User talk:Ferret/Archive 2

Forwards compatibility
Would it be fair to include a "Yes, but to an extent", and include a footnote mentioning that much newer software can't run if the hardware doesn't support required features? Wikinium (talk) 18:05, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Partial is Partial. Please try to be neutral. There's no "Yes, with exceptions". The idea of a footnote that newer software can't run on older hardware is the very essence of a lack of forward compatibility. -- ferret (talk) 20:20, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

PCMR article
Current revision of that article looks fine to me, kudos to you and the other editors for bringing that spat to a consensus. Breadblade (talk) 06:29, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 19 July
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Farming Simulator page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=672145480 your edit] caused a cite error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F672145480%7CFarming Simulator%5D%5D Ask for help])

Gamindustry numbers on Elder Scrolls Online sales section
Sorry, but you are wrong about this, gamindustry IS NOT source of numbers, blog from SuperData (which is completely unreliable source) is THE source.

90.144.32.15 (talk) 16:58, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter. Gamesindustry reported on it and their editor oversight vetted it. The idea of a "reliable source" is one that we can trust to do appropriate vetting and oversight. -- ferret (talk) 16:59, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Nonsense, im reporting you. Random blogs arent reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.144.32.15 (talk • contribs) 17:01, 16 August 2015‎ (UTC)
 * Superdataresearch isn't really a random blog, it's an industry market research company. -- ferret (talk) 17:03, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Superdata is one in line of internet analysts who demonstrated on many occasions on such blogs how wrong their numbers are becuse their numbers were compared to existibg official numbers. And in this it is just someones BLOG from there.

If you can get OFFICIAL verification of those numbers be my guest and revert it, until then remove them from wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.144.32.15 (talk) 17:09, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Along with any other info cosisting any of superdatas numbers. They are NOT reliable source, no matter which media passes their blogs on.

90.144.32.15 (talk) 17:12, 16 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I've reverted the most recent change by 90.144.32.15. Despite his or her opinion, per WP:VG/RS gamesindustry.biz is a reliable source -- Pemilligan (talk) 01:10, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

You will be reported too if you keep reverting this 90.144.32.15 (talk) 06:54, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

From WP:VG/RS "This list is neither complete nor can it be used as definitive proof regarding a listed source's reliability determination" 90.144.32.15 (talk) 07:05, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

And MORE "Articles related to video games need reliable sources like any other Wikipedia article—content must be verifiable" 90.144.32.15 (talk) 07:09, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, they must be verifiable.... by a reliable source, which Gamesindustry is. -- ferret (talk) 12:04, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Reports incoming 5.39.157.198 (talk) 19:24, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Feel free. -- ferret (talk) 19:26, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Your revert on Half-Life (series)
I added Android to the list of platforms on the Half-Life (series) page and you reverted it for some reason. Half-Life 2 runs on Android (NVIDIA Shield devices) natively so that is an incorrect reversion. I have fixed it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pacnet (talk • contribs) 21:08, 21 July 2014‎ (UTC)

IV"e got evidence
If i Cant send you link i thought you should see it in you tube that they have hardcore punk and mathcore in them just look at Howord jones vs jessie leach vocal battle if you don"t believe me just check out the 1999 demo"s then hopefully you see my point and provided sorcesJg9443 (talk) 22:14, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Youtube is not a suitable source, you are doing original research based on watching a video. In short, it's your personal opinion. Please read WP:RS for details on what constitutes a reliable source. -- ferret (talk) 00:35, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

i got big evidence
I am trying to prove that they are in the punk rock lead just for example rise against is an american punk rock bandJg9443 (talk) 17:47, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Yet again i am going to give evidence but diffrent big and juicy something you cannot denied i am going to give the websit the source and the link of the video that they say that they are punk rock just give me little while and latter you"l know what is their main lead genre.Jg9443 (talk) 18:00, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

OK i put melodic hardcore in my page if you change it to rise against is a Chicago punk rock band instead of rise against is a american melodic hardocore band you scratch my back i"ll scratch yours.Jg9443 (talk) 23:13, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

OK i put melodic hardcore in my page if you change it to rise against is a Chicago punk rock band instead of rise against is a american melodic hardocore band you scratch my back i"ll scratch yours.Jg9443 (talk) 23:14, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Both pages, Rise Against and Rise Against, should say melodic hardcore. This most accurate reflects the current state of the band and what sources say. -- ferret (talk) 23:16, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry i did not no but that does not give you the right to change my page to rise against is a Chicago punk rock band and i gave the the information i had the evidence.Jg9443 (talk) 00:12, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but you do not own pages, everyone has the right to change the pages. Pages both here on English wikipedia and Simple Wikipedia have to be backed by sources, so they should match. In this case, the sources point to melodic hardcore. -- ferret (talk) 00:18, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

By the way the last time i checked punk rock is a genre and one question strike annywere is melodic hardocre why cant you put that there ?Jg9443 (talk) 00:31, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Please don't discuss this on my talk page any further. Use the talk page of the article. -- ferret (talk) 00:32, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Just to be easy just to serge to change it please i am also getting tired of this but i will not quit.Jg9443 (talk) 14:40, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Refusing to accept WP:Consensus is not going to work well for you. I've asked you to keep this discussion on the article talk page. Any further messages on this topic here at my talk will be removed. -- ferret (talk) 14:42, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting
I just saw this. What the... Thanks for reverting. --Soetermans. T / C 08:40, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Heh. No problem. He got upset and told another admin that I was harassing him and "even reverting my real edits" .... He was ultimately infdef'd by ARV. -- ferret (talk) 12:17, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

List of games using Steam authentication
So. Maybe add this tittle in new section "Authentication reiquired in past" with descrption "released on GOG"? Eurohunter (talk) 19:20, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
 * , I would bring it up on the talk page of the list if you want input on this. The removal from the list was valid, as far as how the list's inclusion is currently defined. -- ferret (talk) 19:31, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Far Cry
Just because you say there's a consensus, doesn't make it so. Also you have no proof there's any connection between me and the other IP. Unless you're a checkuser, you can't make that allegation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.216.79.210 (talk) 22:33, 13 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Hah, displaying the exact same editing patterns? Sorry, don't need a checkuser to make the association.... -- ferret (talk) 22:40, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

About Skylanders SuperChargers and Skylanders SuperChargers Racing Reverts
I reverted your change since both titles are different products as their name indicate. As Nintendo state on its website, "Skylanders SuperChargers Racing for the Wii and 3DS: Fans can augment their SuperCharger experience with a complementary, dedicated racing combat game -- Skylanders SuperChargers Racing -- for the Wii™ system and Nintendo 3DS™ hand-held system. All-new tracks, augmented with power-ups, boosts, hazards and more, offer up to 50 different and exciting gameplay experiences. On Nintendo 3DS, gamers can go head-to-head with competitive multiplayer via local play or online with up to four players. Iconic Nintendo character Bowser™ and his Sky vehicle, Clown Cruiser are available in the Skylanders SuperChargers Racing Starter Packs for Wii and Nintendo 3DS and can also be played on the Wii U™ system. The Supercharged character not only works in Skylanders SuperChargers Racing, but also as amiibo in compatible Nintendo games, so players can store their saved data in both modes with a simple twist of the figure's base.". Also, Maxime Montcalm, the game director of Skylanders SuperChargers Racing explains in an interview with GamerGen (in French) why this game isn't a port: "Le porter à partir de la PS4, c'est un gros défi, alors le porter sur Wii, personne n'était capable de faire un jeu d'une qualité semblable à la PS4 et la Xbox One. Donc quand on nous a demandé de faire un épisode Wii, on a tout de suite décidé d'en faire notre projet."

Also, Guha Bala, president of Vicarious Visions, confirmed in an interview FamilyGamer TV, that Beenox helped develop Skylanders SuperChargers (race tracks, power-ups). Nintendo Life states "Beenox, which is responsible for the Wii and 3DS games, has also contributed these Kart Racing modes to the main Wii U (and PlayStation and Xbox) experience.". Facteur Geek, upon visiting Beenox during the game launch, confirmed this was well (in French): "Le mode aventure fut développé en grande partie par l’équipe de Vicarious Visions, studio d’Activision alors que le studio de Québec Beenox, quant à lui, s’est attaqué à la partie course qui est très présente dans le titre. C’est donc dire que la version Wii et 3DS sont les bébés du studio car elle ne possède que le mode course.". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Francois Taddei (talk • contribs) 23:25, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * , part of the reason for the reverts is that you did not use sources, and wikilinked to a non-existent article. I do not believe Racing will be treated as a separate game by enwiki. It is clearly a feature reduced version of the main game. You need to take some time to include the sources you've listed here in both the Beenox and Skylanders SuperChargers articles. I will leave the table change at Beenox alone, but without these sources, others may revert them. Per WP:BURDEN it is on you to include the sources in the article. -- ferret (talk) 23:44, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Additionally, WP:COI requires you to disclose when you have a conflict of interest. It appears you have a business relationship with Beenox. -- ferret (talk) 23:46, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * -- that is now done, I made sure to communicate to Francois that this disclosure was required. :) As for the matter at hand, I definitely think that Skylanders: SuperChargers Racing deserves at least a section or mention at Skylanders: SuperChargers (I'll see what I can put together), and since the credited studios differ, I'd be absolutely fine with it being listed in Beenox's article. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  23:49, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I've got no issue with that as long as sources support, which appears to be the case (Though not enough for an independent article in my view) ;) I just don't have time tonight myself to expand on it, especially working with sources that are primarily in French. I've already started to put together some thoughts on other expansions for Skylanders SuperChargers, it's in need of some serious work. -- ferret (talk) 23:52, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I did write up a small (sourced) section in the main article, which Skylanders: SuperChargers Racing redirects to. Thanks for your cooperation, and of course the article will need serious work to expand it -- but then again, most articles do, don't they? ;) ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  00:06, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for letting me know.
Hello, thanks for letting me know. Yes I own the site but I'm trying to add the news whichever is new or not yet added, please do check i'm not trying to add anything unnecessary.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sohelmoldhariya (talk • contribs) 20:25, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I own the website that's correct but as you noticed all the info which I linked was legit and was related to the topic. if you think it's wrong please let me know. I post latest news related to anime, so just trying to update news and also link it to wiki.\

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sohelmoldhariya (talk • contribs) 20:29, 17 October 2015 (UTC)


 * From what I can tell, you are simply adding links without improving the articles or using the link to source anything, so this is essentially spam. Since you own the site, despite your good intentions, you should avoid adding it to articles. If the site is noteworthy enough or carries important news not covered elsewhere, other editors will use them. However, the reliably of the site as a source might be questioned due to a lack of reputation for fact checking and no stated editorial policies. -- ferret (talk) 20:31, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you and here I have a news and it's confirmed and also mentioned in WIKIA of Dragon Ball Super. https://otakukart.com/otakublog/anime/super-saiyan-blue-female-whis-s-real-names-champa-s-identity-revealed and not yet posted anywhere else — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sohelmoldhariya (talk • contribs) 20:56, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * This isn't really news though, just trivia about a character revealed in the latest chapter. And a quick Google shows over 10000 sites have already posted about Vados. -- ferret (talk) 21:05, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

I need you to undue my unjust suspension
i have been using wikipedia for years and everyone has their own way of editing, i have made contributions here that i know for a fact that before i put them no one in said article has, i'm not a pro at editing and or citing the sources cause well i'm not here 24/7 but i do contribute and i don't just make stufff up, i look up the info from places and websites and just because you don't see all the facts in 1 area doesn't mean you cant find them elsewhere, now regarding articles some articles in here in wikipeidia can also be used as sources, i don't see why sources within wikipedia can't also be used because they were put there by other who sourced it, now i see some atcles that have some parts sourced, others they don't have everything sourced and yet the info is still there, even though some information isn't linked doesn't mean that its not true or doesn't exit, i actually plan to source as much as i can but i'm not a pro here, no one has told me how to edit, i learned all this from seeing others edit, the coding in how to extend title boxes etc etc, i learned from what others have done...and its unfair that i'm being suspended because i try to make everything as accurate as possible, trust me i know the information i put isn't made up but its sourced, i just got to put it there where i get it from, i rememeber putting information on articles that no one has bothered to look up and since i put them people have used it and built on that, no one else has done it before me, and the information is correct but no one made the effort to look it up...I DID ;/ ...and i'm being suspended fojust because i'm thorough and want to make the best articlee as i can, if that's the case why don't you just let users make their ow version of articles for their own personal use..i thought we were all suppose to work together here..and i do not, i repeat do not make up facts, everything i put is what i have seen from websites , i might not have been able to put links to all of them but no one has taught how to do things here, i learned all this myself from other editors works.. no one is born knowing everything, the way i do my contributions is as thorough and specific as possible because i blieve it makes it easier for people to know exactly what said article specifications are, yes we all don't get it erfect but i look up the information, there's many wbebsites i get my sources from, credible websites, it doesn't always have to be the websites from the creators of said device because lets be honest some device makers don't reveal their devices full specs always because they don't want the tech-savy and more intelligent consumers to know cause they know how to decide which is better, im that type , i dont just buy things and not knowing their capabilities or features, i don't understand how some editors revert back to a simple article that btw is missing facts, so basically its a bunch of boxes with little to no information on them cause those editors were too lazy to look up the information, there r many articles n websites that hjave detailed specs of devices , just because the device maker doesn't put them because they're afraid of the competition would outdo them in specs or users to pick the more powerful or most featured device  doesn't mean we all don't have the right to know the full feature set of a device, i got all this information from legit articles for example look at this one, some of the information here is sourced from wiki itself , meaning the same info that its in some of these  SOC's is that's in other articles here and they match, now regarding facts about clock speeds and performance if a same model GPU for example runs at 600 MHz with a flop count of 600 gflops and another of the same model or family but clocked higher at 700 mhz then its common sense to figure out that for each 100mhz speed it adds 100 gflops even though its not mentioned there in the article because someone didn't fill it out, if it has the same specs but different clock speeds or cores than its not heard to piece 2 and 2 together..do you really need to be told what  X means in 2 + X = 5? no because we can just figure this out on our own, maybe the device maker didnt put it there to avoid competetion, maybe they forgot to put it , but the truth of the matter is that some things you can figure it out if you have the smarts for it..some of these articlesi see online besides the ones in wiki go into detail about all the internals or specs of a device but ofocoruse the device maker wont always tell you exactly what all the features specifically for obvious competition reasons.. i mean theres formulas to calculate flops and they vary depending the type of graphics architecture etc...take a look at this article..its def not posted by the device makers but the information there is accurate because it was gathered by other articles but also form people who prob also tested the performance of devices, well in this case GPU performance...the WII U was never told by nintendo its CPU clock speed because they know that people would compare it unfavorably to the competition but the truth is even if your device is inferior you shouldn't hide the facts of its specs which is why some users actually took the device apart and tested the CPU cpeed of the Wii u to get its clock count, nintendo or ibm never wnet into detailed about because they know the PS4 and X1 would outperform it by several times, just because the device maker doesn't post the full specs doesn't mean others wont figure it out test the hardware, the only reason why we found out the gpu clock speed of the wii u is at 1.24 ghz was because someone took it apart and tested it...they did tests, calculate, etc to come out with the specs, they didn't just make them up, now i know articles posted by people who havent made the devices make mistakes, i mean we re human we all make make mistakes but even the device makers make mistakes as well but the truth of the matter is that most information about a device is usually correct and i see many articles here that doesnt have every single detail sourced yet its there because they didnt put it in there i mean can you imagine an article that has lots of details but has every couple of words sourced i mean, having sources is good but u can get alot of information about a device from 1 article at least  but ofocurse its good to put as many as possible that has the specs to match the sources, i didn't put links to everything i found but it is legit the info i put, and yes i know specs change and rumors happen , its always going to be like that but facts that are done by a third part other than device makers are usually pretty accurate sources and wen you think about it , 3rd party sources aare alot more honest than the device makers at times because they would at least tell you the things that the device makers don, t want to tell you: http://kyokojap.myweb.hinet.net/gpu_gflops/..look at his link..this is one of the places i get my info from.. you mean to tell me this isn't a valid source? i seen sources in other articles in wikipedia that come from third parties and they aren't even all linked or sourced but they're accurate..i don't deserve to be suspended just because i want to make an article as fleshed out and specific as possible especially when the stuff i put in there is mostly if not all accurate, imean for god sakes some articles even tell you the performance of a device...and i'm not sure if it could be used as a source but theres even articles in wikipedia that back up my claims, now not everything in wiki is going to match cause well people make errors that's when you have to use your head and calculate..fill in the blanks if you will, and i already gave an example of this..so please take away this silly suspension and let me edit peacefully, i know i haveto source as much as i can but i'm trying, im sourcing as much as i can and yes it is time consuming and i dedicate myself to editing..now if i was trolling or doing bad things than yes i would happily blame myself but imnot being disruptive at all, jsut because others have different ways of doing things and just because i can be more thorough than others doesn't men that other admins have to abuse their authority because they didn't figure it out themselves so it seems more like a personal attack than me actually doing things wrong...i mean my work speaks for itself...i put info thats correct or pretty close to it and i also am trying to source the websites i get this info from..look for yourself if you are persistent and smart enough 1 can find out as much about something if they search for it and at times doing a little thinking n math n piecing things together helps too..it not a guess or made up when a times i try to piece things together its actually fact all you gotta to at times is just figure it out..i contributed enough in wiki and i don't know what the requirements are but i don't want to be harrassed like this anymore, being judged because i can figure out things better than some can..that is harrassment so what can i do to be an admin myself? take away my suspension and let me show you how accurate and detailed i make my edits which i know for a fact others don't make the same effort and its likely the ones who complain about it its because of personal envy that they din;t do it themselves so they abuse their power just because others are more dedicated..i noticed articles that i edit that i put facts in there that werent there before i edit them and others have built upon my contributions to make it better, used my edits to help their own now i'm not trying to take full credit because we all do our part but i don't want to be labeled DISRUPTIVE when in fact i'm actually making the article even better..you have editors who are also admins that think its fine to have very little to know specs in articles, that is just wrong and they haven't improved it...i have i filled in the blanks they have't and what do they do? they revert it back to simple and blank sections in articles..does that look right to you? of course not, so i know for a fact this is personal, theyre' reverting not because i made a few msitakes oh no cause i i' am learning but that's not it because the truth of the matter is, my contributions despite not always putting the sources are pretty close if not correct but they're jsut so immature and envious that since they didnt' figure out themselves they get upset i mean how you gonna have ab article that for example has A B  F  H I L , has missing facts and i fill in the blanks because those editors didn't bothered looking up the facts and yet when i fill in the blank they revert it back to the version that is missing facts..does that make sense to you? so if you have to talk to a superior to uplift my suspension than so be it but i did nothing wrong..and i hate the term DISRUPTIVE used on me when i'm doing anything but that..i'm actually improving an article and filling the blanks WITH FACTS, taken from other sites whether its a 3rd or 1st part website so please let me edit because i contributed here and did hings many editors despite their experience here, haven't bothered to look up or figure out themselves... look up my latest contribution and tell me if what you think i'm doing is so called disruptive or vandalism...im actually improving it by putting out as much facts about it as possible..little by little...you have these editors have the articles with blanks for example having some devices say that it doesn't support storage media when in fact it does.the editor didn't even bothered to look it up, they just put that it didnt't when in fact the deice actually supports it..and i'm doing the 1 getting being disruptive or doing it wrong? and yet you have editors who don't bother looking up the facts, leaving blank spaces or not wanting to figure out the specs is just unacceptable...just because you're an admin it means you have the right to mess up and the ones who are very dedicated to finding out facts are the 1s being disruptive ? are you kidding me? do the right thing uplift my suspension and make me an admin if you have to to keep others from abusing their authority, i would never do that to someone who is contributing to make the article better, i would actually appreciate he or she took the time to find out and make it as specifically and accurate as possible...i'm not asking for a medal but i feel like the things i'm doing i'm not being credited for or others are taking my credit for things i done when others haven't ..i don't deserve this treatment..just because other who aren't admins are more capable and dedicated doesn't mean you have to abuse your power because you are envious of them because you didn't figure it our or thought of it yourself... 71.172.52.70 (talk) 16:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC)and yes i know i have a few typos but that's ok 71.172.52.70 (talk) 16:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC) 1more thing: look at this this is the version of the article from the 1 who suspended me :https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_video_game_consoles_(eighth_generation)&oldid=685534613...tell me if you see a big difference between his version and mine; https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_video_game_consoles_(eighth_generation)&oldid=685519785    now the memory clock speeds of the main consoles (x1,PS4,Wiiu) I put that there along time ago when no one lse has bothered to and other details in that article and thers i have done it and others built upon it...now look closely att he microconsole section in my version comapred to his...in his he has alot of things missing in mine i actually went to 1st n 3rd part websites n with a little thinking and figured all this stuff out myself and ofcourse looked up the facts in other websites...i mean the info matches even some articles here i mean i dont understand what the problem is when i'm actually doing the better job here, how the hell can he think doing a half assed job with errors be  better than one that is more detailed and accurate just because he didn't bothered looking it up or figuring it out on his or her own hmm? like i said this is more than just an error correcting it seems more like a personal thing to me from some envious 42 year old man..if he was the one who went through all this trouble to look up the info, fill in the blanks with a little thinking and problem solving he wouldn't say anything lol but since he din't  he uses and abuses his power by saying its disruptive..that is ridiculous on so many levels and totally untrue..ilike i said before i;m learning and yes i'll try to cite and get  links or sources as much as i can but as you can see by the links i put here well i know how to find out facts about something as best as i can...as you can see my contributions and work speeks for itself...so i made a few mistakes in the past, we all have its completely normal to make mistakes but theres adifferenc between making mistakes and being disruptive to purposely mess up an article..i would never do that because this is 1 of my favorite websites i come here pretty often to look up information and its wonderful that anyone can contribute but i also know that also anyone can purposely vandalize or mess up on purpose..im not those people, take my edits seriously and i did enough contributions here that i can tell the stuff i put has helped others because the ones who appreciate my efforts are the 1s who built upon it and don't erase it because its correct..just because some1 does edits in a mor lazy and half assed way doesn't mean they have to abuse their power as admins just because they couldn't do it themselves..thats childish and immature and unjust...i'm sure theres many who would agree with me on this and i know the ones who don't aree are probably the ones who have the same prejudice and envious mindset as the 1 or 1s who suspended me just because i want to make a more accurate and specific version of an article as opposed to a half-assed mostly blank article just because they didnt feel like doing the extra work or researching or figuring out piecing things together or because they aren't knowledgeable on the subject...im tech savy so i know enough i contribute and i come to wikipedia to get information and research so im a contributor as well as a reader..do the right thing..people like me aren't disruptive just because we have different ways to edit that are more dedicated than some...we all have our ways of doing things and as long as they do it with good intentions to make the site better than they're not being disruptive its nto as if they're purposely trying to mess up an article..it because we all have ways of doing things..but 1 thing i know is that being as accurate n thorough as possible isn't bad.. 71.172.52.70 (talk) 17:22, 18 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but I really can't be bothered to read that massive wall of text. The section title says you want me to undo your suspension. I am not an admin, but you also do not appear to be blocked. If you mean the page protection on History of video game consoles (eighth generation), I also cannot remove that, and I would not if I could. Multiple editors reverted your edits and asked you to use the article's talk page to discuss the changes you wanted. So far, you still have not used the article's talk page. I recommend when you do decide to use the article's talk page that you pause to review your message and check for spelling and grammar. You'll get a much better response if you make an effort to type clearly. just as info. -- ferret (talk) 18:10, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * IP, you are not blocked, the page is locked. Please propose your changes on the WP:TALKPAGE rather than these massive vague rants. Thanks. Sergecross73   msg me  01:34, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

rollback
Hi Ferret. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3A enabled] rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Katietalk 23:17, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.
 * Thanks Katie. :) -- ferret (talk) 23:31, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2015
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=687785651 your edit] to Video game industry may have broken the syntax by modifying 3 "[]"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]. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:02, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Repaired. -- ferret (talk) 19:29, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Maria Gheorghiu
Buna! Nu am inteles de ce se tot sterge pagina cu Maria Gheorghiu. Ce nu este in regula? Nu se poate sa-mi corectezi eventualele greseli in loc sa tot stergi pagina? Incerc sa fac tot ce pot, dar nu stiu foarte bine. Cred ca ai putea sa ajuti, in loc sa tot stergi de atatea ori... — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndaVeronica29 (talk • contribs) 14:14, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Google translation for my sake:

"Hey! I did not understand why all Delete page Maria Gheorghiu . What is wrong ? Can not my place to correct mistakes in all Delete page ? I try to do my best, but I do not know very well . I guess you could to help, instead of deleting all so many times .."
 * I have marked the page for deletion under A7 for the same reason it was deleted the last two times. It does not meet the notability criteria for English Wikipedia. Our policy can be read at WP:GNG, and in addition, notability guidelines for musicians can be found at WP:BAND. You have recreated the article with the same content each time it was deleted, which is why it keeps getting tagged again. Without reliable sources and a statement on why she is important (Backed by sources), the article will likely continue to be deleted. -- ferret (talk) 14:18, 29 October 2015 (UTC)


 * While writing this response, your article was moved to the draft space. You can access it at Draft:Maria Gheorghiu. You may continue to work on it there, but it should not be send back to mainspace until notability is established. -- ferret (talk) 14:19, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Maria Gheorghiu page
Hey! I did everything the best I could and tried to respect the rules. I do not understand why everything is deleted page. Instead delete it all the time, you could help me to correct mistakes. Maybe not quite so big ... I reserved a lot of time to write page as well and it's bothering me all the time ... I'd rather faded a little help, a message of encouragement, not only "your page has been deleted. "Especially as Maria Gheorghiu deserve a page in English. Thank you in advance! Anda — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndaVeronica29 (talk • contribs) 14:32, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Anda, several editors have left you notes about the necessary guidelines you need to read and explained why the deletions were being done. -- ferret (talk) 15:06, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for helping out here. --Neil N  talk to me 15:17, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

User warnings
Hey, just a friendly reminder to use User warning templates when reverting cases of clear cut vandalism like you did, otherwise the AIV process won't work as efficiently. Thanks for your editing. —Hermionedidallthework (talk) 20:07, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Dreamcast
Please change the dreamcast page. You can use the data on the Japanese wiki. The 10.6 million figure is totally wrong. The total sales of the dreamcast worldwide as of 2014 are 9.13 million the source is CESA. CESA publishes a yearly annual report on world software and hardware sales in the games industry. The Japanese wiki uses this as the source. There is no business source for the 10.6 million the only source people could find was a blog.

By you blocking my changes to the Dreamcast page you are promoting bad information. Please do the right thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.45.9.125 (talk) 06:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Ringzntattz vandalism
Thanks for reverting WoW and warning User:Ringzntattz. I have added him to Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism Seadragon (talk) 20:11, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem. AIV will almost certainly block him as a vandal-only account. -- ferret (talk) 20:13, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Console Generation dates
Regarding to your edit in the "video game consoles"-area: where do you found that the third and fourth generation BOTH ended in 2003? This makes no sense for me, especially in the template "history of video games" below are standing other discontinue dates (1983-1995 and 1987–1999 respectively). According to the article, the 3rd generation ended with the discontinuation of the NES in 1995 and the 4th generation ended with the SNES' discontinuation in 1999 in North America, Australia and Europe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by XLight (talk • contribs) 20:09, 16 November 2015 (UTC) ‎
 * Both the NES and SNES were not fully discontinued until 2003. Wikipedia is meant to reflect a worldview, not just a North American view. -- ferret (talk) 20:14, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Still a redirect
probably shouldn't have happened per WP:NOTBROKEN. (See also MOS:REDIR.) I'm not hard-strung up on it, just letting you know that a redirect isn't a problem. --Izno (talk) 15:05, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Interesting. I've no issue if you really feel it shouldn't have been done, but in this particular case and the history of name-warring over this genre's name, I believe it probably really is preferable not to use the redirect. It's settled down for now but a couple years ago, not sure if you were involved, was a lot of move warring between "AoS", "Dota-like", "Action RTS", and "MOBA" before it finally settled down as "MOBA". As a side note, WP:NOTBROKE and MOS:REDIR seems to directly go against the all the AWB users who script pipelink/redirect fixes.... -- ferret (talk) 15:08, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those users should probably be reminded. ;) WP:NOTBROKE has exceptions of course (largest of which is navboxes; second largest of which is probably certain/most/all template redirects). Regarding the location of the page, of course I was involved (I've been here a while...). The use of AoS on SC gets to the fact that SC is what made the genre popular and hence brought about its original name, "AoS" ("Aeon of Strife", the fictional Protoss civil war). --Izno (talk) 15:19, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah I know you've been here a while ;) I just don't recall the exact participants anymore without looking. It finally quieted down, so my memory has grown hazy. :) I'm fine if you want to undo it, but my basic reasoning was that the genre article and its redirects has been contentious and should be treated directly where possible as a result. -- ferret (talk) 15:22, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Fallout 4 spouse names
Hi Ferret,

Your revert makes sense. I haven't played the game so I'm trying to stay away as much as possible from the article. I used ctrl-f for the names and didn't see them, but shouldn't the name of the player character's spouse be mentioned on the article on Fallout 4? --Soetermans. T / C 16:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC) Soetermans. T / C 16:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The names are very minor plot wise and short lived. I think it's useful to list them for a cast list... But WP:VGSCOPE discourages cast lists at the game article itself. But now that I think about it, how does VGSCOPE apply against the series article? I'll see if I can work it into the plot anyways. -- ferret (talk) 16:43, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually someone already has. Fallout 4 currently states "their spouse (Nate/Nora)" in the plot. -- ferret (talk) 16:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Overwatch Spring vs Q1/Q2
I suppose I get that Spring can be confusing to those in the southern hemisphere, but why then did Blizzard put their release date range as 'Spring 2016'? If that is what the publisher releases to the public, I feel that is what we should put.

CoruscantHero (talk) 05:57, 2 December 2015 (UTC)CoruscantHero
 * Blizzard serves different web sites to different regions and languages, adjusted to fit that particular target region. The page in question is targeted to North America. Wikipedia however has to consider a global audience. Please read WP:SEASON, which is a part of Wikipedia's Manual of Style. -- ferret (talk) 12:39, 2 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Cool. I understand. Thanks for the fix. -- CoruscantHero (talk) 05:57, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

bethesda hexaware edit
Re I honestly think you are being harsh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.216.44.188 (talk) 19:12, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Edit summaries don't give a lot of space for niceties. Who Bethesda uses for beta testing is irrelevant in the long term, and likely changes from project to project. A valid source has not been provided that Bethesda is currently using Hexaware. Even if they are, without secondary reliable sources commenting on it, it's simply not important. In addition, your edit removed a section heading that needed to be restored. -- ferret (talk) 19:16, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

steamos
why are you removing all my edits?

Like Gnome ISN'T the default UI used in SteamOS. It has to be specially enabled. that makes it NOT the default.

the list goes on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshmnz (talk • contribs) 09:35, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. -- ferret (talk) 19:20, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Clearly You are one of the Blizzard defenders
Don't like the truth? Well those where comments about info that was missing from the article! You don't know hearthstone is a simplified mtg? WELL? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ertttttttt (talk • contribs) 23:23, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Your edits are biased and do not represent a neutral point of view. They are also unsourced. -- ferret (talk) 23:25, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the Fallout 4 features revert
I left a message on the talk page regarding my deletion of Fallout 4 features on Creation Engine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FortyFiveBananas (talk • contribs) 18:45, 14 October 2015‎ (UTC)

Star Wars Battlefront
What was your problem with my Star Wars edit. You said you had a problem with me removing context for the Star Wars celebration however the only thing I removed in that regard was a sentence stating that " In late March 2015, it was revealed that the game would be shown at Star Wars Celebration 2015 in Anaheim, California." this is just an announcement of an announcement and while it would of been useful before the Celebration, the fact that we then list that it was shown at the celebration makes the sentence redundant. --Deathawk (talk) 00:53, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I felt that the location and date context was stripped out, along with a typo introduced at the start of the paragraph and another removed source that I felt should stay. I have just edited the page to remove the first "Announcement of an announcement" as you wanted, while keeping the context I was looking for. -- ferret (talk) 12:59, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

For what its worth...
In response to your comment on Salv's talk page, for what its worth, if I had the ability to just designate Admins, I'd make you one. If you ever did want to run for being an admin, I'd help/nominate, but...please don't let me talk you into it or anything. Its a completely nerve-wracking process, and I'd feel absolutely terrible if I talked you into it, and then it went terribly and the community was really hard on you for it. As I've said before, had I failed my AFD RFA, I don't know what I'd have done. I'd be pretty crushed if the community generally believed, "You know what, Serge, we disapprove of the manner that you volunteer your time so strongly that we collectively are rejecting you."

Anyways, my point is, I'd support you if you ever needed it, though I don't especially recommend it to anyone, because its a rough process, if that makes sense. So its more of a compliment than a suggestion, you know? Sergecross73  msg me  16:32, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * ^ I agree. (And I have the same feelings regarding the process.) --Izno (talk) 16:36, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Though, a lot of people fail AFDs, Serge. ;) --Izno (talk) 16:37, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, I know, that was one of the reasons I was so nervous years back, I think statistically, many more fail than succeed. Some people really get a pretty public roasting and fail pretty miserably. And sometimes its one minor detail from years past, and all of a sudden its a giant pile-on and you're done. I don't think I have anything to hide, but I'm sure its possible that I could have made some questionable edits in the 2008-2009 era that could have been hard to defend had they been brought up. Anyways, maybe being so hurt would have been extreme, but that's just me. I've generally got a thick skin, and can ignore any number of trolls/disruptive editors who may have bad things to say to me. But if it was the collective community of experienced editors...I'd have a harder time with that. Sergecross73   msg me  16:45, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * No, you missed your misspelling. had I failed my AFD, I don't what I'd have done. --Izno (talk) 16:47, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I can empathize Serge, I almost failed my own DRV! ;) ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  16:56, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Wow, it took me longer than it should have to realize what I had done... u_u Sergecross73   msg me  16:58, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Haha. I appreciate it. I've read through RFA a few times, and paid attention for a while to the recent RFCs about RFA, and it's just a brutal process that I don't feel like subjecting myself to.... yet. I've had too many self-conscious fumbles or policy misreads (Or perhaps too strict of a read) in just the last year to let anyone deliberately spend hours picking at me ;) And there's eddies of Wiki politics that I have only just barely brushed, such as deletionists versus inclusionists and the like. -- ferret (talk) 17:08, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

sourced content?
Can you define sourced content? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.129.96.253 (talk) 23:42, 10 December 2015‎ (UTC)
 * It means that you removed content from the article that was valid and had sources backing it up. You did so without explaining why, and so I reverted it. -- ferret (talk) 01:00, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Parentheses
Hi Ferret,

After your revert, I suddenly noticed that pretty much every reception box has the aggregated reviews like (PS4) 86%, (PC) 84%, etc. Now I'm thinking, isn't this a bit odd? Since parentheses are used to note that it is something in addition to, or separate from the rest, we usually use parentheses at the end of a sentence or an entry. I don't think that any reader will be confused if it says (PS4) 86%, but shouldn't it either be 86% (PS4) or PS4: 86%? --Soetermans. T / C 14:09, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I've seen multiple formats over the years, but don't really recall any WP:VG discussions on the matter. I would agree with you that "xx% (system)" seems more natural, but "(system) xx%" seems to have gained the most traction over the years and I believe it's in nearly uniform use in most (more recent) articles now. I can personally recall a few cases (Quite a while ago) of building a new reception box with "System: xx%" and having a later editor change it. I think also that a lot of people build a reception template by first copying it from another article, which helps "spread" the format. Another alternative might be to present the system name in supcase, like regions are for release dates (Via Template:Vgrelease), but no one does that currently.... Maybe a Template:Vgscore to help standardize formatting? It might be worth discussing at WP:VG. -- ferret (talk) 14:44, 9 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hey Ferret, thanks for understanding. I would've started a new discussion myself, but right now I'm trying to focus on my thesis. I'll probably start editing Wikipedia as usual when I'm a little less busy. --Soetermans. T / C 10:05, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Denied Star Wars edit
Hi, I added a Star Wars: The Force Awakens edit about a Poster Spy design contest, you said there is no proof it's a reasonably important contest. It's an official Disney contest and was judged by Anthony Daniels. I feel that's pretty significant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editorofthepedia2015 (talk • contribs) 11:12, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Responded again to edit request at the article's talk page. -- ferret (talk) 13:04, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Reverted patrolled edit on Aziz Sancar
Hi Ferret, I'm just notifying you that on Aziz Sancar I reverted three IP-edits in a row that were previously patrolled by you. The IP removed sourced material, in this case the statement that Sancar's parents were Arabic-speaking. The IP gave another source which however doesn't contradict. It seems to be no more than a truth that Turkish nationalists cannot bear: that one of them, even more so the first Turkish Nobel Price Laureate, might have Arab origins, or at least parents who spoke Arabic. Following the debate about Sancar allegedly being a Kurd, this is now the second controversy that keeps IP running with their heads aginst the wall again and again. That's why we're patrolling the page, and might have to semi-protect it, if this gets worse. Just wanted to make sure yo're warned, too, for the next similyr IP edit. Regards, --PanchoS (talk) 14:40, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi . In my accept comment (Which should be visible in the review log), I noted that the CNNTurk review currently sourcing the statement appears to support the IP. When asked about his mother language, Sancar replied that they spoke Arabic but grew up speaking Turkish. CNNTurk, as the standing source, does not appear to support the version of the article that includes "Arabic" as his family ethnicity. I am fine with maintaining the status quo, but that was how I read the CNNTurk source and decided to handle the pending edit. Since the IP was not replacing with a different unsourced ethnic group, it would be my position that since this is in contention and does not have a clearly supporting source, it should be removed. -- ferret (talk) 14:51, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * To expand on that, while I understand that the prose is technically noting that they spoke Arabic, it links in a way that suggests their ethnicity. They also spoke Turkish though, which is covered in the same sources. As such, I still believe it should simply be removed from this sentence. If a later sentence wishes to note the various languages he (and his family) speaks, that would seem more appropriate. -- ferret (talk) 14:54, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Moved to article's talk page. -- ferret (talk) 15:40, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

WP:ORCP further comments
Hi - Regarding creation stats, would it be appropriate during an RfA to note cases of essentially starting an article, but not having credit as the original creator? My immediate example is that I "created" the current Fallout 4 article, but it already existed as a redirect at the time. Should I note "creations" that are not visible from a stats perspective? - many serious RfA voters will look into cases such as this, however it would ideally be the job of your nominator to make the voters aware of the less than blatantly obvious, such as the creations we're talking about -- samtar whisper 12:57, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. Article creation stats somewhat bothers me because it seems like a race at times to get "first edit credit". In the WP:VG arena, the moment the news hits the wire, most articles are created, even if nothing but a single line stub. It's on my list though to try to find some missing things, but I also want to be careful not to create something that will end up at AfD. -- ferret (talk) 13:00, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I disagree with the emphasis put on content creation at RfA (although my voting criteria specifies 10+ articles ;) oh well..). Get a couple more under your belt, and improve on other - taking a random article to GA is a massive plus :) -- samtar whisper 13:26, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't like it either. That's one of the reasons why I keep a running tab of all the articles that I've created on my talk page - to better document the ones I've actually created. Technically, if someone checked through my list of created articles, there'd be a lot of differences between my list and the Wikipedia generated one, mostly because of the article's I've created out of redirects like that. I've never had anyone call me out on it - if someone actually dug through all the details, they'd see that for all intents and purposes, its the truth. One of the first things people check is your userpage when looking you over at RFA too, so they'd see it if you listed it there. You could always try to create some new articles out of scratch though in case they check your article creation log before your user page too I suppose. Sergecross73   msg me  14:37, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

I've worked some of this into my user page. It's hard to comb back over your contributions and attempt to remember every place you've spent some time. :) I included most of what I considered particularly notable. It's less than I might have hoped, but as I primarily patrol, I understand why. I'll look for some more opportunities to create. I also did my first GA review today, and will see about doing more work in that area. -- ferret (talk) 22:02, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Zombies, Run
I have been trying to talk to ScrapIron, but he only talked to me by edit summaries and warnings until finally giving me that 'prepare to be edited' thing that I linked. I've restored the list of writers because it is too long to go in the infobox. --211.30.17.74 (talk) 00:04, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * As you want to make the additions and were reverted, it's more or less on you to open a conversation on the article's talk page. I do not see one. -- ferret (talk) 00:07, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Pings don't work for me because I edit using an IP. The cast lists were in the article long before I got to it, and ScrapIron removed it, so isn't the onus on him to begin the discussion for its exclusion?  --211.30.17.74 (talk) 00:12, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * When he removed it with guidelines as a basis, and you added it back, the burden to argue for it's inclusion (Against various guidelines) fell on you. After that we're in edit war territory so... Regardless, I'm happy with the edits you've made since I came to the article. I won't judge whether or not there isn't more work to do, but the basic prose is the right direction now. -- ferret (talk) 00:18, 22 December 2015 (UTC)


 * He ignored me until giving me that ultimatum, and I would appreciate additional feedback and eyes on the article, because the message that I got seemed to imply that the entire article was bad and that he would gut the article tomorrow. --211.30.17.74 (talk) 00:25, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't know that I would be ok with it if someone claimed it was a C class. It needs a lot of work, but you seem interested in getting it done. I would read over WP:VGSCOPE in full, and the rest of the guideline it is a part of... You may also want to read the projects rating scale for an idea on what's expected for a higher assessment. -- ferret (talk) 00:31, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I've been concentrating on finding and adding more sources - this was what it looked like before I got to it. :) --211.30.17.74 (talk) 00:37, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I think you're doing ok on sourcing, if you were aiming to satisfy WP:Notability and avoid the potential of an AFD. But you're really heavy on primary sources, and there's a lot of cleanup to be done. For example I see some citations with formatting issues. You should also avoid duplication... There's a large-ish Further Reading section. If these are already in use as a source, they don't need to be listed again. (Note: Did not directly check, just offering a thought). If you need reliable secondary sources, check out the custom google search under WP:VG/RS. This CSE is set to search sites that are vetted as reliable. -- ferret (talk) 00:40, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

December 22 - Line 26: First Indonesian Women Congress vs Mother's Day
Regarding your revert to my edit on December 22 Line 26: *1928 - First Indonesian Woman Congress held in Yogyakarta, the foundation of Mother's Day in Indonesia where you mentioned that you cannot verify Mother's Day because it is in Holiday Section, I would like to explain that the Mother's Day in Indonesia is pretty much different with the Mother's Day US. We celebrate it as the day of women right movement during Dutch colonial era, initiated with the Congress in 1928. Later, our President Soekarno established it as Hari Ibu Nasional (National Mother's Day) in 1953, during the 25th celebration of the Congress. It is a national day, but practically not a holiday at all. Please return my entry so such important event may include in Wikipedia. Thank you. Ciput (talk) 11:55, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * A clarification on that. I verified Mother's Day, but did not keep your inclusion because it was already on the page. What I could not verify was that December 22 was the first Indonesian Woman Congress. There is no article for Indonesian Woman Congress, nor does Yogyakarta make mention of one. Does this maybe refer to Gerwani? If so, Gerwani also does not mention December 22. -- ferret (talk) 12:40, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

No, it is not about Gerwani which is a communist-influenced women activist group disbanded by new government under Suharto in 1965. You may be confused with Kowani (Kongres Wanita Indonesia, Indonesian Women Congress) which is established as "organisation" later after the 1928 Congress. You may also check their website http://kowani.or.id/ since the valid reference is relatively rare in English. And I started to post it in Wikipedia Bahasa Indonesia. Thank you. Ciput (talk) 03:22, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Regarding Critical Acclaim status of video games.
Since Dragon Age: Inquisition and Shadows of Mordor also have below a 90 on metacritic, should they be changed as well? Just asking since I am not 100% positive on how critical acclaim vs. positive is perceived on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JustObserver (talk • contribs) 17:32, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * My view is, yes, those games should not say "Critical acclaim" or "Universal acclaim" or similar, unless there's a source backing it up. Typically, an aggregator like Metacritic is our only source for a "overall general reception" phrasing on what kind of reception a game got. Anything else is original research.
 * In the particular case of Fallout 4, the highest rating is only 87, and the lowest is 84. That's far from widespread critical acclaim. -- ferret (talk) 17:39, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Steam
Happy to talk, however please revert your own edit, to restore to status quo before the 3rr breach. Springnuts (talk) 00:44, 27 December 2015 (UTC) Springnuts (talk) 00:44, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd rather follow BRD here. The original addition was reverted, and discussion should have started at that point. Masem's 3RR breach doesn't apply to my own revert. The article without the new content is the status quo before edit warring began. -- ferret (talk) 00:48, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for inviting some other editors to join the discussion. Springnuts (talk) 21:13, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

No critical acclaim for Dishonored
Hi Ferret, I´m sorry if one of the edits came off as peacocky. I was trying to let it shine through that Dishonored did in fact receive critical acclaim (91 PC-version on metacritic as a direct quote, over 90% on GameRankings as an indirect fortification), a fact that I feel is under-represented within the article. In fact (no pun intended), I edited it to “praise” in the first place to combine both the aspect of it being in the strange position of having received both critical acclaim and generally positive reviews and being quotable as such. Since you deleted the “praise” and all the correlating sentences, I´m lead to believe this is a very factual article, using the quotable “generally positive” from metacritic to justify the text in the intro and the “reception”-part.

However, this begs the question why at least the “critical acclaim” on metacritic is not represented anywhere in the article in written-out form, all while the “generally positive”-phrase is even used in the introduction of the page.

I understand why the “praise” was deleted on that approach, yet I don´t understand how the quotable “critical acclaim” has met the same fate? If the article would have a factual continuity, shouldn´t “generally positive” and “critical acclaim” both be featured separated by a “/ Slash” since both are very much empirical? So why was that edited out? Just to explain my point a bit better with a more plastic example: If I would ask three groups (consisting of, let´s say, respectively 10 persons) with the same level of validity to review a videogame and two groups came to a mixed and one group to a positive response, how would it be legitimate to only mention the two “mixed” group-conclusions and mention their results in the intro/review part of my website while leaving the last group hanging? This would be inadvertent distortion to some extent.

So this is quite the same problem I have with this article; while it´s well written and features a lot of quotes, why is one aspect of the critical response featured throughout all of the article in written out form, while another tremendously important aspect of critical response of just the same level of validity is left without a written-out form? Why shouldn´t both not just be separated with a “/ Slash”? Why was this last edit deleted since it was, in that respect, a factual edit with a valid basis on a legitimate score provided by the website the “generally positive” used throughout the article is based on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autorefiller (talk • contribs) 08:09, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Since this pertains to a specific article, and a Featured Article at that, I feel it would be better to discuss it there. Any discussion here on my talk won't be seen by others and might result in others reverting changes, even if between us we agree on something. -- ferret (talk) 15:54, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
 * To add to that, in re-reading your message, I was not the one who reverted your edit that contained the "/ Slash" format. Since we've got multiple editors involved, the article talk is definitely the place to go. I'll start a section. -- ferret (talk) 15:59, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Define "there's no added value from [GameRankings]"
I am thinking about clarifying this one guideline because I cannot seem to understand the meaning of "value" at all. I mean..."How can you all manage to understand what it is trying to mean?". Does "not adding value" mean "It does not belong here.", or does it mean "It is not at all important."?

My point is that I want to know what it means and how I can clarify it on that page of guidelines. I have a feeling that value is an important word but cannot quite work out what it means, so can we edit the guideline so that no one else would misinterpret it? Thank you. Gamingforfun 3 6 5 ( talk ) 02:43, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The rough version is that the VG project reached a consensus that Metacritic holds more value than Game Rankings, especially for newer games. GR often lists the same reviews as Metacritic and the score is generally the same. Sometimes, GR will list fewer reviews than Metacritic, or ones that are less reliable as sources. In addition, they are both owned by CBS Interactive, so there's usually little value in using two sites from the same company. Typically, Game Rankings has more value for older games, particularly those that predate Metacritic. The discussions that led to this can be read at WT:VG. If you have any further questions, it may be best to ask at WT:VG. -- ferret (talk) 03:21, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * But does "value" mean "importance"? With all due respect, this implicitly answered my original question, and I am looking for an explicit answer. Gamingforfun 3 6 5 ( talk ) 03:48, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Value in this case is probably best taken to mean, "Does it improve the article?" The inclusion of Game Rankings does not in many cases. It provides no information that Metacritic lacks, and creates clutter or confusing prose. -- ferret (talk) 04:08, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * So, maybe, we need to make the guideline say that instead for the sake of clarification.
 * Moreover, even though I am obsessed about sameness and being informational, I do not think that raising the question about its change again would do any good (therefore making me be without questions on the talk page), and I wish that somebody informed me of that sooner, but I do not ever use my watchlist; I do not see any use of it whatsoever. Recently, I have seen the newspaper on that WikiProject, but my only question is whether it also provides us news about recent changes for video game guidelines. It that should be false, then, I might start suggesting that we inform subscribed users about recent consensus about changes for such guidelines. Gamingforfun 3 6 5 ( talk ) 05:11, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I am starting to become used to the system because there actually is a point of doing this. It just takes time for me to adjust. Still, such a notification of the recent change of the change would have been great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gamingforfun365 (talk • contribs) 13:10, 18 January 2016‎ (UTC)
 * As for notification, unfortunately I don't think there's any real structure to ensure things like this get broadcast. Consensus is established on WT:VG on a regular basis for things like this. Responsible editors who are making changes based on a recent consensus will generally refer back to the discussion or where it has been noted, such as WP:VGAGG. The best I can offer is that you should watchlist the main project page (WP:VG) and some of the subpages (WP:VG/RS, WP:VG/GL). -- ferret (talk) 13:18, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

January 2016
Your recent editing history at Rise of the Tomb Raider shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. J♯m (talk &#124; contribs) 20:51, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


 * So that's the template. Big and scary. Basically, the idea is that if you see stuff like Kvally was doing, and it wasn't just pure, blatant vandalism, the proper course is to revert once and then engage in discussion. If he won't discuss, then you can pursue other options, but it looked to me like you just engaged him in a revert war.
 * That being said, I'd like to ask you a question, because I believe that you have some expertise on the subject. Does Microsoft qualify as a publisher since they "published" the game to the Xbox and other Windows/Xbox-y platforms? I thought that a "game publisher" published games, and simply porting it in didn't count. I'd love it if you'd answer this question on the article's talk page. J♯m (talk &#124; contribs) 20:59, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Normally I wouldn't but I feel a need to defend just a bit. The first edit I reverted introduced some OR and put Microsoft as a developer, which is wrong and needed to be undone. He then put it as publisher, and I reverted and posted to his talk. He repeated this once more, and I reverted (Third over all, second regarding publisher), and left another (warning based) message. I'm aware of 3RR and made sure I stopped at this point, and approached an admin to take a look, staying out of it further. Kvally ultimately self-reverted. As for the actual content in question, I'll reply at the article. -- ferret (talk) 21:55, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Bethesda Softworks - Studios
See source. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 17:12, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Replied to user's talk page. -- ferret (talk) 17:53, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Left 4 Dead 2 Competitive
Hi. I made some edits to the Left 4 Dead 2 article, which you reverted. I'd like to work together to get that information back into the article, as it's an important facet of the current state of the game on the PC. What is it about the article that you didn't care for or that I can improve? ZeroShadows (talk) 03:10, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The additions consisted of what we refer to as original research. The entire section was unsourced, except for one reference to a mod's webpage, which does not act to support the content you added. Anything you add to the article needs to be backed by reliable sources. User communities, such as forums and Steam groups, are inherently unreliable. You can find a list of sites considered reliable by the Video Game project at WP:VG/RS. Remember, the sources must actually back what you are adding to the article, for example you cannot add "Such and such mod is the defacto standard" unless a reliable source actually says that. -- ferret (talk) 12:55, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Book of Mormon Edit
I feel that my edit on the "Book of Mormon" page was constructive and does not violate wikipedia terms. I would like to work with you to add in this section.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.231.191.88 (talk) 19:18, 26 January 2016‎ (UTC)
 * Replied to IP talk page. -- ferret (talk) 19:21, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Would you kindly
Would you kindly fix the other broken section redirects then? — Dispenser 22:13, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Most of those probably shouldn't even exist, but they're fixed now. -- ferret (talk) 22:29, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to join StrategyWiki
Hello Ferret. I've noticed how active you are working on video game articles. I was hoping you'd consider accepting an invitation to join StrategyWiki. We're a friendly wiki community focused strictly on video games, and we could really use someone with your acumen and attention to detail to help around the site. We'd be very grateful for your contributions. Hope to see you there. Plotor (talk) 01:53, 28 January 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plotor (talk • contribs)

The Elder Scrolls VI: Argonia
Just noticing you were the last one to edit the redirect at The Elder Scrolls VI: Argonia and I wanted to get a second opinion. Is there any reason for this page still to exist? It lines up with some of the reasons for deleting anyways. This title was a complete rumor in the first place. Idealist343 (talk) 01:21, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Pretty sure it was a hoax or pure rumor. It's probably died down so I don't think it's really a valid search term anymore. -- ferret (talk) 01:31, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Kiesel guitars
Ferret, this is Kiesel Guitars.....  Stop redirecting our page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.28.164.179 (talk) 17:27, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * If this is someone from Kiesel Guitars, please read Wikipedia's policies concerning conflicts of interest. Please stop trying to redirect or remove Carvin Corporation's article from Wikipedia. -- ferret (talk) 17:29, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for splitting the pages (carvin and kiesel) please stop adding or changing the info for what is current on the pages, carvin can no longer manufacture musical instruments.

The past is fine, but the category links at the bottom should not have anything to do with instruments - period.... They no longer make instruments — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.28.164.179 (talk) 17:53, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It takes time to perform a split and properly clean everything up. I assure you I do not plan to leave anything left undone. -- ferret (talk) 17:55, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

The Kiesel Guitars page needs to go back to what we had... It has nothing to do with Carvin Corporation. Stop altering our page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.28.164.179 (talk) 18:01, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Please read the notices I've posted to your talk page at User talk:12.28.164.179. You have a conflict of interest. Wikipedia is not for promotional purposes and you do not own the article. Content must be backed by reliable sources, we are an encyclopedia, not a business listing. The article may not match what you prefer for marketing purposes. -- ferret (talk) 18:04, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the Xbox 360 main page pictures
Looking at the page from my phone, I see you are right, the original caption was correct. But, load the page on a 1366x768 display, and the centre picture (the S model) is displayed on the left while the right one (the E model) is displayed below the first two, in the middle. This may create some confusion if a reader isn't familiar with the consoles. Tesla (talk) 00:17, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I somehow missed this message till this morning. I'd suggest bringing this up on the article's talk page. I'm not sure of a good technical solution to the images shifting due to screen resolution. Perhaps the text should simply read "From left to right: Model 1, Model 2, Model 3". -- ferret (talk) 15:06, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

How Good are you at Makeing pages?
Hey do you think you could help me with my page? I can't code from scratch very well.-- kody1492 Talk 16:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Feel free to borrow from mine for examples. I borrowed heavily from myself. Other people have even more advanced user pages, but mine or Serge's will give you some examples for user boxes, making columns, tables, etc. You can learn about userboxes at WP:USERBOX. -- ferret (talk) 16:22, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks!-- kody1492 Talk 16:26, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

"non-English release dates except developer's region"
Where does it say that this information isn't supposed to be non-English release dates included. Sounds like this is pretty egregious ignorance of Global perspective.--Prisencolin (talk) 20:05, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Template:Infobox video game has the documentation, which was decided by WP:VG consensus. If you disagree, you'll need to take it up at Template talk:Infobox video game. Note this only pertains to the infobox. Sourced releases for other languages can be included in the prose, which is typically put under the Development section. -- ferret (talk) 20:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Space Run
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Space Run you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 13:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Space Run
The article Space Run you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Space Run for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 19:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Space Run
The article Space Run you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Space Run for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 20:21, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks ferret for helping me with wikipedia!
I'm a newbie at wikipedia so please excuse that. I do not want to violate the terms of service. Sorry. -MCPE FAN — Preceding unsigned comment added by MCPE FAN (talk • contribs) 23:31, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

sorry
Hey Ferrit... Sorry I was only changing the elder scrolls thing to mess with my friend... i was gonna change it back immediately — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.39.250.242 (talk) 20:12, 12 January 2016‎ (UTC)