User talk:David Fuchs/Archive 24

re: Uru
Thanks for the quick response. I will revisit as soon as I get a chance. On the issue of the Plot section - wasn't there a consensus some time ago that Plot sections for fictional media can use primary sources? In other words, can't you fill out the plot section based on the game itself and not on a secondary source? -- Laser brain  (talk)  16:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I left some stragglers at the end of the Uru FAC page.. any idea when you might look at them? I think we could get this out the door with a bit more effort. I can probably run through it again tonight. -- Laser brain  (talk)  20:40, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, it was archived. I'm excited to read your next one. VI is my favorite Star Trek movie, along with the other even-numbered ones. -- Laser brain  (talk)  03:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

FT image
Need an image for my current featured topic candidate. Logo for the series is here. Whatever you can come up with would be greatly appreciated. Cheers, — sephiroth bcr  ( converse ) 21:53, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * There's noting really distinctive past the logo. Maybe the main character's weapon (see real-life replica, anime image) if you can do that. Anyhow, for the image you have, if you can write out "Bleach", then I think it'd be fine. Thanks, — sephiroth bcr  ( converse ) 02:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Any progress on that image? If absolutely necessary, I'll live with the present one, but if you could write out "Bleach", that would be pretty nice. Thanks, — sephiroth bcr  ( converse ) 08:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 31, 2009
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 21:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks !
David, thanks for reverting the troll post on my talk page; it's kind of you to watch out for me! Best, Sandy Georgia (Talk) 12:45, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Sideshow Bob
Hello, I was wondering if you could tell me what your concerns with File:SideshowBobsfirstappearance.png are, and whether or not they can be fixed. Also, a lot of the article has been copyedited since you commented (although admittedly not every section), but is it better now? -- Scorpion 0422  00:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Star Trek: The Motion Picture
Nice job with the added details to the Star Trek: The Motion Picture page. I'm made some minor changes, clarifying one sentence about the transporter room and deleting a redundant section about the massaging bridge chairs (they're mentioned twice).THD3 (talk) 11:06, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Star Trek VI ref
This might be useful:

Magid, Ron. "Narita leads Enterprise camera crew", American Cinematographer Vol 73, No 1 (January 1992), p. 42-50.

Best of luck! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 06:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You've not resolved an unsourced sentence in Filming btw. Alientraveller (talk) 19:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

i hrd
I hrd u were srs adminz. Is this true? 62.30.168.82 (talk) 18:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, SideSHOW Bob!
I've done a thorough copyedit to Sideshow Bob, pursuant to your concerns at FAC. Perhaps you'd care to have a look. Cheers! Scartol •  Tok  19:30, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (January 2009)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  00:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Metroid (series)
If you have a chance, can you comment at Peer review/Metroid (series)/archive2? I've been checking out other articles, such as Halo (series), but it's hard to gauge what is missing or unnecessary in the Metroid article as these series articles all have different sections. I imagine they all have to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Gary King ( talk ) 20:13, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

(leans)
It's that time again... Ealdred (archbishop) could use your attention over the next few weeks. I think he's all assembled. There are still a few minor points I'm trying to chase down, but nothing major. I've made a few CE passes, but... well.. I just finished off the last of the red links. Anything context wise that's missing, I'm more than happy to add, I just need to know what's left out. If you wanna copyedit, go for it. Malleus is probably going to be playing too, so play nice together. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:27, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Premiere (The O.C.)
Hi, you probably don't know me but I am working on Premiere (The O.C.) for FAC. User Sgeureka has been copyediting the article for me recently, and gave you a glowing reference as a fiction editor. I was wondering, if you have any spare time could you possibly read through the prose for AmEng (because I'm a Brit) and possbily give me some tips. This would be very much appreciated. Many thanks, Rambo's Revenge (talk)  16:13, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for agreeing to help and providing your comments. You probably have it watchlisted, but just to let you know I have responded to the comments you made at PR and sent you an email. Best wishes, Rambo's Revenge (talk)  20:34, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I have added some of that information. Is there any chance you could look through the changes before I get a final copyedit from someone else. I have also sent you another email. Rambo's Revenge (talk)  18:34, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

A few things. Firstly thanks for your email reply, although unfortunately I haven't found any local institutions with Nexis subscription. Secondly Premiere (The O.C.) is at FAC now, so thanks for your help getting it there. Thirdly, do you know what I'm meant to do about the people who helped work on it. There have been quite a few so should I let them all know or is that WP:Canvassing? Best wishes, <b style="color:#E32636;">Rambo's Revenge</b> <b style="color:#FFA500;">(talk)</b>  15:11, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry I am probably being a dunce, but could you clarify "ping them unless they declare that they were contributors". Are you saying I should contact them all now, or just contact them if they review and don't declare they were a contributor? <b style="color:#E32636;">Rambo's Revenge</b> <b style="color:#FFA500;">(talk)</b>  16:16, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
I don't even see how they can claim this was implied in the original.&mdash;Kww(talk) 17:09, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Chicxulub Crater
You drew an animations for the Chicxulub Crater, but this animation is just played 1 time when you open the file. Could you do something for that good animation repits ever? Sorry for my bad english and thanks!--Ssola (talk) 22:50, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, thanks!--Ssola (talk) 16:23, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

(The) Enterprise
I figured I would let you know since it's been a while from the initial posting. I replied on your peer review of These Are The Voyages... asking if the ship is referred to as Enterprise or "the" Enterprise on the show. I'll read the article when I get home and may have further comments then. :) Natural Cut (talk) 00:25, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sure if it is consistent on the show, but I can offer a nautical tie-in. A ship is the U.S.S. Foo, but we may refer to her as "the Foo", "the U.S.S. Foo" or "Foo" in different cases. Protonk (talk) 01:07, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

System Shock 2 Peer Review
I believe I have addressed your concerns. If you have time, Can you give it another look? Some parts have been largely rewritten and I would like to know if any new issues have cropped up, or hopefully that the article has improved. Thank you for your time, it is greatly appreciated. Here's a link. -- Noj r (talk) 06:49, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You probably are watching the peer review, but in case you aren't, I left more comments. -- Noj r (talk) 02:49, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Help!
I am in a quandary at this FLC. The article uses four non-free images with (currently) skimpy fair use rationales. I don't think that all are needed, but I do not want to oppose over it because I am a novice on images. Could you provide a third opinion please? Dabomb87 (talk) 14:05, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Centre for Research on Globalization
I didn't have time to come back to it as promised until now, just when the AfD was closed. Picking out appropriate stuff on such organizations can be very time consuming. There are a number of gbooks hits talking about this centre: e.g., , ,  ( "a key website"}, and these news story Scholarly organization suggests debate in Canada’s Parliament over Afghanistan is being faked for media spotlight,   has 2 hosted Canadian newspaper articles  on it:  U of O professor accused of hosting anti-Semitic website Group files complaint over 'wild theories' that blame Jews for 9/ and Controversial site 'not an issue' for university Not U of O's job to find out if professor's website is anti- Semitic: expert. Also, , and  in Foreign Policy (preview "At an even more extreme end of the spectrum, the Web site of the Canadian-based Centre for Research on Globalization sells books and videos that "expose" .." )  So I guess I am asking for a relisting, in view of your careful closing summary. At least, it deserves to be a redirect to Michel Chossudovsky. Regards,John Z (talk) 00:42, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, February 8, 2009
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by §hepBot  ( Disable )  at 21:43, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Spider-Man
Hello. :) Since you have been involved in editing the article Spider-Man, I wanted to let you know that we have nominated the article for "Good Article" status. You can view the review page, and if there is anything you can do to make the article better, please do so. :) There are a number of concerns to be addressed and some work to be done, so pitch in if you are able, make any suggestions that you think might be helpful, or at least just be there for moral support. :) BOZ (talk) 00:41, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying on the review page; engaging with the reviewer allows us to work things out, and working together will hopefully get some goodness accomplished. :) Note that I just shortened the Powers and Other media sections, but some sections do need expansion and sourcing. BOZ (talk) 02:36, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Understood. :) Nothing I've done on the article has yet met with any resistance, so feel free to make suggestions, and I'll deal with them as I can. BOZ (talk) 02:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Request protection?
StarCraft has been undergoing some reasonably regular vandalism over the last week or so. Do you think it might be a good idea to slap on some temporary protection from IPs for a while? -- Sabre (talk) 16:26, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I've never really thought about it previously, although I must admit I'm receptive to the idea after thinking about it. Do you think I might stand a chance at an RfA? They seem to scutinise rather thoroughly these days, although I'd hope there's nothing in recent history to hold me back significantly. -- Sabre (talk) 17:53, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Heh, your RFA was unanimous support, I don't think I'd quite manage that. I've got some AfD stuff in living wiki-memory (I dislike the drama that can build up when an extreme inclusionist or deletionist turns up, so its not extensive participation), along with some GA reviews and some third-opinions in uninvolved articles, I suppose they would help in an analysis by others. I think I can handle those types of questions, though I wouldn't feel comfortable nominating myself.-- Sabre (talk) 18:16, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * That reminds me, something I've been meaning to ask for a while. Where are you from? Fuchs – assuming its your real name – suggests a Germanic descent, but your writing style (and use of limey) suggests American, or possibly Canadian; enough to suggest native English speaker, but not British. But I recall that on one Wiki page somewhere you associated yourself with Vatican City (some page where a whole bunch of editors from various countries were signing up for something). -- Sabre (talk) 18:25, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * A challenge! -- Sabre (talk) 18:34, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Found him on Facebook :) Gary King  ( talk ) 18:36, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * There's 71 of him (clones I say!), how can you find him that fast?! -- Sabre (talk) 18:44, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I can tell you that you will need to know what network he's in to find him, because he's not a public listing ;) Gary King  ( talk ) 18:48, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Shh, don't ruin the fun! -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 18:51, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I stand corrected, answering those questions was harder than I thought. -- Sabre (talk) 20:02, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Bungie.net-heatmaps.png
Thanks for uploading File:Bungie.net-heatmaps.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like PD-self (to release all rights), (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 01:34, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Myst Featured Topic
Congratulations on the successful outcome of the FTC for the Myst series, and indeed all the hard work that you put into the articles. It's particularly good to see that, contrary to popular belief, Myst Online: URU Live didn't bring it down, and in fact forms part of it ;). Talk Islander 17:08, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Factual Pie Party
Hi, I see you closed Articles_for_deletion/Ruth_Blechynden. Would you also be able to delete the related article Factual Pie Party? I know it wasn't part of the original nomination, but I think that there was a clear consensus at the AFD to delete it as well. I could nominate it separately, but it seems like that shouldn't be necessary. --Megaboz (talk) 17:27, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Megaboz (talk) 04:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Star Wars: Rogue Squadron
I have addressed your image concerns adequately, I believe. If you could hop on over and take another look at the article and possibly reassess it, I would really appreciate it. Thanks! --TorsodogTalk 14:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

deletion of Daniel Mulhern
I have undid what seems to me to be an entirely improper early closure of the AfD -- and clearly against the consensus of those expressing opinions on the page. older ≠ wiser 16:30, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Improper close of Space Ghost Episodes AfD
Please fix your close of the Space Ghost Coast to Coast Episodes AfD. The proper close was "keep" and discuss merging on the talk pages. Anyone who reads the discussion will see that the concensus was clearly against merging at the AfD. AfD's are not the proper venue for deciding editing decisions such as whether to merge or not, a point which was made repeatedly in the discussion. The "vote" was roughly and the arguments against merging at AfD were very strong.
 * 3 Delete
 * 3 Merge/Redirect
 * 2 Keep at AfD then decide whether to merge or not through normal editing procedures.
 * 8 Keep

If you have your own personal opinion, you should have participated in the discussion and left the closing to an impartial admin. Please take another look, thanks. AfD hero (talk) 18:49, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The arguments you just made on my talk page are all fine and good, but you should have made them in the discussion, so that myself or someone else could have responded to them, and so that they would be given fair weight in relation to the arguments of others (including at least 1 other admin who voted against merging at the AfD).


 * Instead, you made up your own judgement independent of the discussion going on, and then closed the AfD based on that, basically giving your own opinion infinite weight and ignoring the entire discussion that actually went on.


 * Furthermore, by "impartial", it is not meant that you like, dislike, or even know about the subject matter. What it means is that you do not let your own opinion on whether the article should be kept, merged, or deleted interfere with your ability to gauge concensus, except in extreme cases such as BLP or CopyVio. This is the job of administrator as you well know. Now in consideration of all this, I would recommend that you please either a) rectify the situation by restoring the articles, or b) reopen the AfD and make your argument there down below in the discussion section, not at the top. AfD hero (talk) 03:34, 15 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I somewhat agree with AfD hero. The problem in that discussion is that not all of those episodes are of the same "notability".  Whereas the others on the list can arguably be considered in the same context, Baffler Meal is absolutely not in the same league as the others, because it is the first appearance of the Aqua Teen Hunger Force and even appears on additional DVD releases than the Space Coast episodes (i.e. on the Auqa Teen DVDs).  That episode thus is notable in comparison to other Space Goast episodes because it is perhaps the lone Space Ghost episode to appear not just on the Space Ghost DVD release, but also on the Aqua Teen DVD release as a special feature, for being the first appeareance of characters in a franchise that spawned a video game and theatrically released movie, and as such is covered in a variety of secondary sources as a result.  Thus, no real opinion on the merges for the other episodes; however, "Baffler Meal" absolutely is a stand out episode that merits its own article and that does indeed have real potential for further improvement.  Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 22:03, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

FAC
Hi, as someone who previously commented on Featured article candidates/John Wilkes Booth, you may wish to revisit this page, as the FAC has been restarted and additional content to meet the concerns expressed has been added.  JGHowes   <sup style="color:blue;">talk  23:42, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Consensus
This close seems to have ignored the arguments by those involved in the AfD in favor of your own research and conclusions. I find this troubling and against policy. You also seem to have ignored a substantial number of editors who suggested a merge. I don't see how anyone could reach a delete conclusion based on the arguments and conclusions of the numerous editors involved in the AfD. ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:07, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * One of the delete arguments was "per nom" and another was "Is this more notable than any other church? Not from what I can see. The measure of a church's work is not its fame, but rather its success in saving souls."


 * The next time you have a strong personal opinion on an article I hope you'll join the discussion instead of imposing your will on the outcome. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:16, 15 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Someone asked me a question about these on my talk page, and I responded there, explaining about what in my opinion was or was not likely to be reversed at deletion review. I thought you ought to know. By the way, had you considered simply closing the Church as  merge or  redirect?  DGG (talk) 01:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)


 * My understanding is that the article is being redirected and/or merged into the appropriate town? I feel that outcome is reasonable in respecting the consensus of the editors who participated in the AfD discussion (including the deleters, mergers, and keepers). It includes the bits as appropriate in a broader subject, preserves the history and doesn't wipe the information completely, whereupon it would be unavailable should better sources and indications of notability emerge in the future.
 * While I stand by my conclusion that the closing did not reflect the AfD discussion, and that a particular opinion based on individual research should be made part of the discussion itself rather than used as a basis for closure, I do respect D.F.'s efforts to investigate the subject. When a "I hate to repeat myself" comment is posted on my talk page, the native New Yorker in me tends to respond assertively, but I have no hard feelings. I do get frustrated at the vigilant effort and time required to prevent useful content from being deleted. The need for PRESERVATION as a priority is strong given the damage done when useful content is lost without a trace. A redirect is very painless and not that difficult to maintain, especially when a semiprotect forces discussion and a specific request to be made before recreation can be done. Cheers. ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost &mdash; February 16, 2009
<div style="margin-left:30px; margin-right:30px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:135%; line-height:120%;">

<div style="margin-left:20px; margin-right:20px; text-align:center; color:#333; margin-bottom:-20px; font-size:90%; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; padding-bottom:5px; font-style:italic;">You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Delivered by §hepBot  ( Disable )  at 06:30, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Followup
Hi, just a gentle reminder that you are a peer review here. If you are not going to do it for whatever reason, please let me know and I will make some comments to clear the backlog's oldest item. Thanks, Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 19:59, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem and thanks - I once completely forgot a doing (others made comments) and only caught it when the PR was archived. Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 20:48, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review; I will get to it in due time, probably within the next week or so. As you know, I'm working on a full Metroid topic and am planning on bringing all those articles to FA. I have another, more urgent matter that, if you have time, I'd appreciate some input on. I'm currently working on bringing Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones to FAC; it will be my first film article. Since you are an experienced film article editor, if you've got any comments on the article, especially what it's missing in terms of content, I'd appreciate some comments at its peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones/archive2. I'm also currently working through the recent FAR that the article went through, so I'll begin knocking down those points as well. Thanks in advance! Gary King  ( talk ) 21:06, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * In particular, I could probably use help in the Analysis section as it isn't really the type of content that I've worked with before (i.e. interpreting a work). Gary King  ( talk ) 21:17, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll get back there, in due time. Gary King  ( talk ) 22:04, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I'm saving a dying topic. If the Star Wars topic (my very first FT) does not get a new FA, then it will be demoted. Gary King  ( talk ) 22:15, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Anyways, I plan on grabbing some books to expand the article, specifically the Production section. Themes will, again, be my most difficult part. I also contacted Alientraveller. I'll probably end up rewriting the entire article from the bottom up as that seems easier at this point. Gary King  ( talk ) 22:21, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you have access to databases such as International Index to Film Periodicals? Or anyone? Gary King  ( talk ) 22:27, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, you're the pro, so where should I go for more information? I'm not asking you to actually write the article for me (which would be nice though!), I'm just wondering where I can go for sources to expand the article. Also, what are your thoughts on the current state of the article, anyways? On second though, maybe it doesn't need to be completely rewritten. Gary King  ( talk ) 22:33, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Bone Wars
Yeah, it's easier to do a nice translation when you're translating a nice article. This was actually the 150.000th article on the Catalan wikipedia, and I chose it on purpose because I thought it was interesting, well-written and about a subject I liked. The only thing which I found missing was some info about Uintathere bones in the Bone Wars, but I guess it wasn't that important, what with the Stegosaurus and all... Well, have a nice day. Leptictidium (mt) 21:30, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Populous
Hello, how come you keep deleting the "Characters" section in the Populous: The Beginning article? Most games have a description of characters, with some like Halo even having a page dedicated to the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ksevio (talk • contribs) 01:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

To name or not to name, that is a conundrum
I'm currently attempting a rewrite of LucasArts adventure games (no small task for an era of 15 titles and 14 years), and need a little help with the naming of one section. I don't know how much you know of these games—if its nothing, then stop wasting your time with Halo and Myst and go try a real work of art like Curse of Monkey Island. I'm a little stuck with a name for the second sub-section in the games section, which covers 1990 to 1993. The titles there, less the Indiana Jones one, are considered the classics of the LucasArts adventure games; its those ones, along with Grim Fandango and Curse of Monkey Island, that are usually found on lists of top games in the press a decade later and onwards. I just don't know what to call it. Something like "the classics" or "the golden era" doesn't seem to be particularly encyclopedic wording. I don't suppose you have any suggestions? -- Sabre (talk) 23:53, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Not really. LucasArts deny all knowledge of these games' existence now, although they used to throw "classics" around when re-releasing this particular group in compliations. I know that Telltale refer to it as the "golden years" in their articles, but as former LucasArts employees they're pushing an agenda. I've not really come across a name in the media: I found the phrase "the early nineties" but that's not very engaging. -- Sabre (talk) 00:16, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Could you delete every single trace of him from wikipedia?
I no longer want his name to be associated with anything with en.wikipedia.org. Wiki commons is fine, but others such as AfD debates, rescue squadron, requst page, or even his page that says that his page is deleted, I want completely gone. Including this post in your talk page. Angdl (talk) 00:07, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

OK
Courtesy blank everything about him, including his name in talk pages. I'll blank my talk page. My userpage isn't part of wikipedia, so it doesn't matter. Wiki commons is free, so I don't care if his name is there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angdl (talk • contribs) 00:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Luke Smith (writer)
Shubinator (talk) 01:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Re:RfA
Ah, don't worry. I still love you. I'm glad that RfA is over though, I didn't enjoy those Q&A's.

New buttons! I'm afraid to touch them! -- Sabre (talk) 19:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, they did suggest it was possible to delete Wikipedia in the 15 seconds it would take them to dig out my user id. Don't think I will, its no fun unless there's a big glaring red button that says "DO NOT PUSH" to do so. :P -- Sabre (talk) 20:07, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Sheesh, 83 thanks messages take a long time to deliver! Anyway, I suppose I should get on with business... any suggestions as to the topic four above? -- Sabre (talk) 21:52, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Spartans eva etc.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Spartans eva etc.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:12, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Angdl and his article
Hi, just wanted to let you know. After the your closing deletion of the article he created, User:Angdl suddenly went on a blanking spree trying to have all history of the article's deletion removed from WP. (I can see he even asked you to try to delete all evidence of the discussions.) A look at his contributions includes this edit summary - "I do not want his name to be existent in any wikipedia article, including AfD debates.". He's been going around to the talkpages, such as the rescue squadron, the wikiproject where he originally tried to canvass votes from, etc removing all text about the deletion discussion. *But* it's kinda hard to AGF, seeing as he's maintaining the entire, unaltered article on his userpage at User:Angdl. If he truly wants the name to be eradicated from every article, that theoretically should include his userpage. Now I've been thinking, (and AGF aside), he might want all deletion discussions wiped so that he could show the "article" (which, while in userspace is clear to us WPedians as not really an article but not to those not acquainted with how WP works) to his friends, to show off that he "has a wikiepdia article" on himself/his friend/whoever. I am not sure how to proceed with this since this is the first time I've seen something like this on WP. Shrumster (talk) 10:31, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

DC Meetup Events: You're invited!
This has been an automated because you your name was on the invite list. BrownBot (talk) 16:23, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Luke Smith GAN?
Hey, I'm Hunter. I saw on the GAN site you had nominated Luke Smith (writer) for a GA. I conducted a review in Notepad and was about to copy and paste it into the review page on the Talk page...but then found there's nothing in there about the GA nomination.

I'm guessing maybe you just forgot to add the nomination to the talk page (it's #2 under "How to nominate an article at WP:GAN"), but I don't want to do it myself because I don't want to give the impression that I'm nominating the article, because that would disqualify me from reviewing it.

So could you just place that in the Talk page and let me know when it's done? Then I'll copy and paste my review into it and we can get this thing up to GA status. Thanks! --Hunter Kahn (talk) 05:11, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. I just started a day at work though, so it'll be about 8 hours before I can copy and paste my review into there, but it's all ready to go so I'll put it in there as soon as I can! --Hunter Kahn (talk) 15:24, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * There are still a few outstanding objections; I struck the ones that are addressed and left in the ones that aren't, please address those line-by-line. Also, I tweaked the addition you made to the intro, please look at it and tell me if you're OK with it. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 01:19, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That's a pass. Nice job! I wish there were more articles like this one on Wikipedia. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 00:18, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Undoing changes
Hey, what's with undoing all of my recent changes to Halo 3 article? Did you even look at what I changed, and more importantly, do you have a in-depth knowledge of Halo 3? If you do, then you would surely realize the legitimacy of my edits. I'd like to know exactly why EVERYTHING I changed was reverted, as your edit summeries where unclear or didn't mention any reasons at all. The TRUE Adoring Fan (talk) 08:57, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sam & Max: Freelance Police
You say that you've already checked Lexis Nexis over for sources for that? I'm getting opposes based on a lack of print sources, in particular referring to Lexis Nexis. Although at this point, I'm just more than content to leave the article at GA. -- Sabre (talk) 14:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost &mdash; February 23, 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:


 * Philosophers analyze Wikipedia as a knowledge source
 * An automated article monitoring system for WikiProjects
 * News and notes: Wikimania, usability, picture contest, milestones
 * Wikipedia in the news: Lessons for Brits, patent citations
 * Dispatches: Hundredth Featured sound approaches
 * Wikiproject report: WikiProject Islam
 * Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.

Delivered by §hepBot  ( Disable )  at 01:21, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

WP:WPTC
–Juliancolton <sup style="color:#666660;">Tropical <sup style="color:#666660;">Cyclone  02:48, 27 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Meh. Surely there must be some video game that's in some way related to storms. –Juliancolton <sup style="color:#666660;">Tropical <sup style="color:#666660;">Cyclone  04:41, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * SimCity_2000 –Juliancolton <sup style="color:#666660;">Tropical <sup style="color:#666660;">Cyclone  04:46, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Halo Wars
You reverted my edit in Halo Wars. I changed this sentence: Ground vehicles are powerful against infantry, infantry is stronger against aircraft, and aircraft are exceptional at destroying vehicles. I changed it, because it is completely false. Take the UNSC infantry units for example. One is your basic unit, same damage to everything, one is stronger against other infantry, and one is a sort of super unit good against everything, but it has a special ability that makes it really strong against certain aircraft AND ground vehicles. The UNSC ground units are similiar... one is good against infantry, one is good against aircraft, and one is good against other ground vehicles. I am going to edit the article again. If you have a better way to word what I am trying to explain, then feel free, but please do not revert it back to the false information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Poh Tay Toez (talk • contribs) 14:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Halo trilogy
OK, I merged them. Could you possibly do me a favour and use your admin-like powers to delete the now-redundant Category:Wikipedia featured topics Halo trilogy featured content, Category:Wikipedia featured topics Halo trilogy good content and Category:Wikipedia featured topics Halo trilogy? Thanks... rst20xx (talk) 17:10, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! rst20xx (talk) 17:15, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Removal of Arbiter categories
Hey, Dave. Some anonymous editor keeps removing categories from the Arbiter (Halo) article. I've requested that the editor provide justification, but he hasn't, and keeps removing the categories. Should this be considered vandalism, or stubborn good faith edits? Peptuck (talk) 20:18, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the input! I'll let the article be; if the anon decides to remove the cats again, I'll leave it. Peptuck (talk) 20:33, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost &mdash; 2 March 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:


 * Books extension enabled
 * News and notes: Stewards, Wikimania bids, and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's role in journalism, Smarter Wikipedia, Skittles
 * Dispatches: WikiProject Ships Featured topic and Good topics
 * Wikiproject report: WikiProject Norse History and Culture
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello
Hi, I'm Shamwow86. I'm new here at Wikipedia and I'm very inexperienced. Having friends to help you out is great, especially when you're new to stuff. Thank you very much for lending me your ears. I hope to work with you and all Wikipedians for all time. All the best. Shamwow86 (talk) 23:16, 3 March 2009 (UTC)