User talk:CountdownCrispy/Archive 1

Welcome Message
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! - Trevor macinnis 18:17, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Robot Wars robots
Hi Chris, you may be interested to note that various Robot Wars robots articles are up for deletion here. The consensus may well be that a merge of some kind is appropriate in which case a collated article of robot wars robots may be needed. I noticed the Robot Wars userpages that you have and thought that you might like to add to the discussion, and would probably be interested in the outcome. MLA 13:42, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I hope this is the right place to reply to the message you left me - many thanks for doing so, I've added my vote and will keep a close eye on the outcome. As I mentioned in my vote, I'm hoping to do a lot of work to the Robot Wars articles over the summer months and, once the main article gets a much needed once over, I will probably move onto the competitor articles.


 * Hopefully they'll be a bit more organised once I get there! ;-)


 * Many thanks, CountdownCrispy 16:37, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Userpage header
Dear Trevor,

I hope you don't mind me suddenly popping up on your talk page like this. At the moment, amongst other jobs I'm working on redesigning my rather plain user page and I remembered the header that adorns your user page and a few others which I have seen - User:Trevor MacInnis/Header (apologies, I'm not sure how to link to a template page). I wonder if you could tell me if this is a freely available template that can be copied onto the user space of anyone who wants it?

Many thanks in advance, CountdownCrispy 23:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)


 * The template is certainly free, just like anything on Wikipedia. Feel free to copy at will. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 02:52, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorting out newsticker.png on User:CountdownCrispy
Dear Harry (I hope you don't mind me calling you that),

Thank you for updating newsletter.png to newsticker.png on my userpage - had you not done this my userpage may well have looked sloppy and unprofessional for months before I'd noticed! I mean really, you'd have thought the big red cross would have been enough to notify me. Unfortunately, even if I had seen it I wouldn't have been able to do anything - I have a phobia of crosses, brought on by a particularly nasty game of noughts and crosses. ;-)

Thanks again, Countdown Crispy  (  ? 22:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

P.S. You have a cracking userpage! Very nice!


 * Thanks so much for the comment. You've made my day, especially after all the ups and downs I've had in the past week. (And I don't mind you calling me Harry.) Harryboyles 23:20, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Heli Attack 3 improvements
Hi Tarret,

Having waited three weeks for the results of the GA nomination for Heli Attack 3 I'd appreciate it if you could make some more specific suggestions on how to raise the standards of the article. For example, the article used to have a History section - see this old version of the article. During the peer review it was suggested that this was moved to a separate article and I duly obliged, starting Heli Attack (series). Should this be brought back or should a new section be written and, if so, what should it include?

Also, how should I go about making it come from less of a gamer's perspective? I can see your point, but how much should be rewritten or removed without compromising the quality of the article? Again, any comments and suggestions on this would be richly appreciated.

Thanks for reviewing the article, now please make it possible for myself and other edito... actually, it's just me ;-) to raise the bar and make this a GA.

Regards, Countdown Crispy  (  ? 11:19, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * What I want to know is how the system that runs the game was developed. For example was the game engine an enhanced version of the Heli Attack 2 engine or was it a new one that was created from scratch? Might I also suggest that you expand the "Response" section to reflect the poin of view of a new gamer who played this before the rest of the series? Tarret 20:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Featured picture promotion!

 * Mr Crispy,


 * Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Zabriskie Point-Panorama-edit2.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on . If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-02-17.  howcheng  {chat} 17:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Howcheng,


 * Apologies for failing to respond sooner to the notice that you left on my talk page. I was logged out of Wikipedia for some time, neglected to sign back in and hence didn't receive the 'new changes' notice until today. A belated thank you for letting me know that the photo I nominated for FP would be hitting the front page today - it made for a lovely surprise when I saw it! Also, sorry that my inability to log back in meant that I couldn't help edit the caption, but frankly I'd have done a rubbish job anyway!


 * Kind regards, Countdown Crispy  (  ? 14:49, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned public domain images
The following images were uploaded by you, but are currently not in use. They have been tagged as public domain (PD), either as PD-self or other PD claim, or equivilant. These unused PD images may be subject to deletion as orphans. You may wish to add them to an article, tag them for copying to WP commons Copy to Wikimedia Commons or if they are no longer needed, they can be nominated for deletion by following the easy three step process at Images and media for deletion. If you have any questions, please leave me a note on my talk page. --Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 22:44, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Image:Chris Philpot.jpg


 * Hey there,


 * Cheers for bringing the orphan picture Image:Chris Philpot.jpg to my attention - I've now nominated this for deletion as suggested.


 * Regards, Countdown Crispy  (  ? 21:01, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Tim Vine.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Tim Vine.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Chowbok  ☠  18:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi there,


 * Just a quick question about Image:Tim Vine.jpg which I uploaded, and which you (perhaps rightly) question the claim of fair use for under criterion one. My question is, given that it's rather hard to track down a Wikipedian who lives next door to Mr. Vine who could ask for a quick snapshot ;-) is it possible to just leave a more permanent note (i.e. allowing more than a week) on the article page, as per Image:GMiniXS202s.jpg in the article Archos? If this was to prove unsuccessful then obviously the image could/should be deleted.


 * Regards, Countdown Crispy  (  ? 20:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * How much longer would you need?&mdash; Chowbok  ☠  20:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I highly doubt that I could track down a free image (I had a good look when I rewrote the article in the first place); I was suggesting that if it was made more obvious that a free alternative was desirable then someone who can help might be alerted and thus be able to help out. Having looked at the article again, the photo is definitely useful - Mr. Vine is currently an active comedian and the last picture of him is circa 1997 - and so deleting it might be a bit extreme. Time will tell. -- Countdown Crispy  (  ? 22:29, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Current Wikipedia policy as I understand it is that it's better to have no image than a fair-use one, unless a free one couldn't be created. &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  22:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Having re-read the fair use criteria, I actually reckon this photograph is covered. Whilst you suggested that fair use is only applicable where "a free [picture] couldn't be created", the actual wording of criterion one is that fair use applies where "no free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information". Since there are seemingly no free promotional photographs for Not Going Out, and that the photo provides information which the photograph from many years earlier does not, I do feel that it is covered. -- Countdown Crispy  (  ? 22:46, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Right, it says "is available or could be created". How is that different from my interpretation? &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  22:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Because of the "or" - one of the two sections of the criterion is correct, hence the whole criterion stands. -- Countdown Crispy  (  ? 22:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Huh? You're misreading it. It says "Any non-free media used on Wikipedia must meet [the criterion that] ... [n]o free equivalent is available or could be created". So, if a free equivalent is available or a free equivalent could be created then a non-free image can not be used.


 * If you still disagree with my interpretation, then go ask the folks at Media copyright questions and see what they say. &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  23:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * If you would like to do this then you are of course welcome to and I will be interested to read the results. But for now, it is late at night and I'm trying to enjoy reading the tip of the Wikipedia iceberg and I really lack the patience to do so myself. If you want to bother the legality guys, or just cut out the middle men and nominate the picture for deletion, it's fine by me. I am of course merely trying to add a little of information to Wikipedia articles wherever I can, and this is clearly second within this community to the task of grumbling about the wording of a criterion on a policy page. -- Countdown Crispy  (  ? 23:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Robot Wars
Hey there,

I couldn't help but noticed that you'd reverted some vandalism on the Robot Wars article lately, and also your userpage mentions that you like the show. I am keen to rewrite the article to a decent standard, perhaps creating an article solely for the UK series of Robot Wars, and make it fully referenced, add pictures, and so on - would you like to help?

Regards, Countdown Crispy  (  ? 14:58, 18 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi. CBFan here. I've just seen your message for the Robot Wars thing and decided to reply here. I doubt I'll be able to actually provide pictures, and I have limited (I.E. virtually nothing) info for S1 and 2, but I'd be delighted to do assist as much as possible. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CBFan (talk • contribs) 18:04, Nov 18, 2006 (UTC).


 * Hullo again,


 * I've started a page at Robot Wars/Rewrite so that users can write a new and extensive article without having to sift through the current level of unnecessary detail and general rubbish. Your knowledge of later series is great to hear; even if it's not all that extensive, every little helps as we try to turn a mess of an article into a triumph. As for pictures, I am able to take screen captures from any repeats broadcast on Sky or whatever, and once the article starts to take shape I intend to contact some roboteers to see if they have any free images which we could use.


 * Thanks again for replying, and I hope that you are able to contribute in some way, however big or small it may be. -- Countdown Crispy  (  ? 21:44, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Robot Wars rewrite
Hullo Statistic,

You replied to my message on the Robot Wars article's talk page a few days back to say that you were up for helping to rewrite the article so that it was a little more readable. I've started a page at Robot Wars/Rewrite so that users can write a new and extensive article without having to sift through the current level of unnecessary detail and general rubbish. I hope that you are able to contribute in some way, however big or small it may be.

Regards, Countdown Crispy  (  ? 19:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I need you to elaborate on exactly what kind of info you are looking for, so I can better serve the rewrite. Thanks. (Statistic)


 * I'd like to get the article to featured status (or at the very least standard), since this would ensure that even if the article was to end up failing as a featured article candidate it would still be pretty damned comprehensive. I've added some section headings which I'd like filled in, so feel free to add to those, or indeed the lead section, but anything you can add will be of value.


 * I recommend doing what I am: going to What is a featured article?, seeing what the article is missing and adding it bit by bit! All the best, Countdown Crispy  (  ? 20:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, I don't think I'm good enough to come up with "compelling prose", but I just know a fair bit about Robot Wars, that's all.


 * In that case, write what you know! I'm aiming for featured standards so that the best possible article is created, but contribute whatever you know! I am, slowly but surely! -- Countdown Crispy  (  ? 13:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Television channel names
Hi Chris,

I thought you might like to be aware of the fact that the channel names of the BBC's channels are officially spelt as words (eg BBC Two as opposed to BBC2). Obviously the name 'BBC2' redirects to the BBC Two article, but if you could try and help keep some continuity between articles in this case, that would be a huge help. Thank you. --Jrothwell (? 18:30, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Heli Attack 3 Gameplay.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Heli Attack 3 Gameplay.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Countdown
Countdown (game show) has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Image:Wordlock logo.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Wordlock logo.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the 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. Ilmari Karonen (talk) 01:51, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Happy Birthday
Have a great birthday, CountdownCrispy! Good health, and good luck! — what a crazy random happenstance 04:46, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar!

 * Thank you for the barnstar - my first! Motivation to continue working on the article. :-) Best wishes, Countdown Crispy  talk contributions 22:23, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem! ;) I always liked Razer, and the Wikipedia article didn't do it enough justice! BTW, will you work on other RW robots, like Tornado, Hypno-Disc, etc.? 86.28.171.246 (talk) 12:10, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I might well - I'm still not quite happy with the text and referencing on Razer's article. My next project would likely be Tornado, as they are one of the only Robot Wars competitors to still have a fully-functional website, complete with press articles about the robot and potentially usable images per WP:IUP. Let's see how long I remain keen to edit/forget that I have to resume my degree in less than a fortnight! -- Countdown Crispy  talk contributions 15:28, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Alright! Yeah, Tornado's website has HUNDREDS of images of Tornado through the years! 86.28.171.246 (talk) 18:32, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Your addition to the McQueen bio
Are you joking in adding this rubbish to the article? Off2riorob (talk) 22:57, 4 September 2010 (UTC)


 * You added these unreliable cites http://www.thescambaiter.com/forum/showthread.php?t=85258 .. http://www.aus-scambaiters.com/forum/showthread.php?p=34514 and left the edit summary that it looks like vandalism but you will AGF, were you serious? Off2riorob (talk) 23:00, 4 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Humble apologies - I intended to revert the addition of the nonsense, but reverted the reversion! Please forgive me; I should learn not to patrol recent changes when the clock strikes 12! Sorry once again, and thanks for making me aware of this error. Countdown Crispy  ☎ ✎ 23:01, 4 September 2010 (UTC)


 * No worries, at least it is out now. Off2riorob (talk) 23:21, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing!  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 18:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.

Hello
Could you please tell me why did you tagged the Cervia gas field with the notability tag? Bine Mai  09:43, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello there, and thank you for getting in touch via my talk page. My concern was that perhaps, with only a single source, the subject of your article might have been so 'new' that it had yet to receive sufficient significant coverage to pass WP:GNG bullet point 1. It wasn't so much a criticism as a call for additional referencing so that its notability was assured. Feel free to remove the tag if you disagree, or perhaps swap it for . I hope this helps - please drop me another message if I can provide further information. Best wishes, Countdown Crispy  ☎ ✎ 13:06, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

New Barnstar!

 * Thank you for the latest barnstar - it's been a pleasure watching Razer grow with time. I'm tempted to move onto expanding a new competitor article as Razer is now looking greatly improved, and doesn't need nearly so much time and maintenance. A Google, however, suggests references for any of the other machines may be a lot harder to come by - but watch this space. :-) Countdown Crispy  ☎ ✎ 12:54, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You said you would try improve Tornado next, right? Anyway, no problem! ;) 86.28.171.246 (talk) 13:56, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Razer (robot)/Combat history
This doesn't look like an article, can you move it into your userspace? Unless I'm missing something.Prezbo (talk) 03:29, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hullo there, and thank you for leaving me a message. The page in question was created in response to discussion on the main article's talk page about what form the combat history section of the article should take: prose, or a table. A peer review suggested we were right to stick with prose, so the page is largely obsoleted. It would be a shame to lose it in case we change our mind, so is there an automated procedure for moving the page to my userspace? Thanks for alerting me to this. Countdown Crispy  ☎ ✎ 07:27, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem. I moved it to User:CountdownCrispy/Razer (robot)/Combat history. Next time you need to do something like this you should just create it in userspace.Prezbo (talk) 07:34, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Acknowledged. Thank you for your help. :-) Countdown Crispy  ☎ ✎ 07:36, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe it would be better if it was merged into the main Razer page? (with all the videos of them to source, I know they're all on Youtube so it shouldn't be hard to find them all) The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 08:45, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Razer GAN
CountdownCrispy, I highly commend you on the work you have done on Razer (robot) and I think it may well be good enough to be a good article, so I have nominated it for good article status here, just to let you know. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 08:41, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the good article nomination for Razer (robot). I thought I'd follow up on your message on the article's talk page so that it is easier for more users to be involved. Best wishes, Countdown Crispy  ☎ ✎ 09:36, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * CountdownCrispy, I've had a question answered on the GAN page and It says that you can ask someone else to decide whether its good enough for GA status. If you like I can give you the name of an editor I've found to be quite amicable if you wish to request him to review it just to speed up the process a bit. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 17:59, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking into asking another editor to perform the GA review. I'm not sure of another editor I would be happy to ask at this stage, but I'm glad the option's open if protocol takes too long! :-) I'll give it a day or two at least, as it is only fair that first come are first served. Please keep me abreast of any further news and developments. Best wishes, Countdown Crispy 19:08, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, but if you need an experienced amicable editor, I would highly suggest you try Ged UK as I've found him to be quite accomidating during my experiences with him on RFPP. or maybe there's Patken4 who I find is rather easy to work with but I don't know if he's ever done something like this before. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 16:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Just to let you know, I've messaged Ged UK for now to see if he is interested in conducting the review. I'll do my best to keep you abreast of his response. Best wishes, Countdown Crispy 18:21, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Good article mentor request
I hope you don't mind me dropping you a message, but I noticed your name on the list of good article mentors and, indeed, that you are interested in film and television articles. I performed my first GA review today for the EastEnders character Bianca Jackson, and wonder if you wouldn't mind looking at my findings and providing a second opinion. I am fairly sure that the article fails, with too much work required for an 'on hold' status to be appropriate. However, I am happy to be told otherwise and indeed would appreciate general advice on the style and depth of my review.

The appropriate review can be found at: Talk:Bianca Jackson/GA2. Thank you for any help you might be able to provide. Best regards, Countdown Crispy 15:04, 18 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello,


 * I would agree with you that the article is not GA standards, if nothing else the article is far to large; around 32kb is a good size, 64kb is far to big, an article that size on a fictional character is almost certainly WP:FANCRUFT.


 * Placing an article "On Hold" is always appropriate; the nominator (and others) should always be given an opportunity to improve the article. I tend to give around a week, but 2-3 days is fairly typical for minor fix-ups with longer for major re-writes.


 * All in all your review is good; giving specific examples and clearly laid-out. A good thing to do is to look at the GA reviews of others (particularly on a similar subject) to aid you in your review and to also ensure consistency.


 * Regards, Sanguis Sanies (talk) 18:44, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Razer: Featured Article?
Now we have Razer as a GA, maybe we can take it to the next level. (This may be a bit quick, but...) I have nominated it for featured article status as I think it meets criteria. Just to let you know, the nom is here. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 09:30, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Never mind. I jumped the gun on that and it turns out I need the significant contributor's say so before nominating and theres a few issues they've raised that need some work, which i've done a couple of. But If we can fix these and I have your consent, I'll re-nom it in 2 weeks, or we could ask Ged UK again. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 13:54, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed you did! I must admit I was a little surprised when I read that you'd nominated it, but no sweat. On the plus side it has provided further notes for improvement, but in all honesty I have no real interest in pulling the article up to FA standards. This isn't out of a sudden burst of apathy: I'd just sooner give other robots the same treatment and pull them up to GA standard, which is good enough in my eyes for this 'level' of article. (Robot Wars ought to be an FA, but that's another story!)


 * The level of precision required is beyond what can be supplied by the references available for a competitor robot in a defunct TV show, so I'm reluctant to give my consent for now. I am busy this weekend and resume my degree on Monday, but I'll try to keep my eye on this and contribute where possible&mdash;including sorting out the image I mentioned on the GA review&mdash;and will re-evaluate in a couple of weeks if you'd still like to try for an (unlikely) FA.


 * Thank you for all your help and enthusiasm, mind, and feel free to try and convince me otherwise - seeking advice of the sort an FA candidacy would provide can only improve this article. Best wishes, Countdown Crispy 15:10, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

In response to your questions at my talk: Hope that helps. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:16, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) I definitely think it would flow better with fewer subheadings - I'm not sure it's necessary to go with none, but I'll leave that to you. Ideally, I would prefer 1-2. As for the last sections - merge Legacy with Merchandise, and in Retirement elaborate on why Razer did not participate in series 7 and what Robo Challenge is. As for length...if anything, I would slightly reduce the Combat history section. However, though I'm not aware of any specific size recommendations for this type of article, in general 41 kB is not particularly expansive.
 * 2) Fancruft is a content issue, tone is more of a prose point. Some of the writing is informal, almost colloquial, and I would prefer it be slightly more academic. Actually, I was impressed by the lack of fancruft - most articles of this type seem overwhelmed by it.
 * 3) Other than making a "Description" or "Statistics" subsection, your best bet would probably be to incorporate most of them into "Construction"
 * 4) There is a way to do that bibliography method, but as you say that's probably not the best option here. My concern with namedrefs was with references that seemed to have the same content, like 24 and 26 - however, having now actually clicked on the links, I see that the problem with those two is not namedrefs, it's that ref 4 is mistitled. As for formatting consistency, I think the issue is how many of the parameters are filled out, and being consistent in which ones are, especially for shows and DVDs.
 * Very much so - many thanks. :-) Countdown Crispy 07:29, 26 September 2010 (UTC)