User talk:Czar/2015 Sept–Dec

Assassin's Creed (film)
Hello c! Please move Draft:Assassin's Creed (film) to the mainspace, and it'd be better if you first move Assassin's Creed (film) to Assassin's Creed (movie) to get a way. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 11:29, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The (film) page should just be deleted to make way for the move. Why make an extra step? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The old "film" redirect page had history so I moved it to "movie" (which now redirects) so as to preserve its attribution just in case it's needed. Anyway, resolved now. – czar   17:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Got it. Didn't realize it had so much history. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:40, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * 's Creed – czar   03:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Yep . My username was from the game, it was renamed later to Captain Assassin!. And thanks for the help here. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 03:50, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Cocoron
I saw the AFD result of Cocoron and thought I'd try to go hunting for sources. Since the game was only released in Japan I went ahead and asked the Japanese Wikipedia for help: ja:Wikipedia:Help for Non-Japanese Speakers. If you want I can ask the English WikiProject Japan and/or WikiProject Video games for help too.

I found one scan of a magazine article talking about a potential sequel for the game that never happened: http://www.hardcoregaming101.net/cocoron/pccocoronmag.jpg - I would like to see if there's anything else.

I wish these articles from the early 1990s were more accessible online :( WhisperToMe (talk) 17:13, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * A valiant attempt. (What is that mediaarts-db.jp link?) I've tried posting to jawp's WPVG before and haven't had any luck. It's easier to reach out to the fan communities, who tend to have scans of specific articles. In my experience, Japanese language games without English coverage are nearly impossible for us to source. I have not seen a single site or database that provides digitizations of Japanese print reviews. Even trying to track down a print Famitsu review is a chore (and few places actually provide such scans for interlibrary loan). I have a project on the backburner to make a database to index old game mags and credits—all the current indices are scattershot and unreliable. As for accessibility, the games community actually has much better scanning and archiving efforts than the communities of other consumer periodicals. (Think about finding old longform articles from old fashion magazines...) What would really help is some sort of Japanese-language equivalent to WP:VG/RS so we at least can figure out what databases and sites to search. – czar   22:55, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I put the text of the mediaarts-db.jp link in Google Translate and it seems to list magazines that wrote about the game. If people can hunt down copies of the articles it could be great. WhisperToMe (talk) 03:26, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Unless I'm missing something, doesn't give the citation for specific issues to hunt down—it just lists a bunch of publications –  czar   03:47, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * If those publications have websites it's possible they may have published an "index" of articles for each issue. I'm hoping with such a document somebody can track down which one has the Cocoron content. I've seen similar indexes for some anime and manga related magazines WhisperToMe (talk) 07:13, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Sierra Vista Mall
The version I made is significantly different from all other drafts, so unilaterally redirecting it is not a wise move. WP:OUTCOMES dictates that malls are generally notable, and that this level of coverage is sufficient for asserting notability. If you want, I would suggest AFD, since this version is significantly different from any prior version. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:41, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It's BRD—my redirect is as unilateral as your undoing the original redirect. I said in my edit summary that the sources added were all local. Do you have non-local coverage? (Also "outcomes" is an essay—it doesn't "dictate" anything, nevertheless that local coverage is sufficient, yadda yadda) – czar   00:46, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The NRDGA source already in the article is non-local, and while I haven't found much else in the way of non-local coverage yet, I still think that the silent precedent that malls are most often notable, and the difference in content from all other revisions, warrant something other than just reversion to a redirect. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:51, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I think that's the contention editors have with citing "outcomes" even if it's somehow true that malls are often kept, it should be based on having significant coverage (meeting the GNG) and not on the circular logic that malls are kept. So there isn't a silent precedent. Moreover, the article went through AfD twice, which should be enough to keep the verdict barring some heroic new cache of sources. I think it's more than fair to ask that the draft remain a draft until there is consensus that it has sig cov. – czar   00:56, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It still doesn't seem right to me to just redirect something that has a decent amount of sources, even if they aren't of the best quality. For that reason, I think this article needs a few more outside voices yet again, since consensus can change. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:05, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't disagree—all I asked was that you kept the status quo (redirect, with new version on a draft page) until you develop that new consensus. The discussion happens all the same, but it's a matter of BRD (keep the status quo until there is a discussion otherwise). – czar   01:09, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't see any need to draft it. Where do you suggest I get further consensus? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:11, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * (I know you didn't see a need to draft it, which is why you overwrote the redirect. The burden is on the adding editor to justify the new content, so when you said I unilaterally reversed your redirect, the actual BRD framing is that you unilaterally reversed an AfD consensus. But as you said, consensus can change.) I'd draft it at Draft:Sierra Vista Mall. I'd keep looking for national sources. I'd notify the Sierra Vista Mall talk page, WP Cali, any other wikiprojects, but I don't think it needs to go to AfD. If there was any cited indication of larger regional importance, I wouldn't even contest it. Alternatively, perhaps preferably, you could just expand the mall's section in the parent article. It's a stretch to argue for independent notability given the local extent of the sources. – czar   01:22, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Does WP:LENGTH mean nothing to you? There is no precedent for merging malls to their towns that I can see unless the mall is super duper obscure. I really do not want this merged because of the long standing precedent that malls are notable, and merging what you merged seems WP:UNDUE in the Clovis article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 16:53, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't see the length issue, and I don't see the need to be accusatory. There is plenty of precedent for merging to a parent article when the child article only has coverage in local news sources... Yeah, the merged content can be trimmed for weight—that's fine. – czar   17:54, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't have time to discuss this further or deal with your reverts of the merged content, so I've reluctantly taken your original advice: Articles for deletion/Sierra Vista Mall (5th nomination) – czar   18:18, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Question about TechRaptor
Hey Czar, Hopefully I'm doing this right - not too well versed in communicating on Wikipedia!

I had a few questions about my site, TechRaptor. In the thread about our reliability you cited credentials and requirements for credentials as a reason we are unreliable. May I ask how we can display such credentials, what credentials you're looking for, and why proper credentials are required? The main reason I ask is because I'm not always looking for credentials when it comes to a new hire. What I look for is writing skill, grammar, and an ability to be as objective as possible in both the news and reviews submitted. My reasoning is that most people who want to get into Tech/Gaming journalism may not have the credentials, which reduces the chance to find and read some of the great writers I have the pleasure to work with on my site. In a lot of cases as well, many of my staff have journalism degrees or full english degrees. Personally, I have a degree in Game Dev.

I'd love to chat to figure out what we need to do to become reliable in Wikipedia's eyes, so if you want to contact me directly outside of here (I'll mark this as watched), you can do so at rutledge@techraptor.net or @TheRealRutledge on Twitter.

I look forward to your response!! TheRealRutledge (talk) 14:57, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, WP's stance on what makes a source reliable is available at Verifiability and Identifying reliable sources. It's not so much a checklist to be remedied but an organization's reputation. This could include being recognized by mainstream sources as reputable, having reports that are widely trusted and referenced by other journalists (not just scoops but reliable reporting), having a staff with prior editorial experience (or staff members independently regarded as experts), having an editorial policy for fact-checking and editorial oversight, etc. – czar   13:41, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Huh. Never expected something like this to happen. GamerPro64  17:38, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Hey, Thanks for the response! I've talked it over with my editorial staff and we're going to start discussing drafting some new amendments to our ethics policy for editorial fact-checking and oversight. We thought we included everything, but it's apparent we definitely missed a few things we should include in it! As for the rest, we break stories from time to time, but I'm working with my staff to try and get more early reports out. The rest should follow in due time, and I totally understand that us time to become recognized. I've been at this for 2 years, and will continue to work on making TR something great. Every day is learning experience, and this thread is helping me to understand what we need to do to improve! :) Note for curiosity's sake: Can you clarify what you mean ? Thanks for both of your time! TheRealRutledge (talk) 02:09, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * What I mean,, is that I never expected a founder of a website asking for how to get their site to be more reliable for the site. I mean I once noticed one of the founders of Rock, Paper, Shotgun had an account here but that's it. GamerPro64  02:14, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see ! Yeah, I'm pretty hands on when it comes to the site, and pay attention to all of our social media, what people say about us on Reddit and in the comments, and try and keep track of what happens on Wikipedia in regards to TR (I kept tabs on both threads about us). I guess it really comes down to how much I care about my site and staff, and how much I really want TechRaptor to succeed. If people don't see us as reliable, I'll do whatever it takes to remedy that, because "your alternative source for Tech and Gaming" isn't just out tagline - we want to become a site that people can know and trust. Which is why we're send out a reader questionnaire in the near future, and plan on getting readers heavily involved with tweaking the new site design when it's ready. Maybe most people don't care, but I feel that every voice matters, and you guys come from an experience pool that I know I need to glean some knowledge and advice from. So thanks to both of you for taking the time! TheRealRutledge (talk) 02:20, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * There are a number of sites that have contacted us in the last year re: their reliability in the WT:VG/RS archives – czar   05:54, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll talk-stalk this one, interesting question. User:TheRealRutledge, fundamentally the wiki-guidelines are fuzzy (purposely so).  Usually what is checked, in my personal 'checklist' anyways, is whether you are putting your corporation on the line (or for non-incorporated-entities your personal full-legal-name reputation on the line).  If you have a site that publishes the physical address, landline telephone, and email address of the editorial staff, along with their full legal names, and the full legal name of the corporate entity that owns the firm (or when there is no such corporation the founder-slash-owner of the site), then that goes A VERY LONG way towards prima facie editorial oversight.
 * There is also some emphasis on selectivity: if you publish every single press release that every single videogame firm sends you, that means you don't *really* exercise editorial oversight.  If you let any random person with a webmail account become a 'journalist' aka unpaid intern for your news-and-reviews-sections, then you again aren't *really* exercising editorial oversight.  It is okay to let the readership author pieces, but they have to be clearly marked, and in their own URL section, distinct from the news-and-reviews portion of your site where you claim editorial oversight and fact-checking.  (Same goes for publishing adverts and even republishing PR stuff... as long as you are VERY clearly marking them as such, 'tis okay with respect to wiki-reliability, for instance Reuters has a PR-section that is clearly distinct from their news-section.)
 * In the long run though, wikipedia's criteria for wiki-reliability is very fuzzy: it mainly rests on whether you have a well-deserved reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, and for editorial-oversight and selectivity.  When the WSJ makes a mistake, it's pretty rare, because they fact-check article pre-emptively, *before* they publish.  If a mistake *does* slip through the checks and the editorial staffers and the skilled journalists, not only is it a rare event, it is a *fixed* event:  the WSJ issues a correction, in a later print issue (and on their online archive-copy too).  Therefore, if you really want to get and keep the status of wiki-reliable, you need to have a lot of processes and procedures and double-checks and triple-checks, and you need to Make Those Stick, and not let writers and editors and other folks cut corners.
 * It's hard to be a wiki-reliable source, you have to put your legal neck on the line, you have to be very very clear when you're speaking in the journalistic voice, versus when you're quoting somebody, etc. I too am impressed that you came asking, but as smart as they are about wikipedia, Czar is the wrong person (no offense Czar!) to be asking:  instead, go ask the major newspapers and the major newsmagazines (don't bother asking the television newscasters).  If you ABSOLUTELY want to guarantee that you'll achieve wiki-reliability, look into how the hard-science journals for academic researchers work, with double-blind controlled experimental trials, peer-review, a system of increasingly-high-status conferences, etc.  Instead of hiring one writer to playtest a game and then smash out a review, plus one editor to quickly skim it (with a dozen other writers on their plate simultaneously), you end up with tens or hundreds of playtesters getting paid minimum wage, dozens of scientists doing the investigations and dicing the statistics and critiquing the methodology, and dozens more scientists acting as gatekeepers and journal stewards and departmental deans and grant-making entities.
 * Point being, achieving local-newspaper-of-Podunk level of wiki-reliability is not very hard/costly, achieving international-newspaper-of-industry level of wiki-reliability is *quite* difficult/expensive, and achieving world-renowned-scientific-credibility is ASTOUNDINGLY implausible/trillions. Make sure, for the sake of your business, that you are achieving the correct balance, so you get the correct ROI.  Not saying you should aim low:  most respected accuracy in the videogame industry, for instance, would be reasonably difficult and reasonably costly to achieve, but that reputation ought to generate significant ROI... whereas, more respected than International Journal of Hydrogen Energy to pick one I recently ran across, would NOT be a good use of your fact-checking-dollars, right?  Aim high, but start with the low-hanging-fruit, and make sure you are trying to achieve a level of wiki-reliability that dovetails with your bizplan/audience/staffskills/etc.  75.108.94.227 (talk) 20:52, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, so the ethics code is okay, but who will guard the guardians? Are you making your writers and vloggers sign a legal contract, that they'll follow the ethics code, with their personal bankruptcy on the line if they do not?  How much will it cost, to guard the guardians, in dollars and time?  Here is the staff-page, and I see one founder, one editor-in-chief, and one former editor-in-chief ... who guard the guardians... plus way over sixty contributors, who are SUPPOSED to guard themselves using the ethics-code.
 * Now, how hard can it be? Hard:  maybe they each only contribute 3 pieces a month, and each piece is 333 words max, which means the small editorial staff only needs to fact-check something in the neighborhood of 40 factoids per hour, every hour of every workday.  (WP:CALC does not permit this:  333 words per piece * 65 writers * 36 pieces per year each, divided by ~10 words per factoid and 2000 workhours per annum, which works out to ~40 factoids/hr.)  And of course, if you have *more* prolific contributors, that are posting thousands and thousands of words every day, then fact-checking and issuance of corrections and such gets really expensive really fast.  And in fact, you do require all writers to submit a minimum of three pieces per month.  So at the current levels, you're needing to fact-check somethin north of one factoid per minute, and you don't have very many 'official' editors to do that legwork.  That's not even going into the audiovisual stuff, which is *much* harder to properly fact-check, since it's multimedia rather than ASCII.
 * Finally, there is the putting-your-legal-neck-on-the-line, with regard to slander and libel and copyright violations by your writers-slash-contributors: you require real names of the writers and vloggers, and give real names of the founder and editor-in-chief, but there is no phone number and no physical address, just emails and a domain-name.  When some adversarial lawyer wants to sue the publication over something less-than-complimentary in one of the game reviews, where does the hostile lawyer contact you?  Point being... wikipedia DOES NOT want that hot-shot lawyer ever contacting the WMF, complaining that wikipedia treats 'TechRaptor' as wiki-reliable and therefore wikipedia is getting sued for linking to copyvio, re-publishing libel/slander, or otherwise screwing the pooch known as international law.  Part of the reason the big newspapers get a reputation for accuracy, is because they have their legal neck on the line, when one of their journalists slanders a major celebrity/politician/etc.  Keeping out of legal trouble, means having a bunch of editorial oversight, fact-checking, et cetera.  75.108.94.227 (talk) 22:01, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Di Bonaventura Pictures
Hello C! Please move Draft:Di Bonaventura Pictures to Di Bonaventura Pictures - Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 15:24, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done, though the sourcing is skimpy and I suggest that you bulk it up – czar   18:02, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah sure, I've done it. Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 04:10, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Get Smurfy
Hello czar! Please move Draft:The Smurfs (2017 film) → Get Smurfy - It's an animated film, first image is already released from the film, which means it's in-production. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 04:09, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't see the citation in the article, if you could add it – czar   05:54, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Both citations at the end of the "Production" section. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 15:44, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that a single promotional image establishes the production phase as opposed to pre-production, but I'll leave that to the NFF experts. ✓ done – czar   16:03, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, has approved it. Thanks. -- Captain Assassin!  «T ♦ C ♦ G» 04:07, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

RE: Superbeat: Xonic Draft
Yeah, sorry about moving the draft to mainspace when it wasn't approved. I wasn't thinking straight. I've gone ahead and resubmitted an improved draft if you wanna give it a look. Jotamide (talk) 05:04, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

PC Engine Best Collection
Have your eyes checked, there were sources for everything there! --Stormwatch (talk) 17:29, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, primary sources. Independent articles require significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources. (?) Please revert your edit. – czar   17:56, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

actually came to ask a 'simple' question...
Does something like this already exist? See, nested-footnotes helpdocs for what doesn't work.


 * Factoid one.[1] Factoid two.[2]  NewFactoid three.[3](A) NewFactoid four.[3](B)
 * References
 * ^ Cite one.
 * ^ Cite two.
 * ^ a b "Cite three".
 * (A) "...which proves fact#3 is true..."
 * (B) "...which proves fact#4 is true..."

Closest that already seems to exist is a combination of  followed by , which has the downside that the 'Notes' section must be added, in addition to the 'References' section (so footnote-quotations are physical split from their source-metadata), and that the linkage between the QuotationGoesHere and the url/title/author/etc is a two-hop procedure. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 22:11, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Nested refs are a pain. They sometimes break with Mediawiki changes too. You're close—the way to do it is with refn instead of efn, which will let you nest  tags inside and will automatically compile into the main reflist section. –  czar   01:02, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, perhaps I misunderstood. If you want two separate lettering orders (reflist by numbers, notelist by alphabet), then you'll want to call both separately. If you want your "A" and "B" to be included as numbers within your reflist, go with my first response. The issue might be the conceptualization—if you want to include quotes for each source, it's best to either write your ref3 to include the quotes and give a little more explanation, or to give factoid three and four their own dedicated refs with their own info. Separate orderings will require separate reflist/notelist calls, but I think you want to avoid the notelist if you can cram what you want in the reflist alone. An example of the former: FACTA FACTB FACTC


 * Wherein you don't need to have superscript numbers at the end of your quotes because they are attached to the citation right above it. I don't like manually typing A/B because the ordering can change over time. I'd prefer the option of giving each quote its own ref. – czar   01:17, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Hacksaw Ridge
Hello czar! Please move Draft:Hacksaw Ridge → Hacksaw Ridge — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 04:09, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done – czar   01:02, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Re Flash Gorden
Actress who played Dale Arden as drawn by Alex Raymond for NYTimes comic strips was Ruth ( Hildman) Doran.. I have original photos and article for proof. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.148.137.144 (talk) 22:27, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi 73.148—I'm not sure which article you're referencing (I am not active on Dale Arden), but I can try to help if given details about what you want. Please provide reliable citations with your requested changes. – czar   01:02, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Ouija 2 and more
Hello czar! Please move Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 03:32, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Draft:Ouija 2 → Ouija 2
 * Draft:Storks (film) → Storks (film) — It's an animated film so it doesn't need a production start source. It might be already in-production, just one year far from its release.
 * Draft:The Circle (upcoming film) → The Circle (2016 film)
 * ✓ done, though I'm not so hot on the ssninsider.com source—the site doesn't appear to have any obvious hallmarks of reliability. Also, NFF explicitly says that animations need to be out of pre-production, so I think Storks needs more time in the oven. (And while I'm happy to move it for you, I think you could have overwritten the "2016 film" redirect for The Circle because you were the one who made it. That is to say: if you would have attempted to overwrite the redirect, I think it would have deleted the redirect and moved the draft in its place.) – czar   07:04, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah I know when we overwrite the redirect it delete the redirect and move the other article to it place. But it only applies when the redirect is targeted to that article which is needed to be overwritten. When redirect is targeted somewhere else then it's impossible. Thanks for the help. And for Storks I will come back when a news comes out. Thanks again. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 14:36, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Good to know—thanks for looking into it – czar   14:40, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Draft:I Kill Giants (film)
Hello again, please move Draft:I Kill Giants (movie) to Draft:I Kill Giants (film) for now as MoS. Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 02:48, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done – czar   13:48, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Vertigo Entertainment
Hello! Please move Draft:Vertigo Entertainment → Vertigo Entertainment — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 04:12, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done, though it would be worth establishing the company's notability apart from its affiliation with Roy Lee (otherwise it would be best to merge to the section in his article) – czar   04:42, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Draft:The Space Between Us (film)
Would you please merge already existed Draft:Untitled Peter Chelsom project into the new titled Draft:The Space Between Us (film)? Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 12:26, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done – czar   05:33, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

The Purge 3
Please move Draft:The Purge 3 → The Purge 3 — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 02:36, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done – czar   05:33, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Resident Evil: The Final Chapter
Hello czar! Please merge Draft:Resident Evil: The Final Chapter → Resident Evil: The Final Chapter — There are no dates overlap so it should be easy. Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 02:40, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done – czar   03:39, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Battletoads
I wonder if you'd like to get the article to the GA status based on your interest in Rare's legacy. A collaboration seems a great way to get the thing underway. —Electroguv (talk) 17:29, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Hey, check out WP:RARE and its talk page—you're most welcome to join in – czar   18:13, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Killer Instinct Gold
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

On MOTHER Series article
I saw that you had replace "Pokey" instead of "Porky". While Pokey has been used in Earthbound, the name used more recently has been Porky. This has been reinforced in MOTHER 3's Pig Motifs in his empire and how the name was spelled in recent works with his name (Super Smash bros)--Mpo9 (talk) 18:14, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I understand that the name has changed between series entries and translations, and I haven't replaced anything so I'm not sure what that means. When I wrote the Mother series articles, I used the terms that occurred most often in the sources. That's the WP standard. – czar   02:30, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Rare Replay
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Pixel Press
I have addressed your question on my talk page. Thanks for being more hospitable on my talk page than editors are being on the noticeboard about conflict of interest editing. --Bathchurnning (talk) 19:29, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Undertale
In the vain attempt of trying to make Draft:Undertale into its own article, I've come to realize that I haven't played the game due to not being one to buy things off Steam. And seeing how you were the one to write up the Earthbound page, which Undetale has been compared to, by any chance have you played Undertale? GamerPro64 22:11, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Haven't played Undertale, but if it warrants an article, there should be plenty of sources that describe its gameplay (and in any event, there'll be YouTube playthroughs) czar  03:13, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It has become very difficult to source this for me. I've been waiting for reviews of the game and all there is so far is from Destructoid, Giant Bomb and Jim Sterling. There's also sources from The Escapist, Kill Screen, Kotaku, RPS, Polygon and such but I have to say this game comes off as very intricate. GamerPro64  04:03, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Xbox One system software protection
Hi Czar,

Just to let you know that I've requested the Xbox One system software page to be protected in the same way as the Xbox 360 system software. Wagnerp16 (talk) 07:37, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Passengers (2016 film)
Hello czar! Long time, huh. Please merge Draft:Passengers (2016 film) into Passengers (2016 film) — It should be simple and easy because there is no date overlaps, I've checked. Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 16:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done—the issue is not only date overlaps but when a page has a substantial edit history. Unless I can be entirely sure that those edits will not be missed, I need to move the page somewhere else to preserve attribution history if someone needed to reference the edits. czar  18:15, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Mushihimesama Futari
Hello, I have revert your edit and added additional citation. ♠♠ BanëJ ♠♠ (Talk) 07:19, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Farm-Fresh eye.png Talk:Mushihimesama_Futari czar  15:49, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Grand Theft Auto soundtracks
Hi there. I see you've created redirects from the Grand Theft Auto soundtracks, with your claim being that they are "not notable". Considering the soundtracks make up a large part of the Grand Theft Auto games, I just wonder how you can claim it is "not notable". Thanks. 81.96.94.137 (talk) 18:00, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I said a bit more than just "not notable". I said there weren't enough (reliable, secondary) sources to warrant dedicated articles to those soundtracks. The common practice is to build a section about the soundtrack/music in the parent article, and let it spin out summary style if there is more that needs to be said. czar  15:49, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I have added my two-penneth to the discussion on the relevant San Andreas soundtrack page. Again, why did you not instigate that discussion on the other pages before you went ahead and created a redirect? Just because you believe it is "overkill", does not mean others don't, and if it was "overkill" someone would have merged the pages long ago, but they haven't. I propose you undoing your edits to those pages and posting the same question on the talk page, in order to gauge a reaction from other users. 81.96.94.137 (talk) 17:36, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm reading your tone as presumptuous because I imagine you already know the answers: the WP principles of being bold and not using "it exists" as notability criteria, and that I informed my judgment call (on the role of summary style in a subtopic such as a soundtrack), which should never be contentious in the face of an unsourced article. If you feel there is sufficient reliable sourcing, I encourage you to write the soundtrack sections (and expand to full articles if necessary). Take care, czar  21:48, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * For the record, I am not "presuming" anything, as I have neither the time or Wikipedia experience to dedicate my time to something like that. As for reliable sources, another user has pointed you in the direction of some on that talk page. Moving on from that, my main point on here has been your claim on the talk page that listing all the songs is "overkill". "Overkill" is very subjective, and I was wondering why you decided to create a redirect for the GTA IV and V pages without a discussion, whereas you instigated a discussion on the San Andreas page. As I have said, I am no experienced Wikipedian, but I always thought that when it came to issues like splits, merges or redirects, the common practice was to discuss it first, and I have seen no record of a "discuss" tab on the two aforementioned pages. 81.96.94.137 (talk) 23:13, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * "Overkill" isn't the only reason to redirect it, but, yes, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information—it doesn't include lists of things just because they were once published somewhere. It's relevant to list, within reason, tracks that are the subject of commentary (e.g., an official soundtrack's tracks, when they are the subject of reviews), but to list a hundred background songs from an in-game radio station is closer to video game trivia. Even with the soundtrack's sources, the full list has not been invoked enough to make it something an encyclopedia includes in full. When it comes to splits/merges/redirects, the procedure is to be bold unless the action is against a prior consensus or likely to be contentious. In the latter cases, a preemptive discussion is preferable to an edit war (reverting back and forth). So, no, you don't always need to discuss first if it's in good judgment. czar  15:14, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Today's featured article/October 18, 2015
Hi Czar. A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. It mostly follows the lead section; how does it look? - Dank (push to talk) 23:06, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Looks fine—thanks! I appreciate it running on an anniversary of its release. I removed some of the gerunds and would fiddle around with it some more but don't want to break anything. More or less fine as it is. Thanks again. czar  23:48, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Happy to help. That looks good. If you want to fiddle some more, I'll have a look. - Dank (push to talk) 23:57, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Vegetarian Campaign Nepal
Hi, Deleting this article with just a single delete vote does not seem to be acting in accordance with finding genuine consensus. Could you please re-open the discussion? AusLondonder (talk) 03:45, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Articles for deletion/Vegetarian Campaign Nepal was open for three weeks (the maximum, and two weeks longer than usually necessary). If you have new evidence to share (secondary source coverage), I'd recommend starting with that. I'm fine with restoring the draft to your userspace, if you want to work on it, but I would ask that it go through the Articles for Creation vetting process in the future. (Also there was not just a "single delete vote"—the nominator counts and AfD is not a vote. There was no substantial opposition to deletion.) czar  15:24, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

The Zookeeper's Wife (film)
Hello czar! Please merge Draft:The Zookeeper's Wife (film) into The Zookeeper's Wife (film) — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 04:12, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  04:18, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

S. Srikanta Sastri (Ruthless deletion)
Dear Editors, I logged in only today to find to my shock that the page on India's foremost historian has been deleted as and I quote "Google Scholar does not have enough citations". !! While I agree that the academician section may have been a tad offbeat, it does in no way warrant ruthless deletion of an entire page. Let me go on record in saying that 1) He is a historian of no trivial importance. 2) Having died in 1974 and having penned most of his book (if not articles) in Non English languages before the Internet Era, Google Scholar obviously cannot have citations! 3) The Star line up of his students who by their own merit have Wikipedia Pages dedicated to each of them bear testament to his fortitude and greatness as a teacher. 4) The historian who was quoted on Berlin Radio by Goebbels along with Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan cannot (for the love of God) be trivial. 5) Western perceptions of Notability need not hold ground in the orient. At best this action comes across as severely racist. Wonder what this will do to Wikipedia's standing in India and the East. ! 6) Notability in terms of outgoing and incoming links is a mundane concept especially when dealing with personalities of yesteryears. 7) WHile the page has been ruthlessly and racially discrimnated, the priceless group photographs of that Golden Age serve their purpose on other Wikipedia Pages. In fact Wikimedia Commons has given a good images badge ! 8) If Notability is the question, why then would 42 western libraries stack their racks with is books. Good Heavens. ! 9) Why would his thirty year old books undergo reprint even today to find a vast audience in India and abroad. ? 10) WHile Pornstars in the west find Wikipedia pages, a learned, reputed scholar and polyglot of enormous intellect finds no place here, because he is not noteworthy.!! Racism at its best. 11) I hope better sense prevails. MOdifications are most welcome. but deletion is arrogance personified. We can concoct a thing or two. But to fabricate 10 books, 300 articles, to imagine 20 monographs and materialise 20 odd group photographs from the Golden Era of University of Mysore is indeed a trick that would put Houdini to shame. I implore you to restore the page. Advise us on the requisite modifications and we will certainly visit those concerns. We are not fanatical. Give Wikipedia a chance to be genuinely global. Western perceptions need not be the only perceptions the world sees. Hope justice can be done. Otherwise We for one would lose all inclination or interest towards a "Western Wikipedia". For the Love of God, He is not a "Borderline Academic". We remain yours Affectionately.Rkkrupa (talk) 05:03, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * It went uncontested for three weeks, so I don't know about ruthless. As noted via the soft delete, I'm happy to restore the page to your userspace if you want to work on it, but it will need to be much less promotional before someone will accept it back in article space (i.e., completely rewritten, more reliant on secondary sources than primary source citations of his work). As for everything you said about Google Scholar, I noted it myself at the discussion page so I'm not sure why you're bringing it here. I don't think anyone has it out for the guy—the article was just a mess. Take care, czar  05:13, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

How does one go about rewriting this article from scratch (albeit with same media content as before)..? Is it allowed.? And can you clarify as to what you mean by secondary sources vis a vis primary source citations of his work..? Thanks. Rkkrupa (talk) 09:24, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I've restored the page to Draft:S. Srikanta Sastri. You can either work on it there or on a new draft in your userspace (e.g., User:Rkkrupa/Sastri). Feel free to reuse or wipe out chunks of the text. For the difference between primary, secondary, and tertiary sources, see the overview at WP:PSTS. The Sastri article should be written from secondary sources—biographies and other writings that have editorial distance from the writer. The sources should be reliable as well, as in having some editorial and fact-checking control over what is published. Those are good sources for an encyclopedia article. (Distance from the subject would also mean not stuff written on his website by his family members.) I'd wipe out almost all of the citations to Sastri in the draft. It's fine to have a bibliography section of his major works (I would suggest making it a "Selected bibliography" of his most important works so as not to presume completeness) but the source for claims about his work, the impact of his work, and his life should be biographies and not his own works. His own writings can be used with the limitations set at WP:SPS (as a self-published source, mainly for small, ordinary statements of fact). For example, statements like "vast repertoire of historical knowledge saw him author works with far-reaching influences" should likely just be removed. "Vast repertoire" and "far-reaching influences" are peacock terms that should be stated more plainly/directly in an encyclopedia. And if his legacy is even slightly so praiseworthy, those types of extraordinary claims require extraordinary citations: they should be cited in a reliable, secondary, independent source that says so. I do think it's best to use the previous draft as a guide but only write directly from secondary sources as if the previous draft didn't exist. My 2¢. It's fine to re-use the media content (such is the nature of free-use images) although the personal website source of those copyrighted images should make it clearer that it indeed holds the copyright from each individual photographer... It's kind of a stretch that all the book covers and every image from every stage of his life is owned by his family and not the original photographers. czar  12:57, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. We will attempt to adhere to your recommendations. There are close to 110 images and 11 Audio recordings that the family does not hold copyright to. The rest, the family owns them whole and sole. Some of these are on wikimedia Commons. We request some time be allotted for these revisions as they need to be done from the basics. We will try to stick to encyclopedic terms of writing. There are numerous biograpahical pieces on him by close to 12 different authors in Kannada (South Indian Language) and a few in English by 3 different authors. Sadly, these are in print and not available online as digitised sources to link to. How then do we showcase these books as sources for his biographical information..? Kindly illuminate us on this. The Academician section will be scrapped. Group photographs will be retained. Bibliography will be limited to only list of books. The long list of articles will be deleted. Thank you again for your consideration. Apologies for delayed response to notice for deletion.Rkkrupa (talk) 14:08, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No rush—you have as much time as you want. Those books sound great. You can still cite them as one would in a scholarly paper or book's footnotes. (Let me know if you need help with setting that up, but it's a similar format to the other citation styles.) It's particularly helpful to include frequent footnotes with page numbers for each section of text to make it really easy for others to verify individually facts when they check the book out of the library. And the bibliography doesn't have to be limited to books, but I would have a "Selected bibliography" section that lists Sastri's major/famous works, ideally as selected by another scholar. For examples of well-written and -formatted biographies, see any of these. Also I should ask: when you say "we", to whom are you referring? Please keep in mind that accounts should only be used by an individual and that if you have an affiliation with the subject, you should declare any potential conflict of interest on the article's talk page. czar  18:35, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for reply and help. I am a retired University Professor in his seventies. I am not particularly tech savvy and am unable on more than one occasion to comprehend many of the software intricacies. In this regard, I often request my thirty year old son to lend me a helping hand in the technical (typing, alignment, insertion of image, linking and so on) aspect of the work. My late brother was a student of Dr S. S. Sastri in the 1940s. He was a Second World War military hero. That aside, through my brother, we were endeared to Dr S. S. Sastri's corpus of writings and the extent of the man's intellect. We have no direct affiliation to the personality in question. We will keep in touch for I am certain that we will need your guidance. If you are not averse to an old man's ramblings, I wish to share with you a piece of history. India's First Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru after penning his autobiography "Discovery of India" while in a British Prison, decided to send his first copy to Dr S. S. Sastri in Mysore for critical review. Dr S. S. Sastri sent back a not too complementary letter to Nehru regarding his accuracy as a historian, while commending the exuberant style of writing (having had formal education at Cambridge). Such was the standing of Dr S. S. Sastri. I sincerely hope his page (with your assistance) finds resurrection so that many a discerning reader may stand to realise how India's Universities and Colleges were once peopled by such polyglots and intellectual tour de forces as Sastri. I remain Humbly yours in Gratitude. Rkkrupa (talk) 05:15, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Very interesting—looking forward to reading about it in the article (and following its footnotes). I'm confident that you can pull it off with the sources you mentioned. Please reach out if I can be useful. czar  13:48, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletions of Nvidia tech-demos
Bit of a mundane subject but you've replaced two articles that are (to my eyes) "a trip down memory lane" (and I was hard ATI back then) and given them pointless redirects.

It is far easier to re-write something than start from scratch, please take the time to fix stuff and not leave some silly redirect behind (otherwise leave it) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.204.46 (talk) 16:08, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a trip down memory lane. There are other websites to document technological moments in history that do not have enough sources for their own encyclopedia article. As for whether the topic is "pointless", I think the secondary sources have already spoken (that is, by not speaking). Burden's on the editor to source their contributions, not on everyone else. czar  17:50, 5 October 2015 (UTC)


 * RE Orb-3d to, you bastard. And of course not but everything it documents is a trip down someone's "memory lane", there are now gaps missing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.204.46 (talk) 17:58, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

About your deletionist efforts
Hey, listen.

I'd like to ask you to plesse stop doing this. If you really must, do with it with only actually viable cases of May (Pokémon) and such, or maybe Amanda Ripley (character) too if you really need (I have no strong opinion either way here). Or maybe productively write something because I see you hardly ever even do anything but go around deleting very large chunks of Wikipedia content, gutting articles left and right. Not only that, you are summarily redirecting entire well-sourced articles without attempting any discussion at all as you just did with that Sarah Bryant and even did away with all the VF characters in their list. And when you try discussion it's not much better. Look, here I'm now planning to write VF's Akira Yuki article (who's a big fighting game icon, one of the most famous Yu Suzuki's creations and one of SEGA mascot), and maybe one for Pai Chan too (about this I didn't decide yet). And you too might write some articles, or expand the existing ones, contribute instead of trying to obstruct and frustrate those who try. Now I don't know should I even bother at all, with anything here. How many feel like me? I can tell you this is extremely irrittating and putting off and just demoralizing. So please reconsider this.

And I'd possibly try and help you with some of these articles you'd work on. I've got a rather large collection of game magazines especially from the 1980s and 1990s, for example, and I love helping people and I'm here to share. --AggressiveNavel (talk) 18:51, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * If you are looking to be treated in good faith, you might want to remove the pejorative intended as an insult from the section heading. The claim that I don't create content (as a rule or not) is very poorly researched and doesn't help. Sarah Bryant (Virtua Fighter)'s at AfD, so I'm not sure what you want to discuss about it here. I suggest that you develop a firm grip on the general notability guideline and what constitutes in-depth coverage before creating more articles. Aggregating every passing mention of a video game character from listicles and its respective game reviews does not an encyclopedia article make. Likely better off taking the highlights and writing a really good series character list instead. czar  19:08, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

The Book of Henry
Hello! Please move Draft:Book of Henry → The Book of Henry — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 02:04, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  02:26, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Please move Book of Henry to The Book of Henry — The original title. Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 02:40, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  02:44, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Mushihimesama Futari
Hi,

The video game cleanup talk page you posted on Mushihimesama Futari cannot be found. The article has enough mention to be notable for an article by itself as per Reliable Sources for Video Games ) as stated under WP:VG/RS. ♠♠ BanëJ ♠♠ (Talk) 09:27, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Banej, the talk page can be found on its own tab at the top of the article: Talk:Mushihimesama Futari. The issue is that this game doesn't have any readily available review sources so it would have to rely entirely on pre-release news. Those VGRS sources are the place to start, but this is more about how we determine which concepts get individual articles. Many Cave games like MF lack review/wide coverage and would be best compiled together as List of Cave games. And its unsourced info should be removed. czar  13:40, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Kirby's Block Ball
Gatoclass (talk) 19:02, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Moana (2016 film)
Hello c! Please move Draft:Moana (2016 film) to Moana (2016 film) — A second image from the film just came in yesterday, which means it's obviously in production. Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 03:17, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done! I don't see sources in the article that say it's out of pre-production, but I trust that you'll be able to provide them for WP:NFF if needed czar  03:49, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Cobra Triangle
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:02, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Updating project templates
Hey, I noticed you have been incubating a few articles into draftspace recently. If possible can you update the Project Template to draft class. Thanks, Salavat (talk) 03:45, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I usually do, but it shouldn't be a big deal in either case. By the way, thanks for keeping the New articles page updated. (Feel free to join in converting unsourced articles to drafts when you come across them.) czar  05:27, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Nocturnal Animals (film)
Hello czar, please move Draft:Nocturnal Animals (film) → Nocturnal Animals (film) — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 17:13, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  17:30, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Saturday Night Live
Saturday Night Live is filmed live in New York City and I thought people involved in the WikiProject dedicated to improving articles about New York City would be interested.

I remember watching Saturday Night Live (season 27) and how it addressed the September 11 attacks and the appearance of the Mayor of New York City on that program and I realized how integral Saturday Night Live was to the culture of New York City.

But fine, I won't post again to that particular WikiProject.

Perhaps it might be useful to have a WikiProject Saturday Night Live at some point, instead, and that could be a central noticeboard for such notices related to Saturday Night Live.

Hope you're doing well,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:32, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 * If there are editors who are interested in coordinating that way, it could be a good idea. But for the WikiProject tags I removed, the page did not appear to fit the projects' stated scopes. Perhaps SNL might be important to the NYC project (though I think it's a stretch), but that individual episode certainly had little to do with NY or NYC. czar  19:36, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see what you're saying, that makes more sense, thanks for the extra explanation. Yes, per Saturday Night Live (season 27), I do think SNL is integral to the culture of New York City and appropriate for the NYC project. But you may be right, upon reflection, that individual episode articles would be better for a WikiProject Saturday Night Live. Thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:44, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Visual novel engines
Hi Czar,

I don't think the visual novel engines article you created is a good idea. Right now it doesn't seem like coverage of the topic as a whole, but also isn't really a list. Instead it is just three separate articles mashed together, which I don't think is a good way to cover the subject. If you could find some sources covering the topic of visual novel engines in general, rather than just about those three specific ones, then maybe it could be made into a reasonable article. However, I think for now it would be better to keep those three articles separate, and nominate any of the three that are non-notable for deletion. Calathan (talk) 15:19, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * , possibly. Let's talk it through. Do you have sources for any of the three engines? They need to be pared down but I saw that page as becoming a list. There are other engines too, but they tend to not have significant coverage. We can use their sparse coverage to mention them in a list. Visual novels aren't exactly my area, so I don't know what sources would discuss them as a group. czar  20:26, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * There are links to a few sources given on Talk:Ren'Py, and a couple other magazine articles are mentioned there but not linked. I haven't checked the links, so I'm not sure how good the sources are (also, since they were posted years ago, they might be dead links).  I'm not aware of any specific sources about visual novel game engines in general or any specific sources about the other two game engines.  I'm not at all an expert on visual novels either, so I wouldn't really know where to look for sources.  Basically, I am doubtful that sources exist that could allow us to make a good list.  I think that in order to have a list, either there would need to be several notable visual novel engines (in which case we could have both a list and separate articles on each notable engine), or there would need to be sources covering the topic of visual novel engines in general (in which case a list of them could be warranted even if most of the engines listed are non-notable).  However, my impression is that there are just a couple notable engines without any coverage of the topic in general (but again I don't really know where to look for sources).  Anyway though, if the content is poorly sourced, I don't think combining it into a list will improve that. Calathan (talk) 20:46, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think the four links on Talk:Ren'Py are usable. I left a note/request at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Visual_novels. Let's give it a few days (up to a week) to see if anything happens. If nothing, I'll reverse the merge and nominate them for deletion separately. Does that work for you? czar  20:55, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That sounds like a good plan. I went ahead and asked at WT:ANIME if anyone has sources, since visual novels are also considered as being in the scope of that WikiProject.  I still think the Ren'Py engine sounds notable from what is described on the talk page, but it would be fine to have an AFD on it anyway to get a wider opinion on it. Calathan (talk) 21:06, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * To bring it to everyone's attention, I've posted links to quite a bit of Ren'Py coverage to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Visual_novels. I'm hoping someone can use these to fix the article, which is in a fairly bad state. — PyTom (talk) 16:23, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Gearing up for another Dota 2 FAC
Hey. The last time I nominated Dota 2 for Featured Article status, I closed it up myself and walked away feeling rather helpless, as I saw that that page was littered with virtually impossible input from Eric Corbett, like stating that the game isn't the most actively played title on Steam... which it is, and so on and so forth. I approached copyeditors and we applied a lot of heavy reworking to the page, but I just felt so fucking uninspired after that, so I left the page alone. Well, I recently started editing the page again and cleaned up some newer gunk that's built up. Would you like to thoroughly go through it and tell me if you think I should nominate it for FA status again? D ARTH B OTTO talk•cont 08:50, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * , good to see you back at it. I have my hands full right now so I can't give it more than a look-see, but I'm happy to help with small asks, if you have any. The lede needs a lot more bulk—it should summarize every major aspect of the article. For example, Development takes up seven paragraphs of the article but only has a single sentence in the lede (its weight should be proportional). I'd also look into the sources that aren't in the vetted WP:VG/RS list, just to preemptively stave off trouble. If a secondary source can replace the PR Newswire and other press release sources, prefer those. And can the esports site articles be replaced with more mainstream games sources? It would help to have a defense for those pre-prepared if you're stuck with them. Any site used at FAC should have a reputation for fact-checking or editorial integrity. I'd also keep in mind that the article's in pretty spectacular shape as it is, overall, but that FAC isn't for merely spectacular but immaculate articles. It's particularly stressful if only because you cannot ever predict how picky editors will choose to be. But you can hedge your bets by asking editors in advance like you just have. Godspeed. I know you can pull it off. czar  17:52, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Trust me, mate, I have tried extensively to find numbers outside of eSports Rankings that substantiate those numbers, but no reputable sources can back it up. Thanks for the encouragement and overview, though. D ARTH B OTTO talk•cont 22:51, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Dunnet
Hey Czar. Thanks for your edit to Dunnet (video game). I learned a lot from the AfD process and I believe the article needs a bunch more work. The 75108 person and I have discussed a bunch of changes that should probably be made. I'm trying to go through these changes one at a time, using the COI template and hoping for feedback. It's been 2 months (today) since I submitted the first (one sentence) of these changes, and I've gotten nobody to look at it at all. Can you take a look at the Talk page and weigh in on this change? Ron Schnell 13:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done, responded there. If you ever need more eyes on the page, leave a note at WT:VG, which is frequented enough. czar  16:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

War for the Planet of the Apes
Hello czar! Please move Draft:War for the Planet of the Apes → War for the Planet of the Apes — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 16:23, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  16:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

This Thursday: Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ University of Chicago
You are invited to join the Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ University of Chicago on October 15! (drop-in any time, 3-7pm)--Pharos (talk) 18:25, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Restoring Stale requests
When moving a stale request back to the current requests, do I keep it in the Stale requests or remove it completely? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 03:33, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * , I'd personally copy the whole thing to the main page and back in the stale archive, I'd remove all text but the heading and replace it with the discussion moved template (just so others know where it went, if they look) czar  03:35, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The thing is, these requests aren't mines. Is it still okay to revive them? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 15:15, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * , yep, it's fine, but it's courteous to leave that discussion moved template to preempt any confusion. You have something productive to add and it's better than starting the thread over again or responding within the archived page. czar  15:23, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Could you please check I did the proper steps for moving a stale request? The request I moved over is titled Saltwater City. Thank you. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:53, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Looks great czar  19:35, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Precious
  video game and education

Thank you for quality articles "written or re-written from scratch", in collaboration, some of "highest quality status" such as Deathrow, for education as in University of Wisconsin Experimental College, for fighting vandalism progress in Video game cleanup, for defining your user by contributions and talk, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:39, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

The Last of Us "Themes" section
Hey, czar! For a while now, I've been considering adding a "Themes" section to The Last of Us, in a similar fashion to the section on BioShock Infinite; I feel as though the game has enough to talk about in this regard, so I've given it a go. If you had time, I was wondering if you could take a quick look at what I've written over at my sandbox? I would be very grateful and appreciate of any feedback that you have, but if you can't do so (and I completely understand), please let me know. Thank you! – Rhain1999  (talk to me) 16:06, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * , I've of mixed minds on Themes as its own section. Since it is sourced mostly as the developers' intentions, I think the bulk of it fits with Development (and thus could be a section or worked into Development of The Last of Us). The Graphic violence section appears to be a major component to the game's Reception. I would combine the refs in the Themes section's two ¶s as much as possible and revise the existing single paragraph in the game's Reception section. I'm not sure it needs more than a paragraph, but if you think so, perhaps two? If Graphic violence was a major theme of the reviews (I don't have a full sense of that), then it could perhaps warrant a two-paragraph section at the end of the Reception. How does that sound? czar  16:58, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your feedback! I'm going to merge the Graphic violence section, as you suggested, but I'm struggling to find a way to include the paragraphs on the giraffe scene and the ending. I feel as though they should be mentioned somewhere, due to the reaction that they received, but I don't know where; they mostly consists of comments from journalists, so I'm not sure if it belongs on the Development article (though I could be wrong). Should they just be scrapped? – Rhain1999  (talk to me) 23:23, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * One idea for the giraffes is to collapse most of the critical commentary refs on that one sentence ("referenced by many journalists as the realization point of this motif") and only use the most insightful direct quotes. (I.e., more summary than explication). That's at least how I'd include it in the main article. There's a little more room to include the themes in the "Story and setting" section of the Dev split article. czar  23:32, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Ahh, that makes sense. I'm still unsure as to which section I should place the information, though: Development or Reception? Would it be better to add as an extra paragraph or two, rather than an additional subsection? If I add it as a paragraph, then I guess the point could be further elaborated on the Development article. I think it would also be worth having an image of the giraffes scene, but that ultimately depends on the amount of information in prose. – Rhain1999  (talk to me) 00:07, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd merge the Themes proper into the dedicated dev article (Story and setting section), and then summarize in the main article (within the dev section). For the former, it would depend how small a paragraph you could make it. I'd only include an image if the text necessitates a visual, though. czar  00:13, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I've gone through and added the information to the main and development articles; if you decide to take a look, let me know if you have any concerns. Thanks for your helpful suggestions and feedback! – Rhain1999  (talk to me) 01:19, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

EZ2DJ
Why does the EZ2DJ article redirect to Pentavision? Pentavision is an unrelated south korean game developer. EZ2DJ was made by amuseworld. 201.209.64.246 (talk) 16:20, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Pentavision is composed of EZ2DJ's core staff, so the rhythm game is part of its history. Amuse World doesn't have its own article.  czar  16:58, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Can you please fix your moves?
Your unilateral page move without discussion to Not in Front of the Children broke the formatting at the top of the article talk page to the peer review, and to the Good Article review, and talk page archives.

Can you fix all those, please?

And in the future, please discuss on the talk page, first, especially if you see there's an active editor on the topic in the middle of an ongoing Peer Review.

Thank you very much,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:33, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
 * , can you please fix the other pages, including the peer review page? Thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:38, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Cirt, no need to discuss this on two pages—the talk page is fine. czar  04:45, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Please, I ask of you, if you see an active editor involved in Quality improvement on the topic, discuss, first. Thank you for your understanding in this matter, and modifying your behavior in the future !!! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:47, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks very much,, for fixing the broken peer review links. Much appreciated ! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:59, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Kong: Skull Island
Hello! Please move Draft:Kong: Skull Island → Kong: Skull Island — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 16:33, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  21:58, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Underworld: Next Generation
Hello! Please move Draft:Underworld: Next Generation → Underworld: Next Generation — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 03:46, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  03:58, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

American Pastoral (film) and Jack Reacher: Never Go Back
Hello! Please move Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 03:50, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Draft:American Pastoral (film) → American Pastoral (film)
 * Draft:Jack Reacher 2 → Jack Reacher: Never Go Back
 * ✓ done czar  14:06, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

War Machine (film)
Hello czar! Please move Draft:War Machine (film) → War Machine (film) — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 16:30, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  05:59, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Afds
I have withdrawn my delete from Furniture music, if you want to speedy keep.--  SabreBD  (talk ) 16:33, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

CHiPs (film)
Hello czar! Please move Draft:CHiPs (film) → CHiPs (film) — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 17:33, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  18:01, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Notable?
Hi. While cleaning up a little after Cyber Nations was deleted, I stumbled across Galava (video game). Doesn't look notable to me, but video games are not my area of expertise so I thought I might run it past someone with more knowledge than me of the topic area and how to find sources for it. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 04:00, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
 * , best to start with a video game reliable sources custom Google search and then check for sleeper reviews in a MobyGames search. If the game is pre-Web 2.0, there are some strategies for finding print sources at WP:VGSOURCE. In any event, would you like to do the honors or should I? czar  04:30, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah, I knew there was a nifty customisable search like that, thank you. I couldn't find anything with it or searching MobyGames and I assume you had the same results. I'm writing this as I'm about to leave the house, so you should feel free to go for it – if not, I'll be back in an hour or so and happy to nominate it then. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 04:40, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Merge completed
I merged the contents of Joe Negri archives into the Joe Negri article and want to know what to do to make the archives article disappear. I would blank it and ask for a speedy delete but I'm not sure if that is how things can be done or if that route is a big no-no. Best Regards,
 * Barbara (WVS) (talk) 00:17, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
 * , I've redirected it —you can edit the archives page to see how I did it, or in the future, you can tag the page with db-g7 (a speedy deletion rationale for when the author requests their own page deleted). When you merge content, it's best to keep rather than delete the page whence the content originated so as to preserve its edit history (who added the content and when). czar  03:50, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Drafts
Sorry, I hope you didn't object but I'm just cleaning out Category:Userspace drafts by sorting them into subcategories. I know some of those were basically blank but I didn't pick and choose them. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:30, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
 * , no, it was my mistake—I had thought the date tag would G13 them but it's just a descriptive tag so it's fine czar  04:34, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

The Space Between Us (film)
Hello czar! Please move Draft:The Space Between Us (film) → The Space Between Us (film) — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 17:55, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  22:47, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Live by Night (film)
Hello czar! Please move Draft:Live by Night (film) → Live by Night (film) — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 03:29, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  04:57, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!


Happy Halloween!

Hello Czar: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!   –  North America1000 23:39, 31 October 2015 (UTC) Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message. Sent to users on my mailing list. To opt-out forever, just remove your name.

John Wick 2
Hello czar! Please move Draft:John Wick 2 → John Wick 2 — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 16:22, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  18:09, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Aardwolf
I am disappointed to see that you deleted a number of references from "Aardwolf (MUD)" and then changed the article to a redirect. It is also poor form that you didn't inform me about it. Axl ¤ [Talk] 11:27, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The sources I removed were patently unreliable, and I wasn't able to dig up any other refs to substantiate the article (which I made clear in my edit summary). You're welcome to revert and add refs, though I'd be curious where you'd find them. I'm also not sure why you were under the impression that redirects need to be preceded by personal solicitation from the article's history. BRD is usually how these things go. czar  15:45, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

New Companies delsort category
Hi Czar: Just a heads up that a new deletion sorting page was created on 16 October 2015 for companies, located at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Companies. Thanks for your work in performing deletion sorting on Wikipedia. North America1000 16:22, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Two articles related to the Brazilian schools in Japan
Hi, Czar. I didn't have a chance to download the documents before they expired. Is it ok if they are sent again? Thank you, WhisperToMe (talk) 02:12, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * , sure, try the links again czar  02:21, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! I have received both documents. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:35, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

New Disability delsort category
Hi: Just a heads up that a new deletion sorting page was created on 19 October 2015 for Disability-related articles, located at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Disability. Thanks for your work in performing deletion sorting on Wikipedia. North America1000 18:12, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Help moving a draft
Hey Czar. Hope you could help me out. Could you please delete Doctor Strange (film) and its talk page to then move Draft:Doctor Strange (film) and its talk page to that location in the mainspace? Filming has begun, which allows the article to exist per WP:NFF. Also, there is an edit notice on the page alerting users about the draft, which can be deleted after the move. That would be this Template:Editnotices/Page/Doctor Strange (film). Thanks in advance! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:13, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Another admin got to the article first. Thanks for considering. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:22, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

The Girl on the Train (2016 film)
Hello czar! Please move Draft:The Girl on the Train (2016 film) → The Girl on the Train (2016 film) — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 03:23, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  14:20, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Edit Request
Hello Czar! Sophie Hunter's page needs updating. Hope you can help! (No one's responding in the Talk page so I'll bring it here) I. Second paragraph in lead --> Staging of the Turn of the Screw has passed. II. Addition of Path to Bly (2015) in directing credits https://tickets.aldeburgh.co.uk/Online/2015-autumn-walk-supernatural-in-suffolk III. Name of son and year of birth. Simplify to "...Christopher Carlton (b. 2015)" http://celebritybabies.people.com/2015/09/01/benedict-cumberbatch-son-name-christopher-carlton/
 * Guardian review: http://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/oct/27/the-turn-of-the-screw-review-britten-collon-sophie-hunter
 * The Times review: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/arts/music/classical/article4598566.ece

Thank you very much! 180.191.147.94 (talk) 02:00, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Edit Request
Hey Czar,

I'm hoping to add OpenCritic to the list of video game review aggregators.

I have already added it to the sandbox on line 62 and it passed all tests.

MattEnth (talk) 06:49, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
 * But is there consensus to add it? Let's keep discussion in one place: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources czar  18:51, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

arb types
So, from the answer to q#8 on your rfa, clearly you would just love to be an arbcom candidate. :-)     Or, then again, p'raps not, since contentious argumentation is almost entirely the job there.  And although wikiproject videogames already has "their" arbcom candidate quota for the year, in User:Salvidrim!, do you have any thoughts on other folks that ought to run for arbcom in 2015?  Are you planning on writing a voterguide?  Your co-nom User:Dennis Brown almost ran, but decided against.  User:TParis, your other co-nom, retired earlier this year, unfortunately.  I have made up a list of usual-suspects, culled from stats-data, if you are interested in skimming, but just people you know off the top of your head will also be an interesting data-point.  Thanks,  75.108.94.227 (talk) 16:45, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty psyched about the pool, actually (as much as one can get psyched about a bureaucracy). I think the other guides cover anything I'd add well enough, though I might be a bit more generous. Especially considering the time sink aspect and the way it changes one's relationship with editing (usually for the worse), I'm not sure I'd pressure anyone else into such service unless it was something they sought on their own. (Otherwise, I'm usually a fan of sortition with representative bodies—less so with regulatory bodies. 75.108 for Arbcom?) Thanks for thinking of me, though. czar  22:04, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, this should be a good year, with any luck. Unlike yourself, I am quite happy to toss people off the cliff into the gnashing wolves and the spinning blades of arb-ness.  :-)      Low moral threshold, prolly, a shame really.  Lucky for User:Salvadrim they escaped at the last moment.  But according to rumour, being an arb is no worse than parenting a teenager, nowadays.  Uh... now that I think about it, that does not really narrow it down all that much.
 * p.s. I do like sortition, good old Aristotlean-virtue-is-a-habit-slash-Homeric-chosen-by-the-gods combo, but the secular problem is, the randomly-selected person tends not to know much about the bureaucracy, so they depend on quasi-professional expert-advisors who recommend this course of action or that.  Later, when everything goes belly up, the "leader" selected by sortition points the blame-finger at the "expert" for giving bad advice, and simultaneously the "expert" points the blame-finger at the "leader" who made the official decision.  It's like the opposite of the military, where the senior officers always take 100% responsibility for the actions of the people beneath them.  Personally, I expect we will soon be under the benevolent aristocratic dictatorship of WP:VG members, once the long-predicted bloodless coup takes place.  In the meantime, I'm just trying to shore up a little anon-insurance, so don't forget me when the revolution comes, okay?  :-)      75.108.94.227 (talk) 23:14, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Killer Instinct Gold PR
Hey Czar. Can you close Killer Instinct Gold's PR? I don't think the bot that archives PR is working anymore and no comment has been made since August. GamerPro64 19:03, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  22:05, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Birth of the Dragon
Hello! Please move Draft:Birth of the Dragon → Birth of the Dragon — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 11:36, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  19:00, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

The Coldest City (film)
Hello czar! Would please move or merge Draft:The Coldest City (film) → The Coldest City (film) — The mainspace article creator just copied pasted from the draft an hour ago. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 17:19, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  02:08, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

RX Exchange Bot
I was wondering about how this bot will be used. Can it archive resolved stale requests and moved them to the completed request section? Or would that have to be manually done? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 15:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
 * You mean what I brought up on the talk page? The archive bot already exists but unlike the one most people use, it would automatically archive Resolved sections. It should also automatically archive stale sections after 90 days as configured. But ClueBot III has been spotty and its maintainers haven't been really around... I haven't seen it run yet. It's on my list to follow-up eventually. czar  20:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Barbershop: The Next Cut
Hello! Would you please merge or move Barbershop 3 → Barbershop: The Next Cut ? — Which was just copy pasted by, instead moving the existed article to rename it. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 17:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  14:52, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Siegelord
If you go to the list of articles needing to be categorized, you will see a decent amount of redirected articles tagged as Uncategorized by others. This is not new. So if it is ok for other articles to be tagged, including other games redirected to that page, it should be okay for Sigelord. either no redirects should be categorized or they all should. Postcard Cathy (talk) 18:19, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
 * , I don't understand this logic. Why should a redirect that has already been sorted be given an Uncategorized tag? Whoever started such a precedent owes an explanation. Redirects aren't even supposed to have more than basic categorization, if even applicable. (I don't even see why Redirects should be tagged as uncategorized at all...) You might be thinking of the AfD closure tool that automatically tags redirects as uncategorized instead of providing a specific redirect rationale, but those exist to be cleaned up, not to be used as cause to tag other articles as uncategorized when they need none. czar  23:12, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

William Allen Montgomery
Thank you. I've added some relevant info to William Allen Montgomery. Someone else said they would upload his picture too. I'd love to find out more about his plantations (apparently in Washington County, Texas) and possibly find some of his sermons.Zigzig20s (talk) 21:37, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
 * , there was a photo in the pages I sent you, but I'm not sure if its copyright was renewed. I'm also not sure if the photo was included in the 1910 edition or whether it was added in the later edition. czar  21:38, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot (film)
Hello czar! There is a duplicate situation here. Would you please move Fun House (film) → Whiskey Tango Foxtrot (film). — Thanks. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 18:08, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * ✓ done czar  18:29, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

DOIs
I can Google to see if any of them have DOIs, and if they do I'll add them. The University of Houston database I use doesn't say what the DOIs are, but maybe some articles do have DOIs. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:44, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * What I meant is that since you plan to use the full citations in the articles anyway, if you could clean them up before submitting (by adding the direct web URL and/or DOI), it'll make the retrieval process easier. No sweat if the DOIs aren't accessible—it's more the direct link to the article czar  20:57, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok. What I could do is google the name of the book to see if any direct web URLs come up, and if they do include them WhisperToMe (talk) 21:30, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Where did you get your citation list? If online, could you share that link? czar  21:35, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Most of the time I get them from University of Houston Libraries. you can enter the name of the book, then refine the results to reviews. I can't access any more info than what the database displays. Sometimes I get the list from the University of Southern California. University of Michigan has something similar. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:47, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Lots of libraries have that all-in-one search (Primo/Summon) to search all of their databases, but it's even better to have a custom search of book reviews in major databases (set up an advanced search within a database). Anyway, okay, thanks for the info czar  23:14, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Archive structure
I've seen you've implemented the new archive structure for the RX. Great job!

While I was looking through them, i noticed how on some of the filled requests there wasn't a resolved checkmark next to it. It's making me wonder if these requests were resolved or not. I'm also thinking of reading through the filled requests to see if the requestors has said it's been done or not. I might go through them and reorganize them as well. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:43, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * While I split some of the huge archives into more reasonable sizes, I tried not to reorder or change the content (in case someone was linking to that archive). The best way to follow-up on requests is likely to contact the requester's talk page rather than pulling potentially completed (or stale) requests from the archive. Note that some of the pages are indeed full of stale requests, but it doesn't mean the refs are necessarily still wanted, right? czar  23:07, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Very true. I only move them back if someone wants a resource I located. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:29, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks alot!
Hello Czar,

Thanks alot for having retrieved Studio Caucasica, number 1, I was really hoping someone would find it but I had already given up hope, haha. Just wanted to send you my humble gratitude directly like this. Bests and take care :-) - LouisAragon (talk) 16:53, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm OluwaCurtis. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Dr. Langeskov, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. —OluwaCurtis »» (talk to me) 15:29, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * , this message isn't particularly helpful unless you have feedback to give, but this said, I created the article mere minutes ago... czar  15:41, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello, the page you created or marked as curated does not look constructive. It requires an expert to mark it as reviewed. Thank you! --—OluwaCurtis »» (talk to me) 15:47, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * , the page was marked as reviewed automatically because I am a trusted user. But even if I was not trusted, telling a new user that their page does not look constructive does not help them (unless it's a form template that is actually intended instead for other trusted users to later judge the recipient, but that's another story...) In any event, unreviewing an article doesn't even have a productive purpose—the point of reviewing is to triage untrusted contributions for the most egregious of violations, so unreviewing a work just creates more work for everyone. If you continue to leave these talk page messages for others—especially for new users—I would recommend that you tailor the message to be less of a notice and more of a suggestion for how to get the article to par. It also makes sense to let under construction articles actually expand before tagging them up. czar  19:35, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Pigeonexhibition.JPG
Hello czar. I don't understand why there's a permission problem here. I am the creator and uploader of the file. I took this photo myself and uploaded it, as I said on the file history 'Own work, photographed in the exhibition in the Basement in May 2009'. I haven't published it anywhere else. Have I filled something in wrongly somewhere? Cephascrispus (talk) 16:00, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * , the photo's permissions are fine, but do you have the permission of the artwork's copyright holder? Privately exhibited art is copyrighted by its creator czar  16:08, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Oh I see! Many thanks for the information, Czar. I do have her permission and will get her to send it. Cephascrispus (talk) 14:49, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Steam Ratings
I saw your revision on Emily is Away. Why is it that user ratings don't count, but critic's ratings do? Isn't that like having an encyclopedia written by professionals instead of laymen? --108.243.152.50 (talk) 18:58, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
 * WikiProject_Video_games/Article_guidelines covers this but let me know if you want more. The short of it is that we are summarizing a professional reception and not engaging in original research about what other metrics or forums say. czar  19:09, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Talking about Videoball again
So 2015 is almost over. Is there any updates on the game coming out? I've only seen an Eurogamer article on it in October but it wasn't primarily about it. Becoming a bother since there seem to be some radio silence. GamerPro64 02:54, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Yep, I've been keeping an eye on it. The press kit said the (American) summer, I believe, but then that came and left. The latest is https://twitter.com/108/status/671943657402929152 czar  04:08, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Good grief. Besides seeing that he looks like a very confused person I guess it was expected that its release wasn't set in stone yet. Ah well. We got 2016. GamerPro64  04:22, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Development of Grand Theft Auto V
Hi czar. Sorry to bother you, but I'm not sure where else to turn with this. There is an edit war taking place at the Development of Grand Theft Auto V article (I am a big part of the problem, I'm ashamed to admit), and I don't like how it's playing out. Another editor, Mainline421, continues to claim that my edits are "disruptive" and that I am showing ownership, but fails to provide any reasoning as to how or why. Despite this, he continues to claim that the issue has been discussed on the talk page; when discussed on Mainline's talk page, still no proper reasoning was given. On more than one occasion, he has agreed to reach a sort of compromise between our opinions, retaining pieces of both our edits in order for the edit warring to stop, yet still continues to revert my edits entirely. I've also explained every one of my edits previously, but with no response. I'm a bit lost, and participating in edit wars is the one thing I don't want. If you could help in some way (even if it is just by telling me to stop), I would truly appreciate it. Thank you. – Rhain1999  (talk to me) 23:17, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It's always best to bring an edit war to a more public forum—usually helps to diffuse any of the back-and-forth. WT:VG is typically a good venue. I left a note on the talk page and will keep an eye on it. A discussion of each individual point of contention is a logical next step. The article should revert to its last stable version while the new changes are discussed on its talk page, but I suggest that an uninvolved party (such as myself) be the one to make those changes (though involved parties can help identify the last stable version). My general advice/opinion in these situations is to ask whether each successive response is a step towards de-escalation. czar  23:40, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Hitwicket
Hello Czar,

Our wiki page "Hitwicket" was recently marked for deletion as the article lacked significant coverage from reliable sources. Our game 'Hitwicket' is the most popular cricket management game in India & in a lot of cricket playing nations. We do have a lot of reliable sources to back up our significance. We were recently funded by Chennai Angels a month back & the news has even been updated on their wiki page as well (reference point 7). Link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chennai_Angels

Please refer the following links which we want to add to our deleted page to provide coverage from reliable sources.


 * http://www.similarweb.com/website/hitwicket.com#overview
 * http://www.sportskeeda.com/cricket/t20-management-game-hitwicket-cricket
 * http://www.sportskeeda.com/cricket/hitwicket-com-hyderabads-gift-world-cricket-gaming
 * http://www.startupranking.com/hitwicket
 * http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-features/tp-metroplus/to-their-own-beat/article4401669.ece (one paragraph)
 * http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/sports/octathorpe-webconsultants-gets-250000-funding-from-chennai-angels/article7869566.ece
 * http://www.nextbigwhat.com/octathorpe-secures-funding-from-the-chennai-angels-297/
 * http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2015-11-12/news/68222069_1_chennai-angels-r-narayanan-cricket
 * http://inc42.com/flash-feed/chennai-angels-invests-in-hitwicket/

Kindly review these links & undelete the article "Hitwicket" so that we can add all these links for references in the article.

(Keertisingh25 (talk) 14:30, 16 December 2015 (UTC))
 * , here's what I can do: I could restore the page to a draft area where all of the unsourced content would have to be deleted and rewritten with citations to reliable sources. Alternatively, you can just start a draft and write fresh from the reliable sources. The article should not enter the main article space with unsourced content. Keep in mind that per our conflict of interest guidelines, you would need to declare the nature of your interest in the subject on the article's talk page. Most companies leave the writing of WP articles to unaffiliated editors. Re: the sources, I removed the duplicates from the list above and struck the sites that should not be used as sources. "Reliable" source means that it has a reputation for reliability, like The Hindu, not sportskeeda.com, which is a platform for self-publishing fans. Might there be more coverage of Octathorpe than Hitwicket still available? The majority of the above coverage is about the investment from Chennai Angels—it would seem that a natural place to start would be a paragraph about the investment process and rationale on Chennai's own page rather than a dedicated page for Hitwicket. czar  14:44, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello Czar, Please refer two additional links were in we were covered by The Business Line & Bangalore Mirror to talk about our game, its strategy & offline meet ups where users of Hitwicket have met each other to discuss the game, something very unique just to Hitwicket unlike other online games.

http://www.bangaloremirror.com/bangalore/others/Beyond-the-realm-of-online-gaming/articleshow/44881150.cms http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/blink/work/bl-ink-live-cricket-matches-virtual-cricket-and-cricket-based-mobile-apps/article6937357.ece

It would be good if you can restore the page to draft area & we will delete unsourced content & rewrite with citations to reliable sources.

Keertisingh25 (talk) 07:42, 17 December 2015 (UTC)


 * , it's live at Draft:Hitwicket. Please do not move it out of draftspace without a review from another Wikipedian. czar  14:23, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Czar. Keertisingh25 (talk) 08:22, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

A few questions
If you get a chance, please see this. The deadline in Jan 5th. Thanks again for your help. -Thibbs (talk) 11:38, 17 December 2015 (UTC) PS - I'm digging the minimalist ambiance provided by that Zabriskie piece. I don't know him in particular, but I gained something of an appreciation for ambient music over my many hours of late-night reading during my school days. Sadly the mere presence of Wikipedia's sound clips seem to crash Firefox v3.6.28 for me every time so nobody using that browser can edit this page or any other with embedded sound clips. Why am I running such an out-of-date version of Firefox? Well it's the most advanced version that can operate on Mac OS X Tiger... You can mark my devotion to the ancient rickety non-touch-screen antique down to equal shares of nostalgia and laziness... -Thibbs (talk) 11:38, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'll have more time for this next week czar  14:23, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * This is just a quick pre-weekend reminder about the interview. The newsletter goes out in 5 days so all material should be in by the 5th. Thanks again. -Thibbs (talk) 13:39, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Public forum
Which public forum for an undeletion discussion should I go to? I think Banana (video gamer) clearly met GNG and was missing a bunch of Chinese languages sources were ignored in the AFD.--Prisencolin (talk) 00:36, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
 * WT:VG, for instance. But the idea is that when a deletion discussion closed mere months ago, it should go back to discussion (or to the discussion participants) before unilaterally overturning the agreement. czar  00:41, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I just submitted it to deletion review, hopefully that was the right place.--Prisencolin (talk) 00:48, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

VG series reviews
I came across your edit to Module:Video game series reviews doing broken ref patrol this morning. The change to default status for GameRanking reviews caused them to disappear from a number of articles, and cite errors to pop up in those articles for unused refs. I've fixed some by adding the "gr=" tag but I'm out of time this morning. If you have time please take a look, otherwise I'll get around to it eventually. Cheers. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 16:25, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Nice—thanks. We're discussing at Template_talk:Video_game_series_reviews czar  18:12, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings!
Happy Holidays text.png Hello Czar: Enjoy the holiday season and upcoming winter solstice, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, North America1000 18:57, 20 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

update
Got them! Thank you so much! WhisperToMe (talk) 20:08, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Mentions not working?
Hey Czar, sorry to bother you, but you might know.... I've found two cases today, just back-checking my talk page contributions, where someone Pinged me and I didn't get a notification... any ideas why that might happen? The last mention that I got notified on actually was when you replied on the Desi article. -- ferret (talk) 22:25, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * , did you get this one? And do you have diffs for the ones you missed? Not a bother at all. The ping templates have changed a few times without letting everyone know so there's still a bit of mystery. czar  22:51, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I got that one. The two diffs I know of are here, which looks like a bare user link (Should mention, yes?) and here (As well as the next diff). Maybe being edited interfered? -- ferret (talk) 23:01, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * These two didn't send because the author needs to sign in the same edit. In the first case, the editor added the ping in a subsequent edit but didn't sign it again (could have replaced their sig). In the second case, the editor used a nonexistent template redirect yo! and in their edit correcting the template (to yo) didn't sign their signature, so it didn't send. Both cases were fine in the end, but they just needed to resign their posts to actually send the ping. czar  23:28, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Didn't know that it was tied to signing. That actually makes a lot of sense. Need to keep it in mind for my own pinging. -- ferret (talk) 23:40, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

SNAFU Con
I respectfully have several issues with the movement of this article to Draft. For the time I have restored the page and marked the page with notability. I look forward to working with you on this issue. Esw01407 (talk) 23:53, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Primary source, if you are referring to animecons.com, parts of it are considered reliable by WikiProject Anime and manga. I do agree sourcing could be better on several parts, but I feel even with the sources you deemed "local", this article meets notability, weakly yes.
 * 2) You also didn't even finish the cleanup work properly, several links still pointed to SNAFU Con's moved page.
 * 3) A message on my talk page would have been a nice courtesy. It was rather unpleasant finding the article was moved with the message "uses mostly unreliable, primary, and local sources → not ready → send through AfC".
 * 4) I would prefer to see this go to AFD. This article will more than likely get no work in draft and be deleted after whatever period that happens.
 * , when an editor adds content, the burden is on them to prove that the content is worth adding. I sent this back to draftspace because I don't think it would have passed Articles for Creation review, and that is the incubation space where an editor would walk through what it needs in order to stand on its own. I have no interest in taking it to AfD or deleting your work—I want to see it improved and we have a process for that. Please restore the draft and work on it there until another editor has reviewed it. czar  04:28, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's greetings!
Happy Holidays text.png Hello Czar: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Esquivalience t 21:13, 23 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

GR
Can you fix King's Quest (2015 video game)? I don't want to violate 3RR. Both GR and MC have a single review for PC, so the last revert rationale is silly. -- ferret (talk) 00:47, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * , agreed and fixed. Thanks for your help mopping up czar  01:03, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I had a reason to use rollback for once. This IP-hopper has been tailing Dissident93's WP:VG/GL edits as well. -- ferret (talk) 01:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Moving my page (Dragon Coins) to a draft
I recently saw you move my page dragon coins to a draft, it doesn't need to be a draft, I want other people to also work on the page so that the page won't be a stub. I am planning to revert it as making a draft of dragon coins won't help the it in anyway. Ae9000ae (talk) 10:25, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * , if you want help, you can reach out at a noticeboard like WT:VG, but the article in its current state is not ready for mainspace. It would need many more references from reliable, secondary sources. This all said, the burden is on the adding editor to make the article/contents presentable—articles, especially messy ones, do not magically de-stub. czar  16:59, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually it is ready for mainspace, I sourced it with help, also it provides information that is ready for mainspace, etc. Ae9000ae (talk) 19:36, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * An Articles for Creation reviewer will help you. WP requires significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources (?) and a draft with solely two Twitter refs and an IGN wiki ref will not be enough. czar  19:47, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Draft:S. Srikanta Sastri
Dear Czar, I have edited, updated and extensively revised the biographical outlay of S. Srikanta Sastri. It meets your recommendations and Wikipedia stipulations. Exhaustive “list of articles” has now been deleted. Citations have been deleted. Sources and References are from third party authors with no personal affectation or relation to S. Srikanta Sastri. Page numbers, Volume, Issue No.s of Journals, Books, News Papers Clippings have been quoted extensively in the footnotes to substantiate that which is stated in the main article. Kindly review and pave way for the article’s quick acceptance. Season’s Greetings. Rkkrupa (talk) 15:11, 25 December 2015 (UTC)Rkkrupa

onGamers
Hey Czar. Just letting you know, since you're focusing on eSports, that onGamers just got shut down. Gotta admit, I saw it coming. GamerPro64 23:04, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Apple Music geography
I've been working on this section to bring it into line with the pre-existing geography sections on the Google Play Music, Spotify, and Rdio pages. Wouldn't that make sense? Or do you think we need to remove the geography sections from all those pages as well? --Akhenaten0 (talk) 18:23, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
 * , the maps, as an illustration, can be justified if there are sources that discuss the service's international rollout, or to emphasize which countries or regions do not have the service. But, if anything, the sources tend to discuss rollout by region (e.g., launched in U.S., Europe, next year launched in South America and Russia, etc.), which the prose should summarize. An image could help with visualizing the phases/years of proliferation, but it puts more emphasis on the countries that display the clearest at a small resolution. In any event, WP doesn't harbor indiscriminate lists of countries so those should be removed from each of those articles. czar  18:47, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
 * So is the solution, perhaps, (1) to summarize to first the total number, then based on "most of" by continent, and stick the rest in a footnote like in Comparison of on-demand streaming music services? Or (2) should the availability be linked in the infobox as in the Google Play Music article? Also, (3) is there any place for the image in the article? Maybe just floating earlier on? Finally, (4), should we then cut the lists out of the Google Play Music and Spotify pages? --Akhenaten0 (talk) 20:58, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure the total number matters as much as reflecting what the sources say. If the sources give a number, we can cite them—ideally a source that lists all the countries would be best for readers who are interested. But ultimately we're an encyclopedia and shouldn't be the place someone is looking to check for Apple Music coverage (though we can link to a site that has the info). I wouldn't recommend getting into an original research breakdown of continent-based coverage, but the map visually shows that info, if that's what you're making. Geographic coverage should fit in the overview of the service, or next to info on its rollout. I personally think the image would be fine—a nice visualization of something that would be laborious in prose—but I think the first priority is scrapping the indiscriminate lists. czar  21:37, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

RE: External discussion
Sure, there was one post on his public Facebook page, one post on his private Facebook page (cross linked from a post on twitter. There may also be some discussion at the alphabasic forums, but that's been closed off from the public for a while. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alainbryden (talk • contribs) 23:14, 29 December 2015 (UTC)