User talk:Dancter/Archive 5

Andras Petöcz
Hi, Dancter

Sorry for it, I put a citation from the http://www.hunlit.hu/petoczandras,en  - but I don't know how to link it to the ref. Please, please, please, help meeeeee! (Lennon :) ) --Andras szokolay 20:15, 5 November 2007 (UTC) from Budapest
 * I'm about to make a few adjustments to the article based on your recent contributions. I'll try to help you out afterward. Dancter 20:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Petöcz citation
 * I put in the last citation. It is on the cover (last cover) of the book te Petöcz, In Praise... so i gave the ISBN number. It was published in English. Please, put it in the references. Thanks a lot your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andras szokolay (talk • contribs) 22:35, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Is the Vilcsek quotation you've attributed to the In Praise of the Sea cover the same as the one on the kalligram.com page you listed earlier? I can't translate, but some key words seem to match. Dancter 00:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Dancter 00:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, Dancter,


 * i shall work on it, please give me 3 days.
 * Thanks a lot
 * --Andras szokolay 09:36, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Dancter 22:32, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Really, I do not understand what is the matter? I used a lot of new book also, really, where is the matter? The "poetry" was really good, and nothing "still not enough to address copyright concerns", that is not true, sorry. I put in a lot of new informations, even in the prose, also. There is nothing about the "copyright". Read again, compare again, please. Thanks  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andras szokolay (talk • contribs) 01:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * DEar Dancter,


 * so. I made a new prose, just about the Idegenek". The poetry - there is nothing "copyright" it was my own article, and i put in new information also. So, i give up, if you think, but really, I don't know what i have to do. Love. --Andras szokolay 01:56, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I did mention how to release the text under a GNU Free Documentation License if you were the copyright holder to the text on the HUNLIT profile. Upon review of some of your changes, it seemed as if you were opting to rewrite the text rather than release the original text under a free license. With respect to the original text, the changes were very minimal. It's as if you took each sentence, made some minor changes to phrasing and added a few other details, and considered that enough. It's not really enough to satisfy copyright issues, but it's not something I will dwell on—in part because I doubt any real fuss will be made about it, but more because it is no longer the main issue with your text.
 * What is happening now is that the descriptions of various works are overwhelming the article at the expense of the main subject; or even other aspects of the works; such as development, sales, public reception, or overall significance and impact. In addition, there is an overly informal tone being used in these descriptions, which is only compounded with the excessive reliance on quotations, which I did touch upon in some of my other messages and edits. Dancter 02:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Dear Dancter, we have made a new and shorter version in encyclopaedic style - hopefully it is now satisfactory. Please, in "Categories" include Petöcz in the Category of Hungarian writers, Hungarian poets. Best wishes and thank you for your help. --Andras szokolay 13:59, 9 November 2007 (UTC) And, if it is possible, please remove the message about that it is just a "stub". --Andras szokolay 14:05, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Trimming the excessive quotation does help, but there are still tone issues with the text. I've added some tags to a few statements, but the problem really extends to most of the article. Dancter 19:02, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

dear Dancter, i have taken out the disputed sentences, please, remove remarks. i personally do not see any further problems with this article. i hope you find it neutral enough now. if not, please feel free to edit it. best wishes and thank you --Andras szokolay 21:03, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

dear Dancter, thank you. There is a remark on the top : "This article is written like a personal reflection or essay and may require cleanup. Please help improve it by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style." I personally do not see any problems so i don't know that we need this remark or not. Best wishes, thank you very much. --Andras szokolay 21:21, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd rather not. I think this is one of the cases where additional parties would be useful for an outside perspective. If it were more active, I'd recommend soliciting input from WikiProject Hungarian culture, but it seems WikiProject Literature may be a better place to turn at the moment. Dancter 22:30, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I spent some time on it at lunch, then lost all my changes in a tragic Microsoft-related accident. I'll give it a going-over tonight if I get a chance. -- Orange Mike 22:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

dear Dancter, thank you your work. Please, if it is possible, remove remarks. There are really a lot of references, compare with Péter Zilahy or Ádám Nádasdy. Best. --Andras szokolay 06:19, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, after some format changes, the Ádám Nádasdy article actually has more thorough referencing, as pretty much everything in there can be directly verified by an associated citation. Despite the considerable time I've spent working with you on the article, attempts to use the "references" on the András Petöcz article as sources for the article's content have been less successful. Perhaps it would be a good idea to consult with active Hungarian Wikipedians such as Adam78, as they may be able to help you in ways I cannot. Given my lack of familiarity with the subject matter, and inability to read the language, my capacity to be pro-active regarding the article is fairly limited. Dancter 09:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Dear Dancter, i did not know that i have possibility to use Hungarian references like on the page of Ádám Nádasdy. So I give you what you want - i have about 353 or more references about Petöcz in Hungarian, of course. Thank you your help, and thank you your work, best wishes--Andras szokolay 16:11, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Dear Dancter, The (!) Hungarian Quarterly is "Central Europe's best English-language journal" (Citation from The Irish Times). I put in the ISSN and the homepage. So, please, cite it. Thank you, best wishes.--Andras szokolay 07:43, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Due to the strange placement of the citation, I didn't understand what statement it was meant for. I'm shifting it to clarify things a bit. Dancter 17:34, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

And the article was published in 1997 in The Hungarian Quarterly. Thanks, make an index. Thanks for your help.--Andras szokolay 08:01, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It was a typo. I meant to put down "1997". Thanks for catching that. Dancter 17:34, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Here is the Medium Art ref. And where is the probleme?--Eva ficsovszky 17:50, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Based on the provided excerpt, the reference does not actually verify the statement that Petöcz was the editor of the publication. This isn't about notability, but verifiability. That what I'm asking for. Dancter 17:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * To clarify: I'm drawing a distinction between "editor" and "author". Based on what is listed in the ISBN link, I could not determine the specific nature of the contributions made by Petöcz as that of "editor". I had also presumed that the reference was being used similarly to another reference that was added, which seems largely superfluous, and not added for verification purposes. Dancter 18:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

And why did you take out the MOST IMPORTANT CITATION from the Hungarian Quarterly? --Eva ficsovszky 18:34, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It seems that by referring to it as the "MOST IMPORTANT CITATION", you're implying that there are other motives for including the citation other than verifying information. I answered the same question to Andras szokolay a little further up, stating that I was unclear about what the citation was being used for. As far as I can see, I left it in the article in my last edit. Dancter 18:48, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Or perhaps you are referring to why that reference is no longer showing up in the "References" section. In that case, it wasn't me. You added another reference using the same label, in which case only the first one will display. If you change the label for one of the references, you should be able to see both. Dancter 18:54, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

YES! REDUNDANT! Because we have to speak about why "a significant forum on contemporary literature the 'Presence" LOOK HUNGARIAN QUARTERLY :) Here we need the citation. So, please. --Eva ficsovszky 19:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * By "redundant", I was referring to the "Medium Art" addition, which is supplementary content not being used as a citation for article information, but as additional information in itself. As for the Hungarian Quarterly citation, as I mentioned above, if you use the same label ("Presence") for multiple citations, they will be treated as one. I didn't remove the Hungarian Quarterly reference this time. If you look at the markup, it's still in there. It stopped displaying because of your changes. Dancter 19:27, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, cool --Eva ficsovszky 20:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you --Andras szokolay 22:52, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Now it is not "essay-like". Thanks.--Eva ficsovszky 17:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It's good enough that it doesn't warrant the cleanup template. I appreciate your patience. Dancter 17:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

And thank you for your patience too. It was a hard work.--Eva ficsovszky 18:16, 15 November 2007 (UTC) Thanks--Andras szokolay 18:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: World Pump Festival
Hey Dancter hows it going. I've never contacted anyone on Wikipedia before, so forgive me if there is another way to message you (I couldnt find a private message option). Regarding the page I made World Pump Festival, you listed it as a potential fan site. I don't want to list a biased opinion or make an innacurate page so please could you give me some pointers what I should change/add/remove to make it appear less of a fan page?

Thanks for your time, Toby7Ten —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toby7Ten (talk • contribs) 11:52, 18 November 2007


 * I'll see if I can help with this article later, but for now I'll say that it's not really a matter of overt bias or blatant inaccuracies, but more in the style and structure. The first and probably easiest issue to tackle is the sprawling lists, such as those in the "General Information", "WPF Images and videos", and "2006 Results" sections. Keep in mind that the article is meant as a general overview for the general reader, who may not understand or desire so much of the details and minutiae of the competition. Try to rewrite the sections as flowing prose paragraphs rather than lists; the process will likely help guide you in distinguishing which information is important from the more superfluous stuff.
 * Also, another thing to do to improve the article is to and cite more reliable sources like the ones you added, so that every fact in the article can be directly attributed to one. This will also help guide you in sorting out the article, as some less-important statements will likely be more difficult find sources for. To be honest, the main Pump It Up article also has these problems, and I added a merge proposal in the hopes that incorporating information on the festival would help balance out the narrow and excessive focus on things such as the different versions of the game, which extends a bit beyond the scope of information for videogame-related articles. Dancter (talk) 17:47, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Double redirects
You just renamed an article to Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. That created some double redirects. Normally the editor who moves an article should clean these up. If you're planning to do that, would you mind holding off doing so, at least for a couple of hours? I'm working on something where I'd like to fix these myself. Thanks. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 14:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I was planning to adjust links to the article, but hadn't gone around to it. Thanks for the heads-up. Dancter 14:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure; as I was saying, if you'll hold off for a couple of hours, I'll take care of it for you. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 16:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. I understood. Dancter 16:13, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * There are quite a few double redirects remaining to the article, as it seems the only ones that were changed were the "Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers" links. Was this intentional? Dancter (talk) 17:05, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

List of Mario Games By Year
Are they making these games by Nintendo Super Mario Rises on Land, Daisy's Super Adventures,Super Princess Daisy, Mario Party 9 and Super Waluigi Smooths His Feasts on Land? 68.162.103.101 (talk) 15:01, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Is Princess Daisy gets her own game of Super Princess Daisy, and Daisy's Super Adventures from the Saralands? 68.162.103.101 (talk) 00:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Please Nintendo make them games of Super Princess Daisy, and Daisy's Super Adventures? 68.162.103.101 (talk) 00:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Link Removal: Eye of Judgment
"15:43, 28 November 2007 Dancter (Talk | contribs) (15,703 bytes) (rv again: per WP:NOT#LINK, Wikipedia is not a directory of external links; link is not a "major fansite") (undo)"

Based on that logic, the following link should also be removed:


 * Eye of Judgment Community

And probably:
 * Penny Arcade editorial
 * Card Database at www.gamerwiki.com
 * The Eye of Judgment at GameFAQs

And the following links should be added:

http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/Games/THE_EYE_OF_JUDGMENT http://boardsus.playstation.com/playstation/board?board.id=eyeofjudgment

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dan2304k (talk • contribs) 19:32, 28 November 2007


 * While I have no personal investment in any of the links, I am not convinced of your rationale.
 * As a fansite, I found My Eye of Judgment to be more content-rich and more connected to the larger The Eye of Judgment community than your site.
 * The only substantive resource on your site, the card table, was available at the GamerWiki link before your site, and GamerWiki is a more prominent site than yours. Another site providing the searchable database version of the table, the Eye of Judgment Card Manager, also seems more well-known. It's not listed in the Wikipedia article, but it's available through My Eye of Judgment.
 * While I somewhat agree about the limited value of the Penny Arcade and GameFAQs links, both of those sites are far more popular than your site.
 * Regarding the US Eye of Judgment game page and message board links, the former is available through the main Eye of Judgment link, and the latter is not appropriate for listing per WP:EL item #11: "Links to social networking sites (such as MySpace), discussion forums/groups (such as Yahoo! Groups) or USENET."
 * You are free to discuss any link removals on the article's talk page, but I'm not sure that's what you actually want. You are also free to discuss the addition of your link, but I believe that most other editors will come to the same conclusion I did. Dancter (talk) 00:05, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Mario Party and Mario Party 2
Is Princess Daisy in Mario Party and Mario Party 2? 68.162.103.101 (talk) 00:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Nintendo DS Lite logo.svg
Thanks for uploading Image:Nintendo DS Lite logo.svg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Only Revolutions.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Only Revolutions.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

"I am considering retiring from wikipedia."
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.158.44.194 (talk • contribs) 02:13, 21 January 2008
 * No!
 * Dont retire please, i like your work Gaogier (talk) 23:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm usually much busier around wintertime, and although did take a bit of a wikibreak for a few weeks, I am not considering retiring from Wikipedia. The banner was added by Michelle Bier (the "Princess Daisy" vandal) while I was away. I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner. I appreciate the comment, though. Dancter (talk) 05:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Stuff
Well, long time since visit to wiki. Got your message about that contribution to me.dium. Well, sorry, didn't know that wasn't allowed. I thought the site did not have any copyright problems with its website reviews. And, please don't retire. Don't have time for wiki at all. But its just one year more for my finishing high school(equivalent) and then gonna contribute a lot.

PS: Is this the way we contact other users of wikipedia???!!. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adhityan (talk • contribs) 10:52, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Although it may be a bit daunting to read, Copyrights is the best starting point for understanding issues of Wikipedia and copyright. To be honest, copyright, the text was a bit too informal, and not well-suited to a neutral encyclopedia. As for your question: yes, this is the main way to contact other users. Some users also enable contact through e-mail via a link buried found somewhere on the user page. Dancter (talk) 05:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:The Whalestoe Letters.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:The Whalestoe Letters.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:30, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Maka-Maka
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Maka-Maka, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Maka-Maka. Orange Mike  |  Talk  15:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I did create the page, but as a redirect for navigational purposes. Wordna built the article that has been proposed for deletion. I've since restored the modified redirect by Juhachi and my subsequent hatnote addition to OpenSocial, which serves my original intent of disambiguating the manga series. Dancter (talk) 19:21, 28 February 2008 (UTC)