessary. Before adding an entry like nonsensal to Wikipedia, you might want to consult a dictionary first. Regards, High on a tree 01:10, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

(Italian) pizza
It was created by a sockpuppet of a user with a history of problem edits and creating unnecessary redirects; usually his edits are reverted and his redirects are deleted, which is what happened here. If you want to re-create it, that's fine; it just seemed a bit redundant to me. :) &mdash;tregoweth (talk) 22:34, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Question
I just wanted to know, are you a Black man, like me? I could sorta tell by the way you write. DisgruntledEditor 19:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Blue laser
Just to let you know, "Blue ray" was formerly a redirect to Blue laser. Someone changed it to a redirect to Blu-Ray Disc. ANDROS1337  13:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

cleanup
when doing cleanup, its not looked upon greatly to just have references that straight up retell the joke. Ones that are keepable describe a reference and then usually have some background info as to how that pertains to the episode, what exactly is being referenced, what the actual joke is....its hard to explain, but try and remove any straight up joke retelling, or add to those to make them verifiable Grande13 16:55, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Reverted edits by random vandal to last version by random wikipedian.
I have been thinking for a long time, "Where the hell does that come from?". So tell me, where does it come from? I tried doing undo, and this message doesn't appear. Surely it must come from somewhere. I doubt people just copy and paste this edit summary. TheBlazikenMaster 21:36, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

you are all over the place there... Whats wrong?  AC Best  My Contributions  Autograph Book  22:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I will be more specific, then some vandal vandalizes an article, some people do "reverted edits by x to the last revision by y" instead of "undid revision x by y", I mean, how is that possible? I doubt people just copy and paste that message. TheBlazikenMaster 22:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

You get that messege when you properly undo stuff - do you know how to do that?  AC Best  My Contributions  Autograph Book  22:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

No, that's why I'm asking. TheBlazikenMaster 22:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay. Go to history on the page thats been vandalized. Then press undo next to the vandalizers edit in the list. Voila! Feel free to try it out on my user page at User:ACBest Hope that helps ;)  AC Best  My Contributions  Autograph Book  22:25, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

No it doesn't, as the summary "undid revision y by x" still appears, I just don't get it, where people get the message "revert edits by x to the last revision by y". Maybe I'm not meant to know. TheBlazikenMaster 22:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I dont know either!! Someone else will come visit you soon and tell you ;)  AC Best  My Contributions  Autograph Book  22:46, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I think I understand – you're talking about the string in the edit summary that's left after a reversion or undo, right? There are two explanations.


 * When admins rollback an edit (non-admins don't have rollback), the rollback feature leaves an edit summary very similar to your phrase. However, if you want to use an edit summary like your "reverted x to version by y", check out Popups or WP:TWINKLE. Both scripts let non-admins revert and undo edits automagically. The edit summary can either be left standard (similar to the phrase "reverted edits by x to the last version by y", or you can even customize it - "version y restored, reverting edits by x" or "undid version by x, restored y's version at time z" or anything you want. I suppose there are people who manually paste that phrase into every edit summary, but Twinkle and/or popups makes it really quick.


 * Does that answer your question? If not, just replace the helpme tag or ask me on my talk page. Thanks - Krakatoa  Katie  00:35, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Category:Gun films
I don't wanna waste people's time in a category for deletion debate, so I'm asking first. Would it be a good idea to add a category with the name gun films? The category description would be:

"Movies that use guns for at least 50% of the movie."

I mean movies like Bad Boys II, and The Departed. Would it be a good idea?
 * You might want to poke the Vilage pump for that kind of questions, you'd have a broader input :) -- lucasbfr talk 18:00, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Which section? TheBlazikenMaster 18:05, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, I'll use misc.

I need help.
I'm looking for info about extinct elephant-like creatures that died on the Ice Age, but the problem is, I don't know what the creature's name is, help please? TheBlazikenMaster 09:52, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Mammoth.--Thw1309 10:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Family Guy talk
I see you've posted an amended warning box at the top, and I've trimmed the talk page down to get rid of stupid questions which don't belong on a talk page (by archiving them). If you see a dumb question, which does not talk about improving the article, then I recommend the following: check the questioner's contribs (like this guy), if they never make useful contributions then ignore them, if the question is a forum like question delete it. If the question if from an IP who hasn't signed, then delete without checking contribs. Hopefully this will keep talk page crap to a minimum. Darrenhusted 12:13, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

July 2007
The piece of information you added, "It has about a day remaining" is not needed in the article. The fact that the length of the month, when it started, and where it ends gives any reader who knows the current date enough information to know how many more days are left in the month. Your information was redundant and could only have been useful on the current date and would require someone else to come along and fix the article. Also the way it was written provides no useful encyclopedic information to the article and does not conform to the rest of the month articles.

Wikipedia has several policies about notable content, encyclopedic content, what not to include in articles, and in this case, information that does not need to be updated in a daily manor articles in the main namespace. I hope this helps. Mkdw talk 19:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

historical events
Well, Portal:History is a good place to start looking. I don't think redirects from the mainspace to portals are kosher, but if so then that's probably the best target. List of timelines and history of the world seem to make some sense...  Big Nate 37 (T) 22:03, 31 July 2007 (UTC)