User talk:Richard Slater

Archives
I have archived everything on this page as of 30th May 2007, much of it was old and redundant, you can find archives (why would you want to?) to the right. I also messed up creating the page somehow... really not sure how, I think I have fixed it, if anyone can explain what I did wrong please let me know. -- Richard Slater ( Talk to me! ) 14:01, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

EVE Online
Thank you for your extensive work on the EVE Online article. Many great &lt;ref&gt; cleanups!

I wanted to let you know, however, that one of your edits appears to have accidentally deleted some information from the article. I have no doubt that this was unintentional, but it did result in some confusion on the article's Talk page. In the future, please be careful with &lt;ref&gt; and other tags that remove visibility from content; it's a lot easier to spot a mistake than a lack thereof! Again, thanks for your cleanup, it was sorely needed, and if all we have to do in return is fix a &lt;ref&gt; tag, we've gotten a hell of a deal! :D Jouster  (  whisper  ) 08:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello Jouster, thank you for your comment, I have been looking over it and I can't see where I went wrong. Could you be more specific as to what I did and where? Thanks again for sorting it out. -- Richard Slater ( Talk to me! ) 19:04, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * This line:
 * ":CCP did not investigate this issue. Instead, posting an excerpt from the supposedly-damning document, they maintained that they only rarely influence the larger in-game fiction's results and never influence which players benefit."
 * Not closing the &lt;ref&gt; tag has the effect of deleting the bullet point immediately after it; compare this and this. Jouster  (  whisper  ) 21:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah Ha, thank you, will be more careful in the future. -- Richard Slater ( Talk to me! ) 09:05, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

There's a broken link on the Eve article in the Cost section near the bottom, the link is to "Official Eve Online Store", since the article is locked, I can't change it, thanks -J —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.60.183.149 (talk) 16:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Reference Test
This reference dosn't work (why?):

This reference has been re-written:

Board Candidacy
Hi! I'm leaving you this note because we've had extensive and/or productive interaction over the course of my time on this Wiki. I (yep, little ol' Jouster!) am running for election to the Wikimedia Board of Trustees. I would greatly appreciate it if you would please take a look at my submission of candidacy, and consider endorsing me, as that is a requirement for me to stand for election.

If you have any questions or concerns about this notice, please don't hesitate to poke me on my Talk page. If you object to this solicitation for endorsement, please do not hesitate to remove it from your Talk page with my apologies; it will not appear again.

I look forward to serving you all on the Board! Jouster (  whisper  ) 18:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Good work Sir
on the EVE online article, I ran away screaming from the keyboard trying to add references for the latest patch, looks nice and tidy now. Been playing long?--The internet is serious business 19:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I have kind of unofficially adopted EVE Online as my pet article, much of the work was done by other editors and I have tried to refine it and keep it in check over time, I am a bit of a stickler for references particularly on a topic that is so well document by Dev Blogs, Feature Pages and News Items. I have been playing EVE for approaching 3 and a half years, no sign of stopping yet! Yourself? -- Richard Slater ( Talk to me! ) 19:17, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

EVE Article
I have heard of and seen articles in the past, but sadly I can't remember where. It might have been Newsweek or something, but if I could find it, id post it and cite it. Piuro 21:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Source for EVE
You asked a while back for the publication that ran something on EVE, well, here you go! http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0c3c18fe-fc03-11db-93a4-000b5df10621.html Piuro 03:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Eve-Wiki
Has 5 editors and has been in operation for over 2 years. Has over 50 contributors and more showing up every week. It meets the criteria of eligibility. Alatari 08:15, 19 August 2007 (UTC) What criterion will it need to meet before you remove your objection? Alatari 08:42, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Please
Make sure you admonish User:2005 who has been the one doing edits without making any attempt to come to an agreement on the talk page Alatari 16:41, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Alatari, I have posted a Request for Comments on the EVE Online Talk Page as per Wikipedia Policy. Also please note that removing warnings from your talk page is a banable offence, 2005 has not broken any rules reverting your changes, please read up on the 3 Revert Rule if you still feel that 2005 has broken the rule, instructions are included on acting on this changes. -- Richard Slater  (About) / (Talk) 16:48, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Just from an outside perspective, your assertion that "removing warnings... is a banable offence" is incorrect. You are well advised to discuss your editing objections on the relevant talk pages without threatening other editors with being banned.  Thanks.  The Rambling Man 17:00, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You are correct, I was in error to say that it was a banable offence, as since the last time I have seen an editor revert a warning on their page a consensus has been reached on the topic. Therefore I retract my above statement. Apologies to Alatari. -- Richard Slater  (About) / (Talk) 17:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

RFCbot
The RFCpolicy list will be populating shortly. MessedRocker (talk) 16:13, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

EVE Online Article
It's getting pretty lengthy and with a new content section going to continue to steadily grow every new major patch; maybe we could get a EVE Online Expansions article to be accepted as notable and acceptable. WoW has an article for each new expansion so it doesn't seem unreasonable to me. The races articles were deleted for being to game specific but new content as a sign of CCP's evolution and any effects it has on the rest of the MMO world are encyclopedic. On a side point, I'm puzzled WoW keeps it's races pages. Maybe it's because those mythical races have roots in other human cultures but the Amarr and others don't? It makes me wonder if the EVE race articles had focused more on the worldly arch types of Slaver, Capitalist, etc. if they would then have been considered more notable. Alatari 10:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * That sounds like a good idea, although I would name it Expansions of EVE Online to fit with the Races of EVE Online (deleted), Spaceships of EVE Online and Weapons of EVE Online (deleted) pattern. I would expect that WoW gets to keep more of its "un-encyclopedic" articles because of the subscriber numbers, 6m accounts is always going to trump 250k accounts even if you argue that WoW has a higher account to person ratio, which I don't even know if you can argue. As you have mentioned in our previous conversations Wikipedias policys are not applied consistantly, my personal choice is to pick an area of Wikipedia that I am willing to devote time to (i.e. one I have an interest in) and stick to that section applying policys to the best of your ability. -- Richard Slater  (About) / (Talk) 13:24, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

External fan links
Another article I watch has an ever growing list of fansites in the EL section and I wanted to clean it up. How did you all handle routing the EL on EVE Online page to the Open Directory project? I mean did you submit them all yourself, post comment on the ELinkers talk pages or delete them and post a comment on the article talk page about how to submit them to Open Directory? Alatari (talk) 22:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It was a while ago, but I looked at Wikipedia's policies and what other people were doing on other articles and just deleted the links. Possibly a bit bull in the china shop, but it wasn't too bad. Most of the content was already on DMOZ - what wasn't possibly wouldn't get accepted anyway or was blatant spam. -- Richard Slater  (About) / (Talk) 22:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * See what I did on the TRS-80 article and the Talk:TRS-80 and see if it is a reasonable course. Thanks for your input. Alatari (talk) 23:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks good, I think I probably interpreted the WP:EL more ruthlessly than you. I would also include a template, pointing to a relevant part of DMOZ. -- Richard Slater  (About) / (Talk) 08:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * You mean allowing the Collection of old analog and digital computers at www.oldcomputermuseum.com link? Every old computer I've looked for; his site has a picture.  It seems allowable under WP:EL to me and I haven't found a professional museum of the same quality yet. Alatari (talk) 17:13, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It is easy to quantify that Old Computer Museum contains more information than else where on the web, however the article TRS-80 is about a specific model not a collection of computers, and the information included on the TRS-80 page is limited compared to the article itself. I can't see a value in the link that couldn't be incorporated into the article and referenced. -- Richard Slater  (About) / (Talk) 14:31, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I understand your point. It's a decent link to keep on the Personal Computer article but linking it to every individual computer at the collection seems against Wiki policy.  Thanks for your input.   Policing every computing devices EL section is a full time job. Alatari (talk) 05:53, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Edit summaries
Hi,

You might want to watch your edit summaries. Lines like "adding unreferenced content into wikipedia is vandalism" are really best avoided; Wikipedia has a clear distinction between vandalism and content disputes, and editors who confuse the two often come off worse when admins get involved to resolve disputes. You're obviously in the right on the actual comment though, and your work on the EVE Online article is great. Chris Cunningham (talk) 10:51, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads up, it is certainly clear in my mind that when the content of the edit is in opposition to references and the references are not updated it is vandalism as per Vandalism. I do concede though that to an editor that has not been privy to past conversations my edit summary would be contentious. -- Richard Slater  (About) / (Talk) 10:57, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Mmm. Thing is, there really is quite a broad line between "an edit I strongly disagree with" and "vandalism", and even trolling isn't really vandalism in that sense. As I say, it's something to watch in your summaries. Chris Cunningham (talk) 11:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Understood, I will approach edit summaries more thoughtfully in the future. -- Richard Slater  (About) / (Talk) 11:22, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:EVEOnlineLogo.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:EVEOnlineLogo.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) 04:20, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Loose Connection
I have nominated Loose Connection, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Loose Connection. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. A bit iffy (talk) 14:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Smart Gaming


The article Smart Gaming has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Unremarkable video gaming jargon with only references being to EVE while used inside quotation marks. Highly unlikely to gather more references or establishing notability past passing mentions (judging by previous gaming jargon AfDs).

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 18:33, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Richard Slater/EVE Online/Rewrite
User:Richard Slater/EVE Online/Rewrite, a page which created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Richard Slater/EVE Online/Rewrite and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Richard Slater/EVE Online/Rewrite during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 05:00, 2 December 2015 (UTC)