User talk:Masem/Archive 2

It wasn't a joke edit, you said Candlejack's name, that means he kidna —Preceding unsigned comment added by LKPieman (talk • contribs) 22:30, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you help me out?
I made the discussion here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games, which you were the only one to reply to. I think a new article called List of Xbox Live Arcade games should be made, with all the content from the "by date" and "upcoming" moved into it. The formatting should be similar to the Virtual Console list, as in: released games at the top, upcoming games at the bottom. I'm not good at making tables, do you have time to make one? RobJ1981 (talk) 18:52, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The new article looks pretty good. No one has replied about it though. So if I see no issues in a week or so: I'm going to redirect the old articles to the new article, as well as remove the extra links from the template. RobJ1981 20:36, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Is it possible to link to that page in a sorted view? (I want to redirect List of Xbox Live Arcade games by date to your new page with the table already sorted by date. Hope that makes sense.) SeanMooney 09:30, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, no, that's a limitation of the sortable table functions - it will only start with how items are listed in the code. --MASEM 14:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sly-comic-2.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Sly-comic-2.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Candle Ja
I'd say that the section is definitely needed. The matter has become overblown in the best tradition of the Internet and attracted completely disproportionately bitter fights over time. Meanwhile, edit warring over it continues in the article. The section could conceivably siphon off the silliness, providing a place to indulge while making it clear that it isn't allowed in the article itself.

Note that I'm keen on bizarre solutions. Not all that long ago I calmed a heated debate slash flame war about Albus Dumbledore by calling it really rather silly and declaring a state of picnic. --Kizor 04:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The section helps in keeping the talk page organized, too. We are otherwise going to have several. --Kizor 04:57, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Siphoning off a special section on the talk page (which most IP vandals will never look at) is not a solution - we just revert anyone that vandalizes the entry. It hasn't been bad for several months so the meme or #chan or wherever it came from is likely passed. --MASEM  04:59, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

BCBot/FURs
OK.....so what you are telling me is I have to have two seperate F-URs on the image from WDIC (AM) and WDIC-FM, correct?...or just one covering the two stations? See, this is where I am having problems. - NeutralHomer T:C 21:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 3rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Jeff
Indeed. People are making too much of a fuss. Too many allegations against Eidos. If it gets to the courtroom, sure. If not, everyone will have forgotten it by Christmas. Will (talk) 01:09, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Jeff Gerstmann Updates
Masem,

I haven't found you to be completely honest. Note, I am not complaining about your report of my 3RR violation. What I am upset about is this chain of messages:

Message 1 to me:

On the Jeff Gerstmann article be aware you have violated the Three-revert rule for doing more than 3 reverts to a single article in a 24-hr period. As you have not received a warning to such, and I'd rather resolve what we can via talk pages, I want make sure you are aware of the rule so that you don't stumble into again and we can work out what information should go where.

Also, please note that as User:Spectre has pointed out that biographies of living people are held to a much higher standard than regular articles (note that while Spectre has also violated the 3RR, reverts made to remove fraudulent, speculative, or other potentially defaming material are specifically allowed and not counted towards WP:3RR. I understand the need to put this information in WP, but as I've mentioned, it doesn't below directly with Gerstmann's article. --MASEM 00:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Message 2 to Sceptre:

Please note that I have issued a formal 3RR violation for Toadstool1969 over this article. Do note that I have explained that you've done as many reverts now as he, but by the BLP stipulation/allowance, I'm pretty sure you're in the clear about it. --MASEM 01:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Again, I am unconcerned that you reported my violation. I can live with that. But, do not tell me you'd rather "resolve what we can via talk pages" and then turn right around and "issue a formal 3RR" complaint. It's the honesty in your actions and words that I have an issue with.

--Toadstool1969 (talk) 19:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Please see what I said on the Gerstmann page. Basically, I cautioned you on the 3RR (technically, you had already violated on the 4th revert).  Twenty minutes later, without a message on talk page, you reverted.  At that point, it was then necessary to report it (3RR is a hard set rule once you've been warned, I've run aground of it too).  However, because Spectre had done 4 reverts as well to re-revert 4 of your 5 reverts, I felt it necessary to 1) include him in on the 3RR report though noting that I believed his was following the BLP fraud/rumor exception, and 2) I let him know that I included him on this report, in case he was actually blocked himself and had no idea where it came from.  --MASEM  20:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

The Amazing Race icons and colors
About The Amazing Race icons issue that I brought on the Survivor: China Talk page, you might consider removing the icons entirely for accessibility reasons. To me, it appears that the icons are used instead of text titles and that's not a good thing with regards to accessibility. While there is no specific policy on usage of icons only, the closest would be the color use guidelines and not using color alone to convey information. For example, The Results table conveys information only through colors and that's bad. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 21:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Uncharted: Drakes Fortune
Nice job with the rewrite, I went for a way-too-much-information-and-someone-else-can-wikipediafy-it-or-me-when-I'm-rested-from-writing-all-that approach.--WhereAmI (talk) 22:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I was actually writing off-my-head rewrite when you posted that, but that helped me to cement/remember the right details. Probably can still use some trimming but still good. --MASEM  22:34, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

GAN
Hello, I was impressed with your works on video games and TV shows articles. I was wondering if you can show me some of your good article nomination reviews.


 * Here's some of the links to the GA reviews for those:

--MASEM 04:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Okami -
 * BioShock -
 * Crazy Taxi (series) -
 * Pinky and the Brain -
 * Guitar Hero 2 -


 * I mean the reviews that you write about on others' articles, not other people doing reviews to the articles that you contribute. OhanaUnitedTalk page 16:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Doh, ok, I've got a few...
 * Planet -
 * Cultural depictions of spiders -
 * Nickel Creek -
 * I believe that's all the GA reviews that I've done to date.. --MASEM 17:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Have you considered archiving your talk page? It's really long. OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Yea, I was lazy :) --MASEM 04:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Official Invitation to GA Sweeps
I would like to invite you to participate at GA Sweeps. We decided it's time to give GA a good sweep to ensure the qualities of all GA articles. You recevied this invitation because we felt that you can improve and uphold the quality of Good articles. This is the reason why only experienced reviewers who are established (trusted) within the project should participate in this sweep initially.

Please take a look at the project page and see if you wish to participate in the Sweeps. Particularly, I hope if you can sweep television episodes on the sweep list. <b style="color:#0000FF;">OhanaUnited</b><b style="color:green;">Talk page</b> 01:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Do you want me to guide through the process? <b style="color:#0000FF;">OhanaUnited</b><b style="color:green;">Talk page</b> 17:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * If you wouldn't mind - I can see what's on the project page, but I want to make sure what the usual routine has been for these things. --M<font size="-3">ASEM 17:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * We keep a running total at WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force/Sweeps/Running total. I have done the basics for you. All you need is follow the format and list out which articles you reviewed, their current status (keep, hold, GAR, or delist) on the running total. <b style="color:#0000FF;">OhanaUnited</b><b style="color:green;">Talk page</b> 19:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

not trying to push guidelines
I was merely being B as in BRD, and I do wish i could persuade you of a more liberal point of view--but if people dont agree, then we might as well just say so. I apologize for coming into the debate at this point, but I really hate going back and forth on policy pages. It's not my style. I prefer finite arguments  about articles  & I'm not going to get into a long argument if others can carry the ball. But I will do what I have to, as when I see disputed policy being quoted at AfD as if there were real consensus. DGG (talk) 22:38, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I accept the way you did it using all 3 boxes. I thought of that too--do whatever you think clearest, as long as its right out on the face of it that the contents or status is not yet generally accepted. Again, if you can find something however vague that might be, compromise is better than repetitive fighting. DGG (talk) 02:31, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree that it is disputed - just that usually when its disputed wait to make changes to the text until the disputes are settled -- those infoboxes may not even stay after the dispution's figured but at present they still should stick as we'd like to use as much as possible with appropriate rewording to avoid massive disruptions. --M<font size="-3">ASEM 03:03, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Thoughts?
Since you seem to be one of the more active Video Game project members, I thought I would ask you this: are system software pages needed? All the newest video game consoles have articles listing each and every update they get. PlayStation Portable System Software, PlayStation 3 System Software,Wii System Software and Xbox 360 System Software are the articles I'm talking about. While useful, they seem like just clutter (which I believe was removed from the main articles in the first place). RobJ1981 (talk) 02:23, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * My first impression is that this is excessive - major system release (eg psp/ps3 1.00, 2.00, 3.00) can be mentions grouping all the releases, but not each specific one. However, I would see if there's any general software articles that have a similar approach of guidelines - I'll take a look to see if such exists as well. --M<font size="-3">ASEM  03:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Have you had time to look for any? I've looked a little, and haven't found any similar articles so far. If they would go to AFD, what reasoning should I give? RobJ1981 (talk) 19:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I haven't been able to find anything consistent. I would not AfD them, but I would cite concerns that it is WP:IINFO/WP:DIR - major milestones should be indicated, and links to other pages that I'm sure list exact changes should be noted, but not every single minor version updated should be included.  x.0 and x.5's at best. --M<font size="-3">ASEM  19:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I posted new sections on the talk pages for the articles. I'll wait and see if anyone replies before making my mind up on AFD. RobJ1981 (talk) 05:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 10th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Admin
Hi. I just wondered if you would consider letting me nominate you for adminship, as you seem experienced enough. Thanks. Epbr123 (talk) 08:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would be honored to. --M<font size="-3">ASEM 15:30, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

<div class="boilerplate metadata" id="rfa" style="margin: 0 5%; padding: 0 7px 7px 7px; background: #FFFAEF; border: 1px solid #999999; text-align: left; font-size:95%;"> Epbr123 would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Epbr123 to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Requests for adminship/. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

NOR Request for arbitration
Because of your participation in discussions relating to the "PSTS" model in the No original research article, I am notifying you that a request for arbitration has been opened here. I invite you to provide a statement encouraging the Arbcom to review this matter, so that we can settle it once and for all. CO GDEN  00:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas
<div style="padding: 5px; background:#801818; border-style: solid; border-width: 2px; border-color:#FF7F50; font-family: Tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 100%; "> <div style="margin-top: 3px; padding-top: 9px; padding-bottom: 9px; padding-left: 9px; padding-right: 9px; width: 400px; float: center;"> <font color="#000000">Blessed editing, and... <font color="#000000"> Happy Holidays from <font color="#FF0000">Marlith  <font color="#228B22">T /<font color="#228B22"> C

Credits: This card was inspired by Macy's123, assistant of V's Shop <font color="#FF0000">Marlith  <font color="#228B22">T /<font color="#228B22"> C 00:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 17th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 19:13, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Kane & Lynch: Dead Men
Hey Masem. I should have read the talk page before, but still I think my edit was right and the text (which is now more NPOV, though I myself think it's a good game) should be there. I would thank you for responding to my post there. Tsar User 14:45, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations
A consensus has been reached by your peers that you should be an admin. I have made it so. Please review Administrators' reading list and keep up the great work. Sincerely, Kingturtle (talk) 17:05, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Cheers, Mas! Dunno about you, but I might have to pull one of my javascript tools to fit the shiny new buttons... *g* Tony Fox (arf!) 17:12, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Congratulations. You might want to make it apparent that you are, in fact, an admin, on your user page. Maybe use administrator -- Anonymous Dissident  Talk 06:37, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! Maybe I'l be one too sometime. heh. <span style="color:#008000; font-family:'Comic Sans MS', sans-serif; font-weight:bold;">lightsup55 ( T | C ) 07:03, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you could/would help
Masem, I tried to ask Pak21 about this, but he refuses to collaborate or even respond to concerns anymore. I have an article that I am wondering if it meets notability. Here's the original text of my question to Pak; perhaps you'd be willing to take a quick gander and tell me/us your thoughts?
 * : Pak, on a wholly different note (but still deletionist-related), can I get your thoughts on the Jack McClellan article? Not too long ago this guy was all over the west coast news and even on CNN occasionally, including a scathing interview on Glenn Beck. Since, though, he's apparently fallen off the radar screens of pretty much anyone. I think his notability is around that of Earl Cole, Yau-Man Chan, Laurel McGoff, Temptation Island, Ghost Tower of Inverness, online wedding, fuzzy dice, and other pages of minimal reference and notability, but many of these have been, could be, will be, have not, will not, or would not be deleted. Obviously, it's on the cusp. What I want to not do is delete the article and cause a firestorm over it, but really, this guy's less notable than the first three people I listed above. What do you think?

Many thanks! VigilancePrime (talk) 00:36, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


 * First glance seems to be notable; the article doesn't appear to violate any WP:BLP issues (references are either reliable sources, or self-published) nor make any unsubstantiated claims, and the coverage is notable. The only thing I'd be worried about is that there is newsworthiness verses noteworthiness - most of the details of that person are only from the last 6 months and only because of the blip in news coverage, though the coverage is not limited to a few local sources.  I don't know if there's an article that this can be merged into if someone else considers that to be the case.  I would tend to say that yes, this article is notable. --M<font size="-3">ASEM  00:48, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Wow; now seeing it in the light you wrote it, I can see the notability. It was a whirlwind news bit at first but totally off the radar (at least nationally) since. It's a good thing I asked first, eh? Thanks for your insight. VigilancePrime (talk) 16:55, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

V-Dash said something in an edit summary I think needs brought into the discussion
During the removal of his trolling comments on the Pokemon Diamond and Pearl talk page, one of V-Dash's edit summaries seen here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pok%C3%A9mon_Diamond_and_Pearl&action=history states the following against myself: "Perhaps I should remove a certain section on your profile that's unsanitary to the public eye Suke..." he's referring to the userbox that states I am gay. Could this be threatening me in some form? Either way I don't like it. If it could be brought up on the notice board I would appreciate it ever so much. Thanks! -Sukecchi (talk) 18:11, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I brought up the specific edit pointing to that wording; its hard to say if it is or not myself, but it is the same type of behavior he's shown before which is very determinental. --M<font size="-3">ASEM 18:25, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Grim Fandango
GA nomination on hold. &mdash; <b style="color:#12A434">Dihydrogen Monoxide</b> (Review) 08:26, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Banking conspiracy theories
A while back, regarding my edits to the Gamespot article, Sceptre mentioned you as an "active" administrator and even contacted you to give me a warning for reverts, and so on.

Well, if that's the case, I have something for you to take a look at, in case informally notifying you of something could perhaps be quicker than going to some committee. The following users (possibly with more sockpuppets) have been engaging in POV pushing:
 * User:Sm8900
 * User:Gregalton
 * User:Timothymak (sockpuppet User:Maktimothy)

They've been doing it on the following articles:
 * Debt-based monetary system
 * Debt money
 * Debt-free money

All three terms are POV pushing terms used by conspiracy theorists (see this video). All of the information in those articles can be found in fractional reserve banking, gold standard, Federal Reserve, Austrian Business Cycle Theory, etc.. As part of being bold, I tried to redirect debt-based monetary system to fractional reserve banking, redirect debt money to fiat currency, and I tagged debt-free money with speedy delete. So far, my attempts at establishing those redirects wasn't successful because, some claimed, I had to wait for some kind of democratic consensus to emerge, even though it's clearly been talked to death on Talk:Debt-based monetary system. I also suspect that, by the time you read this, someone watching those pages will have taken down my speedy delete tag from Debt-free money. 69.138.16.202 (talk) 18:02, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 13:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Tar12-ep2-roadblock.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Tar12-ep2-roadblock.jpg. 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) 21:22, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Tar12-ep7-roadblock.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Tar12-ep7-roadblock.jpg. 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) 21:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

#6
You'll see my comment at the discussion of your proposal #6. I am not trying to be intransigent, but to avoid saying things which will need total rewriting, or be ignored. Probably we can agree on most of the details if the basic views are accommodated. In view of the ANI discussion I missed out on entirely yesterday, i feel this explanation is necessary. I'm willing to discuss my attitude on this offline if you think appropriate; btw, congratulations on adminship, i remind you that admins are expected to be available by email. DGG (talk) 13:45, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I have no problem talking about any concerns in a public forum - that's the only way we're going to get more input from others on this. As I've said, I think we've got an approach that, barring changes to higher-up policy/guidelines, meets many issues that have been raised; its not going to be 100% agreed to, I'm sure, but its a starting point. --M<font size="-3">ASEM  17:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
 * as you like, I won't email you; but you are still asked to enable your email so people who have a need to contact an admin confidentially can do so. DGG (talk) 20:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
 * D'oh, that should now be fixed. --M<font size="-3">ASEM 17:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * are we getting somewhere? But see the top of my talk p. for a problem.DGG (talk) 13:43, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

GA Sweeps
I'm a little confused as to why I'll See You in Court was reviewed during the sweeps, seeing as how it was passed after the date of the stabilized version here. I'm not sure that I understand what's going on with that. Cheers, CP 04:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:FICT
I'm not sure how we'd have managed without your patience, guidance, and well thought out proposals. Thank you, very very much. -- Ned Scott 06:22, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * we may actually be getting somewhere--I will comment more generally when I have the chance. DGG (talk) 05:15, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree with both. I think we should be going back to WP:NPAPER and I'll continue to argue that, but you've done a very nice job! Hobit (talk) 02:44, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Just any FYI, but this editor is the same anonymous IP that's been vandalizing Survivor: China, Dancing with the Stars, and the various Cars related articles. His MO is to remove piped links and add nonsense to the articles. When I have previously seen him, I've blocked him for a week. You might consider doing the same if you see him. I can lookup the old IPs if you're interested. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 09:22, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

You seemed to be interested in this
For your consideration: WP:TODAY. Lawrence Cohen 17:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Non-free content
I just wanted to take an opportunity to say a big THANK YOU for your efforts there. I think it's ultimately futile, but someone needs to try. I failed, as everyone else before you have failed, but if the effort isn't made... --Hammersoft (talk) 15:47, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, you have it right
Yes, the not shouldn't be there. I got confused because I saw your edit in between my two and thought you had added the not and I had taken out again in my second edit, I highlighted the wrong diff when comparing. Sorry about that. Hiding T 22:53, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Amazing Race changes
Hey, Masem. I was wondering if you could tell me what you thought of the changes I made to the TAR10 and TAR11 results tables. I wanted to see if everyone liked them before I made them to the rest of the season pages, but nobody except one anon editor replied when I posted about it on the TAR12 talk page. Also, could you read the proposal I made regarding the Route Marker icons (bottom of the TAR12 talk page) and give me your thoughts on that too? Thanks. -- Crazy Legs  KC  14:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Lemmings (video game)/Ports
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Lemmings (video game)/Ports, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Lemmings (video game)/Ports. Rettetast (talk) 23:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

latest version
Getting there. I would of course prefer a more direct approach to the primary importance being the plot & characters, but if we can get the wording flexible enough, I will compromise to any reasonable extent to get an agreement that might hold a little while. You have my admiration for your patience and ingenuity. Please dont think my continuing comments are a rejection of what you are doing. DGG (talk) 18:38, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Question
Thank you for responding to my entry. I begining to understand now of the way wikipedia works. But I would like my question to be answered if its not a problem. Thanks. Neon6419 (talk) 02:09, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Small appology
Just a small appology - my use of "woah!" was a little strong, whilst my edit summary said it better - it was some great writing, just I didn't want to launch a huge tangent on VPP and drag in everybody at this stage. Thanks, I'll give it a look and see about responding later in the week, work is pretty busy so I can't give your material the attention it deserves until then (that's a compliment ;) ) LinaMishima (talk) 02:26, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Some essays on policy
Don't know if you've seen this yet.

WP:Wikiliberalism

Also, see the changes I made here: Wikipedia is failing

Zenwhat (talk) 03:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I responded to your comments on WP:FICT
See:


 * Village_pump_%28policy%29
 * Wikipedia_talk:Notability_%28fiction%29 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zenwhat (talk • contribs) 08:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ps2 harvey.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Ps2 harvey.jpg. 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) 05:51, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Centralized TV Episode Discussion
Over the past months, TV episodes have been reverted by (to name a few) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here. --User: (talk) 18:36, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Airline destinations?
This is blatant spam. Any chance we could get an official consensus on it, for WP:Notability or WP:Spam?

Category:Airline destinations

I can't help but have paranoid suspicions about company-funded sockpuppetry. The same goes for the radio station listings, which all look like advertisements. &#9775; Zenwhat (talk) 07:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Is this article notable?
It's a video game message board site called NeoGAF. I did a google search, and didn't find anything reliable. Currently, the site is being used as a source for a Virtual Console list. See Talk:List_of_Virtual_Console_games_%28North_America%29. People assume it's notable, because a reviewer for the site gets the games early and posts them for everyone to see. I'm not sure it's even proven he gets the games legally or not. RobJ1981 (talk) 21:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Insomniac engine name
Oof, didn't mean to step on any toes :(, I figured that, since it's practically as generic as the name it replaces, it could work without falsely claiming authority. Evilkeen (talk) 02:58, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:36, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 21:51, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Objective criteria for episode notability
I've attempted to synthesize the discussion. Again, feedback welcome.Kww (talk) 18:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 21st, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 00:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:ER to list entry
Template:ER to list entry has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. —- Cat chi? 19:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use images, commentary, and discographies
A discussion continues at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content about fair use images, commentary, and discographies. Since you have opposed use of such images in certain articles in question there, I would appreciate some suggestions there as to what is the quota of information to qualify as commentary for use with fair-use images. I created these articles as a starting point for others to add material but would be willing to do some additional work myself if there is a clear goal that can be set. If these articles are discographies, please define the term or set some boundaries so that I will know what is a discography and what is not. Thanks. —  AjaxSmack   00:25, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:Fan fiction proposal.
After seeing the deletion review of the Back to the Future timeline, I made the proposal that all fan fiction explicitly be not allowed on Wikipedia. Take a look: WP:Fan fiction

This is already a part of Wikipedia's policy on WP:COPYVIO, but it is obviously not clear or explicit enough, since users continue to violate it. &#9775; Zenwhat (talk) 07:33, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

CharR to list
I've started using the new character template for a few articles. When I applied it, though, two red links were being added to the redirect page. The one mentioned in the instructions, and then one for Category:Redirected fictional character articles. I went ahead and put something in that category just to get the red link take care of, but I wasn't sure what its actual purpose was and thought you might want to check it to tweak it as needed. Collectonian (talk) 21:26, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


 * That second category is a "catchall" that all redirected (X) fall into. The idea is that, should an en masse inclusion of a lot of redirects into, say Category:Fictional character redirects to lists, without classifying them further, it should be possible to use an automated tool like AWB to find those redirects not yet included in a specific category.  At this point, I don't know if that Cat is really needed or not, and removing it is easy (take it out of the template, then delete the cat).  But what I see you did looks right.  --M<font size="-3">ASEM  21:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Cool. That's kind of what I was thinking, but wanted to be sure :)  Once the pages are created for series X, it removes the second cat, so it works well, I think. Collectonian (talk) 21:46, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

My comments on WP:FICT
Do you think they're counterproductive? I could remove them if you like.

I want WP:FICT to get passed and don't want any dickery by me to stand in the way, by igniting any kind of flaming.

I just wanted to solidify the point of how critical it is that this get passed. &#9775; Zenwhat (talk) 00:50, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the cleanup on Elf. --Tony Sidaway 03:00, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 28th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 03:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

something like a barnstar
I would give you another barnstar for all your work and great insightful comments surrounding FICT, but it would only add to inflation... Anyway, you're doing a great job. And frankly, I have no idea how you manage to stay so calm and focussed. User:Dorftrottel 04:50, February 2, 2008

Help me delete WP:ARS?
They are engaging in canvassing. I complained about it on their page. In fact, I asked them to clean up Bawls, since it was one of the articles they were "proud" of saving. Nobody there wanted to do it, so literally pretty much all they do is just vote-stacking for Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians. They achieve this, too, through a bot collects articles proposed for deletion and puts them in the POV fork of category AfD: Category:Articles that have been proposed for deletion but that may concern encyclopedic topics.

This is partially to blame for the problems with WP:FICT and other content problems like that.

Recently, Benjiboi "archived" my comments on the talkpage of WP:ARS, even though virtually all of the discussions there are older than my threads. 

You are respected, influential, and an administrator. I figured that you may be better at developing consensus on this issue. Whereas if I nominated it for MfD myself, it'd probably get snowballed.

Also, I wrote an essay recently you may enjoy: See WP:Cruft portal. &#9775; Zenwhat (talk) 10:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I was writing a message on Freakazoid and happened to be around. Good sir, have your past interactions with ARS been on a level where its members would be willing to do what you ask them to do, even if it's a good idea? --Kiz o r  13:57, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Please stop assuming bad faith against a project that seeks to improve articles and I urge you to make more constructive, less pointy edits. For example, what is the purpose of this question?  Also, calling inclusionists "evil," as you do here and here is unacceptable.  Also, there is hardly an inclusionist cabal.  I have seen enough articles that I thought to be encyclopedic deleted to know that such a belief is just not true.  Sincerely, --<font face="Times New Roman"> Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 18:39, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I really don't see anything inherently wrong with the group, and in fact I think it's a worthwhile cause; scanning through what they have saved seems to show they aren't targeting the usual "cruft" of fiction. The category you suggest is marked as a WP category and thus not subject to usual POV issues, and their page doesn't suggest vote stacking instead of focusing on article improvement.  I wasn't aware of this group but I feel it is a completely fair task force to have around, and have actually joined up into the group. --M<font size="-3">ASEM  19:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Hey Masem, just want to say thank you for removing the spoiler on the Survivor: Micronesia talk page, i try to avoid spoilers at all costs, and i hated seeing it there. Lucky when i first saw it i only saw a few names towards the front end of the table. I enjoy the discussions on the talk page and now i can go back there without having to be wary of the spoiler. So thank you! Survivorfan101 (talk) 10:19, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 4th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)