User talk:GroundZ3R0 002/Archive 3

Tobin Bell in Saw VII
I don't think there is a source that says he's definitely going to be in it. I think one source said "you can bet Tobin Bell will be back". -- Mike   Allen   07:19, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * We probably won't hear any casting news until after the New Year. They are going to start filming a  month early this time, because of 3D. --  Mike   Allen   20:19, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * You can thank Saw V for that. This kind of worries me that David Hackl will be directing again.  I don't know why they didn't leave Kevin as director, he obviously has skills. I hope this is really the last one, I don't see how they could make more. --  Mike   Allen   20:50, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Not so sure I like the 3D. I haven't seen a 3D film, the tickets are like $11.50!  I have a feeling that it will be called Saw VII 3D. :-\  --  Mike   Allen   21:09, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey.
Not a problem. I was only joking anyway. I mean, obviously, I don't edit it as much as you and Mike, but I try. Like I said, if I can help in anyway, please, don't be afraid to let me know. --HELLØ   ŦHERE 22:30, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

GA review - Warcraft: Orcs & Humans
I have restored the GA review. You need to study both the rules of WP:GAN and the practice of experienced reviews. The issues in this special review are: Although this discussion has not gone as either of one would have wanted, please don't give up - we all started somewhere. --Philcha (talk) 07:07, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * There is one reviewer in a GA reviewer, others are commentators and do not make decisions.
 * Timescales are rules of thumbs. For example: (a) some topics are much larger than others; (b) sometimes an article waits so long that the nominator has timing problems in real life (e.g. Talk:Battle of Carillon/GA1).
 * Your contribution at Talk:Warcraft: Orcs & Humans/GA2 was an essay. In time you'll develop your own style, but right now you need to look at examples. You could see the reviews of the most recently passed GAs at WP:GA. I use a very structured approach, which you might like, hate or ignore - see examples at User:Philcha, which start with a "template" User:Philcha/Sandbox.
 * Get 2 - 4 articles to GA your self - that's how I started reviewing and AFAIK is the usual route.
 * Reviews that fail have no clear pattern and it can be difficult to encouragement the nominator, manage the nominator's expectations of the topic article or the nominator's skills, and be tactful.

PS Long time a colleague told me, "Don't sorry, those who do the most work make the most mistakes" - I found it very comforting :-) --Philcha (talk) 07:27, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: Scribblenauts GAN
I think I said in the GAN review they could have a month from my last post. At that point we can pass/fail. --Teancum (talk) 23:07, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Cover system (gaming)

 * Kudos on the article. Such gaming topics are difficult to write and have been in terrible shape for a long time. Keep up the good work. (Guyinblack25 talk 04:45, 30 December 2009 (UTC))

Thanks I appreciate the comments I hope to get it up in references soon and maybe go for a C or B class eventually. GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 05:07, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: Stats tool
It's hard to make it efficient enough to look for all the redirects and look up the stats for them too, I'd run into performance troubles on the (fairly limited) hardware the stats service runs on. henrik • talk  19:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Saw (video game)
Hello! Your submission of Saw (video game) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Intelligent  sium  22:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy New Year..
Hope you had a good New Years and hope you have a great year. :P — Mike   Allen   06:13, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Sacrifice (video game)/archive1
Hi, I believe I have addressed your comment at the FAC for Sacrifice (video game). Please take a look. Thank you. Jappalang (talk) 13:02, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi again, I have adopted your suggestion. Would the current state of the article befit that of a Featured article?  Jappalang (talk) 01:44, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I have responded to your suggestion of review table, with links to its previous discussion. Jappalang (talk) 03:00, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Scribblenauts/GA1
I've added some comments to Talk:Scribblenauts/GA1. I recommend you close the GAN as failed. Little has been done, and even though I said a month a week is the customary time. --Teancum (talk) 18:21, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Re:Saw 7
It looks really good. I think the part about Tobin is fine right now in the namespace, but may need to need to be re-worded once it's in the mainspace. Hopefully by then he will have announced the details. lol — Mike   Allen   04:48, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: Article merging
I've closed merge discussions before. It just takes a WP:BOLD editor to do so. So if you think the discussion is finished, feel free to take action :D --Teancum (talk) 10:49, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Saw soundtrack merge/ Saw GAN review
I merged the Saw soundtrack into the main article. The only reason I was WP:BOLD and did so was that I'm reviewing the Saw video game article. Check the GAN review for my comments. --Teancum (talk) 18:12, 6 January 2010 (UTC)


 * For the David Tapp fair use on Saw (video game) I would probably use something similar to this. --Teancum (talk) 00:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Izuna 2: The Unemployed Ninja Returns/GA3
I've responded at Talk:Izuna 2: The Unemployed Ninja Returns/GA3. If I understood Japanese, I could flesh out the article more, but I unfortunately don't... ɳ OCTURNE ɳ OIR talk //  contribs 03:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Saw game GA userbox
Am I entitled to put the userbox on my page? MikeAllen (talk) 04:51, January 7 2010 (UTC)
 * Why thank you. I see you re did your sig.  Why the gay colors? LOL joking. —  Mike   Allen   00:56, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Jill Tuck-Kramer
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Jill Tuck-Kramer. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Jill Tuck-Kramer. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:08, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Saw Videogame Screen 3.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Saw Videogame Screen 3.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 07:38, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

16 more days
Only 16 more days until the Saw VI DVD! :-) — Mike   Allen   02:22, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes I'm hoping it has some good bonus features, something that can be used for the article. :D — Mike   Allen   05:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Edit History
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also useful when reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. :-D — Mike   Allen   00:57, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * A lot of your edits are missing an edit history. It's something I failed to do until in my review someone told me that I needed to write what I do in the edit history.  It does help to know what you have done, or at least understand.  Specifically this .  BTW, this wasn't a warning, just a "notice", using Twinkle. LOL.   I'm about to play Army of Two and Gears of War, have you played Army of Two? —  Mike   Allen   01:18, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Peer review
Regarding your message, I have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. I have not been an active peer reviewer for over a year, nor do I ever remember reviewing any Saw articles. I of course would be glad to help answer any questions, but you will need to provide me with little background information before I can do so. Thanks. « Gonzo fan2007  (talk)  @  05:08, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Again, I have no recollection of listing anything for peer review, especially if we are talking about recent editing. Can you provide a diff of when I did this?  « Gonzo fan2007   (talk)  @  23:46, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It's alright. Happy editing!  « Gonzo fan2007   (talk)  @  00:00, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Dope Stars Inc.
An editor has nominated Dope Stars Inc., an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. DES (talk) 17:15, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

In particular, better sources to more clearly establish notability would help prevent this from being deleted, IMO. DES (talk) 17:17, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Dabomb87 (talk) 01:11, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Dope Stars Inc.
Template:Dope Stars Inc. has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. wjemather bigissue 21:28, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Please remember to fill in the edit summary, it makes it much easier for others without having to resorts to going through diffs. Also, it wil be immediately obvious if you manage to find any RSes to verify their charting anywhere. Thanks. wjemather bigissue 00:10, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Now in your userspace, here, per TFD outcome. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ (talk)  23:02, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Dabomb87 (talk) 00:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

RE:
Yeah, the IP was me. I was scammed with the score. I listened to the other tracks, and it is NOTHING but the way it sounds in the movie. Like, I mean the voices are still there 100%, they weren't even ripped... -- 0kayD0ck Talk2Me 15:39, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/Black Eyed Peas discography/archive2
Hi, can you comment on the reliability of Everyhit.com at the above FLC? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 00:31, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Non Free Images in you User Space
Hey there GroundZ3R0 002, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot alerting you that Non-free images are not allowed in the user or talk-space. I removed some images that I found on User:GroundZ3R0 002/Dead Rising. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use images to your user-space drafts or your talk page. See a log of images removed today here, shutoff the bot here and report errors here. Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 00:38, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Saw VII filming scheduled to begin Feb. 8
Word on the web is that filming for Saw VII will begin Feb. 8 (next monday). :-D — Mike   Allen   01:21, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Well that is if Bloody Disgusting, ShockTilYouDrop, DreadCentral, etc reports on it Monday, or it will probably be AfD'ed. Yes I rented it and the Director's Cut version is a lot of better, if you noticed.  Like Amanda and Cecil driving at the beginning to the clinic; it not showing how many envelopes Jill gave Hoffman (in the theatrical version it's a dead giveaway); the ending was re-done, when Brent pushes the lever to kill William, that's when Hoffman's timer begins.  Also the after the credits ending. :P   I listened to Patrick, Marcus and Kevin's commentary. They confirmed that Tanedra will be in Saw VII.  They started to say something about the envelope Jill sent to the hospital, but then quickly said "Never mind". LOL   Even though they said that we will know what happened to Dr. Gordon, I think it was Dr. Heffner's office, because when she walks in you can hear a nurse paging Dr. Heffner.  I'm one of those people that want Dr. Gordon to be involved somehow, but don't want it to be cheesy. There's a video on YouTube where someone freezes the frame of Jill holding the envelope and it apparently says "Gordon" on it. :-D  They also said that every time they use archive footage or an image of an actor (like the actor that plays Jeff and Lynn) in flashbacks they get a royalty check, for like over a thousand dollars. LOL   Oh yeah BD and some more sites reported some casting news, BUT they got it off of IMDb.  I think one actress reported was the woman that played Carla in Saw 1.  It may be true, but just a while back IMDb reported that Monica Potter was returning (Gordon's wife), even though in an interview she said she was asked to come back one time, but  said she was done with the series.  I'm waiting on news to break that Cary Elwes has joined. LOOOL   Sorry for the tl;dr message. —  Mike   Allen   00:37, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Correction, it wasn't the envelope Jill sent to the hospital, it was the envelope Amanda got from the drawer. Patrick started saying that John wrote a letter, and may find out what that was in the seventh.. but he cut it short and said "never mind".  Meaning Hoffman took the letter that John originally wrote (because he's one the that told Amanda to go get the letter out of the desk), and added his own letter. Hoffman is a fucking psychopathic murderer.   Saw VII will finally come full circle, and Patrick said there will be really nothing to tell after the end of Saw VII.  and    Thank god.  I love Saw, but it's time to end the story.  Then I guess reboot it in like 5 years (sigh) —  Mike   Allen   01:41, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It's live. :-) — Mike   Allen   04:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Every since I've moved it to mainspace I'm catching all kind of typos. lol Some people on the HOJ has found it  and of course I had to gush.  Well of course you get credit, as you did a lot on the Filming and Casting section. :)  About Saw VI being a GA... It hasn't been reviewed yet, and probably won't for a while.  I think most editors pick whatever interest them, and either you like Saw for what it is, or you don't. lol   I think it's as good as it can get, well it can be worded better, no doubt, but there's not that many sources to use.  In other words I doubt it could ever look like Changeling, because there just not much to work with.  Only a few sites report Saw news.  So, yes I think it is a Good Article.   Uh I have been working some on Inglourious Basterds as it's trying to pass its GA.  I work on Law & Order: Special Victims Unit (season 11), The Bad Girls Club (LOL).   Mostly I like working on things that no one else seems to want to. LOL   Right now I've been formatting my PC, so haven't been as active on a lot of projects.—  Mike   Allen   03:33, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

They began casting in December. That was from Hackl's twitter, before he was dumped. I have thought about using it, but you know people here frown upon using twitter. The guidelines are pretty clear, only time a twitter should be used if it is the OFFICIAL twitter of the person. So I think I'm going to use it and WebCite it in case Hackl removes it. Fuck it, it's 2010, people are using Twitter for announcements, not the newspapers and magazines. LOL. I was hoping more details about season two of Scream Queens would appear. Obviously the show has been long wrapped up, since they begin casting in December and filming in this month. I bet they shot Scream Queens last summer. There's tons of information on Saw, II, III and quite a few on IV. I had been working on a Saw II re-write (it's in my playbox) but haven't fooled with it for a while now. I try to do so many things at once and get overwhelmed. — Mike   Allen   20:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Dope Stars Inc. TFD
'The below is a transclusion of a discussion between User:GroundZ3R0 002 and User:Wjemather from the latter's talk page. This is a closed discussion and no additional comments should be added to it.'

Hey there. I just wanted to let you know I replied to your TFD for Template:Dope Stars Inc.. Basically, I agree that if the template was to stay like that it should be deleted. However, there are at least 6 more articles that will be created and host that template. I could not create these pages until the AFD for the band themselves, Dope Stars Inc., is ended. I know it will not be deleted because of the 6-0 vote to keep as they are notable. Just thought I'd explain my thoughts. Cheers, Ground  Z3R0   002  22:11, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I seriously doubt that most of those redlinks would pass notability guidelines and foresee a great deal of wasted time at AfD if you were to proceed with their creation. wjemather bigissue 22:26, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * As I understand the notability guidelines per WP:BAND, if a band is considered notable, the albums and EPs they have released under a label are considered notable by extension. Is this not the case? And because the current AFD for Dope Stars Inc. is really all about deciding if it is notable or not, this should not be a problem. Or am I missing a notability guideline somewhere that makes these unnotable? Ground  Z3R0   002  22:32, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * First line of WP:NALBUMS: All articles on albums, singles or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines (i.e. refer to WP:N), with significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The same applies to bands, hence my delete in the AfD of the band. wjemather bigissue 22:44, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, but they are notable from many reliable sources. I have explained my reply better at the AFD for the band. Ground  Z3R0   002  23:01, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Replied there also. wjemather bigissue 23:17, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, I realize saying that they are major is POV, but saying they are not is as well. I'm still searching European chart sites for them but I have found THIS. I know this is not reliable, which is why it won't be used, but this is the official myspace for their US label and so I am going to find which charts they mean and will add them to the article. This really is a grey area for notability, but I do think it should err on the side of notable, especially given the quality of the article. Ground  Z3R0   002  23:23, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * You are quite right, blogs do not make for good sources especially when they have an interest in the subject. It could be some obscure genre specific chart, which would not really help solidify their notability. Quality of an article should have no bearing. Very well written and well-sourced articles have been deleted in the past. wjemather bigissue 23:39, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Okay, the Dope Stars Inc. article has been deemed notable and is not deleted. Therefore, with the appropriate sources, articles for their albums are allowed. I just wanted to let you know I am starting their pages in my user subpages and will launch them soon. I will send you a link to each of them before publishing them to see if you would consider them allowable by the WP:N standards so we can avoid another AFD. As for their charting, it really doesn't matter because they meet almost all of the other criterion but I googled "Neuromance Gigahearts chart european" and have found the same text from tons of sources saying that both of those albums held chart positions in many european countries. Whether or not these are underground charts or something, I don't know but I'll keep searching for what they mean. As for the template, I really think that it should be kept and I implore you to see that because I am about to write 6 new articles of good quality that will host it and that will meet the WP:N criterion. Let me know your thoughts. I'm glad to have debated with you these past days as it surely makes Wikipedia better as a result. Cheers, Ground  Z3R0   002  21:28, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


 * As I mentioned above, each subject must be notable in itself, and notability is not inherited. I still view the bands notability as borderline given the lack of RS coverage, but that is passed now. I can only think that at least most of their albums and EPs will not meet the minimum requirements and short subsections in the band article may be a more appropriate way to go. As such, I think the navbox has to go I'm afraid. Also, a lot of the results from your search seem to be the same distributor blurb.wjemather bigissue 22:02, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Hey again. I just wanted to ask your thoughts on my 21st Century Slave article here: User:GroundZ3R0 002/Dope Stars album. Do you think that this is launchable? Obviously it not perfect, but no article is. I just wanted to know if you would allow it to survive in the mainspace without an AFD. Thanks and let me know, Ground  Z3R0   002  04:01, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi. Since I haven't received a response from you about the Dope Stars Inc. article, I am going to go ahead and put it in the mainspace. My reasoning is that because the Band is notable, the album is as well. Since there are plenty of reliable sources from third party sites, this also helps notability and verification. I am not going to recreate the Dope stars template for some time but I do wish to in the near future. Let me know if you have any oppositions. Cheers, Ground  Z3R0   002  23:21, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry, been side-tracked by other issues. I really don't think the article is ready and would urge you to hang on. I'll try list specific concerns in the next day or so, but in general notability issues still exist (highlighted by "the album has not reached any notable music charts in any country"), there are too many WP:PEACOCK terms and redlinks of very doubtful notability. Regards. <sub style="color:#007700;">wjemather <sup style="color:#ff8040;">bigissue 23:25, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thats fine. Okay, I will keep improving in my userspace. If you have time, would you leave a list of issues on my talk page to which I may fix? Also, I am going to copy this discussion and post it on my talk page as well for reference if you don't mind. Ground  Z3R0   002  23:39, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Will do. Sure, feel free to copy it wherever. <sub style="color:#007700;">wjemather <sup style="color:#ff8040;">bigissue 23:45, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I have reorganised the lead and marked where citations need to go. I also did some other minor MOS related changes. There are some other issues, for example it could do with more wikilinks and there are too many redlinks that are unlikely to merit articles of their own which should be removed, but other than that it generally looks OK. Whether it would survive AfD or not, I don't know, but I shall not nominate it. Regards, <sub style="color:#007700;">wjemather <sup style="color:#ff8040;">bigissue 17:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I notice that you have put now the article into mainspace which is fine. However, I am just wondering why you released a version prior to my changes, with all the problems still in place? <sub style="color:#007700;">wjemather <sup style="color:#ff8040;">bigissue 12:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that I did that before I got your changes. Feel free to change the mainspace version back. I am changing that user subpage to the Gigahearts album so just look in the history to find your intro. I appreciate your help with this. Cheers, Ground  Z3R0   002  20:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

FLC
I'll be sure to take a look at it when have the time :).  Afro  ( Its More Than a Feeling ) - Afkatk 20:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

David Tapp GAN
I'm sorry, but I'm afraid David Tapp does not meet the GA criteria at this time, and I chose not to pass it. Please read the suggestions and issues I brought forth at Talk:David Tapp/GA1. I hope this will guide you in a good direction as far as continuing to build the article is concerned and getting it up to GA in the future. I gave you a start on improving some of the prose. Hopefully this helps. Regards, –MuZemike 21:49, 11 February 2010 (UTC)