User talk:Dinoguy1000/Archive 4

Hana to Akuma
Hello, I just added a few references at Hana to Akuma, I'm wondering if that's enough to estabilsh notability for the article? Samantha Lim88 (talk) 08:12, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello, Samantha Lim88! Unfortunately, the references you added to the article do not help establish its notability. Notability is only established through non-trivial coverage in tertiary sources (reviews, for example). 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 01:54, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay. But are the references suitable? I'm afraid notability can't be established at the moment. The series is hardly popular outside Japan and no English licensors are taking up the series so I couldn't find any reviews. Samantha Lim88 (talk) 07:23, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * From what I saw, the references are fine, except for 1 and 7, which are really notes rather than references. 1 should be replaced with proper references to actual example merchandise bearing the alternate English name, and 7 needs to be replaced with a reference to the publisher's website or an online bookstore; KrebMarkt may be able to help you with 7. However, since notability isn't apparent, I'd recommend moving the article into a subpage in your userspace and continuing to work on it there until notability is established; otherwise, the article could be nominated for deletion by anyone at any time. I can move it for you, if you'd like. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:55, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's probably better... The other contributors for the article should be informed about this. About the references, I can replace the reference 7, however how should I do it for reference 1? I've seen pictures taken (by people) with the merchandise bearing the name but these items are all gifts from manga magazines, how can I reference them in a proper way? Samantha Lim88 (talk) 07:15, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and moved it; the other contributors will know about the move from their watchlists (or they'll find out when they visit the article and are redirected). There's no need to notify them. As for the reference replacement, I really don't know much about it. Collectonian may be able to help, or you could try asking at WT:ANIME. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 02:22, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

FullwidthReplacer courtesy note
You may want to check out this discussion User talk:TheFarix. --Farix (Talk) 14:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Commented there. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 18:00, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Template:Japanese episode list/sandbox review
If you would, I like you to review the code changes in Template:Japanese episode list/sandbox. I haven't done anything too drastic other then reformat the code, optimize some bits of it, and made use of ifempty. Not sure if this will cause any problems with transclusion limits on any particular list. I also created a test page for the sandbox. --Farix (Talk) 03:53, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It looks good (and what's this? A bug in the existing template that's fixed in the new version?!). The main transclusion limit problem I'm worried about with the update is main lists where Japanese episode list/sublist is used; we may end up having to hardcode some of that. Also, I'm beginning to question the wisdom of displaying an empty summary cell when ShortSummary is defined but empty; I'll probably start a discussion about that on the template's talk page, though. BTW, are there still any usages of JapaneseTitle? 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 18:11, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * and what's this? A bug in the existing template that's fixed in the new version?!
 * Stumbled onto that one just a few hours ago. I always thought something was fishy about that bit of code. But when I really got looking into it, I determined it wasn't even necessary.
 * The main transclusion limit problem I'm worried about with the update is main lists where Japanese episode list/sublist is used; we may end up having to hardcode some of that.
 * I'm thinking that the limit only includes the first level transclusions, or is based on the number of kilobytes involved in the transclusion, which is why template documentation has been spun into a separate page. But it is something that will have to be checked. I would actually like to spin out more of the code in order to merge Japanese episode list multi-part.
 * I'm beginning to question the wisdom of displaying an empty summary cell when ShortSummary is defined but empty;
 * I think it would look bad when some summaries were filled in and others are not. But I do question if it is necessary to include to force the cell to open fully. The same goes for the title cells, which will eliminate two ifempty transclusions.
 * BTW, are there still any usages of JapaneseTitle?
 * Hopefully, I converted them all. But a cleanup category should be created to catch any stragglers first before removing the parameter completely. Japanese episode list multi-part, on the other hand, still needs to be changed over. --Farix (Talk) 18:33, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, the bug I was referring to was a colspan one in the Summary cell - take a good look at the very first episode entry in the testcases (but still, excellent catch on the unnecessary logic; that always looked a bit off to me, too).
 * IIRC, template documentation isn't transcluded to avoid transclusion limits, it's done so that the documentation can be updated even when the template is fully protected. When the preprocessor was completely rewritten a couple of years back, this is one of the things that was specifically addressed, and now everything in &lt;noinclude /> tags is ignored when parsing a transclusion. And subtransclusions most definitely count towards the limit; see the history of User:G.A.S/Sandbox1 for examples (Navbox --> various navboxes --> sandbox page).
 * I dunno, it's something that would require a mockup so we could see what it might look like, and then discussion could follow.
 * Will-do on the cleanup category, and thanks for the pointer on multi-part - I'll add the alternate parameter in a second to it as well. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 18:45, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Done the multi-part update (it's not protected, BTW, and oh-so-desparately needs the same type of cleanup you've done in JEL's sandbox ;) ). 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 18:55, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * And also done the maintenance cat - see Category:Japanese episode list transclusion problems. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 18:57, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * That bug was caused by the extra bit of code that I removed as unnecessary. It checked to see if any of the title parameters were defined and added it to the colspan count. Think is, the cell for the titles is going to display regardless if any of the title parameters where defined or not. Check the sandbox for the multi-list template, but ultimately I think it should be merged into the main template. I've also changed the sublist templates code per information at Template limits. --Farix (Talk) 19:52, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Aah, that makes sense. I also wonder what other columns should always be displayed (I'm thinking EpisodeList and OriginalAirDate, myself...). As for multi-part, I'm not arguing against a merge, but there isn't any reason its code can't be cleaned up some in the meantime, is there? =) I'll have a look at the sandbox in a minute. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 20:03, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Major tweaking of the sandbox. I think I managed to make it less expensive than the current code. See the main template's talk page for the exact numbers. --Farix (Talk) 03:57, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Commented there. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 02:07, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Quoting refs in School Rumble
Is there a reason you went and changed the refs in School Rumble to all have quotes, including single-word ones which normally don't? I'm not going to undue it, but would like to know why. 陣 内 Jinnai 05:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Mostly consistency. Quoting attributes in (X)HTML is generally considered good practice (and slightly improves readability of the code), and there's really no reason not to extend the practice to tag/attribute pairs that exist purely in wikimarkup. And as for single-word ref names not normally having quotes... Maybe it's just because I don't watch the same set of articles that you do, but most of the ones on my watchlist (that I happen to pay any attention to ;P ) quote the ref name, regardless of how many words it is. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 05:07, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

State Collapsing in Individual Articles
"the idea is that state can be overridden from individual articles"

How does one do that, then?--Stepusual (talk) 22:29, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * As long as the navbox in question has the code {{{state|expanded}}}, you would simply use in any given article (or you can use autocollapse instead of collapsed). -- as 66.116.12.126 (talk) 02:53, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you.--Stepusual (talk) 04:05, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. =) 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:55, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Third opinion
We may need a WP:Third opinion for School Rumble as the debate on the third season episode number for the infobox doesn't look to be ending. It's spilled over from the main page to Talk:School Rumble, List of School Rumble episodes, Talk:List of School Rumble episodes and I have attempted to get support from WP:ANIME, but to no avail. 陣 内 Jinnai 08:16, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * First, let me say that the talk page is where such editorial disputes belong - saying they've "spilled over" to it gives it an unnecessarily bad connotation. Second, you need to get the whole thing under control for now - try to get everyone to agree to keep from making changes on the articles related to the status of the third season until consensus is formed, and then limit discussion to either Talk:School Rumble or Talk:List of School Rumble episodes - having the discussion split between two pages isn't going to do you any favors. Last, I've been watching the whole thing, but I really don't think I can help shed any light on the issue. Could you give a breakdown on how reliable sources are referring to the third season? What does the animation studio refer to it as? Their word would seem to be the most authoritative to me. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:54, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * ANN refers to it as a "mini-series" The anime's website does not appear to call it anything...just 3rd term. The site does however release a plot synopsis of the other never to be released 24 episodes as though they would be, saying these are episodes 25 and 26. 陣 内 Jinnai 00:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm... ANN's page for Third Semester calls it an OVA. The weight of evidence seems to be leaning towards that. BTW, why will the first 24 episodes never be released? 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 02:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't know. But their official statement is that it won't be released, but the last 2 episodes were bundled in special LEs of the last 2 books so that the anime could get a proper ending just as the series did. I have my own theory, but that's speculation. No official word has been released as to why.
 * As to the type, I am going to try and see if I can find a youtube episode or something to see if it was setup more as an OVA in length (their other OVA series did not have higher quality animation for most scenes so that TV quality animation shouldn't disprove its an OVA). I would think though for the actual prose should mini-series or OVA be used? 陣 内 Jinnai 04:00, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I couldn't say, honestly. You should try discussing it on the talk page there and see if you all can come to an agreement, but right now it probably doesn't matter which one you choose so long as you agree on *something*. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 04:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * One last question for the formal request, should the infobox, if its listed a season, show 26 or 2 episodes since the synopsis of the other 24 exist as if they had been aired. 陣 内 Jinnai 04:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Could you look into the deleted history of Cole Brown for me?
When I did new page patrol and red link removal some time ago, I may have mixed up this article between the two. IIRC, repeatedly copied his user page into Cole Brown and similarly named articles. Long story short: I may have actually A7-CSDed an article I created myself. I'd like to make sure that's not the case before I show up at DR. I'd also like to know if the newest revision before the A7 deletion of 20:14, 21 May 2009 looked anything like my version of the article. Thanks.  Good raise  12:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi, Goodraise:
 * At the date of deletion, the article had one revision by yourself, being:

Cole Brown is a voice actor.

Voice acting roles

 * Gondou in Baldr Force EXE Resolution
 * Marshall D. Teach in One Piece (Funimation Entertainment dub)
 * Baphomet in Ragnarok The Animation
 * Boss in Crayon Shin-chan
 * Craven in Strain: Strategic Armored Infantry

Hey Dino
I got this user who keeps posting an unsounced superpower claim over and over on the Hiroto Honda page. He keeps on saying the character has a "super-powerful voice that gives people super strength", which he never had said, and two why should his cheering instantly mean its a "superpower". thank you for your time =^-^=--"I am an oktau and a baka at times but deny proven facts and you got a fight" comment added by Dragonmaster88 (talk • contribs) 19:05, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Revert as vandalism; that's all it amounts to. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 19:07, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I have done it several times now, and it is really starting to get annoying--"I am an oktau and a baka at times but deny proven facts and you got a fight" comment added by Dragonmaster88 (talk • contribs) 19:14, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Taking a look now... 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 19:18, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Semi-protected it for a week. May want to ask for a second opinion on that, as protecting articles is something I don't actually know much about. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 19:21, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I should probably look in that =^-^=--"I am an oktau and a baka at times but deny proven facts and you got a fight" comment added by Dragonmaster88 (talk • contribs) 19:42, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Seems this same editor is hitting other articles as well, such as World of Naruto. This may be grounds for a range block. --Farix (Talk) 20:23, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Looking through page histories, I'm seeing the following IPs (feel free to expand the list with additional IPs/diffs):
 * On Hiroto Honda
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * (originally added the superpower claim to Hiroto Honda)
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * On World of Naruto
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * The only ranges which could be blocked and have any effect here are and, both of which receive far too many useful contributions. Individual addresses could be blocked, but the turnover for new addresses being assigned appears to be as frequently as once an hour, and unfortunately, I don't have the time, energy, or expertise to attempt to keep up with it all. However, I also note that none of the IP addresses above have any messages on their talk pages, which suggests no one has tried to actually communicate with them. 「 ダイノ ガイ  千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 20:49, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Seems that semi-protection is the best option then. --Farix (Talk) 21:02, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Template:Anime and manga
Anime and manga Template you created was needed. I am currently trying to improve it. Do any other place exist we can ask for help. Also I tried to add template to Eiichiro Oda and One Piece characters but 2 users removed it since it is too broad. Is there any guideline referring to templates, that they can be removed for being too broad. Kasaalan (talk) 06:58, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I am aware the template is needed (actually, it would be more accurate to say that there is a use for it), that is why I created it. =) However, it is still far from finished; there are still many more links to be reviewed for usefulness in adding to it, and the whole thing will probably be completely restructured once or twice before I'm satisfied with it. However, it should not be transcluded onto individual series articles, nor should it link to them - this is something I decided on from the very beginning, and it's for the simple reason that if we allow a link to series X, some editor will come along and also want a link to series Y. Far easier to refuse all individual series links. ;) As for asking for help, I was going to formally announce the template's existence and ask for thoughts on it after I'd fleshed it out more, over at WT:ANIME, but you can ask now if you'd like. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 07:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * My english is far from perfect either. I couldn't understand you. Do you say we shouldn't add template to episodes or manga artists pages, where should we add it then. Also is there any relevant guideline for templates. Of course we can wait until it is finished, yet without any help it will take more time. Kasaalan (talk) 07:19, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Aah, I didn't know that, thanks for letting me know. =) No, the template shouldn't be added to episode lists (such as List of One Piece episodes) or to manga artist articles (such as Eiichiro Oda), and it shouldn't even be added to main series articles (such as One Piece). More than likely, though, it should be added to most of the articles that it links to - that's the whole purpose of having a navbox, after all. As for template guidelines, not really, though there are some good rules of thumb. However, this navbox is unlike any others I've ever worked on, so I'm basically figuring out what to do as I go. Lastly, I wasn't suggesting we wait until it is finished to get help, I was merely stating that that was my original plan, and that you are more than welcome to ask for help before then if you'd like. =) 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 07:32, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I seriously object not adding template to manga or anime series, that is the whole purpose of template, it is anime and manga template for anime and manga (series). My rationale is, we cannot add all seperate manga or anime serie titles in template, however we already added several anime and manga lists and categories to the template, so it can be used in any anime or manga series. Kasaalan (talk) 08:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No, the template is too general-purpose. We would either have to choose a specific set of series articles to add the template to (a choice that would be completely arbitrary and therefore almost impossible to defend), or we would have to add the template to *all* series articles (beyond excessive and rather pointless for most of the articles). The terms "anime" and "manga" are linked from almost every anime/manga series article on Wikipedia. If a reader is not familiar with the terms, they will click on the link there, instead of looking for a navbox at the bottom of the page. Once they get to the anime or manga articles, though, the navbox will be on them, providing a compact, organized choice of related topics important to anime and manga in general that they may be interested in reading. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 08:08, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't agree on this matter, since navboxes are much more helpful for standalone articles than wikilinks. Most people don't anime or manga, since they know what anime or manga is, but navboxes are compact in their nature in the first place. Anyone interested can click, anyone not interested will not. They are similar to wikilinks, and they don't consume much space either. But navboxes are superior, since noone has to click to any link, but a javascript button which allows him to quickly browse through various related articles categorised in navbox. Kasaalan (talk) 08:18, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is definitely true. I'm not arguing against the usefulness of navboxes in general. However, Anime and manga is too general to be useful to most readers who are looking at specific series articles. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 08:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I am an inclusionist, I don't agree with your too general objection, specific cases should include general cases with compact navboxes and templates if you ask me. The more (relevant) templates the better for articles in my terms. On the other hand we have a huge improvement in a few days and the template is more or less ready now for anouncement. Though the lack of some articles, lead us to use categories instead. Kasaalan (talk) 10:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Inclusionism (and deletionism) has nothing to do with the use of navboxes on articles; it has to do with the interpretation of content guidelines such as notability. And this template, as I said above, is too general to be relevant in almost all cases. Any argument which consists of "it's relevant because it's so general" can only work when the article is as general as the navbox. Series articles are incredibly specific, so with few exceptions, navboxes which cover more than a single series are too general to be useful on those articles. As for the "improvement": the template has been expanded, true, but it still needs to be reformatted, and there are several more links to be hunted down and added to it as well. Again, as I said above, I never tried to stop you from waiting until the template was "done" to "announce" it, you were perfectly free to do so at any time you wanted to. And the category links will ultimately have to be removed, but I'm leaving that go for now. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 10:11, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, a template should only appear on an article if that article is also linked to from the template: For example, Astronomy subfields links to 10 articles (and 2 redirects), and is transcluded by 10 articles. Further, as Dinoguy1000 said, the purpose of a navigation template, navbox or topicbox is to facilitate navigation between articles (i.e. both ways). Categories are more suitable where this is not the case. Regards, G.A.S talk 11:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Exactly; thank you for summing this up so clearly, G.A.S! (BTW, while I've caught your attention, care to take a crack at making some improvements/additions? =D ) 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 11:39, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * See User:G.A.S/Sandbox3. ^_^ G.A.S talk 16:03, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments, I'm a bit surprised Farix didn't ask about any of them. =) To answer a few:
 * Rather "Longest series by episode count" if only one item in brackets - My original plan was to eventually start a similar list for longest series by how long they've been in production, but I recently rethought that, and am now planning on incorporating that directly into the existing lists (with a rename to reflect the broader scope thrown in).
 * Rather "Series · Films" and Why is this one "in English" and the above "in the USA"? - The licensed anime lists are referenced so specifically because their scope is that specific. It's meant as a heads-up to anyone so inclined that the lists' scopes need to be broadened to *all* English-language licenses (and if no one else ever takes the time to do it, I might get to it *eventually*; it's been on my to do list for some time now).
 * Rather put Hentai in its own line--consider using navbox subgroups for group3) - I was trying to wait and see until I had found and listed as many genre/demographic-related pages as I could, but I would agree that something definitely has to be done with the hentai entries.
 * //Rather put the (closest available English term in brackets--the general audience might not know the Japanese terms) - Once again, I had been waiting until the list of links there was as complete as I could get it before looking really hard about that stuff. Suggestions are certainly welcome, though. =)
 * Put in own subgroup and Use navbox subgroups for group4 - Actually, it's probably a better idea to split them between two groups, as the first line is for topics directly related to anime and manga, and the second is more for related media formats from other countries.
 * BTW, have you seen Farix's proposed sidebar version? (cool, both of your sandbox versions are on "Sandbox3" subpages in your userspace ^_^ ) 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 16:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * In fact, I have not yet seen it, but the sidebar version is actually very nice.
 * That could work. The (longest series) link in the sidebar version may also be suitable here; i.e. "anime (longest series)"
 * That list should be broadened. It is easy enough to note if a series was licensed elsewhere but not in the US.
 * Agreed.
 * Agreed. No suggestions yet, though.
 * Agreed. Though you would have to think of a better name for one of them.
 * G.A.S talk 04:32, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Navigation templates
Hi Dinoguy1000. After some template cleanup it struck me--would there not be sense in creating a intermediary template (between the series template and navbox) to get the anime and manga navboxes uniform? Should I maybe create a demo in one of my sandboxes for discussion? G.A.S talk 19:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Something in the line of:


 * G.A.S talk 06:13, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm... I dunno, it seems like it would probably be more trouble than it's worth, given the huge amount of variation we actually have in our navboxes (not to mention I'm rather leery of adding another metatemplate layer here). For specific issues, though, the immediate thing is the assumption that all series with a navbox are also going to have their own category; not all series start with a manga series which is then adapted into an anime series; and we have a number of examples of series with well over 5 episode sublists. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:45, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the honest reply. I guess it would all depend on complexity... I presume it would be easier to fire up AWB instead:-) (it would at the least do "a bit more cleanup"^_^) G.A.S talk 20:20, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, I just figured you would appreciate a frank answer more than me mincing my words. =) AWB would be good for some of the repetitive stuff (the same type of stuff a template would help with), but I'm not sure how much it would help with the more open-ended things (and, of course, it wouldn't help much at all with finding other articles that belong on the navbox... or would it?). 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 20:28, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I actually use AWB in "manual mode"; being it loads the article, apply basic fixes (if any), and I then edit it manually, preview, and save. I use a browser in a second screen to help with the "open-minded things". It also remembers where I should continue:) G.A.S talk 04:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

My work!
You deleted all my hard work on the Carnivores: series page! I spent half and hour typing all that. I am new you know. I added a list of dinos.

Im a new guy to wiki and i was working on the Carnivores (series) page with a list of dinos and you deleated it! It took me a half hour to type that. --dino Dinomaster10231 (talk) 18:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello Dinomaster10231, I can certainly understand that you put a great deal of work into that, and thus why you are a bit mad at me. However, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a game guide. A full list of the animals in the Carnivores games is appropriate for fansites, but not Wikipedia. Also, keep in mind that your work is not truly deleted - it can still be seen via the page's history. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:49, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I know what I did wrong after reading the "What Wikipedia is not" section. I really like the Carnivores series and I found no good fansites, except one.  It's called The Carnivores Saga.  Is it any good? --Dinomaster10231 (talk) 19:20, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Yep, although I'm not sure how active it is anymore. AFAIK, it's the only real Carnivores fansite (or, at least, forum) out there, and a few of its members have created spinoff fansites of their own (and if you're wondering, yeah, I'm the Dinoguy1000 on the TCS forums). =) 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 02:25, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Recent edits to Template:Animanga by year category header
Were these done by you when you weren't logged in? This IP has made quite a number of significant changes recently and in the past. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 08:12, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yep, thanks for the concern. =) I really need to get that "vetted IP edits" subpage created and populated... =P 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 16:53, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

List of Bokurano: Ours chapters
Hello,

Regarding this, is this true even when it's the same illustration (a "double-page illustration")?

If so, could you direct me to the discussion that led to this consensus? I'm curious as to what the arguments were... Erigu (talk) 17:10, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * You mean the illustration spans the front and back covers, both? This specific instance was not discussed, but the discussion itself can be found here. Looking back on it, though, it really didn't get much attention - you may want to raise the issue again (be sure to point out you're aware of the previous discussion, so you don't get a "we already discussed this" response) and see if you can get more participation. And, for the record, I know of another series that also seems to have cover illustrations spanning both front and back covers, but I haven't really touched its chapter list much. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * And regarding that, I remember I never gave any examples of the xxxHoLic covers... here are some: volume 14's and volume 15's. Akata (talk) 18:02, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the examples, Akata! 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 18:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * And here's Bokura no volume 1 and another xxxHoLic cover, this time volume 4. Volumes 14 and 15 don't exactly have much on the back, which is a shame, they're some of the only ones available without barcodes. Hopefully this one shows it better. Akata (talk) 19:16, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Interesting... if one of you two wants to start a new discussion on this matter, it would be a good idea to include these examples. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 19:19, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

As of!
How did I not know there is a As of template? How long has it been around? We should be using it in every series with ongoing releases. —Quasirandom (talk) 20:58, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I knew of it (sort of) for a while, but only recently resolved to actively deploy it across our articles. Agreed that we need to be using it, though, perhaps a project-wide notice is in order? 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 20:59, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

My goddess :p
Hi, please have a look to THAT --KrebMarkt 08:53, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Interesting, but personally I can't really say I like it (though that's probably just because I'm afraid of change =) ). In addition, your version isn't entirely accurate (prepare for head a splode): the first English release was chapter-by-chapter, in a format similar to American comic books. After a dozen or so of those were released, select chapters from the first three Japanese volumes were compiled and released as an abridged volume titled 1-555-GODDESS. At some point after that, some chapters were also serialized in DH's defunct manga anthology Super Manga Blast! for awhile. Volume releases after the abridged vol. 1 picked up at volume 4, and the first three volumes were re-released some time after that. The most recent release is the re-release of the first 20 volumes, following the original Japanese chapter layout. Confusing, eh? Basically, though, it means there've been 4 distinct volume releases, though you could probably count the first two as one and the same. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 19:27, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The issue is with current the table you can't write summaries. I used a blunt & brutal template to solve the issue. I will think about it a bit more. --KrebMarkt 04:46, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I am acutely aware of the summaries issue, and have been since I started working on the list. I have a couple of potential ideas for how summaries might work in the current table, but they would both result in already ugly, complicated, and hard-to-edit (short-and-sweet: fragile... very, very fragile) code becoming even uglier, more complicated, and harder to edit. =P 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 06:15, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Like making summaries appear when you mouse over each chapters ? :p —Preceding unsigned comment added by KrebMarkt (talk • contribs) 18:43, 3 July 2009


 * Well, no, but that one's intriguing on its own (even if it would never come to pass due to all sorts of accessibility and other technical issues). 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 19:14, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Re-addition of undiscussed script as gadget
Dear Dinoguy1000,

you have re-added an undiscussed gadget on the gadgets definition page giving the following summarry "rv this is a technical gadget to fix scripts in the Vector skin; discussion shouldn't be required (at the very least, leave it up and start a discussion on whether it should be removed))".

I strongly disagree with that. It is not up to you to overthrow an existing process without any previous discussion by just giving a flippant remark.

I will remove this gadget again, please start a discussion on Gadget/proposals (as prominently stated on top of MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition as well as Gadget!) if you want this added as a gadget.

Cacycle (talk) 20:16, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello Cacyle, thanks for the notice. First, I apologise if my edit summary came off as flippant to you; I was doing the best I could with the limited space I had to explain my case. Second, reviewing the history of MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition, it's pretty obvious that I'm not the only one who has had trouble with the idea of requiring every single addition to be discussed - frankly, it seems to be process for the sake of process, and in general, the whole thing hasn't been used nearly enough for any type of established, consensus-based process to be formed (having been personally involved with several proposed gadget discussions, I can personally attest that there is no "existing process"; it's all still very much touch-and-go). I have no problem with requiring discussion for the addition of gadgets which add additional functionality or stylize the interface (if discussion had been required at the time, Blackskin would probably have rightfully never been made a gadget), but Vector-thunks is a purely technical gadget whose sole function is to allow various user scripts (especially Twinkle and Friendly, but also a very large number of tools that aren't well-maintained) to continue to function in the Vector skin until such time as they can be updated specifically to function in it. Requiring that this gadget be discussed before adding it, therefore, only serves to perpetuate instruction creep and bureaucracy while crippling or disabling very widely used tools in the Vector skin. If you have a problem with the Vector-thunks gadget, by all means start a discussion in a centralized location. Until then, I will continue to revert your removal of the gadget as unnecessary bureaucracy. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 20:38, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Without any community involvement required, users were putting arbitrary gadgets online, many of which were clearly not suitable as a gadget and you can indeed see some remnants of that time in the gadgets list. The only way to stop that is an equal process for every gadget, otherwise users will request the same special treatment for their favorites. Furthermore, as you see in the current case, it is very difficult to remove a gadget without hurting feelings after a fait accompli has been created. This makes it especially important to discuss additions beforehand.


 * While not every proposal is discussed in depth, especially if it presented in an difficult to follow way or if it is clearly not suitable, the page is closely followed by several users and it serves as an important barrier against well-intendant but not properly thought out additions. I again urge you to respect the collaborative nature of Wikipedia, not to ignore the possible advice of your fellow editors, and to go the official and established way to add that gadget. Cacycle (talk) 21:15, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * And yes, I have some questions and possible objections which I would like to have had answered before it was put online. Cacycle (talk) 21:34, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict) I understand quite well the importance of community involvement, and in most cases, I would agree with you. Especially with something like the gadgets, merely adding them without discussion in most cases does only encourage further undiscussed additions. At the same time, however, the need for discussion and community input must be balanced against the necessity of supporting our toolbase to the best of our ability, and in this case, I feel that the needs of the toolbase win out over the need for community input. At the same time, it is important to realize that 1. consensus-forming discussions for new gadgets, or discussions clearly demonstrating the need for such gadgets, may not always occur at the recognised venue, and 2. that gadgets which are added without discussion, but which address technical issues like Vector-thunks does, are probably better off being left as gadgets while a discussion takes place, unless the gadget is obviously and demonstrably broken. In the specific case of Vector-thunks, it recieved minimal discussion at Wikipedia talk:Twinkle/Bugs, and the gadget itself was imported from the Chinese Wikipedia, where it was originally developed and tested. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 21:38, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, let's start a discussion. The three of us will participate, and the outcome will be the same... What be your questions, and can you please put the same questions forward regarding the pre-existing and exactly similar modern-thunks gadget... —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 22:34, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see my response on Wikipedia talk:Twinkle/Bugs. Cacycle (talk) 04:52, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Didn't even know the user right existed until I was granted it. LOL Extremepro (talk) 00:28, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Template Challenge :)
Stemming from the answer I got here, do you know how one would add such an optional header to WikiProject Films/Outreach/Welcome so that those of us using Friendly can not have to go back and add it manually after tagging a new member talk page, while not messing things up for those who do it manually? And maybe do the same at WPFILMS Invite (and hey, don't you think Anime/manga should have a welcome template for new members? ;-) ). If so, that would be awesome. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 16:31, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll have a look... the easiest method, I think, would be to add a header parameter that would automagically insert one if it is defined. Do you have preferred header wording for each one? 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 16:55, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Not really. I guess "Welcome to the Films Project" for the welcome and "Films Project Invitation" fro the invite to keep it simple. :) -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 17:23, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Aah, simple stuff. Should I worry about linking anything, or is plaintext fine? 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Plain text is fine since the templates themselves have the linking already :) -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 18:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * All right, ✅. You can now insert headers by including yes (or any other value in place of "yes") in template calls. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 18:09, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Awesomeness, thanks! :) -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 19:56, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Just tried it for the first today, but it didn't quite work out. It included the if with the template :P Maybe a friendly issue?-- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 15:11, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Nope, I know what the problem is. Parserfunctions don't automatically get substituted when a template is substituted, so if you want clean substitution, you need to format it like  (don't worry if you don't understand that; it basically means I just forgot to tie up a loose end =) ). In any case, it's fixed now (test ). =) 「 ダイノ ガイ  千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 19:15, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Only one problem...its still not including when I do it? (now the header doesn't show at all) -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 04:15, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm... I'll have a closer look. In the meantime, can you provide some sample diffs for me? 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:17, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems to be a problem with Friendly's customWelcomeList function... I've left a note at Wikipedia talk:Friendly, feel free to add any info you might feel is germane to the matter. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, will wait to see if they have a fix :) -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 17:53, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Stop removing my link
Stop removing my Getbackers link.

It's not a dumb main page of a fan site but rather it's a SPECIFIC PAGE dedicated to info regarding Getbackers.

Wiki guidelines:

1#Sites which fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources.

2#Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail.

And in case you haven't noticed, that link was present long before. I only restored the link after some vandal removed it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.164.37.4 (talk • contribs) 19:03, 7 July 2009


 * (edit conflict) I never called your site "dumb", I merely called it a fan forum, which is exactly what it is. The link explicitly fails point 11 of Links to be avoided in the external links guidelines, as a fansite that is not written by a recognised authority (who are you, and why are you authoritative on the matter? have any third-party reliable sources identified you as such?). In addition, it fails point 4 as it seems to only be included for promoting your exceedingly new forum, and point 13, as the forum itself seems to be a general-purpose anime fan forum with only passing focus on GetBackers. As for the link being present in the article for some time, if you're talking about this, that's just another point against you - add failing the first point of Restrictions on linking to the list; linking to websties that host or link copyvio material is expressly forbidden and can get you banned if you persist for long enough. As it is, the link is inappropriate and will continue to be removed. You've been warned twice about it and given a lengthy explanation here, so further additions will be reverted as vandalism. If you disagree with my breakdown here, though, you're more than welcome to ask for second opinions at WT:ANIME. And one last note, please sign your posts by typing four tildes ( – ) at the end of your message, or by clicking the [[File:Signature icon.png]] signature icon in the edit toolbar. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 19:22, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

That site is not a fan site or a forum where people can register freely and discuss. It's just an Archive/unofficial site where info regarding Getbackers can be found. Similarly you have links to ANN reviews and info which is clearly an unofficial site. And my page satisfies these 2 guidelines-

1#Sites which fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources.

2#Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail.

As for point 13: If a section of a general website is devoted to the subject of the article, and meets the other criteria for linking, then that part of the site could be deep-linked.

As for first point: The copyright content has been removed.

The reason why there is wikipedia is for users to get information regarding their fav topics. By removing my link you are essentially depriving users of valuable information.

122.164.38.118 (talk) 03:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Its generally inappropriate to include a forum as an external link unless its the subject of the article. Also, ANN reviews are considered reliable.  -- Kraftlos  (Talk | Contrib) 04:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * As Kraftlos notes, ANN is completely different from your website - the reviews and news sections are close to being a newspaper of record for anime- and manga-related topics, and it has industry recognition. While it's good if you got rid of the copyvio material on your website, it still doesn't address the other points: there is simply no indication that your website is worthy of inclusion here; there is no industry recognition of it or you that I can see, and "unofficial site", in relation to anime and manga sites, almost always equals fansite. I simply see no indication that your website is any different from Random Fansite #643782. And lastly, Wikipedia's purpose is to serve as an encyclopedia, not for "users to get information regarding their fav topics". It just happens that most of the time, both of these can be served at the same time without any conflict. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:39, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Fullmetal Alchemist universe
I'm a junior member and I'm not yet familiar with how things work here. I understand that huge articles like FMA, which have Administrators like you in charge, are serious stuff. However, I still believe I have an idea for a good contribution. For example, as things stand now, if you search for "Law of Equivalent Exchange," you will be redirected to the FMA article but you will not find sufficient information on what it is or on any other major concepts from the series. I'd like to write a passage covering these and request you read it and at least consider making it a sub-section in the Plot section. There are various ways this article may be expanded and that's my proposal for now. Thank you for your time. OutOfTimer (talk) 23:39, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi, OutOfTimer. First, let me address your misconception: administrators aren't really in charge of any articles, any more than normal editors are - being an administrator doesn't grant a member any special position above other editors in terms of article editing, it merely shows that the community trusts the user enough to grant him or her an extra set of tools to help with contributing. As for FMA: I am aware of the discussion on the talk page and your recommendation there. While I appreciate you taking the time to specifically ask me about it, there was no need to ask me specifically - if I have further views on the issue, I will respond there. Thanks! 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Outline
I had almost forgotten about that! I agree, it needs to either also include manga or a companion outline only for manga. I'll drop a notice at the WikiProject when I have some time. --Cattus talk 17:51, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * All right, cool. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 18:10, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject Anime and manga
Regarding this edit: The problem is that they are being used that way (see this edit). If the parameter is "no" as it was on that page, the article is still being listed in articles needing photos. While not specifying it vs. specifying it as "no" is the preferred manner, I don't understand your unwillingness to protect against such a simple error. There are no downsides to doing so. -- JLaTondre (talk) 20:20, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello JLaTondre. The reason the banner doesn't check for this is because it's a very infrequently used tag (even less so since Infobox animanga was updated to auto-categorize for needing an image if none is provided). The banner actually originally performed such a check, but I simplified it a few months ago, and you're the first one since then to bring it up. It's probably just better to simply remove the parameter if you happen to see it being set to "no" or being blank on our banner anywhere. Thanks! 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · <small style=font-weight:normal>Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 18:10, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Evangelion Death and rebirth
Can you take a look at the talk page and latest edits here? I'm notgetting into argument over a self explanatory template, especially with the edit summaries. Thanks Dandy Sephy (talk) 00:23, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You may want to ask Collectonian for help on this one; she knows a lot more about this type of stuff than I do. I can say, however, that most of the differences section is beyond excessive and should simply be cut, and there's a lot of other cleanup needed on that article. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:37, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Chapter titles
If you think the manga titles are very long just see the one of the 75th anime episode from Gin Tama: "Complain about your job outside of your house, not inside! Since that`s the case, i`ll complain a bit, okay? "Land of the Samurai", it`s been a long time since our country has been called that... It`s been one and a half-years since the anime that began that way started. A lot of stuff has happened since then, huh? And well, we thought it was about time to look back and reflect on it, but no, you guys said, "God, a recap episode? Are you guys getting lazy?" Hey it`s hard to make an anime, so stop complaining!"

Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 02:06, 19 July 2009 (UTC)


 * LOL, that is pretty long. Is that the official English title? Another long anime episode title is School Rumble season 1 episode 26 (in Japanese; for the English release, they shortened it to "School Rumble Forever!"; and no, I don't know what this translates to, but it would be interesting to find out): "突然の「さよなら」... 迷い込んだラビリンス... あなたはだれ? ... 教えて.「すれちがい」「片想い」とどけ, ボクの気持ち.とどけ, ワタシの想い.たぶん一度しかない季節, 青春の1ページ.これが最後のチャンス, 確かめたい... キミの気持ち.伝わる言葉, 伝わらない想い.あの日の告白, 永遠の一日, だけど... いつまでも続いていく, わたしたちの「いま」.そして明日へ... 「スクールランブルフォーエバー」". In any case, I was trying to say not just that the chapter titles are long, but that thye're very interesting as well... I wonder how long the author thinks about them? 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:54, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know if it's the official since it in North America is only shown in the site crunchryroll.Tintor2 (talk) 19:56, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Something like "A sudden "goodbye"... Lost in a labyrinth... Who are you? ... Tell me. "Passing by without realising" "Unrequited love" Reach, my feelings. Reach, my feelings. This page of our lives' Spring, maybe it comes more than once. This is my last chance, I want to make sure of them... my feelings. The words I want to say, the emotions I can't say. That day's confession of love, that unending day, however... it will go on forever, our "today". And so on to the future... "School Rumble Forever"". Akata (talk) 23:34, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Cool... Sounds like there's lots of room for a translator to get creative with it, as well. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 05:26, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Redirects
I'm not sure I fully understand the logic of this. Redirects aren't sentences, of course not. Rather, they're code. Code which I use to direct people to an article which already mentions a subject. In the majority of cases (like an obscure actor) someone will find that person's name listed in the cast. They will find out what role the person played, sources of information about the movie (it's popularity, region). These are launching grounds on locating information about a person. Since the articles redirected to are longer than a sentence, I do think that it is more beneficial than a single sentence. Other people have already provided information: they've explained why the name is notable at all (establishing notability is one of the major hurdles of starting an article about a person, redirecting to something notable is a good introduction to this).

I don't quite see how blue links or redirects discourage contribution or expansion. If someone has a mind to create or expand something they will. Whenever redirected there is always the button at the top to click to go to the source without redirecting and to change it, if someone wants to create an article. This is a basic skill and something it would be valuable for editors to figure out how to do. Frequently, I expand other people's redirects (if not into a full article, sometimes into a disambig) and even expand my own redirects. I think if someone finds a name they think is important just redirected they will think "hey, this person deserves an article, how dare they not give them their own!" and it will push them to do research on the person and help create a great article in the future. I think people are apprehensive about starting off articles ("what should this article look like? Will I get in trouble for starting it" and more apt to create one that was initiated as a redirect. I think I can understand both perspectives here... basically whether or not blue/red encourages/discourages may depend on the sort of way an editor thinks about topics. Tyciol (talk) 05:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

About you know what...
<cabal_mode>

I'm aware of your nefarious plan to stuff English readers brains with the content of List of manga licensed in French. How evil are you :p

</cabal_mode>

More seriously, i really believe that a such list will need a something like the Manga in France to back it. That why i'm not uber enthusiast. A such list need a context and creating the mentioned article can give it. I'm aware of the existence of a France section in Manga outside Japan article but its content is incomplete & biased.

Bottom line: I can do it but it usefulness will be rather limited until someone cover seriously the Manga in France and fix the List of French publishers.

PS: Few years ago a French publisher signed a mangaka that did not have a publisher in Japan. After the release of his first one-shot in France, a Japanese publisher got interested in his work and serialized his next works on Young Gangan along off publishing that one-shot in Japan. The moral of that story is that you can have a manga published outside Japan first and the Japanese release catching up even if it is weird. --KrebMarkt 21:26, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Aah, I hadn't actually considered the Manga outside Japan (via, in this case, Manga in France) angle. It seems like manga is certainly big enough in France that a decent article on the subject is possible, for whoever feels like doing the work (add it to my to-do list ;P ). And, more generally, I've been planning on developing a general List of licensed manga to act as a hub for various language-specific lists, as well as allowing us to list licenses in languages that don't have enough for their own list (yet). I suppose, though, that it would be best to start from the top and work down, eh? Oh, and before I forget... muhahahahaha! *evil hand wringing* >=D 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 21:35, 21 July 2009 (UTC)


 * We can try to work on both ;) There are verifiable materials about manga in France but a simple addition of verified facts can't make the article coverage balanced, rather complete and unbiased. For the list it's just tackling into French manga databases with a boring part afterward in keeping the list up to date.
 * **Yea, conquering the World with people brainwashed with French manga is very evil but French manga is the worst** --KrebMarkt 22:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Agree about the boring part - once the excitement of listing everything you can find dies down into the dull monotony of keeping up with new license announcements, people seem to stop caring. =D 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:10, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Aside of the edits count increase the prospective to be the only one keeping the list store open is rather bleak unless you could name fews more editors who could update List of manga licensed in French. Na, i will do it rather slowly but i don't do miracle like walking on water or writing a such list in 2/3 days. Beside there are the small details like do we keep table of finished or not series, the no more licensed series because their publishers went BOOM (happened more than once in France) or dropped along the way... --KrebMarkt 20:02, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The English list has everything as long as it was announced as an English license (and the series has an article here) - dropped/cancelled/pulled licensed, ongoing series, licenses that never materialized, the whole shebang. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 20:09, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

File name
Hi,

Do you know if there is a way to rename file ?

As i'm uploading some vol 1 cover the replace other vol number covers and i'm struck with file name title_vol2_cover will the file content is indeed vol 1. Thanks --KrebMarkt 18:59, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Currently, not without uploading it under a new name and having the old image deleted. However, image renames are technically feasible, and were briefly enabled for administrators a few months ago, but were disabled again due to some bugs cropping up. I have no idea if there's anyone actively working on the functionality or how many of those bugs have been fixed, though. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 19:40, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok i can live with file names which are not exactly identifying their contents. I just hope that people won't complain but i can already hear them. I going to stock pile some hear plugs --KrebMarkt 20:00, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It's one side project I intend to look into when file moving is re-enabled (as if I don't have enough work around here ;P ). =) 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 20:04, 23 July 2009 (UTC)


 * To my knowledge, i'm the sole English to French reviews/contents translator for the anime/manga project :p --KrebMarkt 20:48, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * To my knowledge, you're pretty much the only translator for languages other than Japanese in WP:ANIME, at least the only one who regularly does any translating. =D 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 21:13, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

question: How do i nominate one of the file, i uploaded for deletion ? I upload a file for a chapters list and i forgot to check if the main article had already one that could also be used for the list. So now there is file redundancy :( --KrebMarkt 20:59, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Since it's a redundant image, you could tag it with db-f1. Since it's one you uploaded yourself, I think you could also tag it with db-g7 (the specific criterion makes no mention of images, and I'm not sure what current practice actually is). Since I'm an admin, you could toss me a link to the file (and the one it duplicates, just so I can check), and I can delete it for you, without having to fuss with tagging it. =) 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 21:04, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Let do it in the proper way Request file deletion: I, KrebMarkt requests your assistance as an admin to delete the file File:Sketchbook vol01 Cover.jpg as it is a redundancy of File:Sketchbook manga volume 1.jpg and thus fells under db-f1. You should also note that the file to be deleted also fells under db-g7 as uploaded it myself. Thanks --KrebMarkt 06:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

PS:I guess that would placate any wikilawyer.


 * ✅, and note that all the official language isn't necessary, since wikilawyering is explicitly against the rules. =) 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 08:11, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks :) --KrebMarkt 10:29, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

List of Digimon
I've really enjoyed talking over this with you, and you have definitely raised valid concerns. However, I'm quitting wikipedia, so I won't be able to work on the article with you anymore. I would be interested in seeing what you do with it, so once you get done whatever you want to do with it, please drop by the Digimon wiki version of the page. Thanks! Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 05:24, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey KrytenKoro, I'm glad to hear you enjoyed our dialogue; there was more than one time when I thought you were mostly just exasperated with me. =) I am rather disheartened to hear you are quitting Wikipedia, though, and hope that you'll come back one day - I truly believe you could be an excellent contributor (even better than you are now!), but, all the same, I wish you the best on your work at the Digimon Wikia. I'll definitely try to find the time to do some work on the list myself, and you're more than welcome to contact me via this page or email if you need anything else from me. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 22:16, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Talk page reformating
Give your previous involvement with this, I figured you may like to know about this discussion. (Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines) --Farix (Talk) 14:37, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up, commented there. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:56, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

My sig
In reply to User_talk:Jonverve Thanks for giving me the heads up about the signature policy and no transclusion. I fixed it. So now I pointed to User:Jonverve/sig instead of User:Jonverve/sig2. If you wanted to do the AWB stuff you talked about and to delete the sig2, go for it. Thanks for info!! <span style="border: 1px solid #ccc; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft:35px; -moz-border-radius-bottomright:35px"> Jonverve   Talk  Contrib 06:19, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Talkheaders
Thank you for informing me about the policy regarding talkheaders. I was adding them automatically without giving it too much thought. Sorry for the trouble. OutOf Timer  Wanna chat?  19:32, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Weird idea but worth thinking.
Hi,

I just thought that a variant of the graphic novel template could be used to cover the Drama CDs. See an awful bad example User:KrebMarkt/mudpit3 with a good steam lined version it could become a more elegant way to handle Drama CDs. --KrebMarkt 21:00, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It's an interesting idea, and I can help on the technical aspects, but I don't know much about drama CDs and other animanga-related audio formats, so I can't really help with template development in that regards. However, I wouldn't be surprised if there were already some sort of template that handles drama CDs, or that could be adapted for them - you might try asking at relevant wikiprojects (start at WP:ALBUM, I think, and also ask if they know of any other relevant projects that might know more). 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 22:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Doubtful. Zero hit for drama on main WP:ALBUM page + 4 mentions of Drama on their talk archive.
 * The main point of a drama CD and what sets it apart is that it's a self-contained story with plot somewhat akin audio book.
 * Furthermore we don't know how to handle anime/manga related CDs whatever soundtracks, drama CDs or radio CDs. We have only one CDs related article at B class, that the List of Aria (manga) soundtracks and i'm still thinking it closer to C than B.


 * Well, it also wouldn't surprise me if there were *no* such template, but it still never hurts to ask, because if nothing else, you may find someone else interested and with a certain amount of knowledge in the area. ;) We have a couple other high-C soundtrack lists, and there's a bunch of stuff (most needing cleanup) in Category:Anime soundtracks. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 18:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm refining my idea before asking them. At worst i can still do it without any template & IAR it --KrebMarkt 18:43, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Yep, I see. I'm about to save a tweak version that uses style= everywhere and fixes some minor issues. ;) 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 18:45, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks :) While not very at the top of my long do to list, i want to anticipate potential additional split of Aria (manga) which had the dubious record of the biggest manga article size wise reaching the +160 KBs. --KrebMarkt 20:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm not sure it was the *biggest* (that would require reviewing every single revision of every single animanga article that's ever been on Wikipedia - a scary idea o_O ), but it was definitely right up there. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 20:39, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Bleach Season 12
The name of the new season was shown in Episode 229 at the End, and it was published in the WSJ Please stop reverting the name, because these ARE reliable sources -84.112.37.174 (talk) 02:28, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Then it was published in Japanese, correct? Where is the source for the English translation? If there is none, the original Japanese should be provided to one of WP:ANIME's Japanese-speaking members, who can provide a translation for Wikipedia's use. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:58, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You know that the last 7 Seasons were not published in an english-speaking country yet, so they don't have english titles. Still, they are accepted on Wikipedia... -84.112.37.174 (talk) 21:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems to be "斬魄刀異聞篇", "Zanpakutō Ibun Hen". Literally "Zanpakutō", "Strange Tales" or "Another Story" (WWWJDIC), and a kanji commonly used for a story "arc". Akata (talk) 22:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Really, I think we should just be using the romaji titles for those seasons that don't have an official English release yet (at least insofar as section headers); unofficial, "in-house" translations could then be provided on each season page. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 18:20, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Hanasakeru Seishōnen
Since you seem to be a more established user, could you come check out my article and help me fix the errors/improve it? Thanks.Yariau neko (talk) 19:18, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I can have a look, but I can't promise any big work - I've suddenly got a lot of other work distracting me, on top of my already huge to-do list. =) 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 19:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Template:Saint Seiya
Just to let you know, I have originally hidden the character section from view until I could go through all of the articles since some character articles transcludes both Saint Seiya and Saint_Seiya_Characters. I will now go through all of the articles and fix that. Oh, and why did you give the "characters" heading a grey background? It seems a bit out of place... G.A.S talk 04:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, done with that. I have also nominated Saint_Seiya_Characters for speedy deletion as its functionality us now being provided by Saint Seiya. G.A.S talk 05:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, you could have gone ahead and deleted it yourself... ;) I got it anyways (been 12 hours since you tagged it, and no opposition, so...). As for the lighter background on the "Characters" item, that's because IMHO the navbox looks bad with a groupcolor bisecting it. I was trying for the same bluish-grayish-blue that the other colors are, but when you get that light, it's hard to tell. =) We could try f0f0f2 or something, though, that might be more bluish. *shrugs* 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 18:25, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I presume you know CSD T3 has a 7 day waiting period;) G.A.S talk 19:26, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Urk... I... I forgot... If anyone raises a fuss, point them here, or undelete the template and let the 7 days finish out. I should have been more careful, it's all my fault. =) 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 19:31, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, no Wet Trout for for you quite yet:P G.A.S talk 04:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Anyway, if you want to use the same color, the options would be one of the following, my choice being #EEEEFF (or darker). G.A.S talk 05:24, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


 * All right, I used EEF per your suggestion; how's it look now? 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:19, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Much better:) Btw, have you ever considered what to do with Cosmic Era mobile weapons, Cosmic Era ship classes and Cosmic Era vehicles and aircraft? (Not to mention the other ones) G.A.S talk 17:37, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Is there a particular series or mini-franchise that Cosmic Era corresponds to? If so, they should be merged and expanded into a singular navbox for that series/franchise. As for the category in general... User:Dinoguy1000/Gundam, though it's been forever since I've touched it. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:42, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Cosmic Era is the Mobile Suit Gundam SEED franchise. Since there is only one article linked to in Cosmic Era vehicles and aircraft, I've when ahead and nominated it for deletion. --Farix (Talk) 18:06, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Mobile Suit Gundam SEED - still needs some work. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 19:30, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Would you care nominating the following for deletion? Mobile Suit Gundam Wing mobile units, Trigun, Mobile Suit Gundam Wing characters , UC Series Coding. G.A.S talk 05:49, 5 August 2009 (UTC)