User talk:Judgesurreal777/archive 1

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! The Wookieepedian 15:32, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Episode II
I'm sorry, you want to replace one of the posters? I'm not sure what you mean by that. The film poster in the infobox is there because...... well it was the main film poster of the movie. The Yoda poster is there to serve as an example in the Reaction section, which states that the marketing was geared towards hyping Yoda's big fight sequence. I'd honestly like to chuck the Yoda poster and find something else to put there as I think it is redundant to have two posters and two photos of Yoda. I'd really like to find a Cast photo to put in the Cast section, but I haven't had much luck. At the moment I'm considering just putting a screenshot of two or more cast members together to serve as the "Cast photo". Thoughts to any of this? The Filmaker 01:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC) Thanks! I thought I'd finish out the trilogy with The Phantom Menace then I'd start moving forward with A New Hope then Empire then Jedi. :) The Filmaker 21:03, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * If I put a photo of Anakin and Padme at the top of the Synopsis then it will imply that the scene happened towards the beginning, I'd like to keep the images centered around the plot more than the narrative (if that makes sense). But did give me an idea, I think I'll remove the Yoda poster for now and later I'll put up a photo of Anakin and Padme together on Naboo as the "Cast photo" as I don't think I can get a good shot of Anakin, Obi-Wan, and Padme all together (and facing the camera). The Filmaker 02:06, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
 * You can submit the article for GA status whenever you feel it is ready if you feel that it will help the FAC. At the moment I feel that the Release and Reaction sections need to be expanded and cited. Also the Allusions section needs to be completely revamped and cited as it is (of course) loaded with OR. I pretty happy with the rest of the article though, so after I fix those problems I will submit for a peer review and than for FAC. The Filmaker 02:31, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Whoa, this is freaky, Cvene64 just sent me a link for a great photo of Anakin, Padme and Obi-Wan together, so I'm going to go ahead and use that for the cast photo (I'm glad as I wasn't getting many good shots of Anakin and Padme on Naboo). I'll brighten it up a little later. :) The Filmaker 02:40, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Batman Begins

 * It's actually an old plot that was cut out for a tiny "idea" summary, I put the old one back in and I'm trying to condense it down to 2-4 paragraphs (or 5 if we go the way of Episode III), it's a little too detailed and messy at the moment. Also, I took a bit of break from the Episode II article, and now that you mention it, I think I'll start to go to work on it's production, release, and reception sections. And also find some more references. :) The Filmaker 17:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Episode III
Thanks for your words of encouragement, I was getting fed up with them at that time and you really made me look on the bright side. But in other news, why are the images suddenly so small? Is it because of the "hardcoded" problem you fixed? Not am I still confuses on that, I'm confused on why the images are so small. And for that matter, do you know of a reason why he would not like this? The Filmaker 00:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Star Wars Wikiproject
Hello! Thank you for participating in the Star Wars Wikiproject. The participants section has recently been changed so it would be appreciated that you put the template User Star Wars WikiProject onto your Userpage so that you appear in Category:WikiProject Star Wars members. That way you appear in the listing of WikiProject Star Wars members. Jedi6 04:23, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

3 revert rule
Please do not keep undoing other people's edits without discussing them first. This is considered impolite and unproductive. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. Kukini 07:18, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Mongolian Catholicism
Please don't remove either template from this page until you're edits are complete. TheRingess 07:19, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Deletion of Mongolian Catholicism was totally unjustified in my view - (trouble is we have to deal with people who do not know the difference between your and you're). But to avoid similar problems in the future, create your articles at User:Judgesurreal777/sandbox until they no longer look like nonsense. I have placed Mongolian Catholicism there but all it needs is a couple of references / external links and it is ready to copy to the (Main) namespace. Incidentally, do not invent categories - find ones that already exist. -- RHaworth 21:54, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Star Wars Selected Voting
Make sure to vote for the selected article for next week at Portal:Star Wars/Vote. Jedi6 03:06, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Star Wars Collaboration of the week
Make sure to vote for the Star Wars Collaboration of the week for next week at Star Wars Collaboration of the week. Jedi6 03:48, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Pyromania
I really appreciate you noticing my work. My name is Mike, hope to talk to you again in the future! :) Judgesurreal777 21:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


 * My name is Michael as well (just in Polish). :-) Again, good work on Pyromania. I had it watched for almost a month by now and I still hardly believe the progress (the amount of work to be done before cleanup was just beyond my comprehension). The history of your edits to the article (step by step) is also a good lesson in performing a cleanup. Thanks! BTW, I really like your user page: I would also like to have such clean and tidy one but I just can't resist to putting every junk I find around in there. ;-) See ya! Misza13 (Talk) 22:20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Final Fantasy IV
I notice that you tagged Final Fantasy IV as a good article. When you mark an article like that, would you mind adding it to the list of good articles? Thanks!  Pagra shtak  06:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Good work
Great work so far, the style of work you're doing with FFIV mirrors what I had to do with the Patriots article, which means that if you need help with anything, let me know :) Deckiller 03:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Good work (2)
We're really making quick work of Final Fantasy, eh? We can probably flag it to GA status (or get a nom) once we cite a few more sources, trim some of the changes, and so on. Deckiller 00:14, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I might try and push Final Fantasy IX to GA status pretty soon, so if you wanna help out with that at a later date, I'd love it :) Deckiller 00:20, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Beg pardon?
I've never edited J. R. R. Tolkien. Perhaps you meant the message for someone else? Confused, Choess 20:44, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Tolkien
I'm happy to help. I hope you don't take my comment about all the   templates personally though: I'm just concerned that too many citation links (even when filled) will disrupt the flow of the article. The page is riddled with  internal links  as it is! UrbaneLegend 02:28, 13 March 2006 (UTC)


 * All s filled? Good work. ~ UrbaneLegend 10:41, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

J.R.R. Tolkien Article
I revised some style stuff, but the material with no citations is not from me. However, I do have Carpenter's Biography, so I will see what I can do. If the facts are not from Carpenter, then I don't think I will be much help. I will try. --Malecasta 08:22, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

hello Mike, I'm glad to see the "JRRT for FA" effort renewed. I failed at my attempt recently, but I agree that if all the fact tags are addressed, it should be fine. I'll see if I can contribute to this. cheers, dab (ᛏ) 10:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Tournesol.png|70px|]] thanks for your effort getting the citations done! dab (ᛏ) 07:07, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

hi mike!
Great new userpage! Judgesurreal777 06:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Ofermod
I agree that the Old English poem about the very real Battle of Maldon, might be related to fantasy literature as a source document, but that doesn't make it fantasy literature. And the word 'ofermod' is also a very real word. I don't find this article, Ofermod, to be about the poem, but rather to be a gloss on one word in its interpretation, and, thereby extensively, on the use of the word 'ofermod' in other Old English texts. J.R.R. Tolkien was a linguist as well as the author of fantasy literature. I would like you to reconsider the efficacy of the fantasy stub category versus the linguistic one, by asking yourself which group of interested folk is more likely to continue work on the article. All that said, I am not entirely sure that this article belongs in the Wikipedia, while the Battle of Maldon article certainly does. Bejnar 00:08, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

PlayMakers Repertory Company
The article you started, PlayMakers Repertory Company, seems to be copy-n-pasted from and. Cnwb 03:05, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Final Fantasy IV
You added an in the Final Fantasy IV talk page announcing it as a featured article candidate but didn't nominate it in the official list. I've removed the template until you officially list and explain your reasons why you think it should be featured. Thanks. ~ Hibana 22:46, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Whoa, sorry about that. I hate it when that happens to me - you start something and someone interrupts you before you can finish. :P Well, I think the article has improved substantially in the past month or so. However, it was incredibly difficult to get Final Fantasy VI anywhere near featured article status when it was peer reviewed a few months ago. I say, go ahead and nominate it if you want, since it couldn't hurt, but we may still need a collaborative effort from the Project to even hold a candle to some of the other nominees. ~ Hibana 22:54, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Mari (godess)
You have done some few barbarities with the issue of the two Mari articles. Instead of erasing the quite confusing Anbotoko Mari one, you deleted my own less verbose but more serious work with a touch and placed a happy "redirect" there.

I think you are also behind the adition of that image of a Near Eastern divinity to the Anbotoko Mari article. It's so jerky!

Please comment with me before doing any other aberration on Basque mythology issues, thanks.

--Sugaar 04:17, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your nomination
Hey, we have made a lot of improvements on the Hinduism article that you nominated for FARC.1 I would urge you to take a look at it again and hopefully change your nomination or offer suggestions for further improvement. Thanks for your help. (Blacksun 17:20, 23 March 2006 (UTC))

BaK cover
Heya - good job with fixes on Betrayal at Krondor. However, I was not so sure about the game box art; it was taken from MobyGames. While the sites that show scanned cover art etc can hardly claim copyright or anything like that, it's still a bit iffy from fair use perspective - not to even mention a bit funny to show pictures with blatant mobygames watermark! Just letting you to know that it I replaced it with something that looks a bit better - just keep in mind that generally, fair use generally means "I scan it and use it as part of my work" rather than "Someone else scans it, uses it as part of their larger work, then I rip it off". =) I'm not a lawyer so I don't know how it really works, but I think the MobyGames watermarks make it non-borderline-thing. And as usual, I think this new scan is more beautiful anyhow. And sorry I waste your time with this rambling =) --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 16:24, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * templates substituted by a bot as per Template substitution Pegasusbot 06:09, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Merging Pope Christopher and Antipope Christopher
Sir,

Thank you very much for the merging of Antipope Christopher with Pope Christopher... Unfortunately, the contrary was better : Christopher was an antipope and not a pope. I acknowledge it was difficult to see when you read the two pages! I will chang it myself later, after I've modified the text. Thank you again. :o)

Švitrigaila 12:55, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Hellsing_ultimate.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Hellsing_ultimate.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Image legality questions. 13:35, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Page Blanking
On 29-Mar, you blanked Button mashing. Blanking pages is generally considered a bad idea. I've reverted it to the previous version. If this was the result of a broken edit, you may wish to make the correct edits. If you believe the redirect should be deleted, please follow the redirect portion of the deletion procedures. If you believe an article should be written instead of the redirect, please write a stub. If you have questions, please let me know. Thanks! -- JLaTondre 23:05, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Copied from my talk page: My appolgies. I somehow missed this comment. If you want to flip the article and redirect names, you can list it at Requested moves (follow the instructions on that page). If there is no disagreement, an administrator will take care of it. Let me know if you need help. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 13:05, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Lone Wolf gamebook creation
Can you please finish the Flight from the Dark page and use this as a template before creating more book pages based on this. Your link to Lone Wolf goes to a disambiguation page, not the gamebook page, and each book should also be in the Category 'Lone Wolf'. If we get the first page as we want it to start with, we then don't have to go and update 28 other pages every time there's a change. Please discuss on the 'Flight' talk page. Thanks. Burns flipper 08:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Advice
Hi Judgesurreal777, I just wanted to give you some advice, I'm not trying to be hurtful or anything. I noticed you like video games (who doesn't?). I'm just asking you (when you make major changes) to check your spelling, grammar and make sure the headings are actually related to the information in that section. Also, if you create new articles try and find out as much information as you can (Urban Runner has nothing). MobyGames is a great site for information. There are also quality game reviews all over the internet. Cheers! : ) Nomanee 17:37, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Old Skool Esperanzial note
Since this isn't the result of an AC meeting, I have decided to go Old Skool. This note is to remind you that the elections are taking place now and will end at 23:50 UTC on 2006-04-29. Please vote here. Thanks. --Cel es tianpower háblame 20:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Samurai Jack references
Hey, Just a note to let you know that if there is a tag at the top of a page there first has to be a discussion before the merge is carried out. In this case there has been no consensus so far and therefore should be changed. Thanks for trying to help out but before making any major changes check group opinion. Jack 10:28, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

What do you think?
I'm working on Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope and so far I've only got 5 references. This doesn't mean everything is uncited. It's just that I've got to very good sources with tons of information that covers everything. Do you think the voters for the FACs will be turned off by the lack of numerous citations, when the citations themselves are just as suitable as any other citation I might find? The Filmaker 01:28, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Terraforming
Any chance I can encourage you to condense the many small edits into fewer more comprehensive ones? I understand that you're making many small changes that aren't necessarily all related, but when there are 15-25 consecutive edits in an hour, it can be hard to follow and pick apart. siafu 19:38, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Busted with contempt!
Huh! Perhaps you should see the talk?
 * And more generally, your post on ANY TAG should explicitly say what you are adding or deleting with a rigorous cross-note in the applicable talk. I'm sick of chasing down which 'clown' applied a 'Tag' for half an hour when the yahoo that put it there isn't thinking it may be there for months and hundreds of edits because HE DOESN'T CHECK BACK from a LOG he keeps on such applications.


 * Yeah, fiddle with shit and get the edit count up-- doesn't cut it to those of us adding content, or cleaning things up!
 * Looking at your contribs, you sure use 'TAG' an awfully lot. Looks like you're a big part of the problem! Courtesy requires proper documentation. Not "Tag" &mdash; YOU won't even remember which one you applied next week, much less in a month.
 * I'd love to see your log&mdash; Ooops, it's invisible!
 * Where's your annotation matching the NPOV 'tag' in this article history. The tag clearly states I should refer to that note, so where is it here?:
 * "(cur) (last) 06:18, 27 April 2006 Fabartus m (Belatedly add topnote warning on the Peer Review Suggestions)
 * (cur) (last) 19:54, 24 April 2006 Fabartus (Request ..."

In sum, if you can't do it correctly, DON'T DO IT! Fra nkB 19:42, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Funny how none of the dozen plus that looked at that text in peer review said anything about NPOV, and half the text there us from them too.
 * Sheesh! A NPOV without an justification??? You call that professional?? How is someone supposed to clear an undocumented objection, bigshot??? This failure is contemptable in the extremis from an supposedly experienced editor!
 * Well you can sling mud and accusations with the best&mdash; are you a politician &mdash; perhaps you should be, or a scandal sheet writer. You're certainly qualified. Perhaps you didn't comment them because it would show your own POV? I think so.
 * Lastly, the unreferenced template is hardly pertinent yet in an article undergoing initial formulation. Clean is much better as unlike you some of the patrolling editors might even consult the talk before acting and add content, instead of putting things into reverse gear.
 * I hope you realize most of the remaining text there was addded by user: HereToHelp. This experience just boggles the mind! Don't you look at talks or historys before editing. Apparently you just blunder about.
 * Do try to be a team player in this project and perform so that you're respecting my time and that of others or bud out!

First Exchange
From talk:fabartus re:''If there is a problem, address it to me directly; you could have asked me to clarify why I labeled it as such, but do not post a barrage of hate and irrational overreaction on my page. There is no excuse for this exercise in immaturity. Judgesurreal777 19:47, 28 April 2006 (UTC) ''
 * Not sure how I can be more direct! Fra nkB 20:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

An honest contempt is not an over reaction. THAT was very unprofessional. PERIOD. Also, there is no 'hate' in my post— save for your blithe disrespect of others time. It's not personal, it's business and courtesy. FrankB 19:50, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Judgesurreal777"

Answer Post + Reverting your Hidden Revert
From talk:fabartus re:

''If you or anyone related to that page continue this discussion, I'll see if the administrators think it's ok to express "contempt" or whatever you call totally overreaction and piling on for no reason Judgesurreal777 19:55, 28 April 2006 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fabartus"'' I owe you an apology, but you're destroying 'company' documents... I'm not trying to hide anything. Why are you? Fra nkB 20:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
 * What reverting your own talk... HIDING it like an immature kid? Where's there piling on -- there's just us two and your vaporware.
 * Again you're being unprofessional. You can't take manly criticisms and frank discussion, make sure to avoid an edit war!
 * Telling you I hold your actions in contempt is hardly against WP:CIV. Implying that you were a 'clown' and 'bigshot' were probably borderline, but such were chosen to use literary emphasis. Reverting your page without a clear annotation is also nearly contemptable, IMHO. Wiki is an open society... you should be defending your actions underneath, not posting disconnected threats on my talk.
 * Your attempt to 'clarify' by this tag change is the cause of this discord. I apologize for not realizing the tag actually originated elsewhere... and I've been waiting for an answer there for some days. He's See the bottom post been off-wiki for most of the week, and I've been trying to stay away from this article PERIOD.
 * So your clarification just obfusticated a targeted issue when I was editing elsewhere (And Only God knows what's been saved).
 * At my age (51), I don't need the distractions. So a sincere sorry for not seeing the related change down the page when you generalized it. Note however, the prior application was applied to a single statement&mdash; it is specific, not general, and therefore superior. Yours is a shot gun attacking everything in sight. The lesson is obvious. I suggest you revert, I don't do reverts. I will, as you can see, speak my mind.
 * Oh, on that schoolboy threat to contact an admin, be my guest, but HereToHelp will be here regardless 'cause I've already done so. To finish this idiocy!

Wikihug
Getting shouted at sucks, it happens to all of us. You'll feel better, people just need their attitudes checked. Feel better, H ig hway Rainbow Sneakers 21:24, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Courtesy Notice

 * As a courtesy, see This Fra nkB 01:42, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Handshake

 * Thanks for your professional reply--Hand Shake--sorry again for getting hot, and 'making you a convienient target'. That particular template is a hot button for me as it is so easy to abuse in several careless ways.
 * I believe if you check the article Arsenal of Democracy versus the majority of the text (Mine is solely the intro at this point), the summation is fairly fair. Since the article is about the speech itself&mdash;and thus NOT what I envisioned (see the talk, the purpose has 'veered' per the peer review) which was more about the history surrounding the speech&mdash;the article is naturally going to seem somewhat POV in the same way a biography 'always seems' somewhat favorable to the subject of same; even when it is being written by a 'critic' of the subject, this is the normal effect.
 * I would suggest raising such an impression on the TALKs first, and invite discourse over some reasonable time period (min. 2-3 weeks) before applying THAT template... unless it's totally over the top in some way (e.g. 1632 (novel)&mdash; you'll note I even agree &mdash; I'm just trying to get back to it. (see talk:1632 series & overall growth with higher priorities).
 * Life in this kind of thing is not black and white, but infinite shades of grey. It's a balancing act--including one of time allotments-- which also explains my heat.  Ok?
 * I learned long ago not to get excited about 'content' conflicts, so have at it! You and HereToHelp can duke it out since he wrote most of what little remains therein.
 * Look it over again. He (HtH) made POV edit already today, and I just added a bit in line with the peer reviews suggestion on the speech qualities and actual authorship. Now this time, I'm leaving it to it's fate for at least a month!  (Famous last words... 'the road to hell is paved, etc.!) :-)

Best wishes, Fra nkB 17:16, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

An Illustration
Hi! I just thought you might like to see an example of how I handle such things in what I consider a proper way. It took the last 20 mins or so, but if you follow the links, there is no question of what needs done! Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Comics Best regards, Fra nkB 12:02, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * You may need to look FAST- it's already drawn a comment!

Final Fantasy Adventure
Hey, awesome job expanding the Final Fantasy Adventure article. I was planning on doing something similar before, but just never had the time. Maybe I can help out now that you've gotten it started. ~ Hibana 19:35, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Crimson Dawn citation call?
Why the call for citation on Crimson Dawn? The external link seems to suffice. --El benito 17:34, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Ages of Magnamund
I marked that page for deletion because it contained no explanation of its connection to "Lone Wolf". I'll be happy to remove the label if some background info is supplied. Alex&#32;(t) 04:47, 5 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I have removed the speedy deletion tag so you can further edit it. I couldn't see grounds for speedy deletion anyway. Capitalistroadster 05:14, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Chrono Trigger
I'd like to help if I could. I have a few ideas to get us started:
 * Add references (quotes from the game, etc)
 * Improve the prose (that I have no idea on how to do it without a peer review)

I plan to get started as soon as I get home from college. Crazyswordsman 17:24, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Petwo
Hi. You added Category:Hawaii to Petwo. Did you mean to add Category:Haiti? &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 22:09, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Cool, thanks for the reply. BTW, good work on terraforming. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 22:16, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Lone Wolf
Oh My God at everything. Are you plaanning to add more characters and such? --SGCommand (talk • contribs) 20:00, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Batman Begins
The information I deleted from the Batman Begins page is plagerized material copied and pasted from the trvia section of IMDb. It's got little to no bearing on the actual production of the film and it's in bad form to simply copy and paste that information. Please get on top of fixing this or I'm going to remove it again.--Flash-Gordon 02:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

HTMLCommentStrip on Ivy League
Regarding this edit you made, what's the deal with the HTMLCommentStrip? Is that some pointer to an external database of (formerly) ? DMacks 00:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I've seen it being done in a few places. So where does one find the original text? Or, is there somewhere I can read about this whole thing? DMacks 21:02, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Attack of the clones
Oh yeah, I captured those pictures from the DVD. I've updated the image description pages. :) Good luck getting AOTC featured! Coffee 04:26, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Scooby-Doo, Where are You!
Say, pal, the Scooby-Doo, Where are You! is basically an extended episode list; there's no need to por the list of episodes (especially since there are only twenty-five of them) to a subarticle. If you want to boost a Scooby article to FA status, why not focus on the main article at Scooby-Doo, which I have been slowly working on to improve the quality? --FuriousFreddy 01:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 * If you're referring to expanding Scooby-Doo, Where are You!, there's really no need. Any pertenant information that's not alread yi nthe article is in another Scooby article, most likley the main Scooby-Doo article. The only reason I created seperate articles for the Scooby series was because the singular episode guide was getting too big. --FuriousFreddy 04:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Knights of Columbus
I've asked for a peer review for the Knights of Columbus article, with the hopes of making it a featured article. Any help you could give would be great. Thanks! Briancua 13:56, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you - U.S. FAC
Hi,

Thank you for supporting the recent FAC of United States, but unfortunately it failed to pass. However, I hope you will vote again in the future. In the mean time, please accept this Mooncake as a token of my gratitude.--Ryz05 t 15:35, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

HELP WITH THIS PLEASE
205.188.117.6 "BEATLEWILL" This user has repetedly used a main article page to use it for a forum to rant his "opinions" (not facts) - it has already been reverted to the talk or discussion page where is belongs by a wise monitor/editor. But he refuses to take heed and puts up the same "disputes" and "opinion pieces" on a main subject page. THis is esp. true for the article on ART LORIA where the article shows his contributions to the music industry and is sourced, referenced and cited and properly formated.

Then 205.188.117.6 "BEATLEWILL" will come along and deface the article and rant about his opinions on his particular taste in music. Seems that because Mr. Loria was a "DOO WOP" performer, this vandal who has a more un-flattering for that genre of music, rather would share his opionin of the Beatles instead. BEATLEWILL even calims to be a spokesperson foe the Beatles and offers statements on what Yoko Ono or Psul McCartney would have to say. This is a disgrace! But totally acceptable if placed in the right forum. He has been corrected officially once, warned several times, but his banter continues.

That is is right and opinion of course - we just ask that he not be allowed to deface and disgrace an article main page in doing so. It takes away from the integrity of the music, theartist and WIKIPEDIA. Please follow the history of this user and look into this matter / complaint I have discussd. I'm doing research for a book and this is getting quite annoying. I'm not interested in his opinions of the Beatles, I'm interested in certain Doo Wop artists - it is greatly appriciated.

Homestar runner
Read my comment on the FAC for more insight. Lincher 20:52, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

FFIV infoboxes
Could you please point me to the discussion in question concerning the inclusion of additional infoboxes? The boxes are redundant as the information is already available within the commentary, and also, there's a cosmetical issue which leaves great lengths of empty space below the commentary in higher resolutions due to the hardcoded line breaks. Vic Vipr TC 08:09, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Well Vic, during FAC and peer review in the Final Fantasy IV and Final Fantasy (video game),   there was discussion about how best to display the different versions of the games. Most wanted to keep the game boxes, and others were concerned about the quick accessability of the versions information, so  the current structure was formed. Also, with regard to the line break, that occured because one of the bottom boxes was blocking text, so it was all realigned to what it is now.

Anyway, if you have another idea, propose it on the page :) Judgesurreal777 16:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Star Wars
If you nominate it, I'll give it a GA. --P-Chan 16:57, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

A short Esperanzial update
As you may have gathered, discussions have been raging for about a week on the Esperanza talk page as to the future direction of Esperanza. Some of these are still ongoing and warrant more input (such as the idea to scrap the members list altogether). However, some decisions have been made and the charter has hence been amended. See what happened. Basically, the whole leadership has had a reshuffle, so please review the new, improved charter.

As a result, we are electing 4 people this month. They will replace JoanneB and Pschemp and form a new tranche A, serving until December. Elections will begin on 2006-07-02 and last until 2006-07-09. If you wish to run for a Council position, add your name to the list before 2006-07-02. For more details, see Esperanza/June 2006 elections.

Thanks and kind, Esperanzial regards, &mdash;Cel es tianpower háblame 16:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

thank you
Thank you for your welcome and your offer to help. I'll be sure to ask you if i have any questions.

Joseph McCarthy Entry
I'd suggest you be more judicious about your edits on subjects as incendiary as Joseph McCarthy. Making enormous, widespread, wholesale changes to such a thing, crying about anybody reverting your material because you didn't do so more carefully, while you simultaenously make accusations of 'liberal bias' proves only that you have an ideological axe to grind. And honestly, such subject matter should be taken just a little more seriously than Star Wars and bionicle figures and the edits performed with more appropriate care, don't you think? --Dh100 02:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Latest Joseph McCarthy edit...
On your latest edit over there, I'm curious about something... the comment you gave in the edit reads:

(if you continue this, we will be in arbitration)

This leads me to ask the following:

- Are you a Wikipedia admin or arbitrator of any sort?

- Do you somehow believe you have the power or ability to unilaterally invoke arbitration at your command?

- Are you in the habit of delivering what certainly looks to me like a borderline threat?

Just curious. --Dh100 21:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)


 * In response to the message you left on my talk page:


 * Quite frankly, as I have outlined before, you've less 'extended a hand of cooperation' than you have essentially demanded that large wholesale edits be taken in toto, and refused to work cooperatively on smaller edits. You continue to appeal emotionally and use ideological buzzwords as the basis for your claims of 'bias' rather than working on the basis of documented, demonstrable facts.  You continue to be condescending and assert you have some sort of power to unilaterally invoke arbitration, to set arbitrary time limits for when the Wikipedia entry in question has to be cleaned up to suit yourself, as well as be the final determiner of when the entry is no longer 'biased.'  As far as Bionocle being an 'insult', I wasn't aware that referring to a person's own documented edit history was insulting.  If you find editing such entries to be insulting, I simply suggest you stop working on them. And finally, as I stated earlier, continued threats (I'm sorry, that's what it is) of attempting to enter arbitration over the entry in question doesn't intimidate me at all. --Dh100 22:29, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I am in broad agreeance with Dh100's point that sprouting "liberal bias" while doing very large edits isn't a good way to approach the Joseph_McCarthy article. However, I don't think your age or edit history is a valid point against your edits. Anyway, I've removed the NPOV tag as I believe that the issues you initially raised have been fixed. If there are other specific problems may I suggest a WP:NPOV or WP:AWW tag on those sections. (Also naming Ann Coulter as a reliable source is roughly the equivalent of a left-leaning editor using Michael Moore as a source; ie, sure to start a fight, and not the best way to get a good article written!) Nloth 05:20, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Fiction in wikipedia
It sounds good, what they want is that if a certain character would appear in real life, what would be his normal biography (placed in the fictional perspective) so the use of dates coming from the fiction used as if they were in our time is good, also, they do not want to end up having only plot information like, e.g., ... [This guy] grew up in blah town with his parents... instead of ... [This guy] is seen with his parents in this episode so we have to consider that to say that he lived with his parents during his childhood thus implying that at that time he was in this town... So short and sweet like a real bio. Hope this answers your question. Lincher 13:07, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Joedever.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Joedever.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 23:08, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

vanity page
Hi, a while ago you offered me help and advice and I thanked you for it. Now I'm in need of help. Does this page looks like a vanity page to you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tha_Undertaker. His external links is a myspace link. If it is, can you delete it? Thank you. -ScotchMB 11:30, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you -ScotchMB 22:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Eythorne Baptist Church
Thought you should know that Eythorne Baptist Church has been nominated for deletion. See here: Articles for deletion/Eythorne Baptist Church --Michael Johnson 00:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Daler Mehndi
Hi great work on the article. Absoutely everything is referenced! It was on my "to-do" list to expand and clean up a long time ago. I only just saw now and the article is in wonderful condition. Well done, hopefully it gets GA status and one day FA status! Gizza</b><sup style="color:teal;">Chat  <b style="color:teal;">©</b> 08:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Halabja
1. The info is not in the article. 2. Deleting of sourced material=vandalism=block. 3. You have violated the 3RR, i suggest you selfrevert or i have to report you for 3RR. Thank you for your cooperation. -- S p a h b o d  01:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

There is no rule against having a long explanation in an image in wikipedia. However i can put the info in the article as well, but the point of it being in the image is to draw attention. :) -- S p a h b o d  01:36, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, agreed, but please first revert back, i will work on the text and add it to the article tomorrow -- S p a h b o d  02:32, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Your GA nomination
Please make sure to provide a helpful edit summary (per the instructions and big red box) when editing the nominations list in future. -- Run! 08:56, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Boa vs Python
Hi! I have been doing a lot of work on the entry for the film Boa vs Python. Its an experiment really, to prove that any entry, even about a silly movie, if written properly and in strict accordance with Wiki standrads, can become a FA. Anyway, if you have time could you please look over the entry? I know more work needs to be done and I need more input. Thanks! TruthCrusader 08:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Pat the Bunny
An article you recently nominated for GA, Pat the Bunny, has been promoted to GA status. Cheers, H ig hway <sup style="color:#FF917F;">Return to Oz... 16:53, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Copyedit for Episode I
I'm getting ready to submit Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace for FAC and completing the prequel trilogy FAs! :) I was wondering if you would perform a quick copyedit through the article before I do so. The Filmaker 19:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Iraq
Like i mentioned in the article edit summary the info which i deleted regarding evidence that Iran bombed halabja was without source, the source it refered to did not once mention anything about iran bombing halabja. Also the order of the countries as you can see US has the most firms then germany then UK. -- Spahbod  ☼  22:10, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Episode I FAC
Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace is now up for featured article candidates! The Filmaker 00:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey, I'm leaving for a family vacation to Oahu, Hawaii on August 2nd, and won't be back till August 10th. So I was wondering if you wouldn't mind keeping an eye on the FAC while I'm gone, fixing the article should more objections come bye. Thanks. :) The Filmaker 17:29, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Empire Strikes back
I added them back to match the other articles of the Episodes I-VI. Esaborio 04:52, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Davy Jones' Locker
Hello. I have addressed a few problems for the GA nomination. After these have been improved (or tried to) the article will have "Good article" status. Thanks, Iola <b style="color:#50C878;">k</b> ana |<sup style="color:orange;">T  18:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Your GA nomination
Again I must insist that you provide a helpful edit summary when editing the nominations list in future. It is very irritating when people fail to do this. Edit summaries as the instructions on the page decribe are very useful for keeping the GA project running efficiently. -- Run! 11:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

FFIV
Thanks for the compliment. I might try to help out with that one. I'm going to see how things are going on Final Fantasy X-2 and Shadow of the Colossus first, and then I might drop in there as long as nothing offline gets in the way. Ryu Kaze 21:07, 31 July 2006 (UTC)