User talk:Krator/Archive/2008/April

Ninja Gaiden peer review
Hi, Krator. I have requested a peer review for Ninja Gaiden (2004 video game). I recall you were one of its recommendors for its A-class, and would greatly appreciate your feedback on the current state of the article and what can be done to improve it further. Thank you. Jappalang (talk) 15:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Assess Crush 40 again?
Hi, Krator. You've assessed the article Crush 40 twice for me now, and I'd really like you to assess it one more time. It's listed at the top of the articles to be assessed at WP:VG/A. I've got it cleaned up enough that I'd like to list it at WP:GAN, but I'm not sure if it's completed enough. Thanks for your time. Red Phoenix (Talk) 18:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help. Red Phoenix  (Talk) 00:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time peer review
I started a peer review at WikiProject video games for The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. I'd appreciate any input: WikiProject_Video_games/Peer_review Thanks! Voyaging(talk) 01:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Peer review request
Hi Krator, If you are interested and have a chance, would you mind looking at the peer review for Black Moshannon State Park? It is a state park in Pennsylvania (and has a creek in it - oh no), but I saw you were intersted in human geography from the Peer Reviews Volunteer list, so thought I would ask. Thanks in advance for any help, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Advice sought
OK boss. I've just reverted an editor, but I wanted to make sure that what I did was reasonable. First up, his contributions were concerning - Special:Contributions/63.175.18.130. Of particular concern was this diff and the comment behind it, followed with this comment on the talk page. I've reverted the edit and placed a comment on his discussion page here. Do you think this is appropriate, or should I have taken a different course of action? Many thanks for any insight and suggestions! --Gazimoff (talk) 21:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll respond in more detail later, but in short: yes, it was good. User:Krator (t c) 17:08, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Metroid (series)
If you would be interested in peer reviewing this, that would be awesome, I am trying to find anyone who can give it a look at for copyedit purposes :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:19, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Species of StarCraft
While I can understand the references to the rock/paper/scissors in the Factions in Supreme Commander article and how best to implement that with the article, I don't understand what you mean by "broader context within the RTS genre", because I can't see anything that might fulfil that criteria in Factions in Supreme Commander. Could you explain what you mean by that? --Sabre (talk) 21:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I didn't mean to point to the actual article "Factions in Supreme Commander" as a model, because it's quite horrible (I wrote it as a compromise back in Feb '07 to keep the cruft out of the featured Supreme Commander). The only thing I was pointing at, is that the various species in StarCraft are all similar to the RTS faction stereotypes, and most importantly, helped shape them. For example, Zerg has become synonymous with, well, zerging, and continues the tradition started with the soviets of Command & Conquer (video game). To sum up, I'd like this kind of thing to be in the article. Does this clarify my point? User:Krator (t c) 22:37, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * So basically, mention that Protoss exemplifies/defined a strong but expensive RTS race with advanced technology but using small amounts of units, the Zerg epitomise the swarming tactics in RTSs and the Terrans are examples of a typical middle ground race? I presume it doesn't need much in the article, just a few sentences into the introductions of each section. -- Sabre (talk) 13:04, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, that is an example of the content I'd like to see there. Indeed, a few sentences, but the general "kind of thing" I used it as an example of could warrant a section. This is by no means a requirement, but would greatly enhance the encyclopaedic value of the article. User:Krator (t c) 14:53, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, I think I get the jist of it - my mind simply isn't understanding things today, so if there's a clear good example of this around anywhere else (apparently not Factions in Supreme Commander then), please link me to it. I'll try to put something together. -- Sabre (talk) 15:23, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Request for participation in Peer Review of The Orange Box
The Orange Box, an article that you recently commented on at Featured Article nomination, has been put up for peer review. Please can you take the time to re-examine the article for anything that you feel remains an issue. Should you have any comments or concerns, please can you add them to the discussion. It is hoped that once this peer review is complete that the article will be resubmitted for consideration as a featured article.

Many thanks for both your time and valuable input. --Gazimoff (talk) 14:59, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

BEMANI Taskforce
Hi Krator, As a new user to Wikipedia, to create a taskforce such as this...how do I go about doing it? How are taskforces approved? Thanks.

Fireblaster lyz (talk) 16:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)