User talk:Ig8887

looks like someone got an oots adventure game for xmas
LOL :D  Timmccloud (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Nah, I've had it for a while, I just figured these articles needed some out-of-universe perspective, and the first thing I thought of was "appearances in other media". The game is the closest thing that qualifies. Ig8887 (talk) 18:45, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Applegeeks
See the AFD page. You have one reference to Applegeeks (in the Stanford) when the guidelines call for two or more. I cannot find anything about this award nomination. (there was no reference for the award nomination) WhisperToMe (talk) 06:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Also see Articles for deletion/Harry's Legend - It had a brief mention on one notable publication, but that was not enough to save the article. WhisperToMe (talk) 06:47, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I'm well aware of the criteria. I said that I was in the PROCESS of looking for references, not that I had completed my search. The fact that you can't find anything about WCCA just means you didn't search very hard: Their wiki page is well-referenced, with coverage from the New York Times: Web Cartoonists' Choice Awards. --Ig8887 (talk) 06:56, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I found the reference for Applegeeks: http://ryanestrada.com/wcca/ceremony/characterart.htm - But the question is whether the organization is notable. All you have are flimsy/not enough sources. WhisperToMe (talk) 06:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Look, you seem to be under the impression that I need to prove something to you, personally. I don't. I will take my time gathering my references and then present them to the AfD. I have no intention of even attempting to change your mind; I present my arguments for those who have not yet made their decision. The WCCA's have been judged notable by the New York Times and the Wikipedia community in an AfD last year. Whether or not you think they are notable frankly doesn't interest me; consensus says they are. Unless you're saying your opinion is more important than consesus? --Ig8887 (talk) 07:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

About a Mass Nom
See here. -Jéské ( v^_^v +2 Pen of Editing ) 03:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh well, I suppose, but it's just tedious to respond to all of them. That's why mass nominations are possible. --Ig8887 (talk) 04:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Not with respect to D&D - the last mass-nom crashed and burned spectacularly because the nominator had shown himself in other places as having an axe to grind against RPGs en generale. The current ones are marred by the fact that there is some concern over the tags on those articles (largely because the tagger didn't bother to read the article and has no idea what an RPG is). -Jéské ( v^_^v +2 Pen of Editing ) 04:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Can I just add that, as a heavy role-player myself, these nominations will hopefully be a little more successful in terms of achieving something. J Milburn (talk) 18:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Mass D&D AfDs
You reccomended combining the AfDs- trust me, that would have achieved nothing, it would have just been closed as being too broad. The only way this cruft is gonna get deleted (or converted into something encyclopedic) is if each one is nominated individually. And there are probably many more to come... J Milburn (talk) 18:44, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I see that now. I just had a conversation about it above. I wasn't familiar with the last mass AfD, just the usual Gavin Collins stuff. --Ig8887 (talk) 18:50, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Possibly you're interested in centralised discussion regarding the nominations? Just to let you know it's there, better to stick general comments there instead of on individual AfDs. J Milburn (talk) 19:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Come build something constructive!
Instead of worry about whether something needs to go away, why not help build something up? Take a look at User:BOZ/List of Dungeons & Dragons monsters, check out the pages it links to, see what's been done already, and see if there's anything you want to add. BOZ (talk) 22:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Austria)
It looks like the consensus is to keep this article, the concerns raised have been/are being addressed. Are you willing to close the nomination now? Mjroots (talk) 08:21, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I see no reason not to leave that for an admin to do. --Ig8887 (talk) 10:21, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Oots0224.gif)
 Thanks for uploading Image:Oots0224.gif. 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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Sdrtirs (talk) 23:47, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

D&D articles for Wikipedia 0.7
Hi there! :)

As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. Please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 04:13, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject: Dungeons & Dragons
Hi! I’ve been working on a lot of ‘’Dungeons & Dragons’’ articles lately and saw that you were a member of WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons), and am inviting you to rejoin Wikipedia’s D&D group. I've been hard at work removing tags placed inappropriately on D&D articles, as well as modifying articles to remove tags that were placed legitimately. In addition, I have been compiling related articles together so that the articles are longer, making it easier to remove tags and to have short articles on lesser topics by just putting it into another appropriate article (links to such compiled articles can be found on my userpage). Check out the project here, and ask any questions that you may have here. Thank you for your time. Drilnoth (talk) 20:42, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

OOTS
Moving discussion over to here...

I have restored the cleanup tags that you removed. Here's why.
 * As for OR, you claim that there has been "no indication yet of what is OR within the article," but actually there has been a discussion at Talk:The Order of the Stick explaining just that.
 * Yeah, I have looked at that discussion. I still don't see what is OR. The only cites in the Fictional World and Commentary sections that point to OOTS sources are simple pointers to the strip where it happens (which you seem to insist on for the plot, but not here?) or statements that that the author made himself about his intentions.


 * As for self-published, the link you gave in defense of the sources (WP:SELF) is not the policy on self-published sources; what you probably meant to link to was WP:SPS; incidentally, WP:SPS doesn't back up your claim that "self-published sources are valid sources about themselves."
 * They are both policies, and you are being willfully obtuse if you are making the claim that because he owns his own publishing company, somehow his compilations are not verifiable sources about what happens in his compilations. WP:SELF DOES apply, because frankly, we shouldn't need ANY citation for the basic plot of a book. It is self-evident from reading it. Citations are only needed for disputable content, something you seem to not understand.


 * As for references in the plot section, your addition of inline references to the very end of each subsection doesn't qualify as referencing. It's basically the same as adding a book to the end of an article without giving inline citations; you added a reference to the end of each section but didn't give inline citations to the specific events.  Ideally, there should be an inline citation to the specific comic number for every event described in the plot section.  This is standard practice in comics articles; see Gunnerkrigg Court for an example.
 * There is no consensus or WP policy on that. The Gunnerkrigg Court article is one that you yourself have edited heavily, and is not the norm for works of fiction. It is not a GA or FA, and has not been peer reviewed. A brief survey of fiction articles will show that such footnoting is NOT commonplace. See these FA articles: Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Uncle Tom's Cabin, just to name a few. In short, you're the only one who thinks that.

Please don't unilaterally remove cleanup tags without checking out the discussion first. &mdash;Politizer talk / contribs 02:12, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I have checked on the discussion, and have seen no evidence to support your claims. It is not unilateral; I gave you over a month to come up with a better rationale for those tags, or for you aor anyone else to fix your perceived problems yourself. You seem unable to do so, so I removed them. I do apologize for not being logged in when I did so.

The unidentified user is I. --Ig8887 (talk) 02:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * --I have copied this discussion to the Talk page of OOTS, I prefer to discuss this there. --Ig8887 (talk) 02:42, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:OOTS1withbkgd.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:OOTS1withbkgd.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:OOTS463castle.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:OOTS463castle.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:OOTS493.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:OOTS493.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Greyhawk
Hello,

We are considering what to do to make Greyhawk into a "Good Article". Please discuss here if you like, or just check out the article itself and see what you can do. :) BOZ (talk) 03:20, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

OOTS characters at AfD
You will probably want to take a look at Articles for deletion/Roy Greenhilt (it's an AfD for all the character articles, not just Roy Greenhild). Best, r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 05:43, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Dragon339.jpeg
 Thanks for uploading File:Dragon339.jpeg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:24, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:38, 24 November 2015 (UTC)