User talk:Ferret/Archive 1

Red Dead Dedemption
The link is a valid news article and there are plenty others out there if you simply Google "Red Dead Redemption DLC bug". And, despite it having only been for a 36 hour period, I think it's significant to mention it alongside the DLC release article, as it is now notorious amongst the community and, I believe, in coversation (even 5 years from now), it will be shocking to see if a discussion of this problem is not used in the same breath as talk of the DLC. I think the glitches significantly impacted not just gameplay for that day, but also in the future, hence why I felt it neccessary to include it. - Vemnox

steam
Hi ferret, sorry if the 'advert' tag was annoying - one learns something new everyday and today I have learnt to at least give the talk page a chance before slapping a gert big banner on it. I have made a few points on the talk page instead, hopefully these are taken constructively and lead to further improvements to the article.. Lee&there4;V (talk • contribs) 23:04, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

infiniminer
Why you are redirecting the page to minecraft? What is the ralashionship with minecraft? please discuss in talk page before you make any changes. --Kirov Airship (talk) 11:54, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The game is not notable on it's own does not mean that the game is Minecraft! The publishers are different, the codes are different, the platforms are different, the names are differnt, the gameplay is different. --Kirov Airship (talk) 11:57, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries, just confused me. Hobit (talk) 00:12, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Sources about Russia banning Modern Warfare 2
See talk page Talk:Controversies surrounding Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. DVoit 15:58, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Question regarding edit
Hi, regarding your reversal of my edits, may I ask why you removed the edit regarding the Incarna release date? also ill have a look at why the map link is invalid and fix that once im home from work. Ugottoknowme2 (talk) 13:05, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It was caught up in the revert but the source cited is not reliable. In general, blogs can't be used as a reliable source unless they're official or recognized sources. It looks like this was from a blogspot user. The date for Incarna was correct but we need to have it from a reliable sources, such as a more recent update from the official CCP sources.
 * The other issue is that the original source that you replaced was also sourcing other details about Incarna, so should not be removed and replaced by a blog post that announces just the date. When I visited the blogspot page, I noticed that it linked to devblog post 914 as it's source, which is the source we already have in the article.
 * It's better to add a new second source with more details than to replace an old source with one that may have less details. ferret (talk) 13:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * thanks for the help :) I'm still new so ill try and remember that Ugottoknowme2 (talk) 13:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I double checked the Devblog 914 post. It says "June 21st", so I'm going to make that edit. It probably said it all along and someone just typed "late June" instead of being specific. ferret (talk) 14:22, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Slime removal
Hi - Just curious as to why he Slime brand was removed from the Slime page - which includes various other pages. I wasn't meaning to step on any toes, so I apologize if I did that. I just assumed it was a great way to link to the Wiki I need to set up for the company since most people will probably search for "Slime" ... Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agaerlan (talk • contribs) 17:03, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks (Jets in BF3)
Thanks for correcting me. Do you think it would make sense to indicate something along the lines of "introduces jet combat to home consoles for the first time; which previously appeared in Battlefield 2 for Microsoft Windows" ? – xeno talk 13:23, 25 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Probably will make the caption too long. The statement currently refers to the series as a whole, even though technically you would be correct from consoles, due to BF2 not being released on consoles. I've changed the caption to reflect that jets last appeared in BF2. ferret (talk) 17:23, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Hula Hup (talk) 15:19, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Xmas Wishes
 Happy Yuletides! 

Merry Yuletides to you! (And a happy new year!)


 * Sincerely, He's Gone Mental 11:30, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

vandalism warning
OK I Stop Vandailsm Thanks Happy Merry Christmas Joeblanc98 (User talk:Joeblanc98)  14:52, 29 December   2011

Hi there
You alright? Anyway I was wondering about citing.. can you use reference from other Wikias? Like the COD Wikia for example? Cheers. --GABBY (talk) 16:27, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Xbox 720
Hi Ferret, I've declined your speedy deletion request on Xbox 720. This is not the same information as of 2007 and there are six reliable sources reporting about the thing which makes it notable. You might want to consider another Afd though. Regards, De728631 (talk) 17:06, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Steam edit removal
Why did you remove or undo the edit I made to the Steam page? You cited that what I added was already covered and it was not. There are privacy concerns and more that users complain about. Some of the criticism is due to Steam managing games that were purchased in a retail store and being forced to be logged into Steam to play them, even though nothing on the product purchased said anything about the need for an Internet connection. That and if it is a single-player game, and your Internet connection is not working or you do not have one, you cannot play your own games. Those are only a few of the criticisms. So why remove them from the page? --Chris McElroy —Preceding undated comment added 09:16, 7 February 2012 (UTC).


 * I answered this question in my edit history, as well as on the talk page. Use the article's talk page if you disagree, but consensus on this particular topic has been reached several times in the past not to include these things as criticisms. They are mentioned by the article. The article clearly covers these limitations already. Regardless of those facts or editor consensus, no reliable sources were provided. -- ferret (talk) 12:28, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

I did ask the question on the article's talk page twice where no one responded to the question. I also added why there were no reference links and how I can easily add them. And the topic on those limitations is a softball at best. Seems to promote the product and go out of its' way to avoid the privacy concerns and the ramifications of this to music, movies and other things. What if you had to log into apple.com every time you wanted to listen to a song you already paid for? There is a lot more to it. Sorry if others have not addressed this properly. But it needs to be added to that page. So, a little help would be appreciated. I'm a new editor, but been around on the web a long time and I'm known for being a vocal critic when it comes to consumer protection. But I'm not slanting the topic in any direction, just wanting to add factual concerns about Steam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.78.119.101 (talk) 18:41, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I responded to both of your questions on the article's talk page, so you should give it another glance. The ramifications of other software or other forms of media have no place in the article about Steam, unless there's some form of reliable coverage stating that a new product was influenced by Steam into using similar controls. You may want to reread the entire article in-depthly, as many of the concerns you mention are detailed in the article, including the fact that Steam collects various statistics (Without authorization), how automatic updates work, that some retail games require Steam, etc. This is best discussed on the article's talk page as there are many editors who watch and maintain the Steam article and you'll need consensus to make major additions to the criticism section. Wikipedia is built on reliable sources as well, the simple fact is any addition or statement of criticism will be removed if sources aren't provided, however well meaning. -- ferret (talk) 19:10, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Great day for progression
Hey, I just wanted to say that I am very pleased with how you, Izno and myself have unified all the action RTS pages into a well-formed system including the main page, categories and templates. It seems like that after all this time, there is finally a unified consensus and sturdy base to work off of, unlike what we had before. I hope we can continue this progress by building up the action RTS page and its components to a higher standard. It just really seems like having the page called "Dota (genre)" was messing up the inspiration and unity of the Wikipedia community. D arth B otto talk•cont 00:42, 08 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Haha, I thought about messaging you. Everytime I went looking for things to fix, you had beaten me to it! It looks a lot cleaner now and fits a lot better with the existing structures. -- ferret (talk) 01:20, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


 * While we're in conversation, sorry that I wasn't cordial around Christmas time. I have my off days. :( D arth B otto talk•cont 06:23, 08 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Took me a minute to even remember what it was about :) That category thing. No big deal! -- ferret (talk) 12:36, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Renaming
Try looking at and asking around Index_of_pages_where_renaming_can_be_requested.  MBisanz  talk 02:33, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Ferret, I've just renamed the user @ de.wp, so please merge it to your SUL-account as soon as possible. Regards, — YourEyesOnly (talk) 15:58, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I have successfully merged it. -- ferret (talk) 21:31, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

usurpation @ tr.wiki

 * hello, I've just renamed existing username @tr.wiki, you can usurp it now. --Mskyrider (talk) 10:42, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I have successfully merged it. -- ferret (talk) 14:56, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

SUL request at th.wiki
The request has been processed. You can now merge the account. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 21:10, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Merged successfully. -- ferret (talk) 02:36, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Call of Duty: Devil's Brigade
How you like to prove that Call of Duty Devil's Brigade was fake?Here is several links to proof that it is real. http://www.theverge.com/gaming/2012/2/21/2806837/call-of-duty-devils-brigade-unreleased http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Call_of_Duty:_Devil's_Brigade http://www.joystiq.com/2012/02/21/canned-call-of-duty-devils-brigade-was-like-inglourious-baster/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_Development

Fast &#38; Furious (talk) 23:44, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

BF3
Hi

I have given my reasons for re-adding my edits. I hope you can see why I did it, and why it was a necessary change. Chaosdruid (talk) 01:30, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Neither detail needs to be in the BF3 article, that he is either a 'comedic writer' or 'game critic', or that he is 'famous for his comedic style'. Also, Ben's own article starts off immediately with "Ben is a English comedic writer", so the original statement was correct as far as that goes.
 * Instead, I've removed mention of what he is or why he's famous entirely, and linked him to his own article. -- ferret (talk) 04:30, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Undoing my edits again and then putting in exactly what I said is pretty much insulting. I am not some noob editor. He is not a critic in the normal sense, his style is to comically attack the game, it was necessary to show that.
 * The issue is to show that he is not a "normal" critic and is not performing a "normal" review - to represent his review as a normal one, even by omission, is a little off, but you seem unwilling to accept that. Linking to his article is all well and good, but if the reader does not want to click it, a brief clarification should be made. Chaosdruid (talk) 05:11, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you find insulting other than someone disagreeing with you, or how you think I was "putting in exactly what I said". I did a standard "undo" with an edit comment explaining my reason, then removed the extra qualifications based on my reasoning. At no point did that duplicate your edit. You're of course free to bring the point up on the BF3 talk page, so other editors can weight in on the necessity of further qualifying Ben. We disagree currently, so that's the next logical step. -- ferret (talk) 12:35, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You didn't disagree with me, I think that is where you are mistaken. You assumed something which is incorrect about my motives, generally that sort of thing proves to be incorrect.
 * My motivation was to remove the "comedy writer" from this as it was misleading. While it is true that further coverage could perhaps be given to his review of the game, rather than just the end of year awards, that can be done later. The insulting part was that rather than discuss this matter, and see that we were both after accuracy and neutrality, you chose to totally revert my edits whilst carrying on discussion in edit summaries, not really the best way of doing things (after all that is why we have talk pages). Even after I left you a message here you still chose to not enter into discussion before reverting. In future perhaps you could consider discussion and consensus more important - I still believe that "alongside" is terrible grammar as it is a colloquial phrase.
 * As for future edits on the BF3 page, I trust you will remain neutral. Chaosdruid (talk) 13:49, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * He IS a comedy writer, and his article makes this clear immediately in the lead, while your edit history at the time claimed he was not. My alternative view is that we shouldn't focus on his particular qualifications at all. He is a critic by virtue of being in the "Critical reception" section. Your responses are hard for me to follow because you bring up things that I've not mentioned or changed, such as "While it is true that further coverage could perhaps be given to his review of the game". I'm not sure what you're replying to, because I've made no statements about that. If you don't like the word "alongside", feel free to change it, I have no issue with that.
 * You're making a lot of assumption and claims that border on not being particularly civil, to be honest, and I find your responses slightly hostile. You make some misleading comments that don't make sense to me such as claiming I duplicated your effort or replying to statements I didn't make. You dress me down for reverting with edit comments while also using talk page, but you did the exact same thing when I first undid you. You posted here, then undid my edit without waiting on discussion, simply "hoping" that I'd see it your way. I'm fine with taking some blame for a miscommunication and poorly handled situation, but not when the other party wishes to heap full fault on myself when they have exhibited the same behaviors. -- ferret (talk) 14:34, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * As I have already said, I did not think we disagreed - rather we found an uneasy consensus. I was not intending to dress you down, nor to "heap full fault" onto you. It has to be said that after you had removed some of the details it was a satisfactory outcome as far as I was concerned.
 * As for the "assumptions and claims" I make none other than that you made the revert at 04:28, another edit at 04:29, and your initial reply which was at 04:30. It would follow that discussion was not continued (and could not be) until after then, as I could not reply until you had entered the discussion (to which I replied at 05:11).
 * Civility? I am not quite sure where you were going with that one. It is not particularly civil to have made the 2nd revert and edit before continuing any discussion. I am pretty sure that the result would have been the same as it was in the end. I have no particular desire for those qualifiers to have remained and would definitely have agreed with a proposal of that last edit you made. Chaosdruid (talk) 19:28, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Game article
As long as it has a handful of reviews from reliable sources like Gamespot and others (see WP:VG/S for a comprehensive list) it should be okay for an article. And as long as you are careful in adding the information in an unbiased way, there's no real COI issue. Case in point, the guy behind [[Blendo Games is a member of a forum board I'm on. I've asked him for information informally as a friend on the forum to make that article and his game articles. But the only bias is the fact I can add free pictures that he's licensed out appropriately - never a bad thing. WP:COI doesn't prevent someone directly involved from adding information, just that we expect them to add it unbiasedly.

If you want, you can create the article in your userspace and then ask again if you want someone to confirm if its notable or not. You can't yet add images there, but at least you can write out most of the work there. --M ASEM (t) 00:30, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Action-RTS
If there's original research happening, it's pretending that Herzog Zwei had an important role in the Action-RTS genre. It's not even remotely similar to Aeon of Strife or DotA- it's a traditional real time strategy game, which is all specified in the link given. If it belongs on wiki, it belongs in the article for that genre, not this one. I'd like you to remove your reversion.

108.20.207.66 (talk) 21:21, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * If you disagree with it's inclusion please discuss on the article's talk page. -- ferret (talk) 19:31, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Starsiege
You wouldn't happen to be the ferret from the Starsiege forums would you? I'm going off of pretty thin reasoning here so excuse me if you have no idea what I mean. Some guy (talk) 03:02, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Nope, no relation to Starsiege. If you spent any time around Half-Life/Counter-strike mod communities, I am the ferret from AMXX/Sourcemod/WC3 however. -- ferret (talk) 11:28, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, all right, I wouldn't know you then. I was just going off of "interested in video games" and "spells ferret with a lowercase f" :P . Some guy (talk) 02:07, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Funny story, but the fact that my user page is capitalized Ferret actually bothers me :) -- ferret (talk) 02:41, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

World at War and Black Ops
Hello! World at War may not have the Black Ops subtitle, but it is no doubt in the same continuity as Black Ops, and it is stated on the Black Ops page that BO is a sequel to World at War - they are undoubtedly within the same sub-series. I'd prefer the sub-series be called Black Ops, as 2/3 games in the series are using that name. Sabre (talk) 18:18, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean, I had forgotten how they tied Reznor into BO. It doesn't quite fit right but I guess with Black Ops getting the official "sequel" it'll have to do. Another option though may be to follow the Call of Duty series page, with "historial", "modern" and "future" headings. -- ferret (talk) 18:34, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Historical/Modern/Future would look too lopsided - Historical would have 1,2,3,WaW and Black Ops. Modern would have MW1,MW2,MW3 and Future would have BO2. Sounds a bit all over the place. I think by separating it with official sub-brands, potential players would have an idea of how the story/continuity of each sub-brand goes. Sabre (talk) 18:45, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Ghost
If ur questioning why i used so much wikia references, i can explain much about them and revert some of them, but if ur asking the character's notability, open ur eyes brah... and you'll see in the pages why this character is NOTABLE — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.108.159.168 (talk) 14:55, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * As I replied on your user's talk page, Wikia is not a reliable source and does not establish notability. Wikipedia itself does not establish notability, so opening my eyes and reading wikipedia won't help either. -- ferret (talk) 16:42, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

CaseyPenk (talk) 16:24, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Stop removing relevant website
External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they identify major organizations which are the topic of the article. Wikipedia neither endorses organizations nor runs affiliate programs. See also Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for guidelines on corporate notability. Those promoting causes or events, or issuing public service announcements, even if noncommercial, should use a forum other than Wikipedia to do so.

Thanks but no thanks Ferret. Take it somewhere else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.20.216.166 (talk) 03:04, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

The Elder Scrolls Online Zone is recognized by the makers of the game. Check out the official Twitterfor the website and you will see that recognition that the website is getting. It is a valid link and source or information regarding the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.20.216.166 (talk) 04:52, 26 June 2012 (UTC)


 * As multiple editors have informed you, this site does not pass WP:WEB or WP:ELNO. The argument of "if my link isn't good, remove the others" also isn't valid, as sites are evaluated independently of each other. -- ferret (talk) 14:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

HEY FERRET NEED YOUR HELP IN FAR CRY 3:
I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO PRE-ORDER THE SPECIAL EDITION OF FAR CRY 3 FOR PC. I ASKED YOU THAT WHETHER THE GAME SUPPORTS DIRECTX 9.0 AND THE SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS. YOU REPLIED ME SAYING THAT THE INFO IS NOT KNOWN YET.

PLEASE TRY TO GET ME THOSE INFO AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, BECAUSE IF ITS GOING TO TAKE LONG TIME, THEN THE SPECIAL EDITION PRE-ORDER WILL GET FULL AND I WON'T BE BE ABLE TO PRE-ORDER IT ANY MORE.

SO PLEASE HELP ON THIS ISSUE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. John2213 (talk) 07:40, 29 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I can't help you. I do not work for Ubisoft. Once they post the information, it'll be added to the article, but unfortunately they haven't made any announcements yet. -- ferret (talk) 12:31, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Dota user
Hey, Ferret. I thought I'd stop by and confide with you and gather your opinion for simply the sake of knowledge over a subject that you and I have both dealt with. As you know, the extent of the articles Dotaveteran edits are merely action RTS articles and he makes them seldomly; he'll contribute to a bunch of pages and not log in or give feedback for months at a time. Well, as it so happens, his most recent array of edits seem to have been targeting me. I admit, a couple article references on the Dota 2 page were written by me as a journalist for SK Gaming, which is a reputable source. He took the liberty of removing articles written by SK Gaming and replacing them with first-party articles written by Valve, while leaving a hostile message to me in the change log, without even contacting me directly.

I do admit, those references should not have been added by me, but I suppose I added them as early placeholders for when more reputable, third-party references would be available. Third-party is the key phrase, take note, as articles built around subjective first-party references don't hold up well. Therefore, his edits were wrong in one of two regards. The first being that he was removing references strictly pertaining to me, which is vandalism and harassment. The second being that he was replacing the references with first-party content, which is an excellent way to bump an article's quality rating down.

I'm writing to you because I'd like your input. Is it just me, or just this editor really have no regard for learning about Wikipedia and improving upon his contributions? I mean, he doesn't respond to talk page discussions, he reverts edits that contradict the "Dota genre", he replaces "see also" with the "Dota genre", which shows an incessant need for page ownership. His complaints against me seem hypocritical in light of such behavior and it irritates me that he really does not seem to take any heed while editing.

What are your thoughts on what he does? His contributions are so seldom that he could hardly be considered a threat to Wikipedia, but he also doesn't seem to be helping. I admit I've been wrong in the past; hell, I've pretty much done a 180 in my knowledge and work with Wikipedia. So, I'm not asking for support with confronting him or anything, since I'm not planning on such an over-zealous action, but I would like some input on the matter. D arth B otto talk•cont 02:32, 30 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Keeping in mind that talks pages aren't really private ;) Yes, the edit note was very hostile and I almost brought it up myself. While there's a potential COI, the fact is I do believe sk-gaming enjoys RS status currently, and if they were not your articles directly, then I don't see the issue. The editor has always had an issue with concensus and displayed article ownership issues in my opinion. At the moment though, it doesn't appear he's going against concensus and is mostly sniping a bit with you. I'd probably wait it out for now unless it grows to be a bigger issue and a clear trend of harassment. Just my still-pretty-much-a-newbie editor thoughts. :) -- ferret (talk) 02:45, 29 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Okay, thanks for your input. I do acknowledge that articles with my name on them added by me was probably not the best course of action, so I have accounted for that and have some empathy for his response. This isn't the most private, but I wanted to have some discourse because this issue was rather awkward in my mind, as it's something not serious, but still agitating enough for me to want to gather a little input on an idea. I don't want o mix things up too much, so I'll try to avoid using sources close to home for third-party content and instead, see if we could find other third-party sources. D arth B otto talk•cont 04:07, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

RE: Template Spam
I was NOT spamming. I have helped Wikipedia for many years cleaning up some spam links myself both anonymously and lately on this account to. When you removed a vidoe games wiki from the video games template I though it was vandalism but still assumed good faith. So I ask you not call me a spammer and post slander on my talk page. Please see: Assume good faith Sethg556g (talk) 20:02, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


 * It doesn't appear we have much constructive to say, as you continually refer to AGF while calling other editors vandals and slanders. You may need to re-read WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL. -- ferret (talk)

Ok sorry maybe I got too emotional because I spent lots of time improving Wikipedia articles and then I get called a potential spammer, but on the other hand I shouldn't have referred to your edits as vandalism either haha since they were good faith too, so I apologize for that, anyway I am done with editing that template so I guess that's that. Sethg556g (talk) 20:21, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Ouya
Hello Ferret. I Was Told That It Was My Last Warning For Vandalizing A Wikipedia Page. Might I Just Add That My Ouya Section In Eighth Generation Consoles Should Be Included. I Am Just Trying To Be Helpful And My Important Section Keeps Getting Deleted. Can I Please Keep My Ouya Section In Eighth Generation Consoles, Because On The Ouya Wikipedia Page, It Clearly States That Ouya Is An Eighth Generation Console. There Is Proof That It Is, Indeed, An Eighth Generation Console. I Would Like To Keep My Ouya Section Included Because If It's Not Included, The Eighth Generation Consoles Page Will Not Be Completed And Be Missing Information. Please Get Back To Me ASAP. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dennis55789 (talk • contribs) 18:08, 12 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Dennis, multiple editors asked you to stop adding this content and informed you that there was an ongoing discussion. Before attempting to add back content that was reverted, you should read the edit notes left by other editors to understand why the revert was done. If you disagree, head to the article's talk page (In this case Talk:History of video game consoles (eighth generation) and start up a discussion there. You also need to be careful of the 3 Revert rule. You can be blocked with no warning for reverting content on a single article more than 3 times in a 24 hour period. -- ferret (talk) 18:12, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

My edits
Yeah I know that there all a bit sloppy but with time they all may improve. I am a new user here do just getting to grips with it all. Regards.--RedBullWarrior (talk) 14:32, 23 July 2012 (UTC) Sorted out my refs now, think I'm starting to get the hang of it all haha.--RedBullWarrior (talk) 14:38, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ferret
Hey its Bull (feel free to call me by that nickname) but i appear to have badly screwed up the table on the 2012-13 Villarreal CF season article. Got all the transfers sourced and ref'd, but the table is badly mis-shaped, may you help me in fixing it? Asking you seeing as we've bumped into each other quite a few times now.--RedBullWarrior (talk) 22:20, 24 July 2012 (UTC) Actually ive managed to sort out the table formatting, but would you mind just double checking and make sure it meets your standards. Cheers--RedBullWarrior (talk) 22:30, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
--RedBullWarrior (talk) 20:13, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

There's another one on it now as well :)--RedBullWarrior (talk) 21:13, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

22:31, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Diablo III talk page
Hi ferret,

Sorry to let you down, but I'm trough with discussing anon IP's on Diablo III's reception. If I see the words 'biased' or 'agenda' one more time I'll go crazy. Best of luck! --Soetermans. T / C 10:58, 27 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Can't say I disagree with that, as my more recent edits probably show. -- ferret (talk) 11:04, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I enjoy talking with you.
So far I like the discussion we are having on the 8th gen article. It got me thinking about the broader picture of what is a console and what should be included or excluded. Has there been any meaningful discussion that you know of towards coming up with a way of determining how we come to include or exclude systems in each of the "generation" articles? -Kai445 (talk) 02:28, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we request your participation in the discussion to help find a resolution. The thread is "Talk:Diablo III". Thank you! EarwigBot   operator  /  talk 15:57, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Reply
Cool, thanks for that. I didn't look at the IP edit history (yet) but it initially smelled like a promotional/spam link/source attempt. DP 76764 (Talk) 18:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect information
Hi Ferret. You re-edited information that actually needed to be edited. I'm inclined to believe you know little or nothing about the gaming community and existing tensions within several of them simply due to the term MOBA. For starters the history is somewhat incorrect - it labels DotA as a MOBA... that isn't the case. DotA is DotA ; it's the reason the so called genre even exists. DotA still has over 34 million players in CHINA alone. Everyone in the HoN (Heroes of Newerth) DotA (Defense of the Ancients) Dota2 and even Starcraft/Starcraft2 (they're a big brother community to DotA) find the term MOBA being applied to ANYTHING else but League of Legends EXTREMELY offensive. You're welcome to ask the larger websites (playdota.com - teamliquid.com - joindota.com - prodota.ru etc) what they think... But MOBA is a term that is to be applied ONLY to league of legends. Yotcarter (talk) 19:52, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Just a heads-up:
Can you help out with this page? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source_Filmmaker_(software) Thanks, —017Bluefield (talk) 20:03, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

panda of pandemonium


Da panda of pandemonium has given you a ferret! Ferrets promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day much better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a ferret, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Give someone a ferret by adding {{subst:Ferret}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Love your name! Hug da panda. DPandaOPande (talk) 21:50, 8 December 2012 (UTC)DPandaOPande

8th Gen. Consoles
Explain why you say these systems can't be listed. From my understanding from looking at the listings of pregeneration consoles, there are other systems listed on those pages User:Seqqis (User Talk:Seqqis) 8:34, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Because consensus exists that they not be listed. See the article's talk page for more details. I'm also well aware that you've already been informed of this... -- ferret (talk) 15:02, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Image request (VAC)
Do you have a Steam account which is VAC banned account? I require screenshots for Valve Anti-Cheat.--Vaypertrail (talk) 14:41, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


 * That's a negative... No banned accounts... -- ferret (talk) 14:59, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

How to edit diablo 3 article
Hello ferret. I want to follow your advice and update the game development section with the information that the game has reneged on its implied use of arenas in pvp as illustrated in this RS http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/12/29/diablo-3-pvp-delayed-yet-again-games-you-should-play-while-you-wait/. How do I edit a silver locked article?

Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Odin156569 (talk • contribs) 20:21, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Odin, there's a couple choices available. The first option is to perform 10 edits to articles on Wikipedia. You can do this on any article that isn't protected. Fixing typos, small grammar changes, or even more substantial edits to other articles you have interest in. Once you have some edits under your belt, you become a confirmed user, allowing you to edit semi-protected (silver lock) articles. The other option is to prepare the text you wish to add to the Diablo 3 article, and put it on the Diablo 3 talk page as an "Edit request". This requests get reviewed and the edit will then be made for you by another confirmed user if the request is valid. Information on edit requests can be found at Edit requests. -- ferret (talk) 20:30, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * One final note: It's important to keep a neutral point of view on Wikipedia and attempt not to make edits that are biased in nature. When you prepare the edit you wish to make to Diablo 3, you may want to avoid language like "renege" as it suggests a broken promise. Overly negative connotations like this should be avoided, and neutral language used instead, such as simply noting that the originally planned arena mode was cancelled. -- ferret (talk) 20:33, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Ferret I made the edit request. -- Odin156569 (talk) 06:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Wii U
I was undoing some vandalism, please check the edits before chastising me.Darwin-rover (talk) 14:01, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Interwikis
The rollout of WP:Wikidata "phase 1", which supports interwiki links. See also VPT and VPM. --Izno (talk) 13:57, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

For example, you can see the IWs on MOBA still. They should have a little "edit IWs" link below and aligned to the right of the last IW link. --Izno (talk) 14:00, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Removal of Operating System statistics on Steam_(software) page
Hi, I wonder why you removed operating system statistics of Steam market share through Operating Systems. This data aren't stored on Valve's homepage so it would be great to make them available on Wikipedia.

.... (-377)‎ . . (→‎Operating System statistics)

Thanks for your explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zubozrout (talk • contribs) 21:49, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * It's simply not data that is necessary or relevant. -- ferret (talk) 21:52, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok, then is there a way of storing those data and making them available on Wikipedia so users can browse the history of Valves' OS market share statistics? (would creating a new page related to this help?) Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zubozrout (talk • contribs) 23:50, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * No. Users can always go to Valve and Steam's webpage on their own. The information isn't really relevant to an understanding of the topic of what Steam is, and drawing any conclusion or altering the data represented by Valve is original research. If you can find a reliable source that covers the OS statistics that may work, but you still have to ask if it's relevant to understanding what Steam is. -- ferret (talk) 00:29, 5 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok, it probably isn't necessary, I only thought it may be a good addition. Also, Valve doesn't keep the record of OS statistics (not publicly), so it would be good to store it somewhere. However, I will respect your decision and will no longer attempt to add those data to Wikipedia. Thanks for your explanation.

Would you mind
Explaining to the newbie why their edit was reverted? Re:. I think I know why, but I am pretty sure that the newbie is confused. Thanks, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:42, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Re: ARTS sockpuppeting
Re your message: Sure. Same protection applied. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:21, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

The Trooper
Well, now we have a source... of sorts. My problem with it before was nobody was offering any kind of rationale as to why it was included, so for all I knew it was wishful thinking on behalf of the given editor. It didn't help that several anonymous IPs were responsible for adding it repeatedly after it was reverted, and that IPs usually have trouble leaving any kind of edit summary (these ones being no exception).  LazyBastard Guy  00:13, 4 July 2013 (UTC)


 * They hinted on Facebook, and later confirmed in this post. But FB seems a shakey source to use, even if an official page. I'm not sure how well Facebook postings are received for first party sourcing. -- ferret (talk) 01:34, 4 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I didn't notice your second edit until long after I'd already posted here, but yes, I do agree Facebook is a bit testy as far as being a reliable source goes. My concern and the reason for my page protection request was I can easily see this becoming more and more of a problem if we don't stop it now. More and more well-meaning users will continually repost what we've taken down without realizing 1) it was taken down repeatedly before for being original research, or 2) that they weren't the first and they're only turning a dead horse into glue, so to speak. It would just give us some peace of mind to do this before it gets released this October, when all questions regarding the on-disc content will finally be put to rest.  LazyBastard Guy  01:40, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring
I know you know how this works, but keep in mind it takes two to war. I understand you sought assistance and I commend you for it, but as the contested edits aren't unarguably vandalism, I would've expected you to have started a talk page discussion about the dispute already. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  14:24, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

dota2
Please stop incorrectly labeling DotA2 as a 'moba' game. Valve Cooperation has stated officialy what the genre of their game is. And by extension, the creater and handler of the game Icefrog, who is currently working with Valve, has also stated his game is an ARTS game.

Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doglicker9912 (talk • contribs) 17:37, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry but on Wikipedia, the genre is known as moba. See the talk pages of the various articles to see this has been discussed many times. -- ferret (talk) 17:56, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

The same way that Neil deGrasse Tyson has a say in his religious views as displayed on wikipedia, Valve has a say in the genre name of their ARTS game, which not only pioneered the genre, but is still the bases of many games within the genre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doglicker9912 (talk • contribs) 18:24, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Everyone else calls it a MOBA so we go with that. And no, comparing it to a religious view is wrong. --M ASEM (t) 18:40, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I am not comparing it with religion, I am comparing it with the way someone VIEWS their own property. NDT has a right to have his property labeled accordingly, in the same way that Valve has the right to label their property accordingly. It does not matter what other people use, DotA is the original and it is in the hands by Valve. They have every right to call it what they wish, because it is their own. Doglicker9912

Article Feedback Tool update
Hey Ferret. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:32, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

MWO article
If the upcoming community warfare feature belongs in the gameplay section, so does the history of how well the developer has tracked their delivery timelines.

If you insist on taking the context out of the gameplay section, I propose moving both the context and the mention of upcoming features down into the development section where they both might fit better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.246.42.158 (talk) 13:18, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I've reverted your addition as well, 94. That is because you are make several conclusions that are in violation of Wikipedia's no original research and the spin is decidedly negative, which violates Wikipedia's policies on maintaining a neutral point of view. The most that can be set about community warfare is that it has been announced, but has yet to be implemented. By putting so much emphases on the delays, it creates a negative spin on it. 24.149.119.20 (talk) 13:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Portal 2 page
I undid your reversion because, while your reversion was correct at the time, it is no longer correct as I finished posting the discussion to the talk page (I had forgotten to submit it earlier).

The section I removed is invalid because the source supplied does not support the claims attributed to the source, and it contradicts the Half-Life/Portal timeline at the Half-Life Wiki and the Combine Overwiki.

If you feel the deletion was in error, please leave a note on the comment page in the newly created section and feel free to revert. 98.127.104.89 (talk) 04:45, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Dota 2 the continuing chronicles.
I am using the term that is the most neutral. The dota-like genre revolves around the fact that the games are similar to DotA. Because DotA is considered an ARTS by its current handler, icefrog, the whole genre is therefore an ARTS by transitivity. 'moba' is a buzzword that does not explain the dota-like genre, its origins, rather, its only use is mass-marketing and a slick off-the-tongue buzzword. It is not a game genre as every game is a multiplayer online battle in an arena if it has pvp/multiplayer. ARTS is a descriptions based on the nomenclature that a sub-genre should have its parent genre included in the name (e.g; political comedy). Please stop reverting my edits as I am using the genre which is most neutral by form of nomenclature and transitivity. Thank you. Correctingsomestuff. —Preceding undated comment added 00:52, 17 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, while I don't necessarily disagree with your reasoning, the name of the genre on Wikipedia is MOBA. If you disagree, feel free to open a discussion at Multiplayer online battle arena about renaming the genre. Come armed with a great deal of reliable sources to back your position and make sure to quote relevant Wikipedia policy. Until the name of the genre is changed however, please cease editing the genre on these articles. I'm quite certain you read the hidden notes about this, since you edited them as well. -- ferret (talk) 00:59, 17 September 2013 (UTC)


 * "the name of the genre on Wikipedia is MOBA." This is where you are wrong. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of information sourced from places outside of wikipedia itself. It does not claim knowledge onto any specific event or thing, it simply states and collects the knowledge we already have. You dont call Gabe Newell anything else but "Gabe Newell", because that is his given name, not the one 'wikipedia' decided he would have. So please, stop editing my changes. I am simply stating the name that the creators of DotA gave to DotA. You wouldn't vandalize someones birth name, or IP name such as "DotA," so why would you vandalize other names associated with the IP? Its non-sensible and dishonest as an editor. I have provided my relevant sources, one by third party, and one by the first party that created the IP. I have followed all guidelines as presented by wikipedia, however, I am still being vandalized because people who do not understand DotA, are editing DotA. The fact is, the genre is ARTS, the whole community of DotA2 uses ARTS, other gaming forums use ARTS (see: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/tag/dota-2/), the owner of the IP uses ARTS, because it is not a 'moba. Other games may be, but DotA2 is an ARTS, as by nomenclature, by assignment of the IP holders, and by transivity as I have stated above. Thank you for your time, I hope I have convinced you to stop the edit war.    Correctingsomestuff  —Preceding undated comment added 01:20, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Please do not change my edit on Valve's List of Games. You should not be allowed to decide what someone else names their child. Valve and Icefrog has already stated what they want their game to be called. ARTS is the most neutral term, as it followers the proper nomenclature for the naming of subgenre names, in which the parent genre name is located in the sub-genre name, e.g; political comedy. If you wish to change Valve's mind, you can try. However, in the same sense that we dont call DotA "DotI" we don't call DotA anything but an ARTS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fixerupper5555642 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 29 December 2013 (UTC)


 * That's nice. Having found this talk sections, and with the other editors reverting you as well, I'm sure you're aware of the consensus of Wikipedia on what the name of the genre is, and the reasons. I don't see a need to restate them yet again. -- ferret (talk) 18:17, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Internet Police, lol
Nice backseat moderating bro. Get a life.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aethoz (talk • contribs) 06:31, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Your revert on the List of MOBA Games
You reverted my inclusion of Battleborn on the list of MOBA games, citing notability. I referenced the Notability Guidelines and the point in question seemed to be "In general, notability is an attempt to assess whether the topic has 'gained sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time' as evidenced by significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic". While the Kotaku article I provided is considered a primary source, I feel that articles in Forbes: Polygon: and N3rdabl3: are sufficient secondary sources to meet notability guidelines as much as any other game mentioned on this list, which usually only list a primary source. I've no doubt you have years of experience in video games and have a breadth of knowledge on the subject. However, I have been working in the VG field for the past 25 years and in MOBA games for the past 6 years (not for Gearbox), and I personally find it valuable to be able to see which games are in this genre as well as what's coming out. If you have some other criteria that you would like to cite for why you feel Battleborn should not be on the list of MOBA games, I would welcome a discussion. Otherwise, I'd ask that you please re-include this game on the list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vaylen (talk • contribs) 19:23, 15 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Current consensus for this list is that red linked articles not be added. If you feel Battleborn meets WP:N, then feel free to get an article started and then add it to the list. That would be fine with me. However, the other three games definitely needed to be removed, as well as fixing the closing bracket for the table. -- ferret (talk) 19:26, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Your revert on the Source Engine
Hi, I have undone your revert on the Source engine article. The sourcing while correct, strictly only apply to Respawn's highly modified licensed fork of Source. Respawn's "Source" include an entirely new D3D11 renderer. A licensee of Source today would not gain access to these additions, and thus including them under this article is highly misleading. Please do not revert again without examining the issue in greater detail. Thanks. 80.43.50.91 (talk) 08:06, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

System requirements
Hello - why did you remove the system requirements I added for the games Bioshock Infinite, Crysis 3, and Battlefield 4? Each of those games predecessors has system requirements listed in the article, so why did you decided those requirements are relevant to those articles, but the ones I added were not?MisterZed (talk) 15:19, 14 June 2014 (UTC)


 * As I said in my edit statement, which I guess wasn't read, current WP:VG guidelines are to not include system requirements. The fact that they are still in other articles is kinda moot. -- ferret (talk) 18:03, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Usurp request
I have got a question on my user talk page on cawiki about usurpation of local account. I think there will be no problem after a large inactivitive. Please, fill a request on ca:VP:CNU. A response to this message is enough as proof of ownership. --Vriullop (talk) 19:23, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Vriullop. This is my reply for confirmation. -- ferret (talk) 19:26, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

How to message
How do you message and put pictures on unturned? I have a picture of unturned to paste From JayDerp247
 * To talk about the article without making changes to it, click the "Talk" tab at the top of the article. It's right next to "Article". You can also find it if you click this link. Talk pages are used to discuss changes needed in the article, resolve issues, etc. Discussion should focus on improving the article, and should not be used just to talk about the game.
 * As for pictures... To be honest, I've never uploaded any images. Simply have never needed to do it. There are some rules involved, and you need to be certain that they fit the guidelines for fair-use. This is to avoid copyright issues between Wikipedia and the owner of the content. -- ferret (talk) 17:24, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Unturned
I noticed that you did some work on the article which I discovered today. It interests me and I do have plans on working on it. What about you and I try to clean it up? GamerPro64 20:33, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I first noticed it when they injected it into Steam (software) trying to address the orphan tag. I may do some more work on it, not sure, but since there seemed to be 3-4 new editors working on it, I decided to give them a hand, dig some sources up, and do a bit of organization on it. I'm keeping it watchlisted, may do some more work tonight. -- ferret (talk) 21:00, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:
 * Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. &mdash;  MusikAnimal talk 22:33, 20 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks! -- ferret (talk) 22:34, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

AOS
http://puu.sh/bRf4m/0b7d58196a.jpg http://wiki.gosugamers.net/dota2/History_of_DotA

Wow, Just so happens that, I might know what I am talking about. Happy to provide visual evidence

Please put how AOS, in your own terms, since you seem to be holding on to dear life to this PUBLICLY EDITED Wiki, which should be publicly edited by more then two people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mumblevagabond (talk • contribs) 14:36, 28 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Sorry, those aren't reliable sources. What one webpage, and one (also publicly edited) Wiki decide to call it has little bearing on Wikipedia's article, unless they are reliable sources. I recommend you review Wikipedia policy. Besides, the articles already covers that the genre originated with AoS. -- ferret (talk) 15:35, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Steam (Software) Minor Revision
Hi. I updated the Steam (Software) wiki to correctly state that Steam doesn't sell games - it sells terminable licenses for games. As you left no comment for why you undid my revision, I've corrected it again. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HomerSees (talk • contribs) 04:25, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

GoG.com Revision
Again, GoG.com, like Steam (Software) does not sell games. It sells terminable licenses to use games that, in their own words, "in no way convey ownership." Language prior to the edit left a misleading impression. Please leave a reason if you undo edits in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HomerSees (talk • contribs) 04:44, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare edits
You reverted my edit on the CoD AW page regarding the Day Zero release date. Can you please explain why you reverted it as the information on Wikipedia regarding the Day Zero release is incorrect. Further down the page it then explicitly states that there will be a Day Zero edition released in North America on 3rd November. Again this is wrong as I know first hand it is available in Europe and most likely other parts of the world.

I'm all for people reverting changes when someone has deliberately come along and vandalised it but reverting changes just because you don't agree with them is wrong and probably grounds for banning.

PingPlay (talk) 10:13, 30 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Simply, you broke the release date formatting and did not have a source. "/" is not a valid date for NA, and no source was provided for an early EU release. -- ferret (talk) 13:58, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Re: Video game templates
I think you are mixing two different issues together. The merge of generated-related templates and the transfer of content from Template:Video game consoles to Template:Home video game consoles are different issues. That list only lists home video game consoles, so it should be in Template:Home video game consoles instead of Template:Video game consoles. Whether we should merge generated-related templates to one single template is another issue, which you should not mix them with. I can put the merge issue aside for now, but handheld game consoles etc are obviously also game consoles. You should not use the term video game consoles just for home consoles. Thanks for understanding. --Cartakes (talk) 16:09, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I can understand the existence of near duplicate templates due to redirects, but that is a technical issue which can be easily overcome (and I would actively fix it whenever I have time). Regarding the template of home video game consoles, I can understand what you say, but it was not exactly a move, but a separate so that each template has its own content. But certainly I don't mean to make earlier changes to be lost track, so that I will post all earlier changes in the related talk page. Anyway, I will start discussion in these pages. --Cartakes (talk) 16:52, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I can also understand the existence of templates that did not follow the requirement as you say, which I will actively fix too. Thanks for informing me about this. --Cartakes (talk) 16:55, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games. Please note that currently video game console-related articles in WP are already in a VERY inconsistent state which needs to be fixed, as I mentioned in that page. --Cartakes (talk) 18:01, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Categories
If a Wikipedia page has its own category, it is generally expected to be in this category too. For example, Nintendo 3DS and PlayStation Vita have their own categories Category:Nintendo 3DS and Category:PlayStation Vita, so they have these categories in their pages. --Cartakes (talk) 15:15, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

You can also check Handheld game console, which belongs to Category:Handheld game consoles and not Category:Video game consoles (but Category:Handheld game consoles in turn belongs to Category:Video game consoles). So it is already inconsistent by now. --Cartakes (talk) 15:23, 11 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Works for me. -- ferret (talk) 15:55, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

VGC temp talk
Hi, thanks for the link. Can you sum me up on the whole template discussion between you, PresN and Cartakes?GeneticOS (talk) 00:40, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * It mostly revolves around resolving the inconsistencies between the many templates involved in video game consoles, such as Handheld, dedicated, micro, etc. The template used to only have home consoles and has in the last couple weeks been consolidated and refined, along with many of the linked articles. -- ferret (talk) 01:22, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Reverting Wrath of the Lich King
regarding the changes to the World of Warcraft: Wrath of the Lich King Article, in the rules you linked me, it states "Exhaustive version histories: A list of every version/beta/patch of a game is inappropriate. Consider a summary of the game's development instead" for the list of patches i presented, i gave a summary of each block of patches and did not list every patch that was implemented. This 'Patch history' section can be seen on similar articles such as, World of Warcraft: Cataclysm. Please consider letting me add this section again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brendenw2 (talk • contribs) 20:46, 18 November 2014‎ (UTC)
 * Hi Brendenw2. Unfortunately what sometimes is the case is that one article has a format that isn't really appropriate but hasn't really been noticed. I believe the Cataclysm article falls into this category. We can definitely use some of this information, but what I would like to see for both articles is that it be organized into the Development section in prose rather than as bulleted lists of features in a "Patch" section. This may seem a bit counter-intuitive, but bulleted lists are somewhat frowned upon, and it's preferred that the information be presented in prose. Here's a quick example from your Wrath of the Lich King patch notes converted into prose:
 * On April 15, 2009, patch 3.1.0 was released. Titled 'Secrets of Ulduar', it introduced the new Ulduar raid as well as the Argent Tournament. Other features included the ability to have dual talent specializations and an interface for managing equipment sets.
 * This is just a quick example of turning the 3.1.0 list into prose for inclusion in the development section. The Cataclysm article should receive a similar treatment, if you're up for it. I also think the Gameplay section of this article could use some work. The existing plot is already quite a bit long, enough to be a separate section rather than a subsection of Gameplay. Gameplay could use a lot of expansion to list out some of the features introduced with Wrath and it's subsequent patches. Again, prose is preferred over lists.
 * I'll gladly answer any other questions you may have here, or you may create sections on the article's talk page to discussion particular changes you would like input in. Remember to sign your messages with four tildes ~ so that messages are attributed to you. -- ferret (talk) 22:19, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

fallout 3 attributes
heya, can I replace what I wrote with lists with shorter paragraphs then? avoiding lists is cool, sorry I didn't know -- but the actual writing i did was significantly different? current "attributes" section mixes in game introduction and weirdly complex sentences. seemed to be one of the reasons the article was tagged "cleanup" when I first edited. thanks. --Walshington (talk) 15:35, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The important thing is to keep things clear and focus on what sources have mentioned. Avoid excessive game jargon or gameplay details if possible. You're certainly free to edit them, the revert was more or less solely because of the list. Prose is always preferred. :) -- ferret (talk) 20:21, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

ferrets
OMG FERRET. My name is Ferretsrock and being an iPad Wikipedia editer I can't post a message on here :( I just wanted to say that I found you had edited the Avenged Sevenfold page and saw the last editor was named Ferret. So I naturally got excited. :P I have two ferrets so that's why I'm named ferretsrock. <3

Feel free to delete this after you read it and respond to me :( My name is Caroline. <3 Love, ferretsrock aka Caroline <3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferretsrock (talk • contribs) 02:39, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Yep, ferret's do indeed rock. Once upon a time many years ago I have five of them! -- ferret (talk) 13:02, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

OMG YOU ARE THE COOLEST. :3 Nice to meet a fellow Ferret aficionado :D <3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferretsrock (talk • contribs) 17:58, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Your revert on battlefield 4
I don't see why you reverted this line, as the information given is true, and appropriate about the current technical state of battlefield 4.

https://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/forum/threadview/2955065240541816390/ a recent bug report http://origin-1.originloop.com/bf4/forum/threadview/2955065214533489970/ and a 2013 one

please revert your deletion, or put it in a better wording yourself if that is the problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.174.104.94 (talk • contribs) 20:22, 18 March 2015‎ UTC
 * It was original research and commentary without any sources. Forums are not reliable sources, so those can't be used. -- ferret (talk) 11:34, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Open world edit warring
Hi Ferret,

I'm not sure if pinging worked through Tingle, but I've reported ECW28, the open world guy, for edit warring. Today he went back to adding the open world category on Destiny. He told me to shut the hell up, so I don't think this is working out. See here. Thanks. --Soetermans. T / C 22:43, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Fast find
Thanks for finding that link ... did you use a particular tool to search/grep all of the change files? — Preceding unsigned comment added by IamM1rv (talk • contribs) 18:46, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Just experience digging through edit histories. Saw an edit note about adjusting templates and tried it, turned out to be the right one. -- ferret (talk) 18:55, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Reverted Dark Souls II release date edits.
Through the reference is invalid, there's no way to specifically link to the reference because http://www.darksoulsii.com/ does not support linking to specific articles.

http://www.darksoulsii.com/us/news.1.php#item1

"When will Dark Souls II: Scholar of the First Sin be available?

Dark Souls II: Scholar of the First Sin will be available on Xbox One and PlayStation 4 digitally and at retailers on April 7th, 2015. Dark Souls II: Scholar of the First Sin will be available on Steam on April 1st, 2015 at 3:00 PM PST."

Basically for CEST it will be available April 2 midnight(converted), and for US it will be available as stated before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.128.237.143 (talk • contribs) 08:21, 1 April 2015‎ (UTC)
 * That's unfortunate that it can't be linked directly. However it'd be much better if a reliable secondary source could be found that says the same. -- ferret (talk) 13:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Reverting change
Hello,Do not take it personally, I understand you have reviewer rights on Wikipedia but that does not mean you have the rights to take over the Call of Duty 3 wikipage. I see you have been reverting changes from other Wikipedians as you think is the best. Please follow WP:NPOV an think about what you are doing first. If you want to revert some important changes (e.g which I did placing the synopsis under the Campaign section (see Call of Duty 2 Campaign section and it has GA Rating) start a section in the Discussion page first giving more evidences or citations why it should done like you want it to be. For now I am reverting the change you made to the headers. Thank You.  Komchi ✉☆ 02:44, 4 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Also remember, adding more words/bytes is not supposed to make an article better it just makes it lengthier, only important content must be added.  Komchi ✉☆ 02:48, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Woah woah woah. Assume a little good faith... My changes have nothing to do with reviewer (Reviewer is involved in patrolling pages with "pending changes" enabled, it has nothing to do with general editing). Video game articles have fairly standard guidelines. I recommend that you be careful in how you approach established editors and not accuse them of acting in their own best interests. My edits are based on multiple policies and guidelines, as well as fixing minor mistake you made that broke multiple templates. Just because I often edit these pages, typical as part of vandalism cleanup, is in no way a sign of ownership. Additionally, those edits had no bearing on NPOV policies.
 * And yes, Call of Duty 2 is currently a GA article, however your changes could potentially result in that rating being lowered. It was rated as GA while the section headers matched the appropriate guidelines, which I restored.-- ferret (talk) 13:43, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I've reverted all the changes again. Please read the guidelines for video games. There are established guidelines for sections on video game articles. There's a lot of good resources in the WP:VG project that will help you, including how to find reliable sources for video games. Additionally, I removed from reviews you added for GameRankings and Metacritic on Call of Duty 2, because the reviews were for a different game, Call of Duty 2: Big Red One. -- ferret (talk) 14:08, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Well sorry if you took it seriously. Komchi ✉☆ 15:00, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you mean by that. I do take editing Wikipedia seriously. You should as well. -- ferret (talk) 15:00, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Again thanks for the edit on Call of Duty 2 and could you kindly tell which section comes under which header because I was not able to find any specific line which told me in the WP:VG Komchi ✉☆ 15:11, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Video game articles typically have a Gameplay, Plot, Development (or History), and Reception section as the standard expectations. Subsections describing elements of single player (Such as how campaigns work) or multiplayer belong under the Gameplay section. Subsections describing different chapters or campaigns of the plot go under the plot section. Information about how the game was developed, such as developer comments or release information, is typically under a Development section, though it is sometimes called History. There is sometimes a section for downloadable content these days, since it has become more prevelant. The article typically ends with a Reception section, which may have a subsection regarding sales or marketing, following by sections for References and External Links. -- ferret (talk) 15:17, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

YOU STOP!!!
Action, Adventure is correct because you kill zombies in the game I play the game. Tower defence is incorrect! Gameroffun (talk) 01:23, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, you're wrong. It has to be backed up by reliable sources, and "you kill zombies" is not the definition of an action or adventure game. Unfortunately you are simply wrong on this. If you want the genre changed, you will need to make your case at Talk:Plants vs. Zombies, per WP:BRD. Please do not revert again, use the talk page. -- ferret (talk) 01:32, 11 sawApril 2015 (UTC)

Fine I will give a reliable source. Sorry for my anger. Gameroffun (talk) 01:34, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Ferret
I think your edit is now correct thanks for reverting it. Gameroffun (talk) 23:14, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Your Revert on Heroes of Newerth
Please verify the change on our website at http://frostburnstudios.com/. We made the announcement today and can be found at reddit.com/r/heroesofnewerth. Please verify your reverts before making them as we would like this site to reflect accurate information. Please provide reason behind your revert if you feel this information is inaccurate and I can help point you in that direction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasonagajanian (talk • contribs) 01:41, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
 * How can I verify if you make unsourced changes? It's not my job to find sources for you. I recommend that you include reliable secondary sources when making edits such as this, as well as doing more than changing the infobox. You included no sources and left the lead of the article unchanged, as well as not making any other adjustments to the development sections. There's also a big issue with conflict of interest in this case, as it appears you're directly involved. -- ferret (talk) 01:49, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I have found the press release and made updates for you, but I recommend in the future ensuring you use reliable sources when making such an important change as this. Infobox fields are a frequent target for vandalism and are often reverted if no sources are provided and the rest of the article doesn't match. -- ferret (talk) 02:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I am very sorry if I came off as defensive before and thank you for taking care of that for me. I obviously do not have much experience with wikipedia and did not mean to step on your toes here. I will retire my wikipedia career after my first day, because as you pointed out I do have conflicting interests here and I probably should let this organically change to reflect accurate information. Thanks for maintaining the integrity of this site and helping me realize that I was in the wrong. Have a good day. -- Jasonagajanian (talk) 09:57, 6 May 2015 (EDT)

May 2015
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=662375331 your edit] to Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * * Professional Warcraft III competition

ECW28
That's my old account. I've been trying to find a way to get rid of it, but I realized I can't delete it, so I'm just gonna let it fade into obscurity. Btw, read my user page :) Dohvahkiin (talk) 11:44, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Borderlands 2
Is Borderlands 2 an open world game?Dohvahkiin (talk) 22:23, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I replied on the Borderlands 2 talk a while back when you previously asked. -- ferret (talk) 18:40, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I know, sorry about that. This has nothing to do with it, but someone should start an article on Fallout 4 very soon. Just a suggestion :) Dohvahkiin (talk) 18:45, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * There is a redirect currently in place that leads to the Fallout 4 subsection of Fallout (series). As soon as the announcement is released, I'm certain the redirect will be updated and replaced with more details. Best to wait till the announcement is made though to avoid WP:CRYSTAL. -- ferret (talk) 19:02, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

True, true. Just super-hyped for it, especially after all the hoaxes and everything Dohvahkiin (talk) 19:44, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Fallout 4
There are two things I noticed about the article: 1. Why is there box art when they haven't even revealed that yet? 2. I'd assume it'd be a safe bet to add it to the category that we all know I love, but to be on the safe side, id rather have someone else do it. But anyway, it looks good. Hopefully, the game is released by the end of the year Dohvahkiin (talk) 15:05, 3 June 2015 (UTC)


 * On the boxart, the image in use is probably suitable for now until a better version is available. I didn't add it, but have no real objection to it either. On the category, yeah, I'll add it. -- ferret (talk) 15:07, 3 June 2015 (UTC)


 * That is the official box art actually. My mistake. It's pretty, ugly though compared to 3 and New Vegas Dohvahkiin (talk) 15:09, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Very poor quality image at Fallout Shelter
The gameplay image you posted on Fallout Shelter is of really poor quality. It isn't even clearly visible at all when you open it in your browser. It seems you've inserted the image without noticing its low quality. The image is about showing the gameplay but hardly anything can be clearly seen from it. Please post a good-quality image in place of it that is at thevleast clearly visible. Thank you. KahnJohn27 (talk) 03:07, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * This is intentional to meet policies related to fair use of non-free images. Images are reduced in file size and quality intentionally. If you visit other articles you will note similar practices, such as on Fallout 3 as an easy example. -- ferret (talk) 11:52, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Please reply at Talk:Fallout Shelter -- ferret (talk) 12:07, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Fallout Shelter gameplay.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Fallout Shelter gameplay.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 04:05, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Done. -- ferret (talk) 12:07, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Console game articles
Hi. The article Home video game console is a duplicate of video game console lacking some improvements the latter received. I was thinking of redirecting Home video game console to video game console but wanted to make sure there wasn't any useful information that was added in the first one to extract first.

This is the reason I copy/pasted the second article into the first one to compare them as they seemed almost identical. I didn't find how to compare 2 different articles beetween themselves otherwise. Is there a way to do it ??? Thanks. (edit: you spoke of a "Show Changes" button ? Where would that button be, as I searched how to do the comparaison any other way before doing what I did ?)

And what do you think to not let 2 almost identical articles in 2 different places ? This really make sense to me as any modification will likely only be made to one and not to the other. But at the same time, to have a separate Home video game console was making some sense as there are separate articles for handheld game consoles and other type of console, but not if it's to have ... the same article.

Pretty complicated as there are many close articles on consoles: Beetween the "history" articles, the "list" articles, the "home" or "handheld" console articles and the console article itself... Mevo Wiki (talk) 19:36, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * You need to post the rationales for the mergers on the talk pages of the articles in question, so it can be discussed by any editors with an interest in those articles. I think what you'll find if we dig into the history of Home video game console is that it shouldn't be merged, but the duplication is the result of a page split from Video game console that wasn't fully completed. There are many editors with interest in this area and the merger proposal (Which there needs to be two separate proposals, one for each article you would like to merge) will allow them to weigh in. -- ferret (talk) 19:50, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I skimmed a bit and missed your question about Show Changes. When you edit an article, before you save it, there should be a set of buttons available to you below the edit form, including "Show preview" and "Show changes". The "Show Changes" button will show you a diff between the current version of the article and the changes you have entered, just like comparing two different versions of the article history. -- ferret (talk) 19:52, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Ok, the copy/paste was good, but I should NOT have SAVED the modifications, but used the "Show changes" button instead, understood. To be sure there is no confusion: About the Home video game console article, it is NOT the article which you proposed to discuss about, but the one you reverted. And according to the history, it seems it WAS initially a redirection to video game console, and a duplicate has been created. My intention is to make it a REDIRECTION again. But i can start a talk about it too, if needed.Mevo Wiki (talk) 20:09, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Merging (or redirecting) either article will require a merger proposal, as that page was created in the last year (really, only 7-8 months ago) and a fair amount of discussion occurred at that time. In essence, any time there's a suggestion that someone contests an action like this, a discussion needs to be opened. -- ferret (talk) 20:24, 22 June 2015 (UTC)