User talk:Imperator3733/General archive 3

Scourge of God
Hey can you do me a favor and check out the Scourge of God article, tell me what you think? Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 22:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I would except that I haven't read either The Sunrise Lands or The Scourge of God. I've been reading my dad's copies and he waits until the paperbacks comes out.  It's quite annoying because that means that I can't help with those articles (I don't want to spoil this series).  Sorry. -- Imperator3733 (talk) 00:14, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I couldn't wait so I buy hardcovers all the time. Anyway no big deal, hopefully I don't spoil anything for you. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 02:29, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Archive
Um...why are there so many links on the archive section of the Alternate History WikiProject talk page? Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 20:36, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * How many links do you see? I just see the link to the October archive. -- Imperator3733 (talk) 20:59, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * A lot, a really long list of links to different articles and not to the archived section. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 21:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Weird. I'd upload a screenshot and then maybe contact Cobi (who wrote ClueBot III). -- Imperator3733 (talk) 22:59, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, now the template is messed up for me too. -- Imperator3733 (talk) 23:07, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

ideas on the future development of wiki
Hey. I'm really interested about how wiki is going to change in the future and would like to discuss new ideas with people who are interested. Is there anywhere on the wiki site to do this? I put a post in the "Village pump proposals" but it was removed. thank you. Joehamilton (talk) 22:32, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Redirect of Rising Eagle
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Rising Eagle, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Rising Eagle is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Rising Eagle, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 06:20, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Twit Wiki
The twit wiki won't verify my email, so I can't edit--including editing your user talk page there to ask for help. My email is working fine, and the wiki software says that it's sending me a confirmation, but I never receive any after several tries and two addresses. Any ideas? --LDC (talk) 15:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Rising Eagle: Futuristic Infantry Warfare
In the userspace article, one source is the publisher, the other a blog - unreliable sources. Please see WP:RS.

Notability is not subjective, please see WP:NOTE for general criteria. WP:NOBJ for the specifics I refer to.

Perhaps the guys and gals over at WikiProject Video Games could give you opinions on how to make a better article, but a websearch results only on download links, not even real editorial reviews from well-known gaming magazines or their websites.

As to the game being free, it isn't. After downloading it, I couldn't even play a demo without a gamespy account. While this is original research, common sense dictates that no reliable source would describe the game as being "free" in any of the meaningful ways the word is used: it is not open source, free software, freeware or free as in beer. Sorry, but the publisher is seriously misusing the word "free", and no reliable sources is saying otherwise. Even the blog review mentions the fact you have to pay to play online (along with a lack of players).--Cerejota (talk) 12:55, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Call out
WikiProject Alternate History is currently holding a roll call, which we hope to have annually. Your username is listed on the members list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active within the project. If you still consider yourself an active editor, please add your name back to the Active members list. You can also list yourself as a Supporter if you feel you cannot dedicate the time necessary to be an active member.

Please also see the Project talk page for more information concerning this Call Out. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 13:48, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Minnesota Meetup
 2009 Proposed date: Saturday, October 10. Details under discussion. Please share this with anyone who may be interested.  Delivered by Jonathunder (talk) 21:29, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Update: the meetup will be at 1 p.m. Sunday, October 11, in St. Paul. Click here for more details and to R.S.V.P. Jonathunder (talk)

Proposal on improved watchlists
Hello. I have revived a discussion you took part in back in 2008. It's about improving watchlists to allow a little more user control. Perhaps you would like to contribute? --bodnotbod (talk) 08:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

New Messages
Acps110 (talk • contribs) 05:04, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Hos-Hostigos for deletion
A discussion has begun about whether the article Hos-Hostigos, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Hos-Hostigos until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Sadads (talk) 21:15, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

May I have your assistance?
Hi,

Are you still interested in the idea of at least some non-admins being able to view deleted pages? I understand that the proposal was shot down previously by foundation counsel; however I believe I have at least two possible answers to their concerns.

One possibility is to make this prospective (apparently the antonynm of retrospective although I'm not so sure) - that is to say that only edits deleted after its implementation can be viewed. For revisions such as libelous edits or copyright violations and so on, there can be a hard delete, lying some way between this soft delete and oversight, which will function just like a present deletion. Admins could also have the power to toggle a deletion from hard to soft (or to undelete) - so selected deletions made before this feature is implemented could be made soft.

The second possibility is to introduce a procedure somewhat like RFA where users are given permission to view deleted edits by the community. As admin privileges are currently granted not just based on trust in general, but also on trust that the tools will be used appropriately, there is a much greater pool of users who would be eligible to be given this permission.

And of course, it is perfectly possible to use both of these systems at once.

I have cross posted this to a few users who were active in the discussion in 2008 - I don't feel this is a violation of CANVASS because I have not made the proposal myself - the reality is I need an experienced Wikipedia with some "street cred" to make it. I already attempted to steer a discussion of a similar proposal this way, but sadly that discussion is irretrievable (see here - or even better, don't!). Because I have posted this to a few users, I would be greatful if you would reply at User_talk:Egg Centric/Proposal and perhaps we can get a discussion going!

Thank you!

Egg Centric 22:56, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

P.S. - silly me, I forgot to link to the original discussion in 2008. Here it is: Village_pump_(proposals)/Persistent_proposals/Straw_poll_for_view-deleted