User talk:Pagrashtak/archive10

Final Fantasy V
I am attempting to reassemble wikiproject final fantasy in order to help boost V's candidacy. I would love some help getting a some more references and some copyediting. :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 05:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Zelda Wind Waker Link waves goodbye.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Zelda Wind Waker Link waves goodbye.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) 12:14, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Signpost report
Thanks for helping out in the reports answers. Very much appreciated. Regards, Rudget . 11:57, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Co-nom
Certainly, co-nom would be nice. I'll let you know when I've posted the FTC. Cheers! Gary King (talk) 18:17, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Featured topic candidates/The Legend of Zelda titles :D Gary King (talk) 18:45, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Zelda
Hey man, since you're one of the biggest Zelda-related editors, can you please help me with Twilight Princess, which I put in the FAC? (I know you like to make reviews in FACs, and your thoughts would be appreciated, but first, it's needed to fulfill some of the requests so far) igordebraga ≠ 02:28, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time
I noticed that you put up The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time at FAC. If you need help, just let me know and I'd be happy to co-nom to look through the prose and make sure that all comments have been addressed :) Cheers! (I should also mention that I've played and beaten the game, although it was quite a few years ago :)) Gary King ( talk )  19:30, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

C&C template
In the future, please first discuss any large changes you wish to make to the template, especially when they involve the removal of numerous links and core content. Also, three links you removed under the rationale of not being relevant to the C&C universe are in fact directly relevant to it. As such, I've reverted your edit. Kalamrir (talk) 16:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You apparently didn't read my full edit summary. Those three links were removed because they link to subsections of an article that is already linked to on the template. I have opened a discussion on the template talk page.  Pagra shtak  17:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Majora's Mask
Well, I removed because there were 9 images, not counting the box art. Since that particular section had two, and Zora Link already appears in "Songs", I thought it was unnecessary (Deku Link was less, since the other two forms appear and it "completes"), and removed it - possible influence of having to deal with some image neurotic that appears in every FAC. Also, what do you think of my image thoughts on the OoT FAC? igordebraga ≠ 15:20, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, the caption is well-written and thus helps the image get useful. But what about another image in OoT, specially inside combat? An image of the overworld with nothing happening isn't much helpful... igordebraga ≠ 16:12, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

RE: Lead section
Sorry, I didn't know that.--  LYKANTROP   18:48, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Leadwerks feature list deletion
Question: Why did you delete the Leadwerks Engine technical feature list, and can you undelete it? Please note that all other Engines have a technical feature list also, even CryEngine2. It's the most important information for people to see what an Engine can do, and if it suits their needs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lumooja (talk • contribs) 21:48, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. I also dont see why our images are being proposed for deletion because we dont hold the actual copyrights. I dont see images of other games/game engines being proposed for deletion. CryEngine2, Source Engine, Crysis, Half-Life 2...those images are left alone. I believe you have some major bias in your decisions.Tylerp9p (talk) 13:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Myst
Thank you so much; makes me crazy. Since I don't have admin tools, I can't do it right, but no one else would do it. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 16:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Video game FACs
I just wanted to give you a heads-up that I posted a thread here about the recent flurry of video game FACs. Although you are mentioned, I wanted to say that I did not and do not have any issues with your conduct pursuant to this situation. I simply had to mention one of your noms because it was one where a particular group of editors showed up. -- Laser brain  (talk)  23:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Zelda Oracle of Seasons rod.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Zelda Oracle of Seasons rod.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) 07:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

FT query
I am trying to figure out if I am still too far away to request guidance, but I posted a new query on the FTC talk page that might be up your alley.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:49, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Your advice is still awaited.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Could you examine the article "Independent National Socialism" for bias
I am asking a number of administrators at random to review Independent National Socialism which is sourced completely from a white nationalist webpage called Stormfront, which has anti-Semitic and other xenophobic material on it. A user is claiming that this website is acceptable for use. I believe that this source is not reliable and could be original research, but you you believe that this website can or should this source be relied upon for the article? Please post your determination on the talk page of Independent National Socialism. Thank you for reading this.--R-41 (talk) 02:25, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Canvassing Re: C&C Template discussion
I object to the notion that I have been canvassed by User Kalamnir regarding the above discussion - I was involved in the discussion which led to the acceptance by consensus of the template as it stood, therefore I had a standing interest in discussions relating to it. Please keep accusations of canvassing appropriate, because this one clearly isn't.Caissa&#39;s DeathAngel (talk) 13:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * His messages targeted only editors who he deemed to agree with his position, which Canvassing calls "votestacking". I have replied more in depth at the template discussion.  Pagra shtak  14:12, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I apologise for my incivility, I shouldn't post such messages when in a bad mood due to off-Wiki activities. To paraphrase Yoda, "Anger leads to hate, hate leads to editwarring, editwarring leads to blocking" (not to mention it kills off any chance I have of winning the argument over the template :P). Anyway, I've made a suggestion regarding it that you may wish to check out, though it is vague at present. Caissa&#39;s DeathAngel (talk) 14:31, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I appreciate that. I think we're starting to make some progress.  Pagra shtak  15:02, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the problem is that there's two facades to this discussion, which are getting confused - the actual layout of the template (i.e. by series or whatever) and where the links go to. There's also the broader issue of the quality of the articles, which makes appropriate linking difficult. I'm definitely hopeful that at the very least this discussion can give us a broad picture of some of the things needing changing. If it turns out for example that the best places to link to don't exist (such as sub sections in a gameplay section) then maybe they need to be created (a vital component of a good VG article is after all a commentary on the gameplay, and factions are relevant to that for RTS games). I think we're heading in the right direction now, it has to be said.Caissa&#39;s DeathAngel (talk) 15:09, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

NY Route 22 FAC
Hey, your comments on this FAC have been addressed - could you look it over? Mitch 32(UP) 12:50, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Shoulda known you'd get there :-) Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 03:01, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, happy to help when I can.  Pagra shtak  03:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

SOCOM II
Someone keeps on adding information that I don't believe is notable, it isn't sourced, it is completely in universe, etc. The article is SOCOM II, especially the problems with online section. It is really poor. I need help, and you seem really good at this type of thing. Thank you if you manage to help.

- Shane —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.131.221.143 (talk) 08:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Pharmaceutical Product Development
A tag has been placed on Pharmaceutical Product Development requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. triwbe (talk) 16:12, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:PPDI logo.GIF)
Thanks for uploading Image:PPDI logo.GIF. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 00:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

That Drawn-out AfD...
Hoo-boy! I can't believe that user is still going at it. I mean, I don't know, now. I mean, I support the said Mana article being deleted because of the apparent lack of third-party notability, but at the same time I do not because of the circumstances behind the nomination for AfD. I think I'm leaning more towards deletion just because of said user's poor attitude, saying that he has been around longer apparently than Jesus Christ Himself to the point in which he can walk on water. That's why I probably stepped over the line there, even though I never should have in the first place. (Be lucky because I was very tempted to directly tell him not to proverbially "let the door hit him on the way out.")

Maybe I do not know any better, but I think that user has lost touch with what goes on, at least from judging from his comments recently. I'll say it as this: "I said what I thought was best at that particular time, and that's it. I can only go so far in defending someone or some belief, at least until someone else messes everything up." That's all. MuZemike (talk) 07:47, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Redirects
Thanks for the heads up. I was unaware that there was policy covering this. The reason I was doing it was actually for my own benefit as it helps me find new additions to certain categories more easily (I find the "Related Changes" tool difficult to use well). As for my edits, I think in most cases the visible text should probably just have been edited, and I'll do that in the future. Ironically I was trying to be especially wikiconscious here by keeping the prose of the original edit intact, but what the heck: if anyone has a problem with changes to the visible text I'll direct them to WP:R. Cheers and keep up the good work, -Thibbs (talk) 20:47, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Ace Combat
I think it is probably better to push for mergers on the Ace Combat stuff (even redirects). Even if Jerry didn't expound much on the close the Ace Combat ones were the closest in the last "bunch" to being no consensus. I don't agree with him, but not everyone will agree. My suggestion is tag them for merger and alert the projects, then we can see where they stand at the end of this. Protonk (talk) 21:48, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Italian interwiki
Thanks; I wasn't sure how to solve it :-) Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 16:38, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Warhammer 40,000 transwiki
More WH40K articles have been put up for AFD. The nominator indicated that they are transwiki material, but doesn't have a volunteer. Are you still interested in transwikiing these articles? If not, is there someone else who has the upload rights on the 40K wiki who could do this?  Pagra shtak  17:01, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm more than happy to. I'm busier in real life now that I'm out of college, but I can still help out. I'm also an admin on the target wiki, so if people want to help I can promote them there too. I'll check back when I'm off work and see what's up. --Falcorian (talk) 17:36, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Soul Calibur (Amy) article
OOPS nevermind, I did it wrong. I posted that template on the wrong page. Sorry! Thanks a lot for fixing it! WikiPorc (talk) 00:32, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Just a head's up
I put a request at Requests for page protection for partial protection for Amy (Soul Calibur), Ivy (Soul Calibur), Raphael (Soul Calibur), Talim (Soul Calibur) and Tira (Soul Calibur) to stop the anons adding the game guide content to prevent edit warring (it gets removed, they add it back). Just giving a head's up.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:38, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Darn the request got denied. Why? I think it is justified, a newly released video game like this would tend to make things like this necessary, and these edit wars that are occuring for these character pages seem to be because of that. I guess we have to wait for the edit war to get worse. WikiPorc (talk) 20:48, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That's a fairly minor edit war. It usually takes something worse than that for protection, this is easily manageable.  Pagra shtak  21:14, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I see. I still disagree with that policy though. I think an edit war at this level should be enough. As an ordinary reader of Wikipedia I was getting ultra annoyed at how unreliable and ever-changing Wikipedia articles seemed to be (on certain kinds of topics) over the last year or so. I have never held Wikipedia up on a pedestal as some others have, but at least it used to be reasonably useful. These days, half the articles I see contain misinformation and are significantly different every day. I don't see why it isn't a global policy for all articles to be "semi-protected" at all times...that just means you have to make an account (which is easy) to edit an article, right? Therefore it will be harder to have anonymous edits so we can see who is doing what. WikiPorc (talk) 01:26, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That's a common proposal. Check out Perennial proposals to see why it's turned down. You may be interested in Flagged revisions, if you haven't heard of them yet. It sounds like a better solution if we ever get it off the ground.  Pagra shtak  02:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the links. Personally though I did not like the idea of Flagged revisions but that is just me. I don't like the idea that new contributions have to be 'reviewed' in a sense before being shown to the outside world, for various reasons. (One such reason would be that in a relatively inactive Wiki topic the outside world might never be shown a good revision for a long time). I also thought that the reasons against the general proposal against allowing anonymous IPs to edit were weak. I myself had thought of a couple reasons against the proposal, one was listed (anonymous IPs often contribute good edits and may afterwards become community members) and one actually was not. Still, I think these reasons are weak. Also, one of the main listed reasons was that semi-protection/protection policies exist so there is no need for the global policy. That is the worst reason ever IF the Wiki administrators are too reluctant to protect pages, which I think is the case. In any case, the current edit war isn't going away and is starting to annoy me. :( I am annoyed if I feel the effects of the war are noticeable to ordinary readers who casually visit the page for a couple days, to me that's the cut-off point at which something should be done. Maybe requesting a temporary IP ban on 71.141.*.* for this page would be better? At this point that IP has broken the 3-revisions rule or come right up to the borderline. WikiPorc (talk) 20:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * As you become more familiar with Wikipedia, I think you'll find that this is quite minor, relatively speaking. Range blocks like that are a last resort measure. It definitely wouldn't be used for a run-of-the-mill content dispute like this. If the IP violates 3RR it will certainly be blocked for a short period. That would be WP:AN3 to report, if you didn't already know.  Pagra shtak  02:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

The Soul Calibur Amy page doesn't seem to work at all anymore. The version that I get whenever I visit the page is always the same old version WITH the Critical Finisher section intact. Editing the page doesn't work anymore. If you refresh the page or log into Wikipedia the Critical Finisher section mysteriously disappears. But if you log out, clear all cookies, and come back, the Critical Finisher section is back and it can't be edited away. Something seems very wrong? What happened? WikiPorc (talk) 23:35, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know, it looks normal to me. Did you try purging?  Pagra shtak  02:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No, I didn't know about it until now, thanks. But the page looks normal to me again now so I will have to wait to test the purge function until the next time a similar thing happens. I thought that was really strange. I had thought that clearing my browser's cache and clearing all my Internet and Search history in the Control Panel, together cleared everything. I guess not?! o_O I wonder what other sorts of leftover cache and useless files is on this computer. :P WikiPorc (talk) 00:26, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Article Milestones on Bulbasaur - Explanation please.
Hi - in this edit on the 27th Jan 2008 you added the two AFD's to Bulbasaur's Article Milestones template. In both cases you listed the results as No consensus - however the result of the first AFD was Withdrawn by Nominator (The AFD page has not been edited since Oct 2007) and the second AFD result was Speedy Keep or Snowball Keep  depending on which closing statement applies. (The AFD page has been edited since 27th Jan 2008 however the results have NOT changed). Could you please explain why you entered erroneous information into the article milestones template? Exxolon (talk) 16:55, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, "withdrawn" is not a valid option for, so that explains that one. As for the second one, I guess I just missed it or was thrown off by the wall of text in that closing statement. It's not really a big deal, as "no consensus", "keep", "merge", "redirect", etc. are basically the same result as far as AFD is concerned. They all translate to "no consensus to delete". I've fixed this one, but if you see other issues like this, feel free to go ahead and correct it in ArticleHistory. A better question is—why was that AFD not represented on the talk page at all before I added it to ArticleHistory?  Pagra shtak  20:08, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, I've asked for an admin to add 'withdrawn' to the results table. As for the no AFD results on the talk page prior - good question. Is it the closing admins responsibility to add it to the article talk? Exxolon (talk) 13:23, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The closing admin usually removes the AFD notice and makes a note on the talk page. I don't know why this one never made it there, unless the closer thought an AFD open for only a few hours wasn't worth the trouble.  Pagra shtak  17:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Undo of removal
Because I've no idea why you're removing the Warhammer 40K banner from the article. But don't worry about it, put it back if you want. I momentarily forgot that I now longer give a rats-arse about the 40K articles on Wikipedia, after the Allementaro (or whatever his name was) debacle - I must have missed the Grey Knights page when I removed all the 40K articles from my watchlist. It's been removed now, so do as you like. Darkson (BOOM! An interception!) 22:55, 5 August 2008 (UTC)