User talk:Ferret/Archive 10

Hello. About that.
The user involved (just removed off of AIV) was deleting things off of Current Events. I tell them on their talk page. They then accuse me of being a sock, which I'm not. I'm just logged out of my regular account. 108.160.125.102 (talk) 01:34, 6 October 2018 (UTC) So from what I can tell, the IPv6 is claiming to be reverting sock edits related to an IP that Ponyo blocked as part of a checkuser action. I cannot really validate that, I don't know the case. Either way, it does not appear to be bad faith vandalism, so doesn't belong at AIV. IPv4/Dreigorich is simply reporting it, so consider it duly noted, and declined as not vandalism. IPv4 clearly doesn't geolocate to the IP that Ponyo blocked, but Ponyo has access to more data than I do. I asked Ponyo to take a look at the case. I see no reason to issue blocks just yet and recommend both IPs go find something else to edit for now. -- ferret (talk) 01:43, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * So you were editing while logged out. Why? Drmies (talk) 01:35, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Incognito mode. I'm the same as User:Dreigorich otherwise until this IP address changes on me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.160.125.102 (talk) 01:37, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * That makes no sense to me at all, neither grammatically nor situationally. If you would take "otherwise" out it makes sense grammatically, but it doesn't make a bit of sense. Hey Ferret, speaking of grammar, please see this--oh, you saw it already. Drmies (talk) 01:40, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * this user, User:Dreigorich, (created just 6 months ago!) who clearly seems to be assisting a sock, now comes to your talk page to end run their behavior - don't fall for it!--2600:8800:FF0E:1200:504A:F75F:C9AB:5DDC (talk) 01:39, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * lesigh. "to end run their behavior" also doesn't mean anything. Ferret, I've been here too long, and I hope you can keep the fort until reports for duty. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 01:41, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * , if an editor with a relevant doctorate cannot understand this strange prose, then how can a humble construction worker possibly do better? Cullen328  Let's discuss it  01:49, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Us weasels certainly cannot follow such twists. -- ferret (talk) 01:50, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Logged in now after I opened a new tab. I am in no way claiming to do this. I was just logged out and editing in incognito under an IP. I'm logged in now and deny such claims. Dreigorich (talk) 01:40, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * "I am in no way claiming to do this"--to do what? Drmies (talk) 01:42, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I am in no way supporting the sock. This IPv6 is not a sock of mine. We are different users editing in different geographic locations. Dreigorich (talk) 01:43, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Very well then. This appears to have been a waste of my time. I shall find something else to edit. Dreigorich (talk) 01:49, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I do know I blocked someone a month or more ago who was disrupting at those recent events pages--that was their thing, that was all they did. But I can't remember if they were adders or removers. Anyway, it may well be that one of those IPs is that, but I remember only blocking an IP, not running CU or anything like that. And I don't know if there is an SPI. Drmies (talk) 01:54, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Mega Brands
That IP, those IPs--now that they're screaming at full blast, they are reminding me of someone, a screamer, who would say their name after a while (I know, sounds very sexy). Look at the IPs: after the first two they're all over the place, and I threw out a few rangeblocks; one of them is their "home range", I think, since they've been making the same trivial edits to children's TV shows and stuff for four years. But thanks for the blocks, and the semiprotection--I thought I'd let it go for another round or two and see what else they came up with, but protection is the better option, I know. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 01:58, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah he hops too easily, have to just protect. No problem. -- ferret (talk) 02:02, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * That shouting is familiar to me as well. It has been some time though and they tend to blend together in my memory. If has the time he is good at tracking socks. Best regards to all. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 02:11, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Chell edit
Hello,

You reverted my edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chell_(Portal)&oldid=prev&diff=837216031 and claimed it is unsourced, but it has a source cited. In fact it is the same source that was already there, I just brought more information from the same source to the article. It talked about the poster and I added more information written down on the exact same poster, but you deleted my edit as unsourced, even though it was from the exact same poster the rest of the section was sourced from. Why is that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nohus (talk • contribs) 00:21, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Wow, an edit from April? The first part is unsourced, as it's not clear that the parent in question was dad and only dad. The second part you added in regard to the journalist's speculation was original research and represents your own speculation. -- ferret (talk) 00:25, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what you mean by "parent in question was dad and only dad"? It's a quote from the poster (poster for reference: https://imgur.com/a/RNq7YwR). About the second part, you are right that it is original research, but the journalist's speculation is evidently false as seen in the primary source (the poster). How can we convey that differently without it being original research? It just seems dishonest to readers to talk about the speculation and not say it's false when we know it's false. Nohus (talk) 00:34, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * How about "however, the same poster refers to both "dad" and "Mr. Johnson" as different people." without saying it's false? Then we are only stating facts with no opinion.Nohus (talk) 00:42, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I'd leave off "as different people" as that is interpretation. The clearest direct fact is that it refers to both. -- ferret (talk) 00:50, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Isn't "dad said [..] Mr. Johnson would get mad" a clear fact that they are not the same person? If one person talks about another it should be clear that they are not the same person, no? Maybe something like "the dad refers to Mr Johnson as a separate person" is free from interpretation? It makes it clear that it's just what it says, leaving open the interpretation that he in fact has a split personality and refers to himself in third-person. Nohus (talk) 00:55, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Funny tidbit
I actually dug back through to see just what was on the Brian Peppers and Longcat pages. Apparently the former was two paragraphs with no references, while the latter was just "Longcat is long". I just had to laugh that those were being used as reasoning.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:09, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Namcokid47
Hi! This user keeps reverting the List of Square Enix video game franchises article without proving his points that Hat Trick Hero S's a port of Hat Trick Hero '95, not a new game. I've asked him five times for a source and he's acting on bad faith, because I undid his claims, since he didn't have anything confirming what he added to the article's correct. He already broke the 3RR and is trying to engage me in an edit-war. Can you help me on this one, please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.164.80.49 (talk) 16:44, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Reverted to previous state, as this is a Featured List. Page full protected. Hash it out on the talk page. -- ferret (talk) 17:17, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki Vishwavidyalaya
Hello, I see you have protected the article when the sock has last removed the contents of it. You might want to have a look at the changes he has made. 1.He has removed the names of the University: (State Technological University of Madhya Pradesh) you can can confirm this here: https://www.rgpv.ac.in/ which is the official website of the university. Rajiv Gandhi Technical University you can confirm this here on the About Us page of official website of the University https://www.rgpv.ac.in/AboutRGTU/AboutRGPV.aspx 2. He has removed references, affiliations, campus area, images of the university (you can see the names of university here too) which are already on wikimedia. 3. He has removed the table without any reason. I request you to restore the content. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.88.168.9 (talk) 17:07, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

added a bit of a story from inside the kitchen of Earthrise
But then you deleted my edit and caused a merge conflict, while I was still editing. In the user talk you have said that it was because it did not appear constructive. How should it be more constructive then and if I write it in a blog post, then cite it on the page, would it be any different?

Here is a part of the text:

It was later revealed by former employees that the whole development of the game was funded to be used as a front for a massive money laundering scheme by foreign investors from Russia. Near the release date several hundred thousand copies of the game were bought from Russian bank accounts. Then the team was dismissed and the fictive development was put to a hold. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.236.131.37 (talk) 19:04, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
 * No, writing a blog won't help. It must be reported in a reliable secondary source. -- ferret (talk) 19:07, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for the fast answer! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.236.131.37 (talk) 19:15, 15 October 2018‎ (UTC)

Talk:Princess Eugenie
Hi, Ferret. You said here that the IPv6 is an LTA, and has been /64 range blocked for 2 further years. But actually you have only blocked the range for 31 hours. Bishonen &#124; talk 21:18, 16 October 2018 (UTC).
 * I blocked the single IP for 31 hours, to stop immediate disruption. I then reblocked the /64 for 2 years after researching the issues deeper. The 2 year range block will show once the individual 31 hour block expires. -- ferret (talk) 21:20, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
 * You did? OK. The log shows 31 hours for the range. Maybe that's a bug — misleading, anyway. Bishonen &#124; talk 21:23, 16 October 2018 (UTC).
 * is the range block, it's for 2 years. The log can be a bit wonky with ranges, especially if you use the full IP with /64, versus the simplied /64 with :0:0:0:0 at the end. -- ferret (talk) 21:26, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Block
This one's for you, ferret. There's a few more IPs and ranges I'm looking into. Drmies (talk) 00:59, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Woo that guy. Sometimes it's hard to find the right pattern when trying to shut the door for AIV. So many LTAs operating in the media spaces. -- ferret (talk) 01:02, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I wish they'd just live happily on Wikia. Drmies (talk) 01:06, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Super Smash Bros Ultimate Release section.
I see now that you were correct about the pro controller bundle. I had not realised there was a game bundle that included the pro controller as well. I'm not sure whether another sentence for the console, game, and joy-con bundle should be included as well. As for the part where I reverted an edit made recently under the main section, the user stated that the project plan was finished, when it really was that the idea was first being conceived. The project plan was likely not finished in the same month, and even if it was, talking about the idea for the game itself sounds better and is more important than talking about the project plan. Sorry for the inconvenience. Please reply with whether you thought my ideas were a good idea, or go ahead and implement them yourself, as there's no point in me doing it if it's just going to get reverted again. Browk2512 21:23 October 16 2018.
 * The edit that you first reverted, the editor had explicitly noted that the source said it was completed at that time. A project plan is often very high-level, but that's splitting hairs. If the Joy-Con bundle is different from the one already mentioned, feel free to add it in addition to the existing two special bundles mentioned. From my view while reviewing edits, you had removed the Pro-Controller special edition which was properly sourced, and replaced with a second mention of the Switch bundle that was already mentioned. -- ferret (talk) 01:27, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying. I'm only seeing one special edition mentioned in the entirety of the page, so I'm going to add a sentence about the joy-con bundle, which has not (as far as I'm aware) been mentioned yet. 01:38, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Revision on JC4
The first sentence in JC4 "Synopsis" is what confused me on why it was in there unfortunately I did not read the other sentence which was my mistake.I also removed the Plot and put the Info under it and added it in the "Synopsis" due to the fact that we yet to have the full story....JustCauseFan..... 03:43, 19 October 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kris2311 (talk • contribs)
 * I'm not entirely sure I follow. I have not reverted any of your edits to Just Cause 4. They seem fine. -- ferret (talk) 11:30, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Interesting, Okay...12:33, 19 October 2018 (UTC)JustCauseFan.....

When you're reverting contributions from the community, it can really be helpful to leave CONSTRUCTIVE comments
Hey,

I saw that you reverted all of the additions I made to Diablo Immortal, with the incredibly condescending comment, "Almost none of this is salvageable". I understand if you feel like you're holding back a tidal wave when maintaining Wikipedia. But if you feel like treating contributors that way, you should just step away for a while. Because alienating the userbase is kind of against the ethos of Wikipedia.

Drkirienko (talk) 15:06, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Almost none of that was salvageable, and had to be reverted. *shrug* If you want the direct reasons, there's clear original research issues, POV pushing, and the entire thing is written as unsourced commentary. About the only salvageable part was that Blizzard announced the game, which has since been readded with proper sourcing. -- ferret (talk) 15:12, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * There’s only so much that can be articulated in an edit summary - sometimes it’s best to have more detailed conversations on talk pages. You've done the right thing in asking for more clarification, but not in admonishing ferret or anything he did here. Sergecross73   msg me  20:20, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

That's all well and good. But you could have easily put in something like that in as a summary, rather than the judgmental tone that you used. All you've done is to discourage participation. As I said above, it can feel like holding back a tidal wave, but that's part of what you signed up for. Drkirienko (talk) 05:15, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The content removed was a POV pushing personal editorial. That sort of editing should be discouraged, and it shouldn’t be a surprise that it’s not okay. You’re directing your concerns in the wrong direction here. Go lecture (or help) that random IP making awful unencyclopedic edits rather than lecturing ferret, who is well aware of how to handle these situations. Sergecross73   msg me  23:52, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Edit on VG History template
Hello, I'm Rebestalic.

Whoops! I didn't see the link on the template. Sorry for the hindrance.

Thank you, Rebestalic (talk) 21:16, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Edit on Thank You Scientist Band History
Ferkijel (talk) 12:38, 24 October 2018 (UTC)Got it, didn't realize literal quote aren't allowed. I'm a casual contributor, and I should have been more careful. Thank you for the notification. I have now completely re-written the part and added it again.

Superfluous line feeds
Fyi the IP you just blocked making superfluous line feeds is the same one as this one from September 1 on the same articles. Seems to be the start of some kind of tradition. Slight Smile 17:53, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I believe it's been going on for years now, sporadically. No one has been able to figure out what exactly they are trying to accomplish. -- ferret (talk) 17:55, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Interesting. It'll be fun thinking of theories. Slight Smile 19:40, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Juan Vargas 2005 block
No, I don't want to override you. I too saw the AIV report as a VOA, and like you decided that wasn't true: there are a few constructive edits. However, looking at the whole picture, including the deleted edits (which are more than twice as many as the undeleted ones) I decided that it was very close to a disruption-only account, even if not quite. I thought it was a close call between on the one hand a limited block with a strong warning about a possible longer block, and an indef block but with a fairly friendly block notice, encouraging the editor to make an unblock request with a promise to change his ways. I decided to go for the second of those, but I accept that you took it a different way. Your block + my warning should, I hope, get the message across. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:41, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thumbs up. I didn't look at deleted in this case, but that there were still-live edits from the account no one seemed opposed to. -- ferret (talk) 13:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, and that was part of why I thought it was either limited block or indef + fairly friendly block message, rather than indef with normal block message. Anyway, having thought again about it I'm inclined to think a limited block was better after all. It may be less likely to put him off coming back as a constructive editor if he is willing to do so, and if he isn't willing to do so we can just block again. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:51, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Persistent vandalism is not a "content dispute"
Can you please tell me how repeated attempts to place the adjective "non-profit" in quotation marks at College Board - an obvious smear against the organization that is rooted in discontent about how it charges money for its services - is a "content dispute" as you recently labeled it at WP:AIV? This is long-term vandalism at that article and your support of a "new" editor who popped up just to continue that vandalism is very disheartening. (This should have been more obvious after I also reported the same editor for edit-warring on my User Talk page.) ElKevbo (talk) 19:01, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
 * A user trying to ask you why you reverted them did not really seem to be "edit warring". Keep in mind that AIV is for clear and obvious vandalism, and we try not to overly bite new editors. Long term patterns on a given page aren't always apparent while we're looking for clear vandalism, and we're often dealing with backlogs here. On a deeper review of the page, I've applied PC1 for a year to try to stem it. A block here isn't going to do much good with the IP and SPA rotations over the last year. -- ferret (talk) 19:12, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks! ElKevbo (talk) 19:46, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Game engine list revert
Hello, you reverted my edit adding the Amethyst game engine to the list of game engines, because you qualified it as "non notable". I find the qualification a little bit arbitrary (as Amethyst is the largest Rust game engine publicly available), I was wondering what criteria is used to determine whether or not a game engine is irrelevant. Thank you in advance. Moxinilian (talk) 01:58, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Notability in this case refers to Wikipedia's Notability policy. In short, every item on this list needs to be notable enough to support an article. If you can create a draft and have it approved through AFC, then it could go on the list. Note that engines are pretty difficult to prove notability for because there isn't much coverage of them. You can start a draft at Draft:Amethyst (game engine). Make sure to use reliable sources that are secondary to the subject. Notability cannot be proven with primary sources (The subject's own webpage, interviews, etc). A list of vetted reliable sources for video games can be found at WP:VG/RS. -- ferret (talk) 02:02, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Problem user
Hi there, Ferret. I saw you making this notice and I wonder, won't you please please please just block that user? Just look at the litany of damage, just in the form of warnings on that very Talk page alone. He's never responded to or respected anything. It's all WP:TEND WP:ICANTHEARYOU etc. It's absolutely endless for years and it constitutes vandalism. Thank you very much. Also I'm a fan of your work, and let me know if you need any help. — Smuckola(talk) 13:28, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Most of those warnings are from 2015, three years ago. Trust me, I get it, but I can't take action on a three year old warning. In response to my warning, he re-did his edit with a source, so he basically acknowledged it. (Minor aside: Per WP:OWNTALK user's are allowed to remove warnings. It counts as acknowledgement that they read them too). -- ferret (talk) 13:40, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Multiplayer redirect
Sorry I missed the primary target angle. I was simply looking at it from the perspective of the Teahouse question the editor asked. If I had been more diligent I could have saved a lot of other editors' efforts.  Onel 5969  TT me 15:05, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Not at all a problem. Issue is the user's insistence on continuing despite being told it's disruptive and to seek consensus. (and then complaining about consensus being a thing). -- ferret (talk) 15:07, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Genre warring IP
As an uninvolved admin, can you block ? This IP has been edit warring to include unsourced genres at The Wild Thornberrys Movie. I started a talk page discussion at Talk:The Wild Thornberrys Movie, where the consensus was to stick with the sourced genres. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:36, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. Pretty sure this is a "not quite LTA" I've blocked on other IPs in the past. -- ferret (talk) 13:38, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I know a few of the film and music genre warriors, but this one is new to me.  It's crazy how persistent some of them are; one of them has done nothing but genre war over Eagles songs for years. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:25, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Boo!


Happy Halloween!

Hello Ferret: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!   –  Iggy (Swan) 17:11, 31 October 2018 (UTC) Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Re: AIV
Would you please comment on the behavior of Special:Diff/866165469 here or at AIV, seeing you've declined my report as a content dispute? 84.250.17.211 (talk) 21:06, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
 * AIV is for vandalism and there's no clear vandalism to act on here. -- ferret (talk) 21:07, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. 84.250.17.211 (talk) 21:08, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Stepford County Railway/Roblox
Hello

Can you notify me when I can move Draft:Stepford County Railway is able to be moved to draftspace? MrTrains227 (talk) 00:26, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * When you're ready, submit it to AFC and a reviewer will check it. -- ferret (talk) 00:32, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrTrains227 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

10 years of editing

 * Congrats, I didn’t realize you were a month Wikipedia-older than me. Sergecross73   msg me  02:13, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm looking at my first edits and wondering why in the world I even visited some of those articles lol. Some aren't in my interest wheelhouse at all. -- ferret (talk) 02:18, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Happy anniversary F. Thanks for ten years of editing and here's to the next ten. Cheers. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 02:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

User:Juan Vargas 2005
I see that you have met this user before: User talk:Juan Vargas 2005. This is a simple heads-up that I've just reverted some nonsense vandalism on Centenary State High School (back to an IP editor, of all things). Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 13:47, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Blocked. -- ferret (talk) 15:05, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

A7X members
So the band's own homepage is not a reliable source? The interview says:
 * When and how did the band get started? How did you guys all come to know each other and create the musical entity of Avenged Sevenfold? (I noticed only 3 of the original members remain, did you murder the other 2 ? What happened ?)


 * Shadows: One member left for college and we added Synyster Gaytes after we realized our songs required two guitar players live. Also he thickens up the sound alot.  I grew up with The Reverend and our old bassist, and met Zacky in high school.  I've also known Synyster for most of my life, but we moved away for a while and didnt hear from him.  Now he's back and in the band.  Justin was playing in one of The Reverends other bands, so when our old bassist left, we picked him up.

This means they had five original members (Shadows, Zacky, unknown dude, Matt Wendt and Rev). Two of them left, one for college (unknown dude) and their old bassist (Matt Wendt). Then they added Syn and Justin. Even if Matt Wendt was the one who left for college, it would still leave upon one other dude that was mentioned by the interviewer. So yeah, A7X had one other member nobody knows the name of. Seelentau (talk) 16:14, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * It's a contradictory primary source. We don't even know who the interviewer was, or whether it was a simple typo. What instrument would this person have played? The quote repeatedly mentions "old bassist", and makes it clear there wasn't a second guitarist before then. Without more information from a more reliable source than an old unattributed interview, it's just not significant to include. -- ferret (talk) 16:27, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I don't know the instrument that person could've played either, but Matt's wording makes it clear that there was someone else. He specifically mentions their old bassist (Wendt) twice, but disconnected from the unknown dude. If Wendt was the one who went to college, Matt could've simply said "our old bassist went to college", but he didn't. Instead, he separated both people. It also makes it clear that the person didn't play bass. He might've played Guitar, and after he left, the band realised that they need two guitarists and got Syn to join them. Anyway, very interesting tidbit, just thought it should be added. If now, alright with me. Seelentau (talk) 16:33, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't personally think it's important to include, but if you feel more strongly on it, I'd recommend posting about it on the article's talk page and give it a while to see if anyone else chimes in. -- ferret (talk) 16:43, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Na, it's alright. I'm just currently going through the band's old website, trying to see if there are any new bits of information (such as Syn's joining date, which I already altered in the article). But I doubt I'll find anything on that mysterious person, since in their second demo (2000), they already had Matt Wendt on board. Seelentau (talk) 17:13, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

The Donald
I won't be able to monitor the page so I returned it to EC. There are plenty of eyes on the page, I'm sure, but in case it gets hit again by compromised accounts... Enigmamsg 19:56, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem, thanks for remembering ;) I had a timer set just in case. -- ferret (talk) 19:58, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

That
TPA of is revoked for very good reasons; isn't the block-notice a bit misleading, if the original owner ever returns back? &#x222F; WBG converse 19:16, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I updated it. -- ferret (talk) 21:55, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

REFUND
Hi, requesting restoration of Draft:No Nut November.

Thanks, Benjamin (talk) 00:51, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- ferret (talk) 00:53, 28 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Benjamin (talk) 01:01, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

help me please. My account from 2004 blocked forever????
Help me!!! i'm the real owner of mateuszica account (User:Mateuszica). I created this new account (MateusZica Account recovery) just to ask for help. I got this account for more than 14 years and i love my account and i don't want to lose it. I have made a lot of contributions and i want to do more in near future (for example on human brain evolution article). Some hacker took my account (i dont know how but maybe it was because my password was too easy, it was a password i created in 2006 when i did not knew i would became a contributor to wikipedia). I really want to take my account back, but i just can't do that. I used ' Unblock Ticket Request System' 10 days ago but i had no feedback. I'm from brazil and my name is really Mateus Zica, and i have my ID Card to prove it and i have access to the email that this lost account (mateuszica) is associated with. Please Someone help me. Can you help me User:Ferret ? MateusZica Account recovery (talk) 02:43, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Contact meta:Trust and safety. might know more about it. <b style="font-family:Papyrus"> Anarchyte  ( talk  &#124;  work ) </b> 10:13, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Please contact trustandsafety@undefinedwikimedia.org to recover your access. Thank you. &mdash; regards, <span style="color:green;font-family:Courier new, serif;font-variant:small-caps">Revi 10:15, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

A thing
Hey there buddy. You just saw the recent infraction which he then turned into an edit war with you and I know youre not the biggest fan of unchecked rampant abusive nonsense so I thought I'd suggest this to ya. Pretty pretty please? Just thought I'd ask. — Smuckola(talk) 02:46, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I left a hand written warning, let's see where it goes. -- ferret (talk) 03:38, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Never mind, didn't realize it was more than an edit or two. Blocked two weeks, with the reason clearly listed as disruption from a crusade to purge imperial measurements. -- ferret (talk) 03:42, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh my gosh, I cant believe i put a message on a User page. Im on my phone lol. And I should have mentioned explicitly that the user had helpfully left his abuse history right on his Talk page. What a waste of time and hard work by volunteers. Nonsense is above my paygrade. When will wikipedia have support for user reputations and credentials and vetting instead of anarchy? Is there any such movement, at least starting with demoting non-authenticated users? They SAY "competency is required" but it's neither required nor respected. If there was any such movement to put any of these items to votes, I will do so faithfully, however fruitlessly. Is it going to take the government requiring a new Fairness Doctrine for social media? We should be a leading example, not a laughingstock. I apologize for WP:SOAP but im honestly querying a knowledgeable and conscientious admin. Thanks. — Smuckola(talk) 04:41, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not aware of anything like that, unless you can maybe count ACPERM. I just work here, as they say. ;) -- ferret (talk) 04:51, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * OK. And you do such great work.  I just wish that it wasn't quite as huge of a waste, because you are one spectacular human spam filter. btw this user does exactly the same thing, crusading for the unsourced or contra-sourced sales figures about the resident evil series. Basically a robotically disruptive crusade so long-running that it's practically an edit war.  Bonus broken English in prose, and zero response to countless warnings.  — Smuckola(talk) 07:27, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Reviewed, 2 week block for unsourced editing. -- ferret (talk) 14:18, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * You are a prince. So to speak. But a democratic and meritocratic and fair one. I guess. — Smuckola(talk) 18:38, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello again sir. Could I possibly direct the attention of the right good gentleman for a moment? See here for my complaint. In any case, see that user's edit history for a whole bunch of crazy spam and edit warring. Have you noticed all the stupid obsession over sales statistics of the Resident Evil series? So maybe you can block that user, and protect the articles. Thanks. — Smuckola(talk) 16:42, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Blocked 3 months. -- ferret (talk) 18:55, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

A user is vadanlizing a page
I noticed this user vadanlized this page can you warn that user or block that user? thanks for reading. BubbleGuppiesIsTheBest (talk) 12:09, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * They were already warned by . -- ferret (talk) 15:50, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Oh Ok BubbleGuppiesIsTheBest —Preceding undated comment added 14:06, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Markus Persson Twitter
Hello,

I noticed that you reverted my edit quickly once published. Much of the information can be rendered "useless" but my main points should stay about his political views, net worth, twitter activities, etc. Under the 'Twitter Controversies" section, a prior section of his page discussed about race, particularly white.

"In November 2017, Persson was criticized for posting a tweet that read, "It's ok to be white." In follow-up tweets, he said he believed privilege is a "made up metric." Critics of Persson said his message was "tone-deaf" and "ignorant"; The Root called the tweets a "white-privilege meltdown."[33]" - Currently on his page

"In December 2018, Persson again caused controversy in regards to politics, race, intelligence, among other things. One tweet that generated much attention was a tweet about intelligence among different races.[34] It has been speculated that Persson was insinuating scientific racism. Another tweet that was controversial was when Persson responded to a user that was denying that there was an "agenda against white men" by replying "There clearly is an agenda against white men."[35]" - My edit.

Half of my edit is identical to the previous one. I am curious as to why you would revert my whole edit? I do understand why but couldn't you atleast take a little bit of time and let the "okay" edits stand? All that I am doing messaging here is to gain understanding. I also added a portion back onto the Wikipedia page due to overlooking secondary sources. Those have been added also.

Including, by the sounds of the [|Self-published or questionable sources as sources on themselves], it is ok to use Twitter as a source. According to the 5 points, the tweets appear to uphold 3/5. They are direct sources from Markus himself; his own views. News organizations are not going to be tracking his every tweet. And with the amount of tweets in regards to his political beliefs, would it be ok to now include such a section? I think so.

I eagerly await your response! Thank you!

Aviartm (talk) 22:21, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Twitter is not a reliable source for a BLP. -  FlightTime  ( open channel ) 22:25, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The greater bulk of content like this has recently been removed for the same reasons I stated. You cannot say he caused controversy, then link primarily to Twitter messages. Coverage in reliable secondary sources is required to demonstrate any sort of controversy. As always when people say "Why'd you revert everything?", my recommendation is to make smaller edits with specific components. It's no one else's job to try to save bits and pieces of your edit, when you make large complicated edits you run the risk of the entire thing being undo due to issues. Also please read WP:BLPPRIMARY which strongly cautions against Primary sources in BLPs. -- ferret (talk) 22:26, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Understandable. I have changed my edits accordingly to exclude tweets at all costs and to use reliable secondary sources. Thank you Ferret! Aviartm (talk) 22:41, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Micke Kuwahara as a Lead Programmer of Battlefield 1942
Micke Kuwahara came across as a Lead Programmer of Battlefield 1942. It is listed at Hokkaido University, Japan- Official Profile page & linkedin. https://researchers.general.hokudai.ac.jp/profile/en.yiU.UEzaAwi.AM91X61x-Q==.html https://linkedin.com/in/micke-kuwahara-1738103 Can you consider this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by As47 battle ground (talk • contribs) 04:55, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * No. These are personal sites that he wrote. While I'm sure he worked at DICE and may have had roles on each of those two games, he was not the Lead Programmer and the game's credits do not include him. He appears to have been more of an auxiliary team for expansion packs or support/patchs, based on his own claims. He was not the Lead Programmer of the games. -- ferret (talk) 12:18, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Revert on Heroes of the Storm
Your revert on the Heroes of the Storm edit by a disgrunted IP user was by all means justified. Thank you for your vigilance. The reference was about important news and from a reliable source, but I guess it's too much to ask to rewrite such a rediculous edit and keep the reference, rather than just reverting it. PizzaMan  ♨♨♨  23:10, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, it definitely is. It's not my job to replace bad vandalism with new content, and there's no expected burden on vandalism patrollers to do so. You'll also note that before the IP did that edit, I had added the news to the talk page so someone could look into adding it. -- ferret (talk) 23:12, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Sameem123
Hi I’m seyer123 I’m oldest brother to my youngest brother sameem123 I was just asking why is my youngest brother account blocked and there any way to unblock him? Seyer123 (talk) 18:32, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Minecraft
The wikipedia is extremely require to write what they say web sites. But why? Why do we remove something from Wikipedia even be true? Greetings. --Furawi (talk) 23:36, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * See the policy WP:V, which requires us to back everything with sources. If the sources don't say it, we don't include it. -- ferret (talk) 23:38, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Incorrect Reversion
My apologies. I was going through the changes on my watchlist, and at first glance, I presumed it was just someone trying to be 'funny', which seemed unusual considering your contributions page(s). I hope you can see where my error came in, as an outside party with no knowledge of this 'dedicated field' name. Thanks for the clarification, and continued hard work. ;) - <b style="color:#ff5d00">NsTaGaTr</b> (<b style="color:#F00">Talk</b>) 15:36, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Possible Paid Promotion
Hi, I recently nominated a page called Rhythm Wagholikar for deletion, a page about a non-notable author. The creator of that page User:Mukesh.bhardwaj40 left a message asking for help on how to make it better, I explained him what I could regarding WP:GNG, conversation is on my talk page. He then showed me a list of awards "Rhythm" won, then I explained those aren't eligible. He then went on trying to push me to somehow say yes to include the author or the book. Him trying hard made me suspicious and I did a check on his talk page. He made an article called Oye Digital marketing that got deleted. Basically that is a Brand marketing agency, that promotes people's web presence i guess. Then I googled the username and the Oye agency together and It brought up some interesting results, you might wanna have a look there. Daiyusha (talk) 16:15, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I've reviewed (and reverted a few) their contributions and the deleted articles. I think its very close to a case of needing a block, but at this time I'm not going to issue one. You may want to try WP:COIN where editors who deal with COI more frequently can take a look. I can't say there's a definitive tie to the Rhythmn Wagholikar editing and Mukesh's obvious COI with Oye Digital Marketing. Oye Digital Marketing is salted, but if he tries to create anything related to it again, it's grounds for a block. -- ferret (talk) 16:58, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you, WP:COIN is just the kind of thing i was looking for, I'll report it there. Daiyusha (talk) 17:01, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Sybreed
The content of the small edit is made up of information that is objective, basic in its complexity, and impossible to source in its nature. Evidence should not need demonstration. Look through your own eyes, not through some rules. Read what was written. This situation is a symbol of wikipedia's decline and ossification. What's the point of contributing with something that is true if one cannot find a "source" from it, even if the nature of the text is unsourceable. Threatening with ban against an attitude of collaboration this page was founded upon is downright tyrannical and contrary to the spirit of the early days of this page, i hope you can realise this. sigh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aeduh (talk • contribs) 16:26, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Source it or move on. If you continue to make unsourced edits, which you've been warned about repeatedly, you will eventually catch that block. Wikipedia is built on sources, not what we "know to be true". You cannot make claims that a band is influenced by things, or considers themselves to be a certain genre, without sourcing where the band made those claims. Making repeated changes in regards to genres without reliable sources is in itself a blockable issue on Enwiki, due to the sheer amount of genre warring we see. -- ferret (talk) 16:30, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Ferret!
<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em;height:173px;border-radius: 1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">

Happy New Year! Ferret, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Donner60 (talk) 06:40, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Sorry
Didn't see you reverted to a previous version at same time as I was going through them. I never looked at the ref just pasted it in to the article from pending changes. Sorry about that, RhinosF1 (talk) 22:11, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem partially my fault since I didn't revert all the way back the first time. -- ferret (talk) 22:12, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Glad it's sorted, thanks for the help anyway. I'll have to remember that's not a good source. RhinosF1 (talk) 22:16, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:43, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Utah teapot edits
there it is - the screenshot with the teapot on the table. May i remind you that the references on the Uthah teapot page also don't have sources/screenshots? looks like youy have somehing personal with me buddy... what you are doing is not objective stuff.

please unlock the pages for editing or i will report you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sorin Mares (talk • contribs) 13:01, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It's neither personal, nor are you being singled out. You edited an article that was on my watch list, and I reverted the edit. You undid my revert and so I looked at what was going on deeper. Wikipedia is not collection of everything and all trivial facts. We judge the importance of trivial details like this based on their coverage by secondary reliable sources (See WP:RS). Movies, books, games, etc often have dozens of trivial details and easter eggs. We don't include those on Wikipedia, unless sources took particular note of them. That is not the case here. You're free to "report me" if you like, but I need to inform you that I'm an administrator, and that anyone reviewing such a report will agree concerning the necessary sourcing. -- ferret (talk) 16:48, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary
<div class="boilerplate metadata" id="SCOTW" style="background-color:#E6E6FA;border: 1px solid #7D00B3; margin: 0.5em; padding: 0.5em;width:90%;float:center"> Happy Adminship Anniversary! Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day! Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:08, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Well me
Hi. So I was wondering how I’m not adding important things to the call of duty’s. Well one thing is with Black Ops Three I just added that it’s not like the first two and that people tend to get confused about that and then you removed it. You edit summary was a little confusing to me so could you explain? And with call of duty WWII I added dates and some more to the story line. I understand about second person so in the future I will change that but could explain that too? Thanks! Somebody persome (talk) 14:59, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The problem with you edits is combination of things. First, everything on Wikipedia must be sourcable. Even if we know something is true, if a source doesn't discuss it, we cannot include it. This means many trivial details will not be suitable for inclusion in an article. You can read more on this policy at WP:V. Second, your edits are unfortunately very informal and use broken English. We simply cannot keep these edits. Articles need to be written formally with correct grammar and spelling. Additionally, an encyclopedic tone is expected. We do not use second person pronouns to address the reader, such as "you can customize your character'. I will leave you a welcome message with more links and guidelines, but you will have to step up your English if you want these edits to be kept. -- ferret (talk) 15:39, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Oh! Thank you! I will try to work on this before I add more things! I’m very sorry about all this it’s just I really like doing this and I was really confused! Once again thank you! Somebody persome (talk) 15:51, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to help if you have any questions. You may find it useful to practice in your sandbox (There should be a link near the top of the page), or to ask on the article's talk page about edits you want to make. A quite long document covering our "Manual of Style" for video games can be read at MOS:VG which has a lot of advice and guidance. -- ferret (talk) 15:54, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Well what do you mean sources? I don’t really understand that part. Could you maybe explain more? Somebody persome (talk) 16:06, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sources are how we verify the things written on Wikipedia. For example this sentence:

The game was released worldwide on November 3, 2017, for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 4 and Xbox One.
 * How do we know that it was actually released on November 3, for those platforms? We use a source for this, in this case Theverge.com was used:


 * The Verge is considered a reliable source on Wikipedia. This means they have a reputation for fact checking and an editorial policy, so that we can trust what they report. Not all sites are reliable, the vast majority are not. As an easy example, the Call of Duty Wikia is NOT a reliable source. This is because there is no editorial policy or control. Anyone can edit it, we can't trust details. A list of reviewed and vetted reliable sources for video games can be read at WP:VG/RS. For more on reliable sources, read WP:RS. -- ferret (talk) 17:55, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Star Wars KOR
You should have a look at the mobile view and certain browsers are unable to read those nav templates that's why I put the See also down. Govvy (talk) 23:41, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * That's an issue site wide that needs addressed somewhere else, not on individual pages. MOS:SEEALSO shows that this rule is still in effect and past RFCs have not removed it. The last RFC did not even propose to remove the rule for navbars but to keep it. We need to follow MOS. If MOS has conflicts, raise a discussion there. -- ferret (talk) 23:44, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Playstaion date change
Whoops, I got things mixed up. I thought we used the mm/dd/yy format mainly instead of the dd/mm/yy but I guess I was wrong. Thanks for correcting me. HurricaneGeek2002 (talk) 14:40, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Jedi Academy, re: emulators
Heya Ferret ... I saw your edit about "not including emulators in the infobox". While I bet that is how Jedi Academy was implemented on the Xbox One, it is certainly not apparent to users that this is an emulated product. Only a very limited number of original Xbox games are available on the Xbox One. They must be released as such, rather than just loaded into an emulator.

Has this difference been discussed before w.r.t infobox? I believe it is a very important distinction. And/or where would that discussion be found? Thanks! Gstein (talk) 04:52, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's been discussed before. You can see the template documentation at Infobox video game. The discussions were probably mostly at WT:VG. Backwards compatibility titles are currently excluded from infoboxes. While I said emulation, the discussions have really been about "backwards compatibility" as seen on Xbox (Which we as nerds know to be emulation). -- ferret (talk) 12:58, 30 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Much thanks for the education. Appreciated! Gstein (talk) 04:33, 31 January 2019 (UTC)


 * For archival/historical reference, the discussion you reference is here Template_talk:Infobox_video_game/Archive_14 Gstein (talk) 04:44, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

RFD on Multiplayer
I rolled back your edit; I was in the process of creating the discussion because I was following the steps in order. Usually, I give the person posting a template like that a few hours before removing it, to prevent a back and forth once the discussion is opened. The Pony Toast 🍞 (Talk) 15:52, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what remedy you are seeking at RFD. That multiplayer game should be unmerged? -- ferret (talk) 15:57, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * , No, just a disambiguation page. The Pony Toast 🍞 (Talk) 16:01, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Then make one at Multiplayer (disambiguation) and hatnote it at Multiplayer video game. Doesn't need an RfD. -- ferret (talk) 16:03, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Multiplayer (disambiguation) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Multiplayer (disambiguation) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Multiplayer (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Daiyusha (talk) 16:56, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

The Witcher
I understand that reverting is more easy, but instead of it you could just rewrite it in the way you thought was more accurate. You completely revert all I did, without discrimination. However in source number 54, CD Projekt admits that: "The Company had legitimately and legally acquired copyright to Mr. Andrzej Sapkowski's work". And the work is The Witcher. Isn't it? Lone Internaut (talk) 14:13, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I followed up with a second edit note to clarify that besides feeling it was inaccurate, I don't feel it is necessary at all to highlight in the lead. As for the ownership, Sapkowski clearly still owns the copyright. The same source makes it clear that Sapkowski's argument is that only the rights to make the first game were sold and that it is a license to make video games that was in dispute. CD Project does not own the entire property, such as the TV shows, comics, novels, or film. The sentence you quoted ends with "insofar as is required for its use in games developed by the Company", making it clear that only rights to video games are being discussed. -- ferret (talk) 14:25, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Mh. Seems legit. The video game series is more successful than the books, tought-sales wise. If we put The video games have been very successful, and as of March 2018, they have sold over 33 million copies worldwide, would it be more complete to make a brief summary of the whole thing at this point? With the necessary corrections and is less than four lines. Lone Internaut (talk) 14:40, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not clear to me what you are proposing, as you suggested no actual text to add. There's really not much more to say. The royalties issue just occurred and is just a minor blip in the history and overall topic of the series, without a resolution at this time. It doesn't have enough weight to go in the lead. -- ferret (talk) 14:43, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I was proposing to use in the lead what I wrote but with corrections. What are we talking about? We are talking about this. However your position is quite clear. For me the whole thing is anything but a "minor blip", but doesn't matter. There's really not much more to say, in the end. Goodbye. Lone Internaut (talk) 14:55, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

List of caves
Thanks for the semi-protection at List of caves in the United States. You may want to keep an eye on List of caves as well. Leitmotiv (talk) 20:10, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- ferret (talk) 20:27, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Now it's List of longest caves in the United States. Vandalism there. Leitmotiv (talk) 20:43, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Also ✅, clearly the same vandalism wave (Reddit origin btw) -- ferret (talk) 20:48, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Now it's Cave and List of longest caves. Leitmotiv (talk) 21:43, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ and ✅. -- ferret (talk) 21:45, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * And now Caving. I'm watching a few other mentioned articles from Reddit as well. Leitmotiv (talk) 22:04, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Yep feel free to keep letting me know. Someone told me about a couple on Discord too. -- ferret (talk) 22:11, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there a wikipedia discord chat? Leitmotiv (talk) 22:47, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:Discord -- ferret (talk) 22:53, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * As expected a late arrival at List of deepest caves. Leitmotiv (talk) 07:30, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

They're back! Leitmotiv (talk) 20:19, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Where? I checked three of the articles and didn't see anything. -- ferret (talk) 22:33, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * List of longest caves and Cave. Reverted a bit ago. Leitmotiv (talk) 23:00, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Blocked the VOA user who did both. -- ferret (talk) 00:18, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

/* Boycott / Strike / Revolt */
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Fantasy_XV:_A_New_Empire

I made some changes to Final Fantasy XV: A New Empire with several links about how players are Boycotting / Striking/ Revolting due to astonishing rates or in game items being dropped. Why was it removed?

https://straightshooterbruce.blogspot.com/2019/02/mz-vs-players-ffxvane-boycott-strike.html

https://straightshooterbruce.blogspot.com/2019/02/what-will-happen-if-gamers-unite.html

https://www.reddit.com/r/FFXVANE/comments/ap8r5v/mz_vs_ffxvane_players_boycott_strike_revolt/

https://www.reddit.com/r/FinalFantasy/comments/aoerpa/final_fantasy_a_new_empire_boycott/?st=JRVTX11V&sh=c3326c03 — Preceding unsigned comment added by StraightShooterBruce (talk • contribs) 19:35, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * You cannot use your own blog as a source. Blogs are considered unreliable on Wikipedia per WP:USERG. Reddit itself is what we call a primary source, it does not indicate any importance or why we should include this. Without reliable secondary sources discussing the boycott, it's not suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia. -- ferret (talk) 19:39, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

@Ferret: I believe it is important since many players from across the world are participating in the Boycott / Strike / Revolt. Unfortunately, this have not been picked up by other sources yet (Awaiting confirmation) — Preceding unsigned comment added by StraightShooterBruce (talk • contribs) 19:55, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Asura engine?
This is what wikipedia says about notability: "On Wikipedia, notability is a test used by editors to decide whether a given topic warrants its own article."

I'm not creating an article but merely adding the engine to a list, that has many reliable third party sources and notable games using it. If this doesn't belong on the list, then why 4A does? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eddmanx (talk • contribs) 21:02, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Because 4A Engine has an article (Which may or may not actually pass GNG, I'm not passing judgement on it at this exact moment). Because of the sheer volume of unimportant game engines that have no in-depth coverage, the list has a general inclusion requirement that the engine be notable and have an article. WP:CSC covers this kind of inclusion limitation. -- ferret (talk) 21:35, 13 February 2019 (UTC)


 * This engine is certainly notable, and not less important than Alamo engine or Iron engine, or 4A. The only reason you removed it is because of lack of its own page, correct? Will it be allowed if its page existed? Eddmanx (talk) 21:51, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Essentially, yes. See also WP:WRITEITFIRST. Try it as a Draft and see if WP:AFC will accept it. You'll need to find reliable secondary coverage (WP:VG/RS has a search engine that hits vetted VG related sources). You can write it at Draft:Asura (game engine). -- ferret (talk) 22:04, 13 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Does it have to be an article, or a section in Rebellion Developments's page would do? Some of the engines on the list do not have their own pages. Eddmanx (talk) 22:38, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Strictly speaking it should be standalone, but I would be ok with a well sourced paragraph or two at the parent topic. The truth is, most game engines simply aren't truly notable. If you add an engine section at Rebellion, make sure to create a redirect that goes to it. -- ferret (talk) 22:42, 13 February 2019 (UTC)


 * It has a full-fledged ru wiki page. Does it count? Eddmanx (talk) 22:53, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * No, other wikis are unreliable and do not help establish notability. Each project has it's own policies and guidelines as well, so you have to meet the English Wikipedia guideline (WP:GNG). However, articles that exist on other wikis might still provide you with useful sourcing (if they have sources, anyway) -- ferret (talk) 22:56, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

113.210.51.244
Is 113.210.51.244 related to 113.210.51.244? Perhaps a range block is in order? --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:40, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * You linked the same IP twice, what's the other? I dimly recall this from an AIV earlier today. -- ferret (talk) 23:57, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, found it in my log, 113.210.50.119. Do you have any other information on the user and their editing patterns? I see edit notes with just years denoted as a commonality. Can you confirm if these were the same edit behavior: 113.210.51.254, 113.210.49.254. -- ferret (talk) 00:04, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry for linking the IP twice. You are right 113.210.50.119 is the other one. I don't have any more information, just thought I would bring it to your attention as the seem like the same person from the both the editing behaviour and IP information. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:20, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Sniper Ghost Warrior 3
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sniper:_Ghost_Warrior_3&oldid=prev&diff=884084624

Well, why would godisageek be an unreliable source in this case? They know about Sniper Ghost Warrior's 2 biggest problems, i.e. rails, lack of freedom and in Sniper Ghost Warrior 3's open world they see fix for this. They explain that SGW 3's open world is not Far Cry, but still they like what has been done here...

"My biggest complaint against Sniper Ghost Warrior 2 was the lack of freedom, that a game that should be about intricate recon and precision execution was so frustratingly linear. By comparison, Ghost Warrior 3 is made of freedom. For clarity, this isn’t Far Cry (the open world is nowhere near as vast), and the 26 missions and 16 side missions won’t take you all that long to get through, but what’s here is well-designed enough."

Actually one can say Porecca is unreliable, he complains about empty roads (mostly true) but he does not know the goal behind the game's open world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichalZim (talk • contribs) 16:36, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia's guidelines on reliable sources can be read here. Reliable for Wikipedia has a very specific context, in that we are looking for editorial controls, a reputation for fact checking, reputable publishers, etc. In the case of video games, there are hundreds of thousands of self-published blogs and reviewers, so its very important that we vet sources. We look for things such as published review policies, writers with credentials, etc. Godisageek doesn't seem to meet any of these. If you'd like a more indepth review by others, try posting to the talk page of WP:VG/S. You'll see several current examples of where we are evaluating sources for reliability. -- ferret (talk) 17:57, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for explanation. Still, it seems strange to me, that this guy giving title of the worst game of the year (Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw) to a quite entertaining game has credentials and can be quoted, but you can't write that another reviewer liked something, because hey, this reviewer does not have credentials. Mick Fraser's experience as a reviewer is another matter, to delve into at a different time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichalZim (talk • contribs) 20:09, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Nintendo
I realized that Doug will be transitioned to President on April before you reverted my edit. Just to be clear, I was too busy to revert my edit, due to school. RareButterflyDoors (talk) 02:52, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok. -- ferret (talk) 03:00, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

3DS
"Reverted 1 edit by EzekielT: You've been reverted on this multiple times by multiple editors. The onus is on you to make your case on the talk page, not wait a month or two and try again. See WP:BRD."

I was reverted only by one editor, Serge. Who was also the only editor who voiced opposition to my edit. And we were having a discussion about it, and then all of a sudden the admin left the conversation. Around a month later, Serge reverted my edit without notifying me. Since the discussion had not concluded when Serge reverted my edit, I added it back. I also made a compromise to the user by leaving the (3DS family) 74.84 million and (DS family) 154.02 million figures there and not deleting them. -- <font color="#00FF7F">EzekielT ''<font color="#00FF7F">Talk  22:00, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I stopped responding because we were just talking circles. I reverted you again because you had still failed to gather a WP:CONSENSUS or follow WP:BRD. Sergecross73   msg me  22:04, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * But you were the only one who disagreed with it. So it's 1:1. Your opinion is superior? -- <font color="#00FF7F">EzekielT ''<font color="#00FF7F">Talk  22:07, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * And since it's only you who disagreed with it, you should've also tried to gather a consensus. -- <font color="#00FF7F">EzekielT ''<font color="#00FF7F">Talk  22:10, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Are you reading WP:BRD or not? The WP:BURDEN falls on you because you are the one who is introducing a change. It’s not about someone’s opinion being superior, it’s about the fact that on Wikipedia, when there is a dispute, it defaults to the original state until there is a consensus for change. Without a consensus, no change is made. Sergecross73   msg me  22:12, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Why wouldn't you want the data, it's just a sentence that shows how many original 3DS units were shipped. I do not see any reason whatsoever for removing it, unless we want to deprive Wikipedia of information... Also, I kept the number of total units sold by all the 3DS family models anyway. I also provided a reliable citation from Nintendo itself, so WP:BURDEN does not fall on me. BRD might, but the "process is not mandated by Wikipedia policy". I also made a compromise to the user by leaving the (3DS family) 74.84 million and (DS family) 154.02 million figures there and not deleting them, something you seem not to have noticed. -- <font color="#00FF7F">EzekielT ''<font color="#00FF7F">Talk  22:16, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * The article’s scope is all of the 3DS systems, not just the original model. It clutters an already busy infobox, and it’s not consistent with any other system articles (PS4, GBA, etc) do it. Why do you insist on arguing circles on user talk pages that are unlikely to have enough participants to form a consensus? You’ve got two valid paths. Getting a consensus on the article talk page. Or dropping it. Because I’m done talking circles with you on user talk pages. (And you’re not reading burden right. It takes more than just a source. You need a consensus through discussion. I don’t doubt the factual accuracy. My concern is that it doesn’t need to be portrayed on the infobox.) Sergecross73   msg me  22:29, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Why doesn't it need to be portrayed on the infobox? Same goes for the GBA. For the PS4 it's different because the PS4 Slim and Pro do not have their own articles. The GBA SP, DSi, 2DS, etc. however do have their own pages. -- <font color="#00FF7F">EzekielT  ''<font color="#00FF7F">Talk  22:39, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to revert, but you should NOT edit comments substantially after someone has replied. That said, I basically agree with Sergecross. If you want to change this, discuss it on the article's talk page, not my user talk. If you feel its broader than this one article, try WT:VG. (Unrelated note: You have two ticks in your signature for italics but do not have any closing ticks.) -- ferret (talk) 23:47, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

typos
do you have any idea how many pages there are with the led/lead typos?

being lead is lead was lead has lead have lead had lead

etc

and do you have any idea how many pages give false positives? DS (talk) 03:11, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
 * So you're going to add a comment to every single article that correctly uses "lead" in a way your search doesn't like? These aren't false positives, they're correct and valid, and these comments completely unnecessary. It's not a "false positive", its a bad search. -- ferret (talk) 03:13, 23 February 2019 (UTC)


 * These are false positives in the search for incorrect uses of the phrase "has lead" instead of "has led", "been lead" instead of "been led", etc. If you can provide a better description, I'd be interested to hear it. DS (talk) 03:18, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
 * You can use not a typo instead. Is a widely-used tool being tripped up by this, or is it just your searches? Qzekrom (talk) 03:25, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note usage as here: diff. -- ferret (talk) 03:33, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Lurs
Hi dear admin. I'm one hundred percent sure that the source User:Shadegan mentioned doesn't say anything about Lurs in Luri. He must prove that his source mentions that, but I'm sure that he can't. You shouldn't leave the page after protection, and if I am right, you should undo his edit. please read the talk page or the two last sections of User talk:Fajr18. Then, you can decide if I am right or wrong, and I'll respect your decision. Best regards.Taddah (talk) 15:23, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not involved in the dispute and have no opinion on it. I have simply protected the article to stop the on-going edit war. Achieve a consensus on the talk page, or use other dispute resolution paths. -- ferret (talk) 22:24, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

About my revision
Hello. Sorry for that, I will take my mistakes into account. Just have to adapt a bit more to EnWiki's policies. Ur frnd (talk) 07:35, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Markus Persson Twitter controversies
The additions about Markus Persson's support of conspiracy theories was removed citing the lack of secondary coverage. However, one of the items had 2 citations and both items linked directly to Persson's statements on Twitter. This wasn't a claim someone just made about him but Persson himself expressing own opinion. It is my position that this was removed in error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pickle.monger (talk • contribs) 17:42, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Use the article's talk page. -- ferret (talk) 23:02, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

FYI
Hello F. Just to let you know that IP has come off your block and has gone right back to their disruptive editing. Thanks for your time. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 10:24, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Reblocked. -- ferret (talk) 13:17, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks F. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 19:43, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Multiplayer listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Multiplayer. Since you had some involvement with the Multiplayer redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. wbm1058 (talk) 21:35, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Pro wrestling titlers
Hi, Ferret. Thanks for blocking the Ips. There is one more IP, it make the same edition a few hours after the block. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/82.246.34.225 Thank you so much :) --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 13:03, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- ferret (talk) 13:04, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi. Sorry to bother you, but another IP is doing the same editions. Do you think a protection would be better for the articles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HHH Pedrigree (talk • contribs) 13:29, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- ferret (talk) 14:29, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Mario Maker 2 mode of gameplay
I've left a reply on what you posted on my talk page, please take a look at it (not to mention I find it quite rude that you have accused me of vandalism) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.63.92 (talk) 19:30, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I've not accused you of vandalism. I've accused you of disruption after you've made the same edit multiple times over several weeks. -- ferret (talk) 19:32, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, well I apologise there, that's my mistake. But you have still accused me of using rumours as sourced despite the fact I was citing the official page - see the talk page for Super Mario Maker 2.92.236.63.92 (talk) 19:34, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

March 2019
Got your message, but thought to message you directly. As I posted on the talk page, I thought to justify some of my FFXIV editing by showing Ibberd not to be a bit character as Axem Titanium referenced him due to how he progress the storyline as a "Knight of Cerebus"-type of villain. The first being theinfamous "regicide" in 2.5 where Ibberd chopped off Raubhan's arm and turned the Crystal Braves on the Scions, starting at 1:35:22, then acting against Lolorito in 3.0 to execute Raubhan as a "traitor" to their nation, and finally Iberd unmasked as the Griffon before committing suicide while using the aether in Nidhogg's Eyes (which the Ascian got in the 3.3 epilogue) and his subordinates' dying prayers to create Shinryu in the first half of 3.5.2603:9000:7D0A:8C00:934:7319:9A57:C47D (talk) 22:25, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The best place to discuss the direct changes you want to make on the article will be the article's talk page, so that more editors can see it and reply. In this case, Talk:Final Fantasy XIV is where you want to go to discuss any important missing plot points. -- ferret (talk) 22:56, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hi There, thank you for blocking that user I wont say what ip to keep their privacy it was starting to get annoying!! many thanks  JJBullet   14:04, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Ridley
Hey there. I saw that you've been working a little bit on Ridley (Metroid) along with 999999 other things as always. I saw that you had reverted some blatant fancruft including links to wikia. Sadly this kind of topic needs a bridge between an encyclopedia and a fansite. :-/ I personally would like to officially link directly to wikia (whether as a citation or some other template) and I want to agree with the other editor's edit message in response to you, as a way to offload fandom. It sounds like he was intending wikia as a soft source in lieu of WP:RS. But there isn't one official way to offload fandom at wikipedia other than to delete it, and the wikia administration is kinda problematic and I hear that site has lost many of its wikis due to its admin behavior. Are we not allowed to put wikia in External links? It seems like there should be a template for that, like there is for findagrave and twitter lol. But anyway that's my semi-blubbering opinion. Luckily, Ridley has a fair amount of RS. Anyway I thought you might want to be aware in case of fandom resurgence, and might want to check that I didn't delete a WP:RS or such. No offense since you're so busy but I am honestly surprised that you put up with such extreme fandom in this particular article, and I just got Nintendonix banned for all the endless garbage WP:OR. I've never seen anyone else NOT ONLY mention WatchMojo over and over in countless articles but ALSO just not even bother to actually cite the dreck among all the carefully wikicoded WP:OR about it! — Smuckola(talk) 04:35, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * "Soft unreliable references" belong in External Links I believe, which is where most articles have a Wikia link, if they have one. See Wikia. As far as Ridley goes, my only edit to that article was a single revert, which someone else had called my attention to I believe. I never reviewed the article any deeper. -- ferret (talk) 12:12, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

/* Games developed */
Why did you revert my edit on the Grey Matter Interactive article? Go to Moby Games, type in the games (Spider-Man 2000, True Crime: Streets of LA), click on Credits and choose Windows/PC to see who developed the ports. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Westcoast1978 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * That edit has been reverted multiple times by multiple editors for the same reason: There are two "Grey Matter" companies, and "Grey Matter Interactive" is not the one who did those. "LTI Gray Matter" is a different company. -- ferret (talk) 22:52, 30 March 2019 (UTC)